Is there something like a type scene in epic poetry after Homer? (The most important book on this topic is still W. Arend, Die typischen Scenen bei Homer [1930].) And if there is such a phenomenon, what does it look like? This question is the basic problem that J.’s book attempts to tackle in her analysis of farewell scenes between people who are in love in Latin epic poetry. Thus, J. follows a current trend in Classical philology which shows a significant interest in structural patterns of this genre (cf., e.g., the current DFG project on ‘Epische Bauformen – Strukturen epischen Erzählens’ at the University of Rostock).
J.’s case study confirms once more for Latin epic poetry from Virgil to Dracontius what is the current opinion of literary critics on this question: due to its origin in oral poetry with its set phrases, repetitions and formulaic language, Homeric poetry also shows a tendency to create certain scenes in similar ways, for example the arming of a hero. Yet already in Homer we can see that this somewhat static repetitiveness is replaced by a more specific working method that pays attention to the individual demands of the context of a particular scene. For the interpretation of a scene it is important to look at the deviations from patterns of action or narration usually used in similar situations. Later epic poetry, needless to say, has to deal with the fact that it is written and available for close scrutiny of individual passages. Intertextuality and everything connected with it becomes even more important than it already was in Homeric poetry. Individual scenes are composed by their authors with a keen eye on what their predecessors have done with similar scenes in their work. (A particularly well-studied author in this regard is of course Virgil. See G.N. Knauer, Die Aeneis und Homer [19792], D. Nelis, Vergil's Aeneid and the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius [2001].) The more specific the context of a scene and the less common a phrase or word is which is taken from the model, the more likely an allusion becomes (J. Grethlein, Die Odyssee. Homer und die Kunst des Erzählens [2017], p. 30).
After a few introductory and very sound methodological clarifications and a thoroughly informed review of the current state of research in the field, J. analyses Virgil's farewell scenes between Orpheus and Eurydice in Georgics 4, between Aeneas and Creusa in Aeneid 2, and between Aeneas and Dido in Aeneid 4. After treating farewell scenes in the Heroides, J. discusses how Ovid deals with farewell scenes in the story of Ceyx and Alcyone in Metamorphoses 11 and the poet's farewell from Rome in Tristia 1.3. J. adduces further material from Lucan (Cornelia and Pompey), Valerius Flaccus (Hypsipyle and Jason as well as Medea and Jason), Silius Italicus (Imilce and Hannibal as well as Marcia and Regulus), Statius (Thebaid: Argia and Polynices as well as Hypsipyle and Jason, Achilleid: Deidamia and Achilles) and Dracontius (Medea and Jason). After reading these scenes in a very detailed and diligent manner, Chapter C collects J.’s findings and categorises them. J. identifies quite a few elements that can occur in farewell scenes. In part, some of these elements exclude others from occurring in a particular narrative. For example, a hero either leaves clandestinely or not. In Chapter D, her conclusion, J., however, is rightfully reluctant to outline a prototypical farewell scene. Just the fact that a certain scene contains a great number of those possible elements does not really make a scene a typical one (p. 490). And the number of potential elements of the action of a farewell scene and the topics on which the speeches of the characters involved can touch within these scenes really creates a vast variety of ways how people in love can leave each other. What is typical about those farewell scenes seems to consist not so much in their individual elements and their rather kaleidoscopical composition, but in their deliberate occurrence as such in epic contexts. As a literary motif, however, farewell scenes pose quite a challenge for any poet and offer many literary possibilities, as J. ably shows.
J.’s study raises further questions: her statement that characters who are in love are ‘unepisch’ warrants a closer investigation of the role of genre for farewell scenes. And what are the differences between the farewell of people who are in love with each other and of people whose relationship is different?
J.’s study displays great learnedness. Scholars will find many instances, such as the parallel between Euripides’ Alcestis and Virgil's Eurydice (pp. 57–9), where J.’s book provides intelligent discussions and observations on individual passages. Occasionally important works of secondary literature escape J.’s notice, like P. Green's commentary on Apollonius’ Argonautica (1997).
The book is well produced. There are only occasional typographical errors, for example, ‘Motivs’ in line 23 on page 488. The formatting of the table of contents, however, leads to an omission of the numbers of the starting pages of the individual chapters A, B, C and D. The latter instance is especially regrettable, since the concluding and thus important Chapter D has no subsections so that readers need to find out by themselves that Chapter D starts on page 487.
