Caesar\'s Calendar. Ancient Time and the Beginnings of History (Sather Classical Lectures)

(WallPaper) #1

  1. Heyworth 1988, 80.

  2. Watson 2003, 76, summarizing the conclusions of Plüss (1913, 84 – 85) and
    Heyworth (1988, 74 – 77) (though Watson does not follow Heyworth in transposing
    lines 23 – 28 to follow line 16). No one denies that there are powerful responsions
    between Horace ’s poem and Virgil’s Georgics,but there is much debate over which
    way the influence goes. Although all the evidence points to the Epodesbeing actually
    published before the Georgics,I agree strongly with Watson (2003, 76 – 77) that Horace
    is responding to Virgil rather than the other way around.

  3. I am not sure why Horace mentions this one festival: see Mankin 1995, ad loc.,
    for some possibilities. In light of the crucial Ides and Kalends coming up ten lines later,
    it is possible that Horace has chosen a date that used to have calendrical significance (as
    the site for intercalation in the Republican calendar), but that no longer does.

  4. Well put by Heyworth (1988, 80). Horace ’s meticulous demarcation of the
    calendrical world of Alfius and of the farmer corroborates again the arguments of
    Griffin (1997) concerning the highly discriminating use made of the calendar by the
    Augustan poets.

  5. Hollis 1977, 104.

  6. My translation ofoperosaas “with their work” is a little labored; it is meant to
    bring out the way that Ovid, at the beginning of his “days” section, puns on Hesiod ’s
    title of Worksand Days,just as Virgil had at the beginning ofhis“days” section: see
    R. F. Thomas (1988) on G.1.276 – 77 for the way that Virgil’s dies... operumalludes
    to Hesiod ’s title (“the first attested reference”). On the pun on Hesiod ’s title to be
    found in the Fasti(uates operose dierum,1.101), see P. Hardie 1991, 59.

  7. Cf. Rüpke 1995b, 17 – 36, 593 – 628.

  8. Hassig 2001, 71.

  9. Gell 1992, 89.

  10. Gell 1992, 313.

  11. Bickerman 1980, 49 – 50; Laurence and Smith 1995 – 96, 143, 148. The Aztecs
    provide an interesting comparison: see Hassig 2001, 83, 123, for the way the Aztecs’
    own calendar spread through their empire and was used to coordinate payment of trib-
    ute but was not systematically imposed on the subject peoples and did not necessarily
    supplant the local calendars.

  12. Compare the way that cities in the East continued to mint their own coins
    while those in the West did not: Millar 2000, 17 – 18.

  13. Samuel 1972, 171 – 78, 186 – 88; Hannah 2005, 131 – 38.

  14. Samuel 1972, 186.

  15. Cf. Beard, North, and Price 1998, 316 – 17, for the “relatively diffuse and unin-
    tegrated” nature of Roman religion’s spread throughout the Empire, likewise with
    comparative evidence from other empires that imposed their own religions much more


notes to pages 208 – 210. 299

Free download pdf