This chapter looks at an early stage in the construction of the Latin tradition, reviewing the ways in which the early fifth-century Macrobius treats Virgil as a godlike author, constructing his influence along the lines of Christian monotheism while resolutely disavowing any knowledge of Christianity. Macrobius too is constructing his tradition of Latin literature, while positioning himself as a crucial contributor to that tradition – an even clearer example of the self-serving nature of such normative historiographies. The chapter proposes that Macrobius’ willed blindness to the Christian intellectual constructs around him, which nonetheless inevitably bleed into his work, serves as a model for the myopias and occlusions of classical philology as practised today

This chapter focuses on late-antique rhetorical analysis of Virgilian poetry: starting from the 2nd century AD, whether Virgil was to be considered an orator or a poet was one of the key issues in the reception of his work, as is attested by discussions in Florus, Macrobius, Servius and Tiberius Claudius Donatus. The chapter shows how Virgil’s text is “micro-rhetoricized” when elements of the poem are read as exemplifying a given rhetorical principle. As a close reading of Macrobius’ discussion of the issue in Saturnalia 5 reveals, this rhetorical analysis works also on the macro-level by constructing the poet himself as a rhetorical performer and reading as a form of rhetorical re-performance.

This chapter focuses on late-antique rhetorical analysis of Virgilian poetry: starting from the 2nd century AD, whether Virgil was to be considered an orator or a poet was one of the key issues in the reception of his work, as is attested by discussions in Florus, Macrobius, Servius and Tiberius Claudius Donatus. The chapter shows how Virgil’s text is “micro-rhetoricized” when elements of the poem are read as exemplifying a given rhetorical principle. As a close reading of Macrobius’ discussion of the issue in Saturnalia 5 reveals, this rhetorical analysis works also on the macro-level by constructing the poet himself as a rhetorical performer and reading as a form of rhetorical re-performance.