In the Image of the Ancestors: Narratives of Kinship in Flavian Epic. By N.W. BERNSTEIN. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008. Pp. 281. Cloth, $65.00. ISBN 978–0–8020–9879–5. Order this text for $44.17 from Amazon.com using this link and benefit CAMWS and the Classical Journal: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect-home/classjourn-20 Previously published CJ Online reviews are at http://classicaljournal.org/reviews.php CJ Online 2010.06.06 Neil Bernstein’s (hereafter B.) book on the representation of kinship in the epic poems of the Flavian period is a welcome addition to the growing number of studies devoted to the Silver Latin epicists, who are starting to emerge from the label of being poets “of decline.” The author focuses on a topic that has received little attention so far, namely the role of kinship and family relationships in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, Statius’ Thebaid and Achilleid, and Silius Italicus’ Punica. B. shows the importance of reading and interpreting Imperial Latin literature in its context: without doubt, the poems reflect the “ideological and social developments of the early Imperial period” (p. 3). After a brief introduction, in Chapter 1 (“Kinship as Narrative”), B. divides his discussion in three groups, the first of which addresses the importance of descent for the formation of kin relations. Correctly, B. identifies that social identity based on descent is complex in that it never remains stable but is an asset conferred at birth that evolves into a quality, “a provisional status that must be continually justified through appropriate performance” (p. 13). Emulation of ancestral deeds, therefore, can be seen as an effort to replicate behaviors of the past but also to break away from tradition by creating a new identity. In the second part of the chapter, B. looks at kinship as social narrative, that is as a reflection of the shifting socio-political realities of the Roman world under the Flavian emperors: the emperor has by and large replaced the individualistic patria potestas, while the significance of descent can be and is often ignored, as other forms of distinction such as “virtue, wealth, and connoisseurship” (p. 20) are now prioritized. Chapter 2 (“Valerius’ Argonautica: Kinship and Power”) looks closely at the first of the Flavian epics, Valerius’ Romanized Argonautica. B. argues that throughout the poem we witness several disrupted family relations, primarily in the Colchian palace of Aeetes. Tyrannical power perverts the norms of familial behavior within each kin group, and such threat to familial cohesion constitutes “a reflection of the anxieties of the contemporary Roman upper-class family” (p. 31). B. presents clearly the complex nature of familial relations as presented in Valerius’ version of the Argonautic saga: the apparent contradiction between obedience to the paterfamilias, joined by the obligation to return to one’s fatherland, and the pursuit of heroic glory, which often goes against the former two endeavors. Tyrants abound in the poem, and B. shows how the sons of tyrants stand in sharp contrast when compared to their fathers, thereby exerting “a form of ethical pressure on their fathers through their examples of superior conduct” (p. 40). B. also observes the gendered difference between sons and daughters in their reaction to the tyrant’s / paterfamilias’ decisions: while the sons display greater virtue in contravening the paternal decisions, the daughters’ reactions are far more limited; for instance, Medea rebels against Aeetes’ commands and flees with Jason, showing an inability to “negotiate between the multiple forces (ancestral, divine, and ethical)” (p. 43). Filial disobedience is thus viewed by the narrator as deserved, since the system of family values collapses before the autocracy of the tyrant. In addition, B. investigates the deceptive role of the gods in the poem, especially of the goddesses, Juno and Venus, who actively promote Medea’s affair with Jason and thus help disrupt the relations within the Colchian house. The following chapter (“Statius’ Thebaid”) explores the complicated kin relationships in Statius’ Thebaid and in particular, Polynices’ puzzling claim in Book 1 that his descent is from Jocasta rather than from his father, Oedipus, whom he refuses to mention. B. shows that the Flavian poet highlights the inevitability of ancestral stigma, despite the claims of the heroes to the opposite, and the value of descent in shaping character and status. By comparing the incongruous views on kinship and descent that Statius exposes in the Silvae and the Thebaid, B. draws the conclusion that Polynices cannot escape the hostility of the gods and of his ancestors after all, being inescapably stigmatized to participate in and commit fratricide, whereas Statius’ contemporaries praised in his occasional poems are being lauded for everything else but their descent from noble ancestors. Descent is no longer as important as are “offices, virtue, wealth, learning, and literary production” (p. 84). In the second part of this chapter, B. focuses on the role of gender in kin relations. Statius’ women are typically portrayed with reduced authority in the androcentric world of Greco-Roman epic. B. insists, however, that