(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "A history of Roman literature;"

m 



iiiiiiisfisis--. 

III 





iii ii'^'- 

I ill 



'm 






.ilililfiiili: 



i il 

lliii. 



il 



!i'l! 



!!l 



i!il!!ii;i:>ri|.i 



HANDBOLND 
AT THE 



U\I\ERSIT\' OF 
TORONTO PRESS 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2011 with funding from 

University of Toronto 



http://www.archive.org/details/historyofromanli02teuf 






Wilhelm SiornvmH '^enf'^el 

A hivstory of Roman literature 

Vol.2 
The imperial period 



Tr. 'b"^'" Wili^elm Wa^^^er 



m 2 4 1968 

^ -v^^'/ry OF löv-^ 



I 



THE 
IMPERIAL PERIOD. 



IV. 

THE THIRD PERIOD. 

THE IMPERIAL EPOCH. 

266. Just as the Augustan age occupies a double posi- 
tion in history, being the close of the Republic and the 
beginning of the Imperial epoch, so also in literature the 
greater half of it belongs to the golden age, though its 
latter part extends to the silver age. In the latter the original na- 
tional power still continued to be of influence though weakened 
and obscured by the new state of political life owing to which 
the monarchy after Augustus rapidly became a complete despo- 
tism. This gradually extinguished all independent intellectual 
life — a result which was quite evident as soon as under the 
Antonines the feverish excitement of the age relaxed for a 
number of years, and new productions were attempted. But 
this complete exhaustion produced only the semblance of life 
and imitations. At the close of the second century Commo- 
dus renewed the former despotism and both nation and em- 
pire were now struck down with successive strokes. In this time, 
the internal dissolution was yet a while hidden and impeded 
by the energy of provincial life; but in literature only juris- 
prudence and learning would thrive. Literature survived for 
some time even the outward downfall of the Roman Empire 
(a. 476) and did not end until the sixth century. Thus the 
Imperial epoch is divided into three parts, the literary impor- 
tance of which is successively on the wane: the first cen- 
tury of the Christian era, the second century or the age of 
Adrian and the Antonines, and finally the third part em- 
bracing the third to the sixth century. 

1 



2 The Imperial Epoch. 

A. The silver age of Roman literature. 
The first century, A. D. 14—117. 

267. The first century embraces the reigns of Tiberius 
(A. D. 14—37), Caligula (37—41), Claudius (41-54), Nero 
(54—68), Vespasian (69—79), Titus (79—81), Domitian (81 
—96), Nerva (96—98), and Trajan (98—117). It may be 
subdivided into three separate portions, the age of the Julian 
(14—68) and of the Flavian Dynasty (69—96), and the time 
of Nerva and Trajan (96—117). The character of this cen- 
tury was fixed by its commencement. The monarchy which 
under Augustus had still appeared in a mild form, gradually 
became under the succeeding emperors of his house mere 
despotism, wily and brutal, obtuse and mad, but always 
equally aggressive against independence of any kind, and 
which tolerated only slaves and tools beside itself, leaving men 
of higher character their choice between death and hypocrisy.^) 
Vespasian and Titus came too late and were too soon fol- 
lowed by the tyrant Domitian to cause any real improvement; 
the age of Nerva and Trajan could only just develop the consci- 
ousness of the losses and forfeits of the fatal past. With 
regard to literature, it should be specially mentioned that 
all the emperors of this period did not appreciate or esteem 
it; all the more suspiciously did they watch all signs of li- 
terary life, and some even felt jealous of the literary success 
of others. Hence hterature suffered all the more under the 
oppression of despotism. ^) 

The influence exercised by this despotism upon the minds 
was partly negative, partly positive. First of all, it created 
around it the quiet of a churchyard, killing all independent 



1) The smaller the genuine enjoyment offered by life and the 
greater its pain, the more easy became the resolution (in agreement 
with the doctrines of the Stoics) to depart from it voluntarily. Such 
was under Tiberius the course of action adopted by his friend Cocceius 
Nerva, by Sextius Severus, Albucius Silus, (Apicius) , Silius Italiens 
Corellius Kufus (Plin. Ep. I 12), Titius Aristo (ib. I 22, 8), and others! 

2) Plin. Ep. Ill 5, 5 : sub Nerone, cum omne studiorum genus paulo 
liberius et erectius periculosum servitus fecisset. W. A. Schmidt, Hi- 
story of the liberty of thought and belief in th-^" €rst century of '^ 
Imperial epoch, Berlin 1847. 



General Observation» on the first Century. 3 

thought, or obliging it to be silent and hypocritical); servility 
only was allowed to speak; all others submitted to what was 
inevitable, nay even endeavoured to suit themselves to it as 
much as possible ^). The positive influence of this suppression 
of independent thought showed itself on one hand in an 
earnestness and concentration benefiting domestic life and 
producing such characters as Arria and Fannia, but on the 
other hand also in morbidity and caprice. As it was im- 
possible to display true character when all endeavoured to 
create the impression of being different from what they really 
were, the consequence was hypocrisy and affectation. Forced 
carefully to hide nature, people fell into artificial and unna- 
tural ways. Always watched by spies, or at least thinking 
themselves to be watched, they always felt as if they were 
on a stage; they calculated what impression their conduct 
would produce on their contemporaries and posterity^); they 
adapted themselves to certain parts and studied theatrical 
attitudes, they declaimed instead of speaking. The greater the 
effort of an individual not to sink in this difficult time, the greater 
were they in their own estimation ; a certain vanity attached to 
all characters of this age*), which was fed by the pubUc decla- 
mations which had no otherpurpose but that of exhibiting personal 
accomplishments and fostering mutual admiration*^). The 



1) It was dangerous to be a man of character; Plin. Ep. V 14, 6: 
tandem homines non ad pericula, ut prius, verum ad honores virtute 
perveniunt. VIII 14, 7: cum suspecta virtus, inertia in pretio. 

2) Lucan. Ill 146 sq.: cuius (i. e. libertatis) servaveris umbram si 
quidquid iubeare velis. 

3) Plin. Ep. Ill 16, 6: ista facienti, ista dicenti gloria et aeternitas 
ante oculos erant. I 3, 1 : mihi, nisi jjraemium aeternitatis ante oculos, 
pingue illud altumque otium placeat. ib. 14, 1 : (nostro) studio et labore 
et reverentia posterorum. Comp. V 8, 1. Tac. A. XIV 49 extr. : Thra- 
sea sneta firmitudine animi et ne gloria intercideret. 

