At vos … Primus in Epirum Boreas agat! The Consuls’ Sea-passage to Greece in Lucan’s Civil War (2.645-648)

Mariusz Plago^*

Uniwersytet Wrocławski
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6545-1492

At vos … Primus in Epirum Boreas agat! Il passaggio marittimo dei consoli verso la Grecia nella Guerra Civile di Lucano (2.645-648)

Introduction: The consuls’ sea crossing in Lucan and in historical sources

At the end of Book 2 of Lucan’s Civil War, Pompey successfully evades Caesar’s blockade of the harbor at Brundisium. This event is dated to 17 March 49 BCE in the Roman civil calendar, corresponding to 26 January in the Julian calendar (Ramsey, Raaflaub 2017: 190). The opening lines of Book 3 depict Pompey already aboard a ship, sailing – driven by the south wind (Auster) – towards the Greek coast (3.1). Before departing from the Calabrian (modern Apulian) port himself, Pompey dispatches his elder son, Gnaeus, along with the consuls L. Lentulus Crus and C. Claudius Marcellus (neither of whom is mentioned by name), ahead by sea to muster additional troops. He first addresses his son, instructing him to mobilize the entire East, while recounting an extensive list of his own triumphs (632-644). In contrast, his directives to the consuls are markedly succinct: in just four lines, he commands them to proceed to Epirus and subsequently to Greece and Macedonia, taking advantage of the temporary suspension of warfare due to the winter season:

at vos, qui Latios signatis nomine fastos,
primus in Epirum Boreas agat; inde per arva
Graiorum Macetumque novas adquirite vires
dum paci dat tempus hiemps.
(Lucan. 2.645-648)

Gnaeus’ mission is poorly documented in the historical record. Only Plutarch reports that Pompey sent his father-in-law, Scipio, and his elder son from Brundisium to Syria to organize a fleet (Pomp. 62.2).^[1] By contrast, the consuls’ crossing of the Adriatic is well attested. The transfer of troops to Dyrrachium had been Pompey’s plan since the outbreak of the war with Caesar, as evidenced by a letter he sent to the consuls early in the conflict (Pomp. ap. Cic. Att. 8.12a.3; this letter is dated to around 18 February 49 BCE; see Shackleton Bailey 1968: 453). Caesar recounts (Civ. 2.25.2-3) that upon his arrival in Brundisium, the consuls had already departed for Dyrrachium, taking most of the army with them. Pompey remained in the city with twenty cohorts. Caesar was unsure whether his opponent had deliberately stayed to hold the port or, lacking a sufficient number of ships to transport his entire force at once, was compelled to wait for the return of vessels from Greece (which was true). Additional references to the consuls’ crossing to Dyrrachium, accompanied by part of the army, appear in the accounts of Appian (App. BC 2.38-40), Plutarch (Pomp. 62.2, Caes. 35.2), and Cassius Dio (41.12.1, 12.3, 14.1).^[2]

Although ample evidence supports Dyrrachium as the consuls’ destination, Lucan avoids naming the city explicitly. Instead, Pompey, in his command, vaguely refers to Epirus (2.646) as the region to which the consuls are dispatched in winter with the first blast of Boreas. In this respect, Lucan aligns more closely with Cicero’s letter to Atticus 9.6.3 from March 11, 49 BCE, where it is stated that the consuls, along with the army, plebeian tribunes, senators, and their families, set sail for Epirus, driven by a north wind (Lucan. 2.465: primus Boreas ~ Cic. Att. 9.6.3: ex ea die fuere septemtriones venti). The consuls embarked in the early days of March.^[3] Because the Roman calendar was ahead of the solar calendar by about six weeks, the event can be dated to mid-January in our calendar.^[4] Nevertheless, “Epirus” in the Civil War may still refer specifically to Dyrrachium, a reading supported by Lucan’s commentators, who consistently invoke Dyrrachium in their analyses.^[5]