mothers, daughters and wives acquire a prominent role in the narrative space of the Thebaid, since the patriarch of the Theban oikos, Oedipus, is absent, incapacitated and marginalized. Female figures emerge as prominent actors, trying to stop the impending fratricide (e.g., Jocasta and Antigone) and at the end as the authors of the burial of the Argive soldiers (e.g., Argia). Correctly, B. identifies Statius’ obsession with the effect of war on mothers and wives, what he calls “the poetics of bereavement” (pp. 101–3). Absent from this discussion, however, is Hypsipyle, who presents an interesting study case of a daughter with a complex relationship with her father, Thoas, whom she saves during the Lemnian massacre. The subsequent chapter (“Statius’ Achilleid: Nature and Nurture”) offers a stimulating look at the complementing role that descent plays in conjunction with the epic hero’s nurture. B. demonstrates by means of parallels in contemporary literature of the period, including Statius’ own Siluae, that nurture and in particular fosterage are key elements for the formation of social identity, which is “neither predetermined nor stable but subject to a continual process of creation and definition” (p. 107). Thus Chiron’s training of the young Achilles inborn talent balances the prominent role of the mother, Thetis throughout the short, unfinished poem. “The Achilleid reveals the constructed nature of social identity by tracing the causes of Achilles’ behaviour back to stimuli provided by relatives, caregivers, and exemplary models” (p. 125). In Chapter 5 (“Silius’ Punica: Kinship and the State”), B. turns to the last Flavian epic, Silius’ Punica, to explore the different attitudes towards kinship and the state by examining the characters of Hannibal, Fabius, Pacuvius and Scipio Africanus. In particular, Hannibal is one of the multiple heroes of the poem who is beset by the debt to his ancestors (especially Dido) and “fated to re-enact their failures” (p. 133). Devotion to his ancestors turns out to be destructive, a process that generates only furor and ultimately supersedes the Carthaginian’s civic responsibilities. In addition, Hannibal is limited at all levels by the gods’ refusal: unlike Scipio, Hannibal’s actions are never sanctioned and therefore destined to fail. In the case of Fabius, the famous Cunctator is fashioned as the exemplary father for both his son and the army. By exercising paternal authority, Fabius is portrayed as an ideal commander. And yet, this authority is not sufficient, as his absence generates lack of loyalty among the troops. Scipio is the only hero in the poem, according to B., who commands the human and divine approval necessary for the ultimate victory. Scipio’s double paternity from both Scipio the Elder and Jupiter himself proves to be the catalyst for the resolution of the conflict and Rome’s ascent to glory. Scipio Africanus balances both public and familial obligations, an aspect that aligns him with the emperor Domitian. In the penultimate chapter (“From Family to Nation: Descent and Ethnicity in Flavian Epic”), B. takes his argument one step further by looking at descent and national identity as presented by the Flavian poets. B. argues that Flavian epic provides a parallel for the national epics of the Augustan period, the Aeneid and the Metamorphoses, inasmuch as descent and ethnicity are central themes, conducive to the formation of unity among Romans: peoples of different cultural aspects merge to form a new entity. In Flavian epic, however, we become at the same time spectators to a different trend, one inspired by Lucan’s epic on the civil war: the descendants of the hybrid people, the product of migration and resettlement, present a cultural discontinuity with regard to their ancestors. As B. shows, “this paradigm of cultural fission contrasts with the strong connections between Roman and Trojan descent posited in the Aeneid” (p. 171). More specifically, B. looks at Statius’ Menoeceus, whose suicide / sacrifice “embodies the problematic aspects of the Theban myth” (p. 191). Even in a small and homogeneous city like Thebes, the population is prone to civil war. In the Punica, Silius fashions cities like Saguntum and Capua as subject to Rome’s policies of expediency, since common descent (syngeneia) becomes irrelevant before considerations of the empire’s future welfare and safety. Finally, in the concluding chapter, B. presents Statius’ figurative kin relationship with his poem, as one of father and child. Through such relations, the poet revisits his position in the literary canon. B.’s study offers rich and insightful analyses of the epic poems of the Flavian period and will be appreciated by specialists and non-specialists alike, as an important addition to the study of Imperial Latin epic poetry and Roman thoughts on kinship and national identity. ANTONY AUGOUSTAKIS Baylor University [log in to unmask] If you have been forwarded this review, you may subscribe to the listserv by sending an email to: [log in to unmask] Leave the subject line blank, and in the first line of the message write: SUBSCRIBE CJ-Online You may remove yourself from the CJ-Online listserv by sending an email to: [log in to unmask] Leave the subject line blank, and in the first line of the message write: UNSUBSCRIBE CJ-Online