This article attempts to define whether literary patronage existed in Roman elegists’ literary relationships. To be more specific, Gold uses the idea that should a literary patronage exist, then could it be interpreted in the context of being a socio-historical document or a literary artifact? In order to explore the overall question, Gold acknowledges the fact that there is a lack of evidence about whether our understanding of the word patronage can be applied to the Romans at all as the Roman poets were not bound by their patron to push political propaganda nor did they used poetry as a means to support themselves. The main arguments for these are examining the patronage through terminology, roles of the elite, especially an emperor, and
…show more content…
The implication of terminology is especially interesting when we look at the dynamics of Roman society that any mention of dependency was unwarranted. For example, we define the relationship between patron and poet as patronage, but the Romans used term, amicitia or friendship. It is intriguing as the word amicitia suggests mutual benefits, whilst patronage is more akin to include power dynamics. However, as Gold examines the various terms associated with patronage like amicitia, amici, cliens, and patronus, the benefits associated with each term vary and so do the expectations. In the use of cliens and patronus, the Roman understanding was unfavorable, since the terms alluded to dependency and unequal power dynamics. Therefore, in the case of amici and amicitia in political and social environments, a distinction between the inferior and superior person could be drawn, despite the poets belonging to the same class …show more content…
This is especially true as in the case of Propertius and Maecenas, where in book 3, Propertius uses eroticized language, mollia, to cast Maecenas as his substitute muse. The case of Propertius and Tullus, unlike Propertius and Maecenas, their relationship is more apparent in its homoerotic tendencies. Hence, with Propertius casting his patrons as amatory figures and the patrons’ own political sway, it seems that Propertius has combined the two opposing ideals and their relationship is greatly affected by his own refusal to submit to the demand of either Tullus or Maecenas that he ends up being swayed by their political influence to continually write about the subject of war and politics, even if it is only to refuse it. Due to the assimilation of the different components Gold used to examine her question, the existence of what we would refer to as literary patronage exists only in a modern context. Yet, the relationship between patron and poet is complex and encompasses the social and political aspects of a poet’s
The implication of terminology is especially interesting when we look at the dynamics of Roman society that any mention of dependency was unwarranted. For example, we define the relationship between patron and poet as patronage, but the Romans used term, amicitia or friendship. It is intriguing as the word amicitia suggests mutual benefits, whilst patronage is more akin to include power dynamics. However, as Gold examines the various terms associated with patronage like amicitia, amici, cliens, and patronus, the benefits associated with each term vary and so do the expectations. In the use of cliens and patronus, the Roman understanding was unfavorable, since the terms alluded to dependency and unequal power dynamics. Therefore, in the case of amici and amicitia in political and social environments, a distinction between the inferior and superior person could be drawn, despite the poets belonging to the same class …show more content…
This is especially true as in the case of Propertius and Maecenas, where in book 3, Propertius uses eroticized language, mollia, to cast Maecenas as his substitute muse. The case of Propertius and Tullus, unlike Propertius and Maecenas, their relationship is more apparent in its homoerotic tendencies. Hence, with Propertius casting his patrons as amatory figures and the patrons’ own political sway, it seems that Propertius has combined the two opposing ideals and their relationship is greatly affected by his own refusal to submit to the demand of either Tullus or Maecenas that he ends up being swayed by their political influence to continually write about the subject of war and politics, even if it is only to refuse it. Due to the assimilation of the different components Gold used to examine her question, the existence of what we would refer to as literary patronage exists only in a modern context. Yet, the relationship between patron and poet is complex and encompasses the social and political aspects of a poet’s