Epirus, Dyrrachium, and Boreas: Geographical and textual boundaries in 2.646

The term “Epirus” is often used imprecisely by ancient authors. The lands across the sea from the eastern coast of the Italian peninsula encompassed both Epirus and Illyria, with the Acroceraunian Peninsula (modern Karaburun Peninsula) marking the boundary between the two. This headland encloses the pre­sent-day Bay of Vlorë, which was home to the coastal city of Oricum. Epirus stretched southward to the Ambracian Gulf, while Illyria extended north of the peninsula, incorporating cities such as Apollonia, Dyrrachium, Lissus, and Nymphaeum (Strab. 7.7.5; Plin. Nat. 3.145, 150).^[6] However, this ethnic distinction did not correspond to Roman administrative divisions. The Lex Vatinia de imperio Caesaris (59 BCE) designated much of Illyria as Illyricum, combining it with Gallia Cisalpina into a single administrative unit (which was assigned to Caesar as a provincia). Meanwhile, Epirus was incorporated into the province of Macedonia, which also included parts of southern Illyria, such as the area around Dyrrachium.^[7] As a result, the ancients often referred to southern Illyria as Epirus.^[8] Thus, when Pompey instructs the consuls to sail for Epirus in Lucan’s narrative, he may actually be referring to Dyrrachium, a fortified city with vital military connections to the hinterland by the Via Egnatia.

The term “Epirus” appears only three times in the Civil War. Besides Pompey’s commands in Book 2, it surfaces in Book 5, where a gathering of the ‘senate’ is held in Epirus (5.9), likely near Dyrrachium, and where Caesar, addressing Antony, refers to the region between Apollonia and Dyrrachium as Epirus (5.496). If “Epirus” in 2.646 indeed refers to Dyrrachium, a problem arises with the north wind accompanying the consuls, as Dyrrachium lies to the north of Brundisium. Lucan describes three other sea crossings from Brundisium to Greece, each of which specifies a particular wind. At the beginning of Book 3 (1-45), Pompey leaves Italy, aided by the south wind (Auster), a detail that typically elicits no objections.^[9] In Book 5, both Caesar (403-460) and later Antony (703-721) undertake sea voyages. Caesar sets sail with the north wind Aquilo (Latin for Boreas), which raises no concerns, as he lands at Palaeste (near modern Palasë), south of Brundisium (Lucan. 5.460; Caes. Civ. 3.6^[10]). However, Antony’s journey proves more problematic: he initially departs with Boreas, which later shifts to Auster (5.720-721), though Caesar himself (Civ. 3.26.4) reports two days of south winds before an improbable shift (incredibili felicitate) to Africus, the southwest wind.^[11] Antony eventually lands at Nymphaeum, a port near Lissus, north of Dyrrachium (Lucan. 5.719-720; Caes. Civ. 3.26.4).

Sailing directly northward toward Dyrrachium with Boreas would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible. Ancient square-rigged ships, like their later counterparts, could sail into the wind to a limited extent, but their “no-go zone” was considerable. According to L. Casson (1971: 274), drawing on J. Smith (1848: 83, 177–178), ancient ships could sail “no closer to the wind than seven points” (78.75º off the wind direction; one point equals 11.25º). Even if this is a conservative estimate, windward sailing, as J. Beresford (2013: 165–166) notes, was time-consuming and generally avoided, even in the later centuries of grand sailing ships.^[12] The emphasis on the north wind in the consuls’ voyage and Antony’s sea passage is therefore surprising. Regarding Antony’s crossing, A.W. Lintott (1971: 491–492) was perhaps the first scholar to suggest that the change of winds in Book 5, compared to the historical source (which may not have been Caesar directly), may have been deliberate and driven by poetic purposes. Instead of the south and south-west winds, two opposing winds – north and south – are depicted, a contrast that highlights the fortuna Caesaris.^[13] Lintott’s reasoning seems convincing. In the case of the consuls’ crossing, which is the focus of this article, some scholars simply noted Lucan’s error.^[14] However, others gave more attention to this issue and proposed explanations.

