My earliest acquaintance with Manilius came through a text only vaguely classical: E.C. Bentley's parody of Dorothy L. Sayers' Gaudy Night. In this short story Lord Peter Wimsey visits Oxford to investigate a murder; strolling by night through the quad he encounters a young man sitting on "an obese volume on the gravel." With alacrity and courtesy the student offers the detective his seat: "Won't you sit down, sir? Not enough room for two, I'm afraid, even on Liddell and Scott." He explains that after the general rowdiness following the Aquinas dinner, he had been…
"just sitting here for rest and meditation. D'you ever meditate?"
"Oh, often," said Wimsey--the passage continues -- "What were you thinking of mediating upon this time?"
"Housman's edition of Manilius," the young man answered, abstractedly removing his collar and tie. "Wonderful chap--Housman, I mean; Manilius was rather a blister. The way Housman pastes the other commentators in the slats does your heart good. I was just concentrating on the way he kicks the stuffing out of Elias Stöber--lovely!" [E. C. Bentley, “Greedy Night,” reprinted from Ellery Queen’s Mystery Magazine in Dorothy L. Sayers: Lord Peter, ed. James Sandoe (NY 1972).]
When I came to read parts of the Astronomica and Housman’s prefaces, I shared the sentiments of this fictional Oxford student, finding the wit and point of A.E.'s malicious judgments on other textual critics, if not lovely, then at least worth remembering and repeating. Manilius, on the other hand, often does seem "rather a blister." I never imagined that I would do what I'm prepared to do today, to urge that Manilius' Astronomica can be a useful, interesting, and even pleasurable supplement to many a class of Roman poetry—say, for a Vergil class in the weeks remaining after the AP exam. For example, this poems offers a reason to discuss the role of astrology in the Roman world and its importance in the Stoic philosophical system. It offers as well an opportunity to consider the continuing vitality of the poetic tradition, for Manilius uses his didactic verse to engage in polemic with the atomistic doctrines of Lucretius, and extends his evocation of Vergil to express of his own convictions. Perhaps this is the most valuable thing such an exercise can offer, for the comparison Manilius invites his reader to make between his poem and its Vergilian models brings into relief particularly Vergilian characteristics. Clearly I can’t say all that I’d like to in 20 minutes, so I’ve included a rudimentary bibliography in case you want to pursue any of these ideas.
About Marcus Manilius, the man so far known only as a blister, we know nothing beyond his authorship of a single poem, the Astronomica, and a few fragments. About the poem's date and composition we have no external information, beyond echoes in later literature, including one pair of lines that appears as an epitaph. Internal cues for dating are few: a reference to the disastrous defeat of Varus at the Teutoberg Forest puts Book I after AD 9; its dedication to Augustus suggests a date in the emperor's lifetime. But references in book 4 point to Tiberius' reign--thus no earlier than 14 AD.
The hexameter poem fills five books, ranging in length from 650 to nearly 1000 lines, for a total of about 4500 lines. Its style is highly rhetorical, strongly influenced by Ovid; Manilius clearly delights in the challenges his subject presents, topics like a description of the stars in the night sky, the planets and their paths, the circles of the celestial sphere, and particularly the zodiac and its constellations, the twelve signs.
Manilian studies have burgeoned in the last twenty-five years; while we may find the poet's "versified sums" (a Housmanian phrases) tedious, we can no longer, like Bentley's student, dismiss him in a single word. The appearance of George P. Goold's Loeb edition in 1977, with its helpful introductions, charts, and English translation, made the Astronomica accessible to a wider audience; this volume has been followed by a second edition and by a Teubner text also edited by Goold. Renewed attention to the poem began to bear fruit in the early ‘80’s when the bibliography started to expand dramatically—some representative items are included in the bibliography; the number of English-language works is small. Specific studies have addressed Manilius' allusions to and borrowings from earlier poets, his influence in the Middle Ages, the evidence for his ideological leanings, and (brand new) his use of similes. As we gain access to more examples of astrological texts for comparison, we find that Manilius' science has close parallels in other sources.
