I. RETROSPECTIVE INTERPRETATION Propertius 1.20 poses many interpretative questions, which scholars have tried to solve not least by comparing the poem with other versions of the Hylas myth, notably those of Apollonius (Argon. 1.1153ff.) and Theocritus (Id. 13). The relationship of Propertius' poem to Valerius Flaccus' Hylas episode (Argon. 3.481ff.), however, has received little attention, although Valerius offers the most elaborate version of the myth. 1 Recently, Philip Hardie has initiated the approach of 'retrospective interpretation' for Valerius Flaccus' reading of Virgil's Aeneid. He has shown that Valerius-and other Flavian epic poets-read and interpret their most important model, Virgil's Aeneid, in a way that anticipates modern studies of intertextuality; it is therefore attractive to use Valerius' readings and interpretations of Virgil as a critical tool for our own reading of the Aeneid. 2 But what about Valerius' other models? I would like to show through a few examples that in his Hylas episode Valerius has carefully read and interpreted Propertius 1.20 in a way that bears close resemblance to modern readings of Latin poetry. In addition I hope to show that Valerius also provides us with an interesting new interpretation of Propertius 1.20. II. GOING FURTHER That there is contact between Valerius' Hylas episode and Propertius 1.20 is very clear from a verbal echo that has often been noted 3 but never subjected to close 606

No abstract

No abstract

In his recent monograph (2012) Tim Stover has provided the first full-scale study of Valerius Flaccus’ interaction with Lucan’sBellum Civile, arguing that theArgonauticarestores epic after Lucan and optimistically supports Vespasian’s restoration of the Principate after the civil wars of 68-69ad. Focusing on the ‘civil war’ between the Argonauts and the Doliones in Book 3 of Valerius’ epic, I will propose an alternative reading of the influence of Lucan as well as Virgil’s Aeneid. Although Valerius at first sight seems to set up the Cyzicus episode in Virgilian fashion, he in fact deconstructs this reading, revealing the impossibility of (re)writing anAeneidin the Flavian age.