Interpretative approaches to Boreas’s appearance in 2.646

A.E. Housman (1927: ad 7.871), in his edition of the Civil War, interpreted the incorrect naming of the winds as a form of poetic pars pro toto. From this perspective, Boreas can refer to any wind. We may further note that the presence of Boreas in 2.646 can be justified by the fact that, firstly, south and north winds prevail in the Adriatic, and secondly, Boreas is often identified with winter in poetry (as early as in Hes. Op. 505-508).^[15] It is precisely during this season that the consuls set off to Greece. Housman’s interpretation was recently revisited by P.H. Schrijvers (2010: 21).^[16] R. Pichon (1912: 121), on the other hand, argued that Lucan mistakenly believed the entire Illyrian-Epirot coastline to be located southeast of Brundisium. This claim is relatively easy to substantiate, given that the poem contains numerous geographical errors and misrepresentations. Pichon further suggested that Lucan’s misrepresentation may have been influenced by Livy. A similar stance was taken by A. Bourgery (1928: 26), who noted that this is a particularly curious mistake – not only because it conflicts with the opening of Book 3, but also because Suetonius’s biography of Lucan records the poet’s voyage to Athens (Suet. Vita Lucani 47.9-10).^[17]

A poetic explanation for this error was proposed by W. Ehlers and later endorsed by V. Hunink. Hunink writes that: “Auster is the normal wind on the Adriatic, and Lucan probably uses Boreas in BC 2 and 5 to suggest ‘adverse wind’ and ‘peril’”. This interpretation implies that Pompey, who sails with Auster, “is lucky at least in this detail.”^[18] Thus, Ehlers and Hunink regarded the presence of the south wind in 3.1 as a symbol of Pompey’s felicitas.^[19] However, the departure of the consuls is not a particularly significant event in Lucan’s poem, making it unnecessary to suggest impending doom or destruction in connection with them.

Pichon’s assertion that Lucan incorrectly located the Illyrian-Epirot coast too far south of Brundisium was refuted by E. de Saint-Denis (1935: 426–427) and later by F.H.M. van Campen (1991: ad 2.645ff.). Pompey’s instructions to his son and the consuls are directly preceded by a depiction of Brundisium as a safe and convenient port, culminating in a description of the routes leading from there to Greece:

hinc late patet omne fretum, seu vela ferantur
in portus, Corcyra, tuos, seu laeva petatur
Illyris Ionias vergens Epidamnos in undas.
hoc fuga nautarum, cum totas Hadria vires
movit et in nubes abiere Ceraunia cumque
spumoso Calaber perfunditur aequore Sason. (Lucan. 2.622-627)

The narrator mentions two major routes: one leading to the ports of Corcyra and the other to the port of Dyrrachium, referred to by its Greek name, Epidamnos. To sail to the latter from Brundisium, one must turn to the left. This detail suggests that Lucan had a general understanding of the geography of the Greek coastline. The routes he described are confirmed by several other authors, including Strabo (6.3.8): one route leads to the Ceraunian Mountains and down to the nearby shores of Epirus and Greece (and also to Corcyra); the other, longer route goes to Epidamnos, which has “now” become a frequently used passage for the Romans (τέτριπται δὲ καὶ οὗτος) due to the city’s favorable connections with the mainland and the tribes of Illyria and Macedonia.^[20]

Mapping Lucan’s geography

Let us take a closer look at the lines quoted above. Lucan describes Dyrrachium/Epidamnos with the adjectival modifier “Illyrian” (Illyris … Epidamnos, 2.624), aligning with the ethnic divisions of this part of the Greek coast. However, some confusion may arise from the names of aquatic areas. While the Ceraunian Mountains and the island of Sason (present-day Sazan), which form their extension, are associated with the Adriatic, Epidamnos, though located further north, is reached via the Ionian waves. The boundary between the Ionian Sea and the Adriatic ran from the city of Hydruntum (Greek Hydrus, modern Otranto, the easternmost point of Apulia) to Apollonia (Plin. Nat. 3.100) or to the Ceraunian Mountains (Strab. 7.5.8-9; Mela 2.54-56).^[21] This corresponds to what is known today as the Strait of Otranto. The Adriatic lies to the north of this line, while the Ionian Sea stretches to the south.