4) Pliny who was himself a very vain character complains of the 
self-importance and arrogance of adolescentuli nostri, ep. VIII 23, 3. 

5) .Quintil. X 1, 18 : et vitiosa pluribus placent et a corrogatis lau- 
dantur etiam quae non placent. Cf. Pers. 1, 83 sqq. Eloquence was 
also influenced by this: Quintil. IV 3, 2: quod natum ab ostentatione 
declamatoria iam in forum venit, postquam agere causas non ad utili- 
tatem litigatorum, sed ad patronorum iactationem repertum est; see 

^\':tve 37, 3. Many instances of these mutual laudations occur in Pliny's 
Correspondence, and also in Martial and Statins. 



4 The Imperial Epoch. 

uncertainty of existence and possession, the continual appre- 
hension, in which this period moved and breathed, caused a 
restless versatility, morbid irritability and hurry, which was 
afraid of always beginning too late, and eagerly put every 
moment to the best possible use now in sensual pleasure, 
now in passionate longings and strife for immortality^). 

The general character of this age appears also in its 
style^). Simple and natural composition was considered in- 
sipid^); the style was to be brilliant, piquant, and interesting. 
Hence it was dressed up with much tinsel of sentences*), 
rhetorical figures^ ), and poetical expressions *). But the same 
end was aimed at in different ways: the one dallying (as Se- 
neca does) with brief, cut-up sentences^), the other with an- 
tique roughness or (like Persius) with artificial obscurity^); 
now effect was sought after by epigrammatic points (e. g. by 
Seneca, Curtius, Tacitus, Pliny the younger), now by glaring 



1) With the fashionable sentimentality the sympathy also with 
inanimate nature increases, a feature greatly developed in Pliny the 
younger (see on him, n. 7), but also found in Quintilian and others. 

2) Even the letters of the Inscriptions of this epoch betray an 
affected gracefulness and effeminate weakness; see Ritschl, Rh. Mus. 
XXIV p. 7. 

3) Quintil. II 5, 11. VIII prooem. 24 sqq., e. g. 26: nos quibus 
sordet omne quod natura dictavit. See below 308, 1 and 6. 

4) Quintil. VII 1, 44. XII 10, 46. 48. 

5) Quintil. VIII prooem. 24: nihil lam proprium placet etc. IX 3, 
I : paene iam quidquid loquimur figura est. 

6) Tac. dial. 20: exigitur iam ab oratore etiam poeticus color. 
Quintil. Vin prooem. 25 : a corruptissimo quoque poetarum figuras ac 
translationes mutuamur. Plin. Ep. VII 9, 8: saepe in orationes quoque 
non historica modo, sed prope poetica descriptionem necessitas (?) 
incidit. Fronto ad Caes. Ill 16 (p. 54 N.) : plerumque ad orationem 
faciendam versus, ad versificandum oratio magis adiuvat. 

7) Quintil. IX 4, 66: mediis . . cura sit . . ne, quod nunc maxime 
Vitium est, brevium contextu resultent ac sonum reddant paene puerilium 
crepitaculorum. 

8) Quintil. VIII prooem. 25: tum demum ingeniosi scilicet si ad 
intellegendos nos opus sit ingenio. 31: quidam etiam cum optima sunt 
reperta quaerunt aliquid quod sit magis antiquum, remotum, inopinatum. 
XI 3, 10 sq. So also Plin. Ep. IX 26, 4: sunt maxime mirabilia quae 
maxime insperata, maxime periculosa. Tac. dial. 23: isti qui Lucilium 
pro Horatio et Lucretium pro Vergilio legunt, . . quos more prisco 
apud iudicem fabulantes non auditores sequuntur etc. 



General Observations on the ßrst Century. 5 

colours (e. g. by Juvenal); some cultivated outward polish, 
even at the cost of the contents ^) (e. g. Valerius Flaccus 
and Statins) ; others again endeavoured to give the impression 
of profound thought. Manner supplanted style, and bombastic 
pathos succeeded to the place of quiet power. It is true 
that under Vespasian some became aware of having sunk 
into utter unnaturalness and intentionally endeavoured to re- 
gain the simplicity of thought and the rotundity of phrase 
peculiar to the Ciceronian age. Men of this kind were Julius 
Secundus, Vipstanus Messala, Curiatius Maternus, and espe- 
cially Quintilian. But this is so little in harmony with the 
general tendency of the time, as to produce no further effect 
and to be unattainable even to these men in its full extent. 
Tacitus abandoned this method after a single attempt, and 
Pliny the younger succeeded in combining rotundity of phrase 
with glittering antitheses. Most writers thought the style of 
their age to be a step in advance and looked down upon the 
Pre- Angus tan writers as wanting in form ^). The victory of 
the modern over the antique element was accomplished in 
literature; only in circles which had no literary importance 
did the antique element exist for some time longer and oc- 
casionally it protested against modern artifice ^) ; technical 



1) Quintil. IX 4, 142: duram potius atque asperam compositionem 
malim esse quam eflfeminatam et enervem, qualis apud multos, et coti- 
die magis, lascivissimis syntonorum modis saltat. V 12, 18: nos liabitum 
orationis virilem . . tenera quadam elocutionis cute operimus et dum 
laevia sint ac nitida, quantum valeant nihil Interesse arbitramur. II 5, 
22: recentis huius lasciviae flosculi, . . praedulce illud genus. XI, 43: 
recens haec lascivia deliciaeque et omnia ad voluptatem multitudinis 
imperitae composita. Sen. Spist. 114, 15. Pers. I 63 sqq. 

2) Martial VIII 56, 1 : temporibus nostris aetas . . cedit avorum. 
Tac. dial. 20: volgus quoque . . adsuevit iam exigere laetitiam et 
pulchritudinem orationis nee perfert in iudiciis tristem et impexam an- 
tiquitatem. 

3) Cf. especially Persius I 127 sqq. Ill 77 sqq. V 189 sqq. VI 37 
sqq. Martial. XI 90. Plin. Ep. VI 21, I: sum ex iis qui mirantur an- 
tiques ,• non tamenj, ut quidam, temporum nostrorum ingenia despicio. 
In the succeeding centuries the latter view became prevalent, so that 
writers actually apologized for speaking of their contemporaries and 
not always walking in the atmosphere of the schools, or as it were in the 
clouds. Cf. J. Burckhardt, on Constantino p. 285 sq. 