And we must overcome our reluctance to consider his astrology as science, at least in the context of the ancient world and its understanding of a spherical, earth-centered universe. Ancient astrology relied heavily on mathematical models and it reflected the most up-to-date astronomical theory, which in turn depended on a fund of observational data. Claudius Ptolemy himself, after all, wrote not only Almagest--the great treatise on astronomy whose view of the universe was dominant until the Renaissance--but also Tetrabiblos, four books on astrological methods and their philosophical basis.
We can quickly sketch the outlines of the history of ancient astrology. Its beginnings are Babylonian, but the complex and sophisticated form in which it came to Rome largely grew out that Babylonian data in the Greek-speaking cities of the Hellenistic era, and particularly in Egypt. References to astrological ideas appear in Rome by the time of Cicero, for instance, who dismisses it in De Divinatione; Horace of course, before he tells Leuconoe carpe diem, tells her not to bother with Babylonios numeros. At the same time, though, a senator like Nigidius Figulus could cast horoscopes; Varro apparently was interested in this skill and his lost de astronomia may have included astrology as well as what we would call astronomy. And Stoicism provided a philosophical basis for accepting the truth of astrology's claims, with its understanding that the universe is orderly and rational, its parts held together by divine logos; this logos is manifest as creative fire, clearly the constituent of the heavenly bodies but also present in the human soul. The Stoic divinity is well-disposed to humankind and thus willing to reveal the orderly working of the cosmos, particularly, as Manilius urges, through our understanding of how the stars influence terrestrial life.
Now Augustus considered the constellation Capricorn as his lucky star, so to speak, and included its image on coins. Both Suetonius and Cassius Dio tell us that he had his own horoscope published, since it predicted a great future for him. Yet it is with Tiberius and his well-documented interest in the subject that astrology becomes big business. Thus, Manilius found an increasingly receptive climate for the poetic undertaking whose innovative nature he stressed.
Manilius emphasizes his originality in a very traditional way, by surveying a quick catalogue of Greek hexameter poets. In contrast to them, he proposes turn his back on oft-trodden paths and muddy and depleted fonts, and in his own chariot, or ship, embark on a previously unattempted venture. The presence of the Latin poetic predecessors, though unmentioned here, pervades his poem. With his frequent echoes of and allusions to (and corrections of) the great Latin didactic poems of Lucretius and Vergil, Manilius invites us implicitly to accept him as their successor. We will see that he answers challenges set by Vergil, and even corrects him—and that the nature of his corrections has to do with scientific understanding.
A good starting point is the macarismos of Vergil's Georgics, “happy the man”:
Vergil, Georgics 2.490 (ref. to Lucretius?)
Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas,
atque metus omnis et inexorabile fatum
subiecit pedibus strepitumque Acherontis avari.
Fortunatus et ille, deos qui novit agrestis,
Panaque Silvanumque senem Nymphasque sorores
Blessed is he whose mind had power to probe
The causes of things and trample underfoot
All terrors and inexorable fate
And the clamour of devouring Acheron;
But happy too is he who knows the gods of the countryside, knows Pan and old Silvanus
And the sister Nymphs.
tr. L. P. Wilkinson
These lines have been read as a particular reference and compliment to Varro, but it's difficult not to understand the first half of the formula in reference to Lucretius, whose great poem did undertake to explain the causas rerum, and did preach contempt for the templa Acherusia. For example,
Lucretius DRN 3.15-37 excerpts, tr. Ronald Melville
nam simul ac ratio tua coepit vociferari
naturam rerum divina mente coorta
diffugiunt animi terrores, moenia mundi
discedunt…..
