Abstract

This article adopts a revisionist approach to the intertextual relationship between Statius’Thebaidand Silius Italicus’Punica, two contemporary Flavian epics that interact with one another (first centurya.d.). As such, this is not only an excellent illustration of intertextuality in action but also a prime example of how texts can be read in either direction depending on which takes precedence. Since both epics overlap in time, it is precisely the difficulty in establishing the direction of influence between the two poets that opens up texts in creative ways by allowing further readings. Of course, such an overlap calls for a shift in power from the author onto the reader in constructing meaning in text. However, textual evidence only allows us to do so much. It is my contention that Statius could not have interacted with Silius’Punicabeyonda.d.92, which is the year when he published hisThebaid. This is also the year when Silius is thought to have composed Book 12 of thePunica. Therefore, Statius could only effectively engage with Silius up toPunicaBook 12, it seems, while Silius carried on writing the remainder of his seventeen-book-long epic. Still, there is ample material from Statius’Thebaidand Silius’PunicaBooks 1–12 to explore in terms of mutual influence. A critical trend in Flavian scholarship has produced a list of parallels between the two epics showing Silius’ potential borrowing from Statius and vice versa. As recently discussed in Ripoll's study, the most significant parallel inviting close comparison is Hannibal's siege of Rome inPunicaBook 12 and Capaneus’ assault on Thebes inThebaidBook 10. In this article, I would like to return to these two specific episodes and read them alongside each other. The purpose of the reading is to evaluate whether this single interaction changes the model of how we think about the intertextual activity between Silius and Statius, before the final publication of theThebaidina.d.92, when Statius could still revise, amend and polish in the light of thePunica.