In antiquity, the waters adjacent to the Strait of Otranto, both to the north and south, were referred to by different names. The phrase Ionias undas in 2.624 likely does not denote the Ionian Sea in its customary understanding. Herodotus describes Apollonia as lying within the Ionian Gulf (6.127.2, 9.93.2).^[22] In Thucydides, Epidamnos is located on the right side when entering the Ionian Gulf (1.24.1).^[23] Both Herodotus and Thucydides refer to at least the first part of the Adriatic Sea (if not the entire sea) as the Ionian Gulf. According to Strabo (7.5.8-9):

After Apollonia comes Bylliaca, and Oricum and its seaport Panormus, and the Ceraunian Mountains, where the mouth of the Ionian Gulf and the Adrias begins. Now the mouth is common to both, but the Ionian is different in that it is the name of the first part of this sea, whereas Adrias is the name of the inside part of the sea as far as the recess; at the present time, however, Adrias is also the name of the sea as a whole.^[24]

In another passage, the geographer places Apollonia on the Ionian Gulf (7, fr. 56 [57]).^[25] When Appian mentions Pompey’s crossing, he uses the form Ἰόνιος to denote the waters traversed (BC 2.49).^[26] Cassius Dio does the same when writing that Pompey did not believe Caesar would cross the sea in winter (41.44.1).^[27] Shortly afterward, Dio notes that the Acroceraunian Peninsula is the westernmost point of Epirus, situated near the mouth of the Ionian Gulf (41.44.3).^[28] These are just a few of many examples. Thus, Lucan’s phrase Ionias undas in 2.624 likely refers to the first part of the Adriatic Sea, north of the Strait of Otranto. Similarly, the phrase omnis in Ionios spectabat nauita fluctus in 3.3 should be understood in the same way. When a storm arises and the sea rages, Lucan refers to Hadria (2.625), a term encompassing the entire basin.

Another riddle in Lucan’s passage arises from the description of the (masculine-gendered) island of Sason as “Calabrian” (Calaber). Lines 5.650-653, detailing Caesar’s struggle with the storm, indicate that Lucan was well aware of the island’s location just off the Greek coast: non humilem Sasona vadis [non litora curuae / Leucadiae saxosa pavent] oraeque malignos / Ambraciae portus, scopulosa Ceraunia nautae / summa timent.^[29] The islands of Sason and Leucadia (assuming L. Håkanson’s (1976: 41–42) correction is accepted; the manuscripts contain Thessaliae, while Housman (1927: ad loc.), following F. Guietus and R. Bentley, deleted line 651 entirely) flank the entirety of Greece’s western coastline “from-to,” encompassing Ambracia and the Ceraunian Mountains. The sites are orga­nized in an ABBA sequence, with A as the north end and B as the south end: Sason (A) – Leucadia (B) – Ambracia (B’) – Ceraunia (A’). According to Strabo (6.3.5), moreover, Sason marked the midpoint of the route from Epirus (likely Dyrrachium) to Brundisium, via the Calabrian Hydruntum, allowing sailors to minimize the voyage across open sea. Strabo writes that while sailing to Italy, one would pass along the coast with Sason to the left, cross to Hydruntum via the Strait of Otranto, and continue to Brundisium with a favorable wind^[30] – a south wind, which aided voyages from Brundisium to Barium (modern Bari; Strab. 6.3.8). The modifier Calaber in Book 2 can simply suggest that the island is situated opposite Calabria. After passing it, the sailors headed toward the Italian, Calabrian coast.^[31]