For once your reason, born of mind divine,
Starts to proclaim the nature of the world
The terrors of the mind flee all away,
The walls of heaven open,……..
at contra nusquam apparent Acherusia templa,
nec tellus obstat quin omnia dispiciantur,
sub pedibus quae cumque infra per inane geruntur……
But in contrast nowhere at all appear
The halls of Acheron, though earth no bar
Opposes, but lets all be clearly seen that moves beneath our feet throughout the void.
hasce secundum res animi natura videtur
atque animae claranda meis iam versibus esse
et metus ille foras praeceps Acheruntis agendus,
The nature of mind and spirit by my verses
must be made clear, and headlong out of doors
That fear of Hell be thrown….
In his zeal to explain the world in Epicurean, atomic terms, Lucretius has an ambitious program that touches on a huge range of topics. Yet he is not the man who knows the rural deities, Pan, Silvanus and the Nymphs. Vergil can evoke and praise Lucretian science and immediately praise as well the kinds of traditional belief for which Lucretius has no interest: and it is in this broadness of outlook, or tolerance of ambiguity, that we see a particular characteristic of Vergil in contrast, we shall see, to Manilius.
Immediately preceding this passage, Vergil had surveyed the topics about which he would like to sing, a list that resembles the song of the bard Iopas in Aeneid I.
a. Georgics 2. 476-82
Me vero primum dulces ante omnia Musae,
quarum sacra fero ingenti percussus amore,
accipiant caelique vias et sidera monstrent,
defectus solis varios lunaeque labores;
unde tremor terris, qua vi maria alta tumescant
obicibus ruptis rursusque in se ipsa residant,
quid tantum Oceano properent se tinguere soles
hiberni, vel quae tardis mora noctibus obstet.
For my own part, my chiefest prayer would be—
May the sweet Muses, whose acolyte I am,
Smitten with boundless love, accept my service,
Teach me to know the paths of the stars in heaven,
The eclipses of the sun and the moon's travails,
The cause of earthquakes, what it is that forces
Deep seas to swell and burst their barriers
And then sink back again, why winter suns
hasten so fast to plunge themselves in the ocean
or what it is that slows the lingering nights.--
tr. L. P. Wilkinson
b. Aeneid 1.740-76
Cithara crinitus Iopas
personat aurata, docuit quem maximus Atlas.
Hic canit errantem lunam solisque labores;
unde hominum genus et pecudes; unde imber et ignes;
Arcturum pluviasque Hyadas geminosque Triones;
quid tantum Oceano properent se tinguere soles
hiberni, vel quae tardis mora noctibus obstet.
Long-haired Iopas,
whom mighty Atlas once had taught, lifts up
his golden lyre, sounding through the hall.
He sings the wandering moon; the labors of
the sun; the origins of men and beasts,
of water and of fire; and of Arcturus,
the stormy Hyades, and the twin Bears;
and why the winter suns so rush to plunge
in Ocean; what holds back the lingering nights.
tr. A. Mandelbaum
These are the kinds of topics Lucretius has tackled, particularly in Bk 5, where he narrates the growth of the world from individual atoms.
But Manilius too answers these questions, from a perspective quite different from Lucretius', and he unambiguously rejects the Epicurean system. In the second half of his first book, for example, Manilius has drawn his reader's attention the regularity of the patterns of the stars, and then continues with selection the following passage:
Astronomica 1.483-500
Ac mihi tam praesens ratio non ulla videtur,
qua pateat mundum divino numine verti
atque ipsum esse deum, nec forte coisse magistra,
ut voluit credi, qui primus moenia mundi
seminibus struxit minimis inque illa resolvit;
e quibus et maria et terras et sidera caeli
aetheraque immensis fabricantem finibus orbes
solventemque alios constare, et cuncta reverti
in sua principia et rerum mature figuras.
quis credat tantas operum sine numine moles
ex minimis caecoque creatum foedere mundum?
si fors ista dedi nobis, fors ipsa gubernet.
at cur dispositis vicibus consurgere signa
et velut imperio praescriptos reddere cursus
cernimus ac nullis properantibus ulla relinqui?
cur eadem aestivas exornant sidera noctes
semper et hibernas eadem, certamque figuram
quisque dies reddit mundo certamque relinquit?