6 The Augustan age. 

writers, such as Celsus and Columella, and the Jurists suc- 
ceeded in keeping free of it. But on the whole, literature 
lost the sympathy of the nation at large ; most emperors even 
intentionally widened the chasm between the educated and 
the great multitude, so that the latter were quiet, if not well- 
pleased, spectators of the maltreatment and spoliation of the 
higher classes. In spite of this, the monarchy was the basis 
naturally assumed even by the authors, and the very boldest 
of them were opposed only to its extravagant power — men 
of an anxious temper speak of the time of the Republic not 
without quiet fear ^) , though the number of those who de- 
graded their talent to humble servility was proportionately 
small, e. g. Velleius and Valerius Maximus under Tiberius, 
and Martial under Domitian. Yet as it was, even Vespasian 
understood how to gain literary men for the Court by gran- 
ting them positions; public contests in Greek and Roman 
eloquence and poetry were more than once repeated since the 
time of Caligula ^), contributing both to the increase of production 
and of artifice. A certain intellectual and literary culture was 
widely spread through the numerous professors and schools^); 
even among ladies*), yet it frequently was but a taste imbibed by 
dilettanti without accuracy ^). The provinces, especially Spain 
and Gaul, furnished literature with its chief talents: Spain 
the two Senecas (father and son), Acilius Lucanus and An- 
naeus Lucanus, Columella, Pomponius Mela, Quintilian, Mar- 



1) See e. g. Quintil. II 16, 5. The new eloquence is characterized 
by modus et temperamentum (Tac. dial. 41 extr.) It is also due to the 
fact that the majority of the great families had become extinct since the 
time of Nero, and the new generation had no ancestral interests in 
the Republican past. 

2) Orelli inscr. 1185: poeta latiuus coronatus in munere patriae 
suae (Beneventum). 2603: coronatus inter poetas latinos certamine 
sacro lovis Capitolini. Mommsen I. R. N. 5252. Friedländer History 
of Roman manners. II p. 309. 393 sq. See below 314, 4. 

3) Tac. dial. 19 : pervolgatis iam omnibus (philosophy, rhetoric etc.), 
cum vix in corona quisquam adsistat quin elementis studiorum . . certe 
imbutus sit. 

4) Friedländer, Hist, of Roman manners I p. 289-293. 

5) Tac. dial. 32 : quod (the manysided culture of the ancient ora- 
tors) adeo neglegitur ab horum temporum disertis ut etc. Friedländer 
1. 1. p. 290 sq. n. 4. 



General Observations on the first Centurt/. 7 

tial, HereDiiius Senecio, and others ^) ; Gaul the orators and 
rhetoricians Votienus Montanus, Domitius Afer, Julius Florus 
and Africanus, Quirinalis, Ursulus, Rufus, M. Aper, and 
others ^). In a later period Africa began to exercise a pre- 
dominant influence on literature ^). 

Rhetoric and declamation governed the whole century in 
prose as well as in poetry; but even the place of rhetoric 
was taken up by pedantic school-learning and havardage*). 
Formal perfection was widely spread, and the metrical laws 
created by the Augustan age were carefully observed. But 
native tact for form was on the wane. All poetical styles were 
mixed up, poetry was mixed with prose, synonyms lost their 
distinct use, the dictionary was disgraced with the births 
of arbitrary fancy; some particles were even quite given up*) 
in consequence of the relaxed form of construction, and some 
were used in a sense very different from their original pur- 
port ^). This imparted a peculiar colouring to the so-called 
silver Latinity. 

1. The age of the Julian Dynasty, A. D. 14—68. 

268. At the beginning of this time both ruler and 
literature continued in the track of the Augustan age. 
But the more openly despotism developed itself and the grea- 
ter the influence was which the Emperors themselves exercised on 
literature, the more decisive was its transformation. This age 



1) Kortüra, Historical Investigations (Leipzig 1863) p. 209— 252: on 
the homogeneous and dissimilar elements of the Spanish-Roman school 
of poetry in the second half of the first century. J. J. Kölly, A Sur- 
vey of the principal studies and places of study in the West in the 
Imperial epoch, Lucerne 1869. 4. 

2) Gallia causidicos docuit facunda Britannos, Juv. XV 111. cf. YIl 
147 sqq. 213 sq. Quintil. X 3, 13: lulius Florus, in eloquentia Gallia- 
rum . . princeps. Fronto p. 160 K : gallicanus quidam declamator. 

3) Juv. YII 148 sq.: nutricula causidicorum Africa. 

4) Petron. Sat. 1: rerum tumore et sententiarum vanissimo strepitu 
hoc tantum proficiunt ut cum in forum venerint putent se in alium 
orbem terrarum delatos. On later periods see J. Burckhardt, on Con- 
stantine p. 316—322. 

5) F. Haase's pref. to his ed. of Seneca, T. Ill p. XIII— XV. 

6) Such are the conjunctions quin immo, nempe enim, ergo igitur 
etc.; also the use of interim and many other peculiarities. Cf. E. Opitz, 

■.iSpecimen lexilogiae argenteae latinitatis, Naumburg 1852. 4. 



8 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

is, therefore, divided into two parts, the reign of Tiberius 
(A. D. 14—37) and those of his successors (37 — 68). 

1. C. A. Knabe, de fontibus historiae imperatorum luliorum, Halle 
1864. 



a. The reign of Tiberius. 

269. In the twenty- three years taken up by this reign, 
rhetoric slowly sank from the height it had attained in the 
Augustan age; some of its representatives, e. g. Votienus 
Montanus, Mam. Scaurus, Romanius Hispo, were active in the 
Senate and also in the Law-Courts, Among the historians 
Cremutius Cordus paid dearly for his candour; Velleius and 
Valerius Maximus were flatterers. The polyhistor Celsus, the 
jurist Masurius Sabinus, and the grammarians Julius Modestus, 
Pomponius Marcellus, Remmius Palaemon were exempt from 
the conflicting questions of the age owing to their subjects. 
Least of all did poetry prosper in this stifling dull period. 
Manilius to a certain extent belonged to it; but besides him, 
Phaedrus, the writer of fables, is the sole poet it can boast, 
and even he suffered persecutions, as also did Pomponius 
Secundus, who subsequently attempted the composition of 
tragedies. 

1. Suet. Tib. 42: Asellio Sabine sestertia ducenta donavit pro 
dialogo in quo boleti et iicedulae et ostreae et turdi certamen induxe- 
rat. A. Kiessling, in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 103, p. 646, identifies him 
with Sabinus Asilius, venustissimus inter rhetoras scurra, in Sen. suas. 
2, 12, and Asilius in Suet. Calig. 8. Cf. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Encycl. 
I 2, p. 1858, 1. 4 sqq. 

