Horace, Satires 2.2, 2.6 and 2.8 - OCR GCSE Classical Civilisation (Roman City Life) Exam Questions

Practise 34 exam-style questions on Horace, Satires 2.2, 2.6 and 2.8 for OCR GCSE Classical Civilisation (Roman City Life). Write your answer as you would in the exam and get it marked in seconds against the mark scheme, point by point, with an AI tutor on hand if you get stuck.

34 questions
1–15 marks each
Instant marking
No sign-up needed

20 questions, marked as you go

Sample questions with model answers

Here are 4 of the questions in this topic, each with a model answer, an explanation of why it earns the marks and the mark scheme an examiner would use.

Question 1

1 mark

Name Horace's neighbour who tells the fable of the town mouse and the country mouse in Satire 2.6.

Model answer

Cervius.

Explanation

Cervius is a country neighbour who 'rattles off old wives' tales' to suit the conversation; he tells the fable when someone praises the wealth of Arellius without realising how much anxiety it brings. Giving the story to a neighbour, like giving 2.2 to Ofellus, makes the moral sound like rustic wisdom rather than Horace preaching.

Mark scheme

1 mark
Cervius
Do not accept Ofellus, Fundanius or Arellius.

Question 2

2 marks

In Satire 2.6 Horace describes dinners with his neighbours on his Sabine farm. Give two things they talk about.

Model answer

They discuss whether men are made happy by wealth or by virtue, and whether friendships are formed for self-interest or for goodness.

Explanation

Horace contrasts this serious conversation with the gossip of Rome - about other people's villas or whether the dancer Lepos performs well. The question of wealth or virtue leads into Cervius' fable of the town and country mouse, told when someone praises the anxious riches of a man called Arellius.

Mark scheme

2 marks
Two from: whether men are made happy by wealth or by virtue (1); whether friendships are formed for self-interest / usefulness or for goodness (1); what is the nature of the good / what is the highest good (1); stories / old wives' tales told by Cervius that suit the topic, such as the fable of the town mouse and the country mouse (1).
Max 2. 'Philosophy / moral questions' on its own scores 1 only. Do not credit what they do NOT talk about (other people's villas and houses, whether Lepos dances well) as a topic of conversation.

Question 3

4 marks

Source A: Horace, Satires 2.6.40-49

'The seventh year, nearer the eighth, will soon have gone by since Maecenas began to count me among his friends - at least to the extent of wanting someone to take in his carriage when he was travelling, and to trust with small talk of this kind: "What time is it?" "Is the Thracian, Chicken, a match for Syrus?" "The morning frosts are nipping people who aren't careful," and the sort of thing that is safely dropped into a leaky ear. All this time, every day and every hour, your friend here has been more and more exposed to envy. He watched the games with Maecenas, he played ball with him on the Campus: "Fortune's son!" everyone says.'

What impressions do you gain of Horace's friendship with Maecenas in this passage? Make two points.

Model answer

The friendship seems relaxed and informal: Horace says Maecenas only trusts him with small talk such as 'What time is it?' or whether the gladiator Chicken is a match for Syrus - he modestly plays down any political importance. It is also close and highly visible, since they travel together, watch the games and play ball on the Campus, which makes Horace envied: 'Fortune's son!' everyone says.

Explanation

Horace stresses that the friendship is personal rather than political - a tactful pose, since Maecenas was Octavian's right-hand man. The irony is that the more Horace insists their talk is trivial, the less people believe him. 'Chicken' (Gallina) is the name of a gladiator fighting in the Thracian style.

Mark scheme

2 marks
First impression with supporting evidence from Source A: 1 mark for a valid impression of the friendship, 1 mark for a relevant reference to or quotation from the passage that supports it. The evidence mark is awarded for a relevant reference or quotation even if the impression is missing, weak or wrong. The two marks are independent: award 1 for a valid point even if no evidence is given, and 1 for a relevant quotation from, reference to or close paraphrase of the source even if the point is missing, weak or wrong.
Two pairs from, e.g.: it is long-lasting (1) - nearly eight years (1); it is close / they spend leisure time together (1) - travelling in his carriage, watching the games, playing ball on the Campus (1); it is relaxed and informal, about trivial things (1) - small talk about the time, gladiators (Chicken and Syrus) and the morning frosts (1); Horace modestly plays down its importance (1) - 'at least to the extent of...' / things 'safely dropped into a leaky ear' (1); there is trust between them (1) - Maecenas trusts him with small talk (1); it makes Horace envied by others (1) - '"Fortune's son!" everyone says' / 'more and more exposed to envy' (1). The second pair must make a different point from the first.
2 marks
Second, different impression with supporting evidence from Source A: 1 mark for a valid impression, 1 mark for a relevant reference to or quotation from the passage that supports it. The two marks are independent: award 1 for a valid point even if no evidence is given, and 1 for a relevant quotation from, reference to or close paraphrase of the source even if the point is missing, weak or wrong.
As above; must be a different impression from the first.

Question 4

8 marks

Source A: Horace, Satires 2.8.84-95

Fundanius is describing the end of the dinner.