For my part I find no argument so compelling as this to show that the universe moves in obedience to a divine power and is indeed the manifestation of God, and did not come together at the dictation of chance. Yet this is what he would have us believe who first built the walls of the heavens from minute atoms and into these resolved them again; he held that from these atoms are formed the seas, the lands, and the stars in the sky, and the air by which in its vast space worlds are created and dissolved; and that all matter returns to its first origins and changes the shapes of things. Who could believe that such massive structures have been created from tiny atoms with out the operation of a divine will, and that the universe is the creature of a blind compact? If chance gave such a world to us, chance itself would govern it. Then why do we see the stars arise in regular succession and duly perform as a the word of command their appointed courses, none hurrying ahead, none left behind? Why are the summer nights and the nights of winter ever made beautiful with the selfsame stars? Why does each day of the year bring back to the sky a fixed pattern and a fixed pattern leave at its departure?
tr. G. P. Goold
The argument that appears in 494-500, that an intelligent divinity must be responsible for the regularity of the movements of the heavenly bodies, is a familiar one in Stoic contexts; it's very similar to the one Cicero has his Stoic representative, Balbus, employ in De Natura Deorum (2. 87-88). Manilius also explicitly rejects the doctrines of Epicurus at vv. 485 ff: "The world did not come together at the bidding of chance, as he wanted us to believe, who first constructed the ramparts of the world from tiny seeds and dissolved them into those seeds again." Furthermore, Manilius makes this challenge using the language of the great Epicurean poet, Lucretius. For instance, the phrase moenia mundi appears in the selection from De Rerum Natura we have just read above, and at least ten more times. For the atoms, M. uses Lucretius' terms, semina and principia; the verb solveo also for Lucretius refers to the process by which the things of the visible world return to their component atoms, and their combination is often called a foedus, although caeco “blind,” that is, “random,” here is Manilius' evaluation: in Lucretius that epithet more frequently indicates "unseen."
Manilius' evocation of Vergil is more subtle and more far-reaching than his relationship to Lucretius: His own language is steeped in Vergil's; the structure of his poem appears to be influenced by that of the Georgics, as the inclusion of this tiny epyllion of Perseus & Andromeda in Bk 5 seems to designed to correspond to that of Orpheus & Eurydice in Georgics 4. (At the same time the choice of this story seems to depend on Ovid's Metamorphoses). As we’ve seen, it’s possible to understand his entire undertaking in this massive poem as a response to Vergil's ideal poem of Georgics 2 and Aeneid 1. In fact, he addresses all the topics about which Iopas sang, and about which Vergil longed to sing. The paths of heaven and the stars are indeed the core material of his new song, and it is his determination to recount all the lore of astrology that make the poem such a challenge for its readers, for instance, lunar eclipses and lunar cycles:
Astronomica 1.221-26
te testem dat, luna, sui glomeraminis orbis,
quae cum mersa mnigris per nocem deficis umbris,
non omnis pariter confundis sidere gentes,
sed prius eoae quaerunt tua lumina terrae,
post medio subiecta polo quaecumque coluntur,
seraque in hesperiis quatiuntur gentibus aera.
The earth makes you, O Moon, a witness to its roundness: when at night your star is plunged into utter darkness and suffers eclipse, it does not bewilder all nations at the same time; but first the lands of the orient miss your light, then the places situated beneath the middle sky, and late is the brass clashed among the peoples of the west. tr. G. P. Goold
Astronomica 2.96-98
atque iterum ex isdem repetis, quantumque reliquit
aut dedit ille, refers et sidus sidere constas;
Thus you too return your features to your brother's car and second time from it reseek them, and as much as he grudged or lavished on you do you reflect, your star dependent on his. tr. G. P. Goold
Manilius may not be able to explain earthquakes and floods (unde tremor terris…) but he points out that their occurrence is simply part of the natural order of things (4.828-29); in lengthy passage he discusses the seasonal changes in the length of day light (3.443-82). Like Iopas Manilius sings of Arcturus (1.316-18) and of the Bears (5.119). His most important response to Vergil, though, lies in his answers to the questions beginning with unde: unde hominum genus et pecudes; his answer is deus et ratio et sidera.