2. Tac. A. Ill 49 : fine anni (21 A. D.) Lutorium Priscuni eq. rom. 
post celebre carmen quo Germanici suprema defleverat pecunia dona- 
tum a Caesare corripuit delator, obiectans aegro Druso composuisse 
quod, si extinctus esset, maiore praemio volgaretur. He was executed, 
though not owing to Tiberius. Cf. Dio LVH 20. 

3. Tac. A, IV 31 : C. Cominiura eq. rora. probrosi in se carminis 
convictum Caesar precibus fratris . . concessit. VI 39: (Sextius) Paco- 
nianus in carcere ob carmina illic in principem factitata strangulatus 
est. Dio LVII 22: Alkiov I^aioQvTvou w? xcu f-'nt} rivd tg v.vtov ovx 
tTiiryjdfia ccjioQQfUfiayra . . (cno jov Karin (xikf.ov xaTfXQtj/Ltyiafy. Suet. 
Tib. 61: obiectum est poetae (Mam. Scaurus, see below 271, 2) quod 
in tragoedia (entitled Atreus, Dio LVIII 24) Agamemnonem probris 
lacessisset (vcrsibus qui in Tiberium flecterentur, Tac. A. VI 29), 



I 



Tiberius and Germanicus. 9 

obiectum et historico (Cremiitius Cordus, see below '212, 1) quod Brutum 
Cassiiimque Ultimos Romanorum dixisset: animadversum statim in auc- 
tores scriptaquc abolita, quamvis probarentur ante aliquot annos, etiam 
Augusto audiente, recitata. Specimens of the libels on Tiberius are 
given by Suet. Tib. 59. 

3. On lulius Montanus (tolerabilis poeta et amicitia Tiberii notus 
et frigore) see above 247, 13. 

4. On the poetry of Remmius Palaemon see below 277, 3; on 
Gaetulicus below 286, 1. 

5. On the prohibition of the oscum ludicrum, see above 10, 2. 

6. Phaedrus was persecuted by Sejanus (Phaedr. Ill 40 sqq.), see 
below 279, 1. On Pomponius Secundus see below 279, 7. 

270. Among the members of the Imperial dynasty Tibe- 
rius himself (712—790 v. c.) possessed accurate rhetorical 
training which he exhibited both orally and in writing, even 
as prince, at least so far as his close malicious temper 
allowed it. He also wrote Memoirs full of daring untruth, and 
verses in Greek and Latin. The unfortunate Germanicus 
(a. 739—772 V. c.) was also highly cultivated and composed 
several works in verse, above all a poetical version of Aratus' 
didactic poem on astronomy which has come down to us to- 
gether with Scholia. 

1. Besides the historical works of Hock (I 3 p. 1 — 194), Merivale 
(vol. V), C. Peter (III 1 p. 137—230), E. v. Wietersheim (Hist, of the 
migration of tribes I p. 110 sqq.) and others, see for Tiberius W. Teuffel's 
article in Pauly's Encycl. VI 2 p. 1931—1943. Wigand, on the Emperor 
Tiberius, Berlin 1860. 4, G. R. Sievers, Tiberius and Tacitus, Hamb. 
1850 sq. 4. = Studies on the History of the Roman Emperors (Berlin 
1870) p. 1—105. V. Duruy, de Tiberio imperatore, Paris 1853. F. F. 
Baur, de Tacitea Tiberii imagine. Tub. 1856. 4. J. J. Bernouilli, on the 
character of the Emperor Tiberius, Basle 1859. A. Stahr, Tiberius, Berlin 
1863. E. Pas^h, on the criticism of the history of the Emperor Ti- 
berius, Altenburg 1866. L. Freytag, Tib. and Tacitus, Berlin 1870. 
471 pp. Beule, Tibere et I'heritage d'Auguste, Paris 1868. A.Schröder, 
de eorum scriptorum qui de Tib. . . tradiderunt fide et auctoritate, 
Königsberg 1868. J. Duchesne, de Taciti ad enarrandum Tiberii Caes, 
principatum parum historicis artibus, Paris 1870. 107 pp. These. 

2. Suet. Tib. 70: artes liberales utriusque generis (Greek as well 
as Latin) studiosissime coluit. in oratione latina secutus est Corvinum 
Messalam (above 218, 9 sq.) sed adfectatione et morositate nimia obscu- 
rabat stilum, ut aliquanto ex tempore quam a cura praestantior habe- 
retur. Tac. A. XIII 3: Tiberius artem quoque callebat qua verba ex- 



10 The First Centun- of the Imperial Epoch. 

penderet, turn validus sensibus aut consulto ambiguus. IV, 31 : compositus 
alias et velut eluctantium verborum, solutius promptiusque eloquebatur 
quotiens subveniret. He attended the lectures of the rhetorican Theo- 
doras of Gadara, Sen. suas, 3, 7. Suet. Tib. 57. Quintil. Ill 1, 17. 
Puristic tendencies. Suet. Tib. 71. Dio LVII 15. 17, His preference 
for archaic expressions, Suet. Aug. 86. gramm. 22. Funeral speeches 
by him. Suet. Tib. 6. Aug. 100. Tac. A. IV 12. Sen. con. ad Marc. 
15, 3. Dio LVII 11 and others. Accusations and defence? Suet. Tib. 8 
Meyer orat. rom^. p. 553 — 556. Documents composed by him are alleged 
by Tac. A. Ill 6. 53 sq. IV 40. Suet. Tib. 67. ib. 61 : commentario quern 
de vita sua summatim breviterque composuit (like Augustus, see above 
217, 4) ausus est scribere etc. Domit. 20: praeter commentarios et 
acta Tiberii Caesaris nihil lectitabat. 

3. Suet. Tib. 70: composuit et carmen lyricum, cuius est titulus 
Conquestio de morte L. Caesaris. fecit et graeca poemata imitatus 
Euphorionem et Rhianum et Parthenium, quibus poetis admodum de- 
lectatas etc. maxime tamen curavit notitiam historiae fabulafis, usque 
ad ineptias atque derisum. nam et grammaticos, quod genus hominum 
praecipue appetebat, eiusmodi fere quaestionibus experiebatur, quae 
mater Hecubae etc. According to Suidas (v. Kcuoccq TtßtQiog) tyQaxj'fv 
iniyQc'cfxfjcaa xal T(/prjy Qt]TOQiy.t]y. The latter may be an error. 