Except for the puzzling adjective Calaber, the geography in 2.622-627 is entirely accurate. Lucan appears to have understood that Boreas would not direct the sailors straight to Dyrrachium, which lies north of Brundisium. If we dismiss the notion that Boreas represents any wind, the consuls in the poem sail south. De Saint-Denis (1935: 426–427) and van Campen (1991: ad 2.645ff.) suggested that the consuls’ route mirrored Strabo’s description in 6.3.5 but in reverse. Thus, the consuls likely first sailed southward along the Italian coast with the north wind. After reaching Hydruntum, they crossed to the opposite shore, arriving at the Acroceraunian Peninsula and the island of Sason, and then sailed along the coast to Dyrrachium. Pompey may have directed them through the Strait of Otranto to avoid exposing soldiers, civilians, senators, their wives, and children to the stormy open sea in winter. A coastal route was also safer, as Pompey had gathered all ships from the region and controlled Italian waters, while Caesar was still on route to Brundisium. The consuls could sail close to the coast without risking being chased or attacked.^[32]

An alternative interpretation of Boreas’s appearance in 2.646

It seems that the explanation for the north wind in line 2.646, proposed by de Saint-Denis and van Campen, resolves all the issues. However, another explanation is possible, one that does not depend on information external to Lucan’s text regarding the consuls’ crossing. The key may lie in the letters of Cicero, briefly mentioned earlier. In his letter, Cicero quotes another letter he received from Ca­pua, stating that Clodia informed her son-in-law, the plebeian tribune L. Metellus, that she had reportedly crossed to Greece with Pompey, the entire army (30,000 people), the consuls, the plebeian tribunes, the senators, and their wives and children. The ships that had to be left behind were burned:

Scripta iam epistula Capua litterae sunt adlatae hoc a exemplo: ‘Pompeius mare transiit cum omnibus militibus quos secum habuit. hic numerus est hominum milia triginta et consules duo et tribuni pl. et senatores qui fuerunt cum eo omnes cum uxoribus et liberis. conscendisse dicitur a. d. IIII Non. Mart. [sc. 4 March] ex ea die fuere septemtriones venti. navis quibus usus non est omnis aut praecidisse aut incendisse dicunt. de hac re litterae L. Metello tribuno pl. Capuam adlatae sunt a Clodia socru, quae ipsa transit.’ (Cic. Att. 9.6.3)

Some of the content in this letter does not correspond to the facts. Above all, Pompey himself, along with part of his troops, remained at Brundisium.^[33] Cicero corrects certain pieces of information in a letter to his friend dated March 17 (Att. 9.9). Atticus seems to have doubted various details, as can be inferred from Cicero’s response:

recte non credis de numero militum; ipso dimidio plus scripsit Clodia. falsum etiam de corruptis navibus. [...] de septemtrione plane ita est; metuo ne vexetur Epirus. sed quem tu locum Graeciae non direptum iri putas? praedicat [sc. Pompey] enim palam et militibus ostendit se largitione ipsa superiorem quam hunc [sc. Caesar] fore. (Cic. Att. 9.9.2)

Pompey’s sea-passage is no longer mentioned. Atticus was right to question the earlier report regarding both the size of the army and the burning of ships. The wind issue resurfaces, with Cicero not correcting this detail, but rather reaffirming it: de septemtrione plane ita est. He also expresses concern about Epirus: metuo ne vexetur Epirus, likely referring not to Dyrrachium itself but to Atticus’s property near Buthrotum (modern Butrint), opposite Corcyra.^[34] The mention of the wind and, presumably, their past experiences lead Cicero and Atticus to worry that those departing from Brundisium might be headed toward Corcyra.^[35] Notably, as discussed earlier, Strabo mentions that in his day, sailors typically sailed directly to Dyrrachium (using the south wind).