Astronomica 2.82-86
hic igitur deus et ratio, quae cuncta gubernat,
ducit ab aetheriis terrena animalia signis,
quae, quamquam longo, cogit, summota recessu,
sentiri tamen, ut vitas ac fata ministrent
gentibus ac proprios per singula corpora mores.
This God and all-controlling reason, then, derives earthly beings from the signs of heaven; though the stars are remote at a far distance, he compels recognition of their influences, that they give to the peoples of the world their lives and destinies and to each man his own character.
tr. G. P. Goold
And in various forms this answer applies to the other questions as well. Furthermore, Manilius insists that to understand the heavens is to understand God, and is characteristic of human kind in contrast to the animals.
Astronomica 4.883-85
iam nusquam natura latet; pervidimus omnem
et capto potimur mundo nostrumque parentem
pars sua perspicimus genitique accedimus astris.
Now nature holds no mysteries for us; we have surveyed it in its entirety and are masters of the conquered sky; we perceive our creator, of whom we are part, and rise to the stars, whose children we are.
tr. G. P. Goold
Astronomica 4.893-97
quid mirum, noscere mundum
si possunt homines, quibus est et mundus in ipsis
exemplumque dei quisque est in imagine parva?
an cuiquam genitos, nisi caelo, credere fas est
esse homines?
Why wonder that that men
can comprehend heaven, when heaven exists in their very beings and each one is in a smaller likeness the image of God himself? Are we to believe that man is born of aught but heaven? tr. G. P. Goold
Manilius stresses God’s eagerness for us to understand his heavens:
Astronomica 4.915-19
atque ideo faciem caeli non invidet orbi
ipse deus vultusque suos corpusque recludit
volvendo semper seque ipsum inculcat et offert,
ut bene cognosci possit doceatque videntis,
qualis eat, cogatque suas attendere leges.
God grudges not the earth the sight of heaven but reveals his face and form by ceaseless revolution, offering, nay impressing, himself upon us to the end that he can be truly known, can teach his nature to those who have eyes to see, and can compel them to mark his laws. tr. G. P. Goold
And this knowledge, Manilius assures his reader, is within our grasp, because "reason is what triumphs over all"--ratio omnia vincit (4.932; Goold’s translation). This phrase evokes its familiar ancestor from Georgics I: omnia vicit labor/improbus-- "Toil mastered everything, relentless toil" (I.145-46).The context of Vergil's dictum is, you remember, how the arts of civilization developed in order to provide humankind a livelihood, since Jupiter had determined that their lives would not be easy.
Curiously, when Lucretius had surveyed the growth of human society, he summarizes progress in this way:
Lucretius DNR 5.1448-57
Navigia atque agri culturas moenia leges
arma vias vestes [et] cetera de genere horum,
praemia, delicias quoque vitae funditus omnis,
carmina, picturas et daedala signa polita
usus et impigrae simul experientia mentis
paulatim docuit pedetemptim progredientis.
sic unum quicquid paulatim protrahit aetas
in medium ratioque in luminis erigit oras;
namque alid ex alio clarescere corde videbant,
artibus ad summum donec venere cacumen.
Seafaring and farming, city walls, and laws
And arms, roads, clothing, and all such other things,
All the rewards, all the delights of life,
Songs, pictures, statues curiously wrought,
All these they learnt by practice gradually
And by experiments of eager minds
As step by step they made their forward ways
So each thing in its turn by slow degrees
Time doth bring forward to the lives of men,
And reason lifts it to the light of day.