4. On Germanic us, the nephew and adopted son of Tiberius, 
see A. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. III. p. 838—848 and G. F. Hertzberg in 
Ersch and Gruber's Encyclop. I 61 (1855) p. 17^^—209. Peterek, Ger- 
manicus, a biographical essay, Trzemesno 1842. 3. A. Zingerle, de 
Germanico Caesare Drusi filio, Trident 1867 (Progr.) p. 3—31. 

5. Suet. Calig. 3 of Germanicus : ingenium in utroque (cf. n. 2) 
eloquentiae doctrinaeque genere praecellens. . . oravit causas etiam 
triumphalis, atque inter cetera studiorum monimenta reliquit et comoe. 
dias graecas. Plin. n. h. VIII 42, 155: fecit et divus Augustus equo 
tumulum, de quo Germanici Caesaris carmen est. Tac. A. II 83 : veteres 
inter scriptores haberetur. Ovid. Fast. I 19 sqq, : docti . . principis, 
quae sit culti facundia sensimus oris civica pro trepidis cum tuHt arma 
reis. 25: vates rege vatis habenas. ex Pont. II 5, 53 sqq. IV 8, 67 
(non potes officium vatis contemnere vates) sqq. 70: gloria Pieridum 
summa futurus eras. 73: modo bella geris, numeris mode verba coerces. 
77: tibi nee docti desunt nee principis artes. Greek and Latin epigrams? 
Anal, n p. 159 (146 Jac.) 285 (nr. 2. 3.) Anthol. lat. 708 R. = Anthol. 
Pal. IX 387 {'_4dQt«yov KaCaccQog, ol ds TfQucany.ov). 709 = Anth. Pal. 
VII 542 {<l^kciy.y.ov). 

6. Under the title Claudii Caesaris Arati Phaenomeua (or Aratus 
Germanici ad Augustum) and in mss., the eariiest of which (see Brey- 
sig's ed. p. Xni— XXVI cf. also R. Dahms in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 99 p. 
269—275) are the Basle ms. saec. VHI (A in Breysig) and Paris. 7886 
(=; Puteaneus) saec. IX (P) we possess a Latin version of the astrono- 
mical poem of Aratus of Soli, in well-made hexameters, the ^Havot^Bva 



Tibenua and Germanicus. 11 

in 725 lines, with three large fragments on the influence of constel- 
lations on weather {dioarj/usYa or prognostica) in more than 200 lines. 
Compared with the fragments of Cicero's similar attempt (above 176,2) 
and Avienus' translation, the present version is remarkable for origi- 
nality, knowledge and relative poetical talent. Cf. J. Frey, de Germ. 
Ar. interpr. p. XXIV: Germanicus prooemium de suo praemisit, fabulas 
nonnullas Arato plane intactas addidit. quae apud Aratum non recte 
disposita intellexit in meliorem ordinem redegit, plura que falsa ab 
Arato prodita esse ex posterioris aetatis astrologorum libris cognoverat 
correxit. The writer treats legends critically: see Phaen. 31. 166. 264. 
The comparison of the text with Aratus and Avienus, and the use 
of the work as a text-book of astronomy, has caused many interpolations : 
see A. Breysig's praef. p. V sqq. 

7. Germanicus, the son of Drusus, is considered the author of 
this version by Jerome, Lactantius (inst. V 5), and others; Firmic. 
Math. Ill praef. (cf. VIII 5) calls him Julius Caesar. That it was rather 
the composition of Domitian, was assumed by Rutgersius on the strength 
of V. 2 eqq. : carminis at nobis, genitor, tu maximus auctor, te veneror, 
tibi sacra fero doctique laboris primitias (cf. 16: pax tua tuque adsis 
nato), while v. 558 sqq. (which Breysigp. XI sq. assigns to the Prognost.) 
are in favour of composition subsequent to the death of Augustus. 
But genitor used of an adoptive father (in this case Tiberius) is not 
unusual (Merkel ad Ibin p. 379); Ti. Caesaris Aug. filius (Divi Aug. 
nep., Divi luli pronepos) Germanicus is also called in official language 
(see Orelli-Henzen 5380), and this work may have been the first he fi- 
nished, especially in comparison with the Prognostica which were 
written at a later period (Phaen. 444 sq.) The assumption of the author- 
ship of Domitian is at variance with the silence observed by all his 
flatterers concerning a performance of this kind, as well as with the 
fact that Domitian did not assume the title of Germanicus until he 
attained to the Imperial dignity, A. D. 84; see Frontin. Strat. II 11, 
7: Imperator Caesar Domitianus Augustus Germanicus eo bello quo 
victis hostibus cognomen Germanici meruit, cum in finibus Chattorum 
castella poneret etc. Cf. Martial. II 2: Creta dedit magnum, mains 
dedit Africa nomen; nobilius domito tribuit Germania Rheno, et puer 
hoc dignus nomine, Caesar, eras; . . quae datur ex Chattis laurea tota 
tua est; though this might mean that Domitian had borne that name 
et puer, which cannot, however, be proved from other sources. A. Imhof, 
Domitian p. 131—135. 

8. Editions of the Aratea of Germanicus. Ed. princeps Bonon. 
1474. 4. Venet. 1488 and (Aid.) 1499. fol. Ed. Hugo Grotius, Lugd. B. 
1600. 4. Cum comm. varr. ed. J. C. Schwartz (Coburg 1715). In Buhle's 
edition of Aratus (Lips. 1801) and especially in J. C. Orelli's edition of 
Phaedrus (1831) p. 137—210. Cum scholiis ed. A. Breysig, BeroL 1867. 

9. J. C. Schaubach, de Arati interpretibus rom. (Meiningen 1817. 
4.) p. 6. sqq. J. Frey, Rhein- Mus. XIII. p. 409—427 and Epistola critica 



12 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

de Germanico Arati interprete, Culm 1861. 4. M. Haupt, Hermes HI. 
p. 153—155. 