Cicero was familiar with these regions. In 58 BCE, when he was exiled, he crossed the sea from Brundisium to Dyrrachium, where he took the Via Egnatia to Thessalonica, only to return to Dyrrachium later that same year (Att. 3.22.4) and eventually back to Italia in August 57 BCE (by the Roman civil calendar; Att. 4.1.4). Cicero also sailed to and from Brundisium via Corcyra during his journey to the province of Cilicia and back. He recounts the route in detail: beginning in Brundisium, where he awaited favorable conditions for the sea passage (cursum expectabamus, Att. 5.8.1), he traveled through Corcyra and Sybota, eventually reaching Actium. From there, he journeyed overland to Athens, before continuing further eastward toward Asia (Att. 5.8-12).^[36] On his return journey, Cicero sailed from Athens to Corcyra, departing from the port of Cassiope and heading to Hydruntum, finally arriving back in Brundisium^[37]. In a letter to Tiro recounting the leg of the voyage from Corcyra, which took place in December (the autumn of the solar calendar), Cicero references the wind under which he and his brother sailed. After spending a few days in Cassiope, waiting for favorable weather (ibi retenti ventis sumus), they set sail with the mild Auster (austro lenissimo, caelo sereno), which carried them to Hydruntum. From there, they reached Brundisium the following day (Fam. 16.9.1-2). This is the opposite wind to that with which the consuls are to sail from Brundisium in Lucan’s Civil War.

Since no other surviving records document the specific wind conditions during the consuls’ departure, it is tempting to suggest that Lucan might have been inspired by Cicero’s letters to Atticus (9.6 and 9.9) when he mentions primus Boreas in the Civil War. However, even if Lucan did not directly rely on Cicero’s writings, they provide a valuable reminder against presuming that the consuls from the poem were necessarily sailing to Dyrrachium. These letters offer a glimpse into how Neronian readers might have interpreted Lucan’s passage. Let us now take a closer look at lines 645-648 of the Civil War. Lucan omits several crucial details, suggesting that he deliberately alters the historical narrative. First, he omits any mention of the army or civilians, presenting the consuls as departing alone. This raises another issue: according to other sources, the consuls were sent ahead with soldiers (and, according to Cicero, with civilians) because there were not enough ships for a single crossing. In Lucan’s account, their voyage is no longer tied to military movements in Brundisium; instead, their task is to gather reinforcements. Finally, Lucan never directly names Dyrrachium, referring only to Epirus (as Cicero does), a term that may or may not designate this specific city. Notably, in line 2.624, Lucan describes Epidamnos as an Illyrian city.

Scholars who discuss the consuls’ passage to Dyrrachium with the troops in the poem draw on extratextual sources and seek to reconcile them with the remark about primus Boreas.^[38] It is possible to assume that Pompey’s words to the officials represent only part of the orders, and Lucan intentionally omits well-known information, bypassing the primary and most substantial task assigned to them at that moment, and instead focusing on what is more significant to the meaning of the whole episode. The orders would then concern only their mission upon arrival in Dyrrachium. In all probability, the consuls transported the troops and then proceeded to levy reinforcements (when writing about the army that Pompey gathered after crossing the sea, Caesar mentions two legions from Asia, recruited by consul Lentulus, Civ. 3.4.5). However, it seems methodologically preferable to remain within the text.

In 2.646, the adjective primus undoubtedly underscores speed, as the consuls are to set sail as soon as the conditions are favorable to their departure.^[39] If they were to go to Dyrrachium, they would not have to wait. Certainly, Boreas can be construed as having a purely poetic function at this point and standing for any opportune wind, with the central meaning conveyed by the adjective itself. However, since Pompey’s speech is directly preceded by the depiction of the sea routes from Brundisium to Epidamnos to the left and in the direction of Corcyra, we can reasonably assume that the Roman reader would interpret the north wind as a course towards Corcyra (across the Strait of Otranto), as Cicero and Atticus did. Like Cicero and Atticus, Lucan’s readers had probably voyaged from Brundisium to Greece. Familiar with sources such as Caesar, Livy, or Asinius Polio, and aware that the consuls had transported troops to Dyrrachium, such readers might interpret the north wind in the text as a deliberate manipulation, whose purpose requires interpretation.

