Ennian Epic and the Traditions of Roman Historiography

Jackie Elliott (University of Colorado, Boulder)

Both Roman historiography and pre-Virgilian Roman epic have traditionally been noted for their uncompromising, even chauvinistic, pro-Roman perspective. By contrast, today, the tendency of Roman historiography to allow room for perspectives from which Roman action and attitudes did not necessarily appear admirable is being noted with increasing frequency (e.g. J. Solodow, ‘Livy and the story of Horatius’, 1.24-26, TAPA 109 (1979) 259; E. Adler, ‘Who’s anti-Roman?’ CJ Apr-May 2006, vol.101, no.4, 383-403). This paper suggests that that open-mindedness towards non-Romans was in fact an inheritance from the early Roman epic tradition, with which Livy in particular is so clearly in touch. The paper takes as its focus moments of contact between the two traditions, such as the modelling of Livy’s Camillus (AUC V.49.3) on Ennius’ Pyrrhus (Ann. 183-90 Sk.), in which the heroism of Rome’s savior is given expression in words which recall the memorable nobility of Rome’s enemy. It also considers how the Livian technique of adopting at least temporarily in his narrative a non-Roman point of view – e.g. by describing a siege from the point of view of the non-Roman besieged, as with the siege of Alba at AUC 1.29 or the siege of Veii (5.21.5-7), and by aligning the audience with the enemy by calling the Romans hostes – is likewise an inheritance of the epic tradition, and in the most immediate instance from Ennius, who, it can be shown from the fragments, adopts similar approaches in the portrayal of Rome’s military opponents.