10. Besides' the poem itself we also possess Scholia on it written 
in different periods. The earlier ones (in the Paris and Basle mss.) 
were in existence as early as the fourth century (Lactantius) and probably 
then in connection with Germanicus' poem. They are originally a version 
of a Greek work, according to the earlier assumption, the xaTccGTfQtG/uol 
of Ps. Eratosthenes, but according to J. Frey (Rh. Mus. XXV p. 263 — 
272) rather of a Greek commentator on Aratus. These Scholia are 
enlarged and corrupted, chiefly for school-purposes, with additions from 
Pliny, Hyginus, Suetonius, Censorinus, Martianus (perhaps also Isidore?), 
in the cod. Strozzianus saec. XIV and even worse in the Urbinas (Vatic. 
1388) saec. XV. A third text which pays special attention to legends 
and is chiefly represented in the Sangermanensis (G) of saec. IX, differs 
so much from the earlier text as to convey the impression of an ori- 
ginal work. A. Breysig, Philologus XIII. p. 660 — 668 and Praef. p. 
XXVI sqq. Editions of these Scholia together with Germanicus (see 
n. 8), e. g. in Breysig's edition p. 54 — 235. Also in Eyssenhardt's 
Martianus Capella (Lips. 1866) p. 377 sqq. 

11, Schaubach, Observat. in scholia ad Germanici Caes. Phaeno- 
mena, 4 parts, Meiningen 1821 — 1834. 4. Suringar, de mythographo 
astronomico qui vulgo dicitur scholiastes Germanici, Lugd. B. 1842. 4. 
A, Breysig, in the scholiastes Germanici, Philologus XHI p. 657 — 669, 
and Emendations in the Schol. on Germ., Posen 1865. 24. p. 4. 

271. Among the orators of this age the most important 
and who also edited their own speeches and rhetorical writings 
were the honest Votienus Montanus of Narbo, who was, how- 
ever, immoderate as a speaker; the talented, but lazy and 
dissolute Mamercus Scaurus; Asinius Gallus (a. 714 — 786 v. 
c), the author of a comparison of his father Pollio and Cicero; 
the knight P. Vitellius who accused Piso of being the murderer 
of Germanicus ; Domitius Afer (c. 740 — 812 v. c.) of Nemausum, 
who held high dignities under Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero, 
and pleaded in the Law-Courts, but was less respectable as 
man and survived his oratorical reputation. 

1. Hieronym. on Eus. chron. a. Abr. 2043 = Tib. 14 = 780 =27 
A. D.: Votienus Montanus Narbonensis orator in Balearibus insulis 
moritur, illuc a Tiberio relegatus. cf. Tac. A. IV 42: habita per illos 
dies (a. 778 v. c.) de Votieno Montano, Celebris ingenii viro, cognitio. 
• . postulato Votieno ob contumelias in Caesarem dictas which may, 
however, be supposed to have been in accordance with truth, etc. 
Votienus maiestatis poenis adfectus est. Sen. controv. IX. praef. 1: 
Montanus Votienus adeo numquam ostentationis declamavit causa ut ne 



Orators: Montanus, Scaurus, Asinms GalhfS. 13 

exercitatis quidem declamaverit. 28, 17: habet hoc Montanus vitium: 
sententias suas repetendo corrumpit; . . et propter hoc et propter alia 
. . solebat Scaurus Montanum inter oratores Ovidium vocare (above 
246, 6). 28, 15 : Montanus Votienus, homo rarissimi, etiamsi non emen- 
datissimi ingeni, vitium suum, quod in orationibus non evitat, in scho- 
lasticis quoque evitare non potuit. . . memini ilium pro Galla Numisia 
apud centumviros tirocinium ponere. . . (16 :) ex iis quaedam in orationem 
contulit et alia plura quam dixerat adiecit. 29, 17: Montanus Votienus 
Marcellum Marcium amicum suum, cuius frequenter mentionem in 
scriptis suis facit tanquam hominis diserti, aiebat dixisse etc. VII 20 
(p. 217, 18 sqq. Bu.): Vinicius (above 263, 10) erat non aequus ipsi 
Montano. accusaverat ilium apud Caesarem, a colonia Narbonensi ro- 
gatus. at Montanus adeo toto animo scholasticus erat ut eodem die quo 
accusatus est a Vinicio disceptarit in Vinici (here a gap). Seneca, fre- 
quently gives specimens of the declamations of Montanus from his 
seventh book. 

2. Mam. Aemilius Scaurus, insignis nobilitate (the great-grand- 
son of the princeps senatus, above 131, 10) et orandis causis, vita pro- 
brosus (Tac. A. VI 29 cf. Ill 66), a. 787 = 34 A. D. driven by Tiberius 
to suicide, see above 269, ^3 and 272, 4. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. I 
1. p. 374 f., Nr. 6.) On him Seneca states controv. X. praef. 2—4: non 
novi quemquam cuius ingenio populus rom. pertinacius ignoverit. dicebat 
neglegenter; saepe causam in ipsis subselliis, saepe dum amicitur dis- 
cebat. . . nihil erat illo venustius, nihil paratius. genus dicendi anti- 
quum, verborum quoque non volgarium gravitas, ipse voltus habitusque 
corporis mire ad auctoritatem oratoriam aptatus. (3.) sed . . ignavus 
Scaurus. . . pleraeque actiones malae, in omnibus tarnen aliquod magni 
ingeni vestigium extabat. . . orationes septem edidit, quae deinde sena- 
tusconsulto combustae sunt (see above 269, 3). bene cum illis ignis 
egerat; sed extant libelli qui cum fama eius pugnant, multo quidem 
solutiores ipsis actionibus. (4.) declamantem audivimus, et novissime 
quidem M. Lepido. I 2, 22: Scaurus non tantum disertissimus homo 
sed venustissimus. Tac. A. Ill 31 : Mam. Scaurus, qui . . oratorum ea 
aetate uberrimus erat. Specimens of his pertinent witticisms are given 
by Sen. contr. I 2, 22. n 9, 39. IX 28, 17; cf. X 31, 19. 

3. C. Asinius G alius, the son of Asinius Pollio (above 218, 1 sqq.), 
Cons. 746, driven by Tiberius to suicide, a. 786; see W. Teuffel in 
Pauly's Enc. I 2. p. 1865 sq. Nr. 9. Plin. Epist. VH 4, 3: libri Asini 
Galli de comparatione patris et Ciceronis. ib. §. 6: libros Galli . . 
quibus ills parenti ausus de Cicerone dare est palmamque decusque. 
Claudius wrote against this work; see below 281, 2. Quintil. XII 1, 
22: Asinio utrique, qui vitia orationis eius (Cicero) etiam inimice plu- 
ribus locis insequuntur. Gellius XVII 1, 1 : nonnulli tarn prodigiosi 
tamque vecordes extiterunt, in quibus sunt Gallus Asinius et Largius 
Licinus, cuius liber etiam fertur infando titulo 'Ciceromastix', ut scribere 
ausi sint M. Ciceronem parum integre atque improprie atque inconsi- 



14 The First Century of the Imperial Ei30ch. 

derate locutum. An epigram by Gallus on the grammarian Marcellus 
(below 277, 2) is quoted by Sueton. gramm. 22. 