Of course, there still remains the possibility that the consuls were heading to Dyrrachium via the Strait of Otranto, as proposed by de Saint-Denis, especially since this route was safer. However, minimizing the risk is not a pressing concern in the Civil War, since the consuls are set to sail alone. Moreover, in addition to the routes listed in the depiction of Brundisium, the direction of the wind, the absence of Dyrrachium, and the mention of Epirus alone in the order, which refers solely to the acquisition of military reinforcements, there is another clue pointing towards Corcyra. In his command, Pompey mentions Greece first, and then Macedonia. From Corcyra, one would sail into the Gulf of Corinth, from where one could, as Cicero did, proceed to what later became (post-27 BC) the province of Achaea (including regions such as the Peloponnese, Attica, Boeotia, Euboea, and part of Epirus), and from there further into Macedonia (which, after 27 BCE, as a province, also included Thessaly, parts of Illyria, Pannonia, and Thrace).

The imagined route taken by the consuls can be visualized based on journeys portrayed by Livy in his narrative of the Macedonian wars. In 169 BCE, consul Q. Marcius Philippus and praetor C. Marcius Figulus departed from Brundisium, arrived in Corcyra on the second day, and reached Actium one day later. From Actium, the consul sailed to Ambracia and then made his way to Thessaly overland, while the praetor sailed by Cape Leucate into the Gulf of Corinth, disembarked at the Boeotian port of Creusa, and then traversed Boeotia (which took one day if one traveled light) to Chalcis, where the fleet was stationed (44.1.1-3). In 167 BCE, L. Aemilius Paullus, the victor of Pydna, related his quick triumph to the people, also briefly recalling his journey from Brundisium to Macedonia. He set out at sunrise and reached Corcyra at nine. Five days later, he arrived in Delphi, and it took him another five days to reach the camp in Macedonia (45.41.3-4). Livy also describes journeys in the reverse direction. In 191 BCE, consul Acilius dispatched Marcus Cato to Rome with news of the recapture of Euboea. Cato departed from the Boeotian port of Creusa (the same port at which praetor C. Marcius Figulus arrived), sailed to Patrae and further along the coasts of Aetolia and Acarnania to Corcyra, whence he crossed the sea to Hydruntum. Whether the voyage continued up to Brundisium is not reported, but it is very likely, given that the port was connected to Rome through the Via Appia (36.21.4-5).

Argument and conclusion

In Lucan’s version of events, the historical record yields to poetic design: the reader of the Civil War is led to envision Pompey remaining in Brundisium with his entire army and likely with the civilians as well. Lucan, of course, does not state this explicitly. Instead, he reshapes the role of the consuls, casting them as envoys sent to gather reinforcements. This maneuver allows readers to imagine Pompey, his troops, and fleeing civilians all boarding ships under cover of night. When Pompey departs “into exile,” he is still described as great (an allusion, no doubt, to his epithet Magnus) because of the peoples accompanying him (adhuc ingens populis comitantibus exul, 2.730). The phrase populis comitantibus is far from univocal. It is typically read in connection with Pompey’s charge to his son Gnaeus and the consuls to summon the peoples of the East, Greece, and Macedonia to the war effort. ^[40] All these peoples will later become Caesar’s spoils after Pharsalus (3.296-297). Yet the same phrase may also resonate with the earlier exodus from Rome depicted in Book 1 (1.486-522); populi may equally refer to Romans, those who, in panic at Caesar’s approach, abandoned a city still standing and intact.^[41] In this light, the sea crossing acquires an added metaphorical dimension. Pompey is recast as a commander and an epic hero – or, rather, an anti-hero – leading his people toward ruin.

Dispatching the consuls in another direction is thus pivotal to Lucan’s poetic agenda and his widely discussed intertextual engagement with Virgil’s Aeneid, a topic extensively debated among scholars.^[42] In Virgil’s epic, Aeneas departs from the ruined Troy in search of his ancestral land, moving westward until he finally reaches Italy. There, after a victorious conflict with the inhabitants of Latium led by Turnus, he lays the foundations for what will become Rome. Yet the ultimate destination of Aeneas’s journey is not merely Latium, but the future greatness of Rome itself – culminating in a new Golden Age under Augustus, Aeneas’s descendant. Lucan’s Pharsalia, by contrast, presents a grim inversion. After the outbreak of civil war, Pompey abandons Rome and sails eastward from Italy, seeking the place of his own destruction (quaeritur indignae sedes longinqua ruinae, 2.731). His downfall also marks the collapse of the Senate’s power, as it had aligned itself with him. His defeat by Caesar, his flight from the battlefield of Pharsalus, and ultimately his death on the sands of the Nile signify the end of the Roman Republic, the collapse of Roman might, and, above all, the loss of liberty under Caesar’s successors. Pompey’s journey thus mirrors that of Aeneas – but in reverse.