For as one concept followed on another
Men saw it form and brighten in their minds
till by their arts they scaled the highest peak. tr. Melville
Apparently here Manilius agrees with Lucretius about the power of ratio to improve the lot of humankinds, and he goes as far as to correct Vergil in an unmistakable way. This example leads us back to my earlier assertion, that to see where Manilius differs from Vergil can perhaps help us to think about Vergil more clearly. Think of the questions this notion can open for your class: Does Vergil seem to doubt the power of reason? Is Tennyson right when he calls Vergil majestic in his sadness at the doubtful doom of human kind?
If Manilius’ formidable poem can help spark discussions like this, time spent with it will be well invested.
Select bibliography
Asterisks (*) indicate particularly accessible items.
Editions:
* Goold, G. P. ed. & tr. Manilius: Astronomica. Loeb Classical Library, 1997.
Manilius:Astronomica. Teubner edition, Leipzig 1985.
Housman, A. E. Five volumes, 1903-1930.
Liuzzi, Dora. Five volumes, Lecce, 1990-2000
Scarcia, Riccardo, intro.. & trans. Manilio. Il poema degli astri. Vol. I, Libri I-II.; text, Enrico Flores, Comment.. Simonetta Feraboli & Riccardo Scarcia. Lorenzo Valli 1996.
Studies of the Poem:
Hübner, W. Die Eigenschaften der Tierkreiszeichen in der Antike. Wiesbaden 1982.
"Manilius als Astrologe und Dichter," ANRW 32.1 (1984) 126-320.
Die Dodekatropos des Manilius : (Manil. 2, 856-970). Stuttgart : Steiner, 1995 (Abhandlungen der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse / Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur [Mainz] 1995, 6.
Liuzzi, Dora. Manilio fra poesia e scienza: atti del convegno: Lecce, 14-16 maggio 1992. Galatina, 1993.
Maranini, Anna. Filologia Fantastica: Manilio e i suoi "Astronomica." Bologna, 1994
*Pozzi, Martin. "Electronic M@nilius" http://www.lingualatina.f2s.com/manilio/
Reeh, A. Interpretationen zu den Astronomica des Manilius (1973)
Reeve, M. D. "Manilius." Texts & Transmission (ed. L. D. Reynolds) Oxford 1983, pp. 235-38.
Romano, E. Struttura degli Astronomica di Manilio (1979)
Salemme, Carmelo. Introduzione agli "Astronomica" di Manilio. Naples, 1983.
Schindler, Claudia. Untersuchungen zu den Gleichnissen im römischen Lehrgedicht: Lucrez, Vergil, Manilius. Göttingen, 2000.
On ancient astrology and astronomy:
Bakhouche, Béatrice, Alain Moreau et Jean-Claude Turpin, edd. Les astres : actes du colloque international de Montpellier, 23-25 mars 1995. 1, Les astres et les mythes, la description du ciel. Séminaire d'étude des mentalités antiques (SEMA). Montpellier : Publications de la recherche, Université Paul-Valéry, 1996.
Barton, T. S. Ancient Astrology. London & New York : 1994.
Evans, James. The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy. Oxford 1998.
*Heath, Sir Thomas L. Greek Astronomy. London: 1932; reprinted Dover 1991.
Spaulding, Timothy, ed. "Ancient Divination and Astrology on the Web" http://www.isidore-of-seville.com/astdiv/
*Tester, S. J. A. History of Western Astrology. Woodbridge, Suffolk: 1987.
Miscellaneous:
Bentley, E. C. "Greedy Night," Ellery Queen's Mystery Magazine, 1942; reprinted in Lord Peter, Dorothy L. Sayers, ed. James Sandoe, NY 1972, pp. 470-87.
Electronic resources for Latin Texts:
http://patriot.net/~lillard/cp/verg.geo2.html
http://patriot.net/~lillard/cp/verg.aen1.html
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/fld/CLASSICS/luc1.html
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/fld/CLASSICS/manilius1.html