4. P. Vitellius, the brother of the Emperor, Germanici comes, 
Cn. Pisonem inimicum et interfectorem eius aucusavit condemnavitque 
(Suet. Vitell. 2), a. 772 = 19 A. D. He died 784 rrr 31; see W. Teufifel 
in Pauly's Enc. VI 2. p. 2682, Nr. 4. Plin. n. h. XI 187: extat oratio 
Vitelli qua Gn. Pisonem eius sceleris (veneficii) coarguit hoc usus argu- 
mento etc. 

5. Hieronym. a. Abr. 2062 = Claud. 6=:46A. D. Domitius Afer 
Nemausensis clarus orator habetur, qui postea Nerone regnante ex cibi 
redundantia in cena moritur. Cons. sufi. under Caligula a. 792 = 39 
A. D. ; cur. aquarum 802 — 812 (Frontin. aq. 102: Cn. Domitius Afer). 
A. 779 he accused Claudia Pulchra, Tac. A. IV 52: recens praetura, 
modicus dignationis et quoquo facinore properus clarescere. . . Afer 
primoribus oratorum additus, divulgato ingenio. . . mox capessendis 
accusationibus aut reos tutando prosperiore eloquentiae quam morum 
fama fuit, nisi quod aetas extrema multum etiam eloquentiae dempsit. 
IV 66: nullo mirante quod diu egens et parto nuperpraemio male usus 
plura ad flagitia accingeretur. XIV 19: sequuntur (a. 812 =. 59) virorum 
illustrium mortes, DomitiiAfri et M, Servilii (below 286, 2), qui summis 
honoribus et multa eloquentia viguerant, ille orando causas, Servilius 
diu foro, mox tradendis rebus rom. Celebris et elegantia vitae, quam 
clariorem effecit (than Afer), ut par ingenio ita morum diversus (better 
than Afer). See also Plin. Ep. VIII 18, 5 sqq. Quintil. X ], 118: 
eorum quos viderim Domitius Afer et lulius Africanus longe praestan- 
tissimi. arte ille et toto genere dicendi praeferendus et quem in numero 
veterum habere non timeas. XII 11, 3: vidi ego longe omnium quos 
mihi cognoscere contigit summum oratorem, Domitium Afrum, valde 
senem cotidie aliquid ex ea quam meruerat auctoritate perdentem, cum 
agente illo, quem principem fuisse quondam fori non erat dubium, alii 
. . riderent, alii erubescerent. cf. also XII 10, 11 (above 37, 2). Tac. 
dial. 13. 15. Dio LIX 19. Plin. Ep. II 14, 10: narrabat ille (Quintüian): 
adsectabar Domitium Afrum; cum apud centumviros diceret graviter et 
lente, hoc enim Uli actionis genus erat etc. Especially famous were 
his (published) speeches pro Voluseno Catulo (Quintil. X 1, 24), pro 
Domitilla (ib. VHI 5, 16. IX 2, 20. 3, 66. 4, 31), pro Laelia (ib. IX 4, 
31). Meyer, orat. fragm. p. 565—570. Other writings Quintil. V7, 7: 
sufficiebant alioqui libri duo a Domitio Afro in hanc rem (de testibus) 
compositi, quern adolescentulus senem colui. VI 3, 42: mire fuit in 
hoc genere (witty descriptions) venustus Afer Domitius, cuius orationibus 
complures huiusmodi narrationes insertae reperiuntur; sed dictorum 
quoque ab eodem urbane sunt editi libri. Cf. ib. 27 and 32. 

6. Bruttedius Niger, aedilis a 775 =;22 A. D., Tac. A. lü 66 (Brut- 
tedium artibus honestis copiosum et, si rectum iter pergeret ad cla- 
rissima quaeque iturum festinatio exstimulabat). He was on friendly 
terms with Sejanus, Juv. X 83. In rhetoric he was the pupil of Apol- 



Orators: Afer and others. Cremuiius Cordits. 15 

lodorus, Sen. contr. II 9, 86. Specimens of his declamations are given 
ib 35 and probably also suas. 6, 20 sq. the relation on Cicero's death 
and the public exhibition of his head. 

7. Sex. Pompeius, the friend of Germanicus (Ovid, ex Pont. IV 
5, 25 sq. cf. Tac. A. Ill 11) Consul in the same year as Augustus died 
(767 = 14 A. D.), a patron of Ovid's (ex Pont. IV 1, 21 sqq. 5, 37 sqq. 
15, 3 sq. 37), w^ho addressed to him his Epistles ex Pont. IV 1. 4. 5. 
15., and of Valerius Maximus (below 274, 1). Ovid mentions his facundum 
OS (ex Pont. IV 4, 37), Val. Max. II 6, 8 (facundissimo sermone, qui 
ore eius quasi e beato quodam eloquentiae fonte emanabat). IV 7. 
ext. 2 (clarissimi ac disertissimi viri). 

8. Tac. A. Ill 24 : M. (lunii) Silani potentia, qui per insignem nobi- 
litatem et eloquentiam praecellebat. Cos. 772 = 19 A. D., driven to 
suicide (Suet. Calig. 23) by Caligula, who had married his daughter 
Junia Claudilla (ib. 12. Tac. A. VI 20). 

9. Tac. A. VI 48 : poenae in Laelium Balbum decernuntur (a. 790 
= 37). . . Balbus truci eloquentia habebatur, promptus adversum in- 
sontes. Cf. ib. 47. Quintil. X 1, 24: nobis pueris insignes pro Voluseno 
Catulo (see n. 5) Decimi Laelii orationes ferebantur. 

10. Tac. A. VI 47: (Vibius) Marsus quoque vetustis honoribus et 
inlustris studiis (of eloquence) erat. A. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. VI 2 p. 
2571, Nr. 23. 

U. On Valerius Messalinus see above 262, 6; on Romanius Hispo, 
Vinicius, and others, above 263, 10. 

272. The expiration of the Republic and foundation of 
the Monarchy had, still under Augustus, been related by A. 
Cremutius Cordus with much candour, which now furnished 
the pretence of persecuting him. In the reign of Tiberius, the 
same subject was in the rhetorical manner of the period 
treated by Aufidius Bassus, a man of philosophical culture, 
who described the Civil Wars and the expeditions against the 
Germans, and whose work was subsequently continued by 
Pliny the Elder. Seneca the Elder wrote his historical work 
in this reign. Tuscus was both rhetorician and historian. 

