The Latin text of Lucan cited here is that of the edition of A. E. Housman (Oxford, 1927). The translation is that of S. H. Braund (Lucan 1992). There are valuable general discussions of Lucan’s Caesar in F. M. Ahl, Lucan: An Introduction ((Ithaca/London, 1976), pp. 189-230; W. R. Johnson, Momentary Monsters: Lucan and his Heroes (Ithaca/London, 1987), pp. 101-34; E. Narducci, Lucano. Un’epica contro l’impero (Rome/Bari, 2002), pp. 187-278; L. Nosarti, ‘‘Quale Cesare in Lucano?’’ AClass 38-9 (2002-3), 169-203. For Caesarian dynamism and Pompeian decline as represented by the programmatic first similes of the poem, see J. A. Rosner-Siegel, ‘‘The oak and the lightning: Lucan, Bellum Civile 1.135-57,’’ Athenaeum 61 (1983), 165-77. For Lucan and Homer, see G. B. Conte, ‘‘Il proemio della Pharsalia,’’ Maia 18 (1966), 42-53; M. Lausberg, ‘‘Lucan und Homer,’’ ANRW2.32.3 (1985), 1565-1622; and C. M. C. Green, ‘‘Stimulos dedit aemula virtus. Lucan and Homer reconsidered,'' Phoenix 45 (1991), 230-54. For Pompey and Agamemnon, see F. R. Berno, ‘‘Un truncus, molti re: Priamo, Agamemnone, Lucano (Virgilio, Seneca, Lucano),’’ Maia 56 (2004), 79-84. For Caesar and Alexander in Lucan and elsewhere, see P. Green, ‘‘Caesar and Alexander: aemulatio, imitatio, comparatio'' in id., Classical Bearings: Interpreting Ancient History and Culture (Berkeley/Los Angeles/London, 1989), pp. 193-209. For Caesar and his subalterns, see M. Leigh, Lucan: Spectacle and Engagement (Oxford, 1997), pp. 158-233. For Caesar and the sacred grove, see M. Leigh, ‘‘Lucan's Caesar and the sacred grove: deforestation and enlightenment in antiquity,’’ in P. Esposito and L. Nicastri (eds.), Interpretare Lucano. Miscellanea di studi (Naples, 1999), pp. 167-205. For Caesar and Amyclas, see E. Narducci, ‘‘Pauper Amyclas. Modelli etici e poetici in un episodic della Pharsalia” Maia 35 (1983), 183-94. For the aesthetic affinities between Caesar and Lucan, see J. Masters, Poetry and Civil War in Lucan’s Bellum Civile (Cambridge, 1992). For a similar approach to the role of Atreus in Seneca’s Thyestes, see A. Schiesaro, The Passions in Play: Thyestes and the Dynamics ofSenecan Drama (Cambridge, 2003). For Caesar’s clementia in Lucan, see F. M. Ahl, Lucan: An Introduction ((Ithaca/London, 1976), pp. 192-7; J. Masters, Poetry and Civil War in Lucan’s Bellum Civile (Cambridge, 1992), pp. 78-90; M. Leigh, Lucan: Spectacle and Engagement (Oxford, 1997), pp. 53-68. My comments here draw out the salient features of an overly convoluted argument and respond to the objections of J. J. O’Hara, Inconsistency in Roman Epic: Studies in Catullus, Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid and Lucan (Cambridge, 2007), pp. 131-42. For Seneca’s verdict on Caesar, see M. T. Griffin, Seneca: A Philosopher in Politics (Oxford, 1976), pp. 184-8.
World History
