Bipartition and non-distinction of poetical genres in Martial: magnum vs parvum

Martial shows to have a bipartite view of the literary system according to which the ‘grand’ poetry (magnum), whose leading figure is Virgil, opposes to the ‘small’ (but not less worthwhile) poetry (parvum), whose best exponent is Catullus. This way of thinking has its roots in Callimachean poetics and promotes a trend of non-distinction among the genres belonging to the same area. On the side of magnum, it causes a reduction of the distances among epic, tragedy and lyric; on the opposite side, it allows Martial to present the epigram (of which he first defines the eidetic identity within Latin literature) as the most representative genre of the whole area of parvum. Martial’s epigram indeed, thanks to its constitutive varietas, continues both Callimachean-neoteric tradition (Catullus of course, but also the Augustan elegy) and Roman realistic poetry, namely satire and comedy; also Virgil’s bucolic is brought by Martial near to his epigram. The Callimachean pattern magnum vs parvum, started up again by Martial pro opere suo, is left behind instead by Statius, who, in a more modern (i.e. really Flavian) way, shifts with great freedom and eclecticism throughtout the literary space, getting even to the point of mixing ‘grand’ and ‘small’ poetry.