The conclusion of Book 2 is crucial in this context, as it draws an explicit yet ambivalent parallel between Pompey and Aeneas, most notably in the narrator’s apostrophe to Pompey (2.728-730), which strikingly recalls Aeneas’s departure from Troy in Aeneid 3.10-12:

litora cum patriae lacrimans portusque relinquo
et campos ubi Troia fuit. feror exsul in altum
cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis.
(Verg. Aen. 3.10-12)

cum coniuge pulsus
et natis totosque trahens in bella penates
vadis adhuc ingens populis comitantibus exul.
(Lucan. 2.728-730)[43]

The altered role of the consuls sharpens this parallel. Aeneas departs from a ruined homeland, sailing with the Penates, his child, and his surviving countrymen toward Latium, a destination still distant and unknown to him. Pompey flees from Rome and from Brundisium – cities still intact and unconquered – taking with him his army, his sons, his wife, and his own Penates, which – thanks to the Virgilian intertext – become Rome’s Penates as well (the use of the adjective totos with Penates is deliberate). When the entire army and a group of civilians flee alongside Pompey – while the consuls, as suggested by lines 2.645-648, appear to sail alone toward Corcyra – readers would naturally imagine Pompey’s wife and his younger son joining him aboard his ship, even though Lucan does not state this explicitly, merely using the form natis to refer to both of Pompey’s sons, Gnaeus and Sextus, who will also sail from Italy to Greece. Of course, Creusa did not sail with Aeneas, but Ascanius (~ Sextus) was indeed a central figure. If Lucan had retained the episode of the consuls crossing the sea with the army, Cornelia and Sextus would likely have traveled with them, alongside other civilians (cf. Hadas 1930: 29–30). It seems highly improbable that Pompey would place his beloved wife at such grave risk during Caesar’s blockade of Brundisium. In Book 5, he sends her away to Lesbos from the camp as soon as Caesar and Antony approach Epirus, before any fighting occurs.

No details are provided regarding where or with which wind Gnaeus is supposed to sail. It was probably apparent to readers of the poem that Gnaeus should set out to Dyrrachium, given that the narrator distinctly outlined two routes, with the consuls heading south. Gnaeus does not need to wait for the north wind, so Lucan’s readers might also assume the south wind is blowing. Moreover, he is tasked with mobilizing the peoples accessible along the Via Egnatia, such as those in the Bosporan Kingdom, along the shores of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, and in Armenia.^[44] Dyrrachium as Gnaeus’ destination neither disrupts nor undermines the poem’s intended meaning. Unlike the consuls’ crossing, his mission is not directly intertwined with his father’s departure from Brundisium. Nevertheless, by entrusting the elder son with a mission to fulfill, the poet clearly signals that Pompey is accompanied by only one son, the younger Sextus (who, incidentally, will play a significant future role as a fierce adversary of the Second Triumvirate). This also reinforces the analogy between Pompey and Aeneas, who sailed with Ascanius.

In sum, Lucan clearly distorts history in lines 2.645-648, alters the role of the consuls, and sends them to a different shore alone, without their soldiers or civilians. This alteration serves to keep Pompey in Brundisium with his entire army, suggesting that they all cross the sea together with the civilians who had fled Rome. Lucan employs this narrative strategy primarily for poetic purposes, specifically to establish both the parallel and the contrast between Pompey and Aeneas, thereby transforming the former into both a hero and an anti-hero who leads his family, his people, and other nations to ruin.