1. Tac. A. IV 34: Cremutius Cordus postulatur (a 778 = 25 
A.D.) . . quod editis annalibus laudatoque M. Bruto (cf. Plut. Brut. 44) 
C. Cassium Romanorum ultimum dixisset (see above 269, 3). His plea- 
ding ib. 34 sq. Egressus dein senatu vitam abstinentia finivit. libros 
per aediles cremandos censuere patres; set manserunt, occultati et 
editi, ib. 35. Sen. cons. ad. Marc. 1, 2 (A. Cremutii Cordi, parentis 
tui). 22, 6 sqq. Dio LVII 24. The real cause of the attack upon 



16 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

him should be found in some expressions of his with which he had 
offended Sejanus, Sen. ad Marc. 22, 4 sq. — Dio 1. 1.: vgt(qov de 
i'^fdo&ri ccvS^ig {td GvyYQCifxfjicna avrov), cckkoi ts yccQ xui fxctktGTa rj 
S-vyaiTjQ avTov MaQ'/Ja üvv4y.Qv\]'fv «vrcc. Sen. ad. Marc. 1, 3 sq. Sueton. 
Calig. 16. (above 262, 10). Quotations from it concerning the death 
of Cicero, are made by Seneca suas. 7, 19. 23. From Quint. XI 104 
it may be inferred that the strongest passages were omitted in a new 
edition : habet amatores, nee immerito, Cremuti libertas, quamquam 
circumcisis quae dixisset eraacuerit; cf. Philologus VI. p. 139. 753 sq. 
C. Rathlef, de A. Cremutio Cordo, Dorpat 1860. 78 pp. C. v. P(aucker), 
Domitian and Cremutius Cordus, Mitau 1861 (Report of a Session of 
the Curland Society of Lit.) 

2. Sen. Epist. 30, 1: Bassum Aufidium, virum optimum, vidi 
quassum, aetati obluctantem. ib. 3: Bassus tarnen noster alacer animo 
est. hoc philosophia praestat etc. ib. 5. 10. 14: dicebat ille, Epicuri 
praeceptis obsequens etc. Quintil. X 1, 108: quam (i. e. auctoritas histo- 
riae) paulum aetate praecedens eum (i. e. Servilius, below 285, 2) Bassus 
Aufidius egregie, utique in libris belli germanici, praestitit, genere ipso 
probabilis in omnibus, sed in quibusdam suis ipse viribus minor. Spe- 
cimens of his historical style, concerning the death of Cicero, in rather 
affected terms, are given by Sen. suas. 6, 18 and 23. Cf. Plin. n. h. 
VI 9, 27: universae (Armeniae) magnitudinem Aufidius . . prodidit. praef. 
20: diximus . . temporum nostrorum historiam, orsi a fine Aufidii Bassi. 
As Pliny's work treated, at the very least, of the latter part of the 
reign of Nero (see below 307, 5), Aufidius probably ended with the 
reign of Claudius. It is doubtful whether the libri belli germanici 
were an independent work or part of another. Mommsen, Cassiodor. 
p. 558 sq. Tac. dial. 23: (antiquarians) quibus eloquentia Aufidi Bassi 
aut Servilii Noniani ex comparatione Sisennae aut Varronis sordet. W. 
Teuff'el in Pauly's Enc. I 2. p. 2129 sq. Nr. 11. 

3. On Seneca see above 264, 3. 

4. Sen. suas. 2, 22: historicum quoque vobis fatuum dabo. Tuscus 
ille qui Scaurum Mamercum (above 271, 2) in quo Scaurum familia ex- 
tincta est maiestatis reum fecerat, homo quam improbi animi tarn 
infelicis ingenii, cum banc suasoriam declamaret dixit etc. By Tac. A. 
VI 29 the accusers of Scaurus (a. 787 = 34) are called Servilius and 
Cornelius; and one of them would appear to have had the cognomen 
of Tuscus. 

5. Aemilius Sura de annis populi rom. (see above 154, 6, c and d): 
Assyrii principes etc. is an old gloss which has crept into the text of 
Velleius (I 6, 6) as a parallel illustration. The work seems to have 
been an abridgment on Universal History, perhaps in the manner of 
Velleius' work, and arranged according to the five great Monarchies 
(the Assyrian, Median, Persian, Macedonian, and Roman), the fifth of 
which the anni pop. rom. seem to have formed. The date of compo-^ ^ 



Avfidms Ba^sr,^. Velleius. 17 

sition is not known. Th. Mommsen. Rhein. Mus. XVI p. 282 — 284. 
Reifferscheid's Sueton. p. XVI sq. See above 157, 3. 

6. On Annius Fetialis see above 254, 8. 

273. Chiefly the history of the Monarchy is treated in the 
abridgment of Roman History in two books by M. Yelleius 
Pater cuius, A. D. 30. This writer had been in mihtary 
service under Tiberius whom he then learned to admire; but 
he soars to such pathos of loyalty and pomp of style that he 
praises anything connected with his general in a most extra- 
vagant manner and rails on all that was opposed to him. He 
does not appreciate the interior connexion of things and his 
interest centres upon the persons only. His diction is pompous 
and affected, but wanting in variety and ease. The construc- 
tion of his sentences is frequently awkward. The lexical part 
generally agrees with the classical usage, but the whole mode 
ot treatment in which the subject-matter is chiefly used as the 
vehicle of individual reflection, is quite in harmony with the 
spirit of the first century. The work has come down to us 
in only one ms., and the first book is mutilated. 

1. üi his personal aftairs as well as those of his family, Velleius 
frequently informs us with vain loquacity. II 101, 2 sq.: quod spec- 
taculum (a. 754 v. c.) . . sub initia stipendiorum meorum tribuno mi- 
litum mihi visere contigit. quem militiae gradum ante sub patre tuo, 
M. Vinici, et P. Silio ausxDicatus in Thracia Macedoniaque, mox Achaia 
Asiaque et omnibus ad orientem visis provinciis et ore atque utroque 
maris pontici latere, baud iniucunda tot rerum, locorum . . recordatione 
perfruor. 104, 3: hoc tempus (a. 757) me . . castrorum Ti. Caesaris 
militem fecit, quipiic protinus ab adoptione (June 757) missus