'Nasidienus, you came back with a changed expression, as if to put right your bad luck by skill. Then slaves followed, carrying on a huge platter the limbs of a crane, sprinkled with plenty of salt and meal, and the liver of a white goose fattened on rich figs, and hares' shoulders torn off, as they are much tastier than if you eat them with the loins. Then we saw blackbirds served with their breasts roasted, and pigeons without their rumps - delicious things, if the master had not kept telling us their causes and natures. We got our revenge on him by running away without tasting anything at all, as though Canidia had breathed on the food, more deadly than African snakes.'

To what extent is Nasidienus himself to blame for the failure of his dinner party? Use Source A as a starting point and your own knowledge of Satire 2.8.

Model answer

In Source A Nasidienus is largely to blame. After the disaster with the tapestries he comes back 'as if to put right your bad luck by skill' and serves an extravagant succession of dishes - a crane's limbs, the liver of a white goose fattened on figs, hares' shoulders, blackbirds and pigeons. Fundanius admits that these would have been 'delicious things', but the host 'kept telling us their causes and natures', so the guests take their 'revenge' by running away without tasting anything, as if Canidia had breathed on the food. It is his pedantic boasting, not the food, that ruins the evening.

My wider knowledge supports this. Throughout the dinner he lectures: the Lucanian boar was caught when the south wind was gentle, the lamprey was caught when pregnant, and the sauce needs oil from Venafrum, Spanish fish sauce and vinegar from Methymna - with rocket and elecampane, which he was 'the first' to use. His showy service, with a purple cloth for wiping the table and Hydaspes carrying the wine like a girl in a procession for Ceres, makes him ridiculous, and when the tapestries fall he weeps as if his son had died young.

However, he is not wholly to blame. The guests behave badly: Vibidius and Balatro, the 'shadows' whom Maecenas brought uninvited, deliberately set out to 'drink him into ruin', and Balatro mocks him with sarcastic consolation while Varius smothers his laughter and the guests whisper on every couch. The collapse of the tapestries was an accident - bad luck, as Nomentanus' lament to Fortune pretends. The guests also came to enjoy themselves at his expense, and Fundanius tells the story with obvious pleasure.

Overall, Nasidienus is mainly to blame, because his pretension and endless lecturing turn an accident into a fiasco and give the guests their excuse to escape. But the satire also exposes the cruelty of guests who accept a man's hospitality while laughing at him, so the failure is shared.

Explanation

Strong answers weigh the host's pretension and lecturing against the guests' malice and the accident of the canopy, and reach a judgement. Horace seems to mock both sides: Nasidienus for vulgar display, the guests for their cruelty. Simply retelling the dinner without discussing blame is Level 2.

Mark scheme

8 marks
Levels of response (8 marks). AO1 (4) and AO2 (4) are equally weighted.
Level 4 (7-8 marks): consistently accurate and detailed knowledge of Satire 2.8, using both Source A and own wider knowledge; very good understanding of the cultural context of the cena (host, guests, shadows, display) and of possible interpretations of Horace's satire; a well-argued response with a clear, substantiated judgement on how far Nasidienus is to blame, supported by a range of well-selected evidence, including critical analysis.
Level 3 (5-6 marks): accurate knowledge, using both Source A and own knowledge; a focused response with relevant analysis and a judgement on the question.
Level 2 (3-4 marks): sound, mostly accurate knowledge; engages with the general topic of the dinner party; limited range of evidence, some analysis.
Level 1 (1-2 marks): limited knowledge, may only use Source A; isolated analysis; little or no judgement.
0 marks: no response or no response worthy of credit.
A mainly descriptive or narrative answer with little analysis or judgement cannot go above Level 2.
Indicative content (not a checklist; credit other valid points): AO1: Source A - Nasidienus returns 'as if to put right your bad luck by skill'; crane's limbs, goose liver fattened on figs, hares' shoulders, blackbirds, pigeons; 'delicious things, if the master had not kept telling us their causes and natures'; the guests' 'revenge' of running away; Canidia. Own knowledge - the boar 'caught when the south wind was gentle'; the purple cloth and the solemn slaves; offering Maecenas Alban or Falernian; Nomentanus placed to point out the dishes; the lamprey caught pregnant and the lecture on the sauce, 'I was the first...'; turning pale at hard drinkers; weeping over the fallen tapestries as if his son had died; thanking Balatro for his 'kindness'. The guests - Maecenas' shadows Vibidius and Balatro plan to 'drink him into ruin', call for bigger cups; Balatro's sarcastic consolation; Varius hiding laughter; whispers on every couch; the collapse of the tapestries an accident. AO2: for - his pretension, boasting and lecturing bore the guests and turn an accident into a fiasco; he cares more for display than for his guests; Horace's 'wretched riches!'. Against - the canopy's fall was bad luck; the guests are rude and malicious, set out to ruin him and laugh at him; uninvited shadows exploit his hospitality; the satire may also criticise the cruelty of sophisticated guests; Fundanius enjoys the story. Possible judgement: Nasidienus is mainly to blame because his pretension gives the guests their excuse, but the failure is shared with malicious guests and bad luck.

Ready to try the rest? Every answer you write is marked against the mark scheme, so you can see exactly where the marks are.

AI Tutor Hints first, answers after you try

Hi! Stuck? Ask me for a hint and I’ll help you work it out. Once you’ve checked your answer I can explain exactly where the marks are.