William J. Dominik, Review of R. Heinze, Vergil’s Epic Technique (London: Bristol Classical Press 1999), Scholia Reviews 9 (2000) 160-161.

ISSN 1018-9017

SC HO LIA Natal Studies in Classical Antiquity

NS Vol. 9 I 2000 South Africa

160

Scholia ns Vol. 9 (2000) 13 7-61

ISSN 1018-9017

should have been more thorough. 14 Criticism is simple to make, however, and faults easy to find. This translation and commentary is a fine contribution to the study of a neglected author. In his opening comments Wardle admits to a relatively low estimation of Valerius as 'one of those authors into whom historians dip for minor details ... ' (p. v). In the production of this commentary David Wardle has produced a book that, like its subject matter, will be dipped into again and again for the wealth of information and insight that it provides the modem commentator on aspects of Roman history, religion and culture. Alex Nice

University of the Witwatersrand

Richard Heinze (trr. Hazel Harvey, David Harvey and Fred Robertson), Virgil's Epic Technique 2 • London: Bristol Classical Press and Duckworth, 1999. Pp. xiv + 401. ISBN 1-85399-579-7. UK£16.95. Richard Heinze's Virgils epische Technik (Leipzig 1903) is inarguably one of the major works on Vergil of the twentieth century. But until the English translation of Hazel Harvey, David Harvey and Fred Robertson appeared in 1993, there was a tendency among some Anglophone scholars to gloss over its critical achievement one lemma results in several important omissions. Most obvious by its absence is the most comprehensive scholarly work on divination: A. Bouche Leclerq, L 'Histoire de la Divination dans l'Antiquite (Paris 1879). Others include M. Beard and J. North (edd.), Pagan Priests (London 1990); R. Bloch Les Prodiges dans l'Antiquite Classique (Paris 1963); W. Liebeschuetz, Continuity and Change in Roman Religion (Oxford 1979); C. Thulin, Die etruskische Disciplin 1-3 (Goteborgs 1905-09); L. WUlker, Die Geschichtliche Entwicklung des Prodigienwesens bei den Romern. Studien zur Geschichte und Uberlieferung der Staatsprodigien (Leipzig 1903). 14 There is confusion at the top of p. 20 due to a lengthy omission. On p. 79 there is an odd sentence discussing Serv. Aen. 11.301 and Cic. Div. Caec. 43, which are said to confirm that the 'orators of old began rightly with Jupiter Best and Greatest' ... 'but one that could be ridiculed by 70'. In fact, the ridicule was based on the fact that there were orators who thought that if this or similar phrases were learnt one would then be ready for court (Cic. Div. Caec. 43). There are minor errors on p. 45 (1.6.6) the pronoun 'he' is reiterated once too often; p. 59 (end of 1.8.6) seems to require some additional commas to assist the reading; p. 87 (insertion of 'the' required); p. 93 deletion of I required; p. 113 'oVer' should read 'offer'; p. 114 an extra r has found its way into imperartores; p. 133 fifth line down the letter 'n' needs inserting after 'a'; the English at the bottom of p. 152 is also unclear; a minor hiatus (the) appears on p. 185, 14lines from the bottom of the page; p. 201, Diskiplin should read Disciplin; p. 223 Hermann lacks an r; p. 224 Lactautius is presumably Lactantius. Herrinann is variously cited in the main text of the commentary (pp. 223, 228, 231 ). It is ironic that Wardle's own article, "'The Sainted Julius": Valerius Maximus and the dictator', CP 92 (1997) 323-41, is not included in the bibliography, although it is cited frequently (pp. 73, 209, 219, 263).

Reviews

161

since only those who could read German were truly aware of its importance to Vergilian studies. Part of the importance of this critical work stems from the fact that it was originally published at the beginning of the twentieth century after Vergil's reputation as a poet had undergone a battering at the hands of various scholars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. It was the fashion among scholars of the time to look for supposed weaknesses, inconsistencies and other lapses of poetic judgement. Scholars argued at the time that the Aeneid was a derivative epic and therefore its writer was not worthy to be considered a poet. It was widely held that Vergil had copied indiscriminately from his predecessors without an overall conception or a unifying plan of action. Heinze's revolutionary work immediately helped to restore a sense of balance to Vergilian studies, as it helped to divert critical energies to the issue of V ergil' s artistry and achievement in relation to his poetic aims, sources and precursors. In the first half of his book Heinze analyses the technique of some of the major passages in the Aeneid; in the second half he summarises the results of his investigation of these passages and attempts to provide an overview of Vergil' s poetic technique. While the central concern of Heinze's study involved the intentions of the poet, a concept that has lost favour among literary critics in the late twentieth century, Heinze effectively established that Vergil shaped his material with a clear poetic vision in mind. Virgils epische Technik was critically well ahead of its time when it was first published, as is apparent from the fact that it immediately encouraged scholars to consider various aspects of Vergil' s narrative technique and adaptation of his sources although, of course, there were those who did not approve of his new critical methods. By focusing on the narrative technique of the poet, by looking for the significance of passages adapted from Homer and other poets, and by generally avoiding subjective value judgements, Heinze laid the foundation of a number of critical trends in the interpretation of the Aeneid in the twentieth century. While some of his ideas never really gained critical acceptance, others generally accepted have since gone out of fashion-for instance, his view that Aeneas' character gradually moves toward perfection and toward the ideal of Roman Stoicism is undermined by numerous incidents in the narrative-but even today no one serious critic of Vergil can fail to take note ofHeinze's scholarly contribution. Vergilian scholars everywhere outside Germany, not just in Anglophone countries, owe a handsome debt to the translators of this important text. William J. Dominik

University ofNatal, Durban