Τοὺς θυρεοὺς ὁ Μολοσσὸς Ἰτωνίδι δῶρον ̓Αθάνα Πύρρος ἀπὸ θρασέων ἐκρέμασεν Γαλατᾶν, πάντα τὸν ̓Αντιγόνου καθελὼν στρατόν· οὐ μέγα θαῦμα· This inscription, attributed by conjecture to Leonidas of From these statements it is clear that Wezel was mistaken when he said, "Pyrrhus autem Epiri rex qui contra Romanos pugnavit nusquam Aeacides appellatur nisi a Silio illis locis et ab Ennio." Doubtless there were also other references to Pyrrhus as Aeacides in the literature no longer extant, as Blass suggests (p. 509). But notwithstanding later uses of the name, Ennius was the first Roman author to employ it and Silius may have learned the traditional association of Pyrrhus with the line of Achilles from this source. 18) In the eighth book of the Punica, 11. 356-621, the author gives a catalogue of the Roman allies who were present at the battle of Cannae. In this enumeration he mentions the Marsi, Peligni, and Vestini in the same order, though not consecutively, in which they are found in the following fragment of Ennius, Ann. 276: Marsa manus, Peligna cohors, Vestina virum vis. For this reason and because Livy and other writers do not name the allies but merely give an estimate of their number, Wezel thinks that Silius must have followed Ennius. Whether the latter also gave an extended list similar to that of Silius or whether he wrote the line in the same connection as Silius, it is impossible to say. The mere use of the names of these neighboring peoples can prove nothing. They were well-known in antiquity, as is shown by the fact that they are mentioned in the writings of many ancient 1 Cf. Droysen, Gesch. d. Hellen., vol. 3, p. 204, note 1. Clinton, Fast. Hellen., vol. 3, p. 503. authors, and their very close proximity geographically naturally caused them to be associated with one another. Though Livy does not mention them in this particular place, he speaks of them frequently in other connections, sometimes individually and sometimes together. The order in which their names occur varies and the only case in which it is similar to that of Ennius and Silius is descriptive of an entirely different situation, Livy, 8, 29, 4: Marsi Paelignique et Marrucini, quos, si Vestinus attingeretur, omnes habendos hostes. Here, too, just as in the Punica, the sequence of the Ennian arrangement is broken by the insertion of another name not found in the fragment from the annalistic poet. Between the Peligni and the Vestini, Livy places the Marrucini, whom Silius does not mention until a few lines later, and in the same position the latter places the Sidicini, whom Livy in his account of the Second Punic War no longer mentions as a people, though he still speaks of their territory (in agrum Sidicinum, 26, 9, 2), which Hannibal ravaged on his march from Capua to Rome. This name, as well as the others, may have come from Ennius, and Silius may simply have changed the order from its original form; or it is possible that the later poet borrowed the arrangement of the three names as now found in the Ennian fragment and then took the liberty of inserting an extra one without the sanction of precedent. But there seems to be no means of securing a basis of positive proof for either assumption. III. PASSAGES SHOWING INDIRECT INFLUENCE Another form of Ennian influence discernible in the Punica came indirectly through the works of intervening writers, especially Virgil and Livy. Of these there are such examples as follow: 1) Enn. Ann. 284-285: hastati spargunt hastas, fit ferreus imber Virgil, Aen. 12, 283-284: it toto turbida caelo tempestas telorum ac ferreus ingruit imber; Sil. 13, 181-182: tela simul flammaeque micant. tunc saxeus imber The first line of this fragment from Ennius is quoted by Macrobius (Sat. 6, 1, 52) as the source of Virgil's inspiration to express the similar thought here noted and from the latter the saxeus imber ingruit used by Silius was clearly derived, as is shown by the use of the same verb ingruit which Virgil introduced in place of the Ennian verb fit. Wezel (no. 26) mentions this fragment of the annalistic poet in comparison with a somewhat similar description of the beginning of the contest at Cannae (Sil. 9, 310), although he acknowledges that verses of this kind may form a part of the description of any battle and in confirmation of this he quotes the Silian passage given above, which is taken from the account of the storming of Capua, and also two other lines from the Punica : Sil. 14, 539: perculsi cuneo Poeni densentur in unum; Sil. 17, 418: Graia phalanx patrio densarat more catervas. But neither of these has any further connection with the quotation from Ennius than the use of the common verb. The first line, taken from the account of the naval struggle between the Roman ship, Perseus, and the Carthaginian Io, is more suggestive of Ovid's similar expression in Meta. 13, 604-605: glomerataque corpus in unum densetur. The second, from the description of the final encounter in Africa, recalls Virgil, Aen. 12, 264: succiso volvi segnem sinit; Livy, 22, 51, 7: quosdam et iacentis vivos succisis feminibus poplitibusque invenerunt; Sil. 4, 341-342: Ufentem collapsum poplite caeso ensis obit, laudemque pedum cum sanguine ademit; Sil. 5, 547-550: dum spoliat, gravis immiti cum turbine costas fraxinus irrupit; Sil. 10, 38: fratres, hic humero, cecidere, hic poplite, caesis. In these selections from Silius, Wezel (no. 23) seeks to trace a direct influence from the Ennian phrase, pernas succidit, but the ablative of Silius, poplite caeso, bears closer resemblance to the ablatives of Virgil, succiso poplite, and of Livy, succisis feminibus poplitibusque than to the earlier expression. Silius has only a suggestion of the thought of the Ennian line, the intervening writers have the thought and the verb, while Livy preserves the idea of the noun also, though in the more usual form feminibus, which he joins with the Virgilian noun poplitibus. The construction and substantive used in the Punica are echoes of the intermediary sources, the verb is a changed form employed independently by the author. 3) Enn. Ann. 540: effudit voces proprio cum pectore sancto; Aen. 5, 482: ille super talis effundit pectore voces ; Sil. 3, 696: inde ubi mandatas effudi pectore voces. The Virgilian phrase effundit pectore voces, echoing in shorter form the thought expressed by Ennius, was without doubt the model that suggested to Silius his closing words. With varied forms and arrangement, the expression voces effundere occurs also, as Wezel points out (no. 38), in other parts of the Punica. But these too are almost all distinctly suggestive of Virgil, and no Ennian touch can be detected. in them that shows any closer relation to the earlier poet than can be traced through the Augustan writer. Thus there is a parallelism of thought in Sil. 10, 365: tunc vox effusa per auras; and in the Aeneid 8, 70: ac talis effundit ad aethera voces; there is a likeness of verbal effect gained by the use of the same closing phrase in Sil. 8, 167: has visa in somnis germanae effundere voces ; Sil. 14, 215: credere erat stabulis armenta effundere voces ; Aen. 5, 723: et nox atra polum bigis subvecta tenebat. and there is a marked resemblance between this last picture and the one presented by Silius, 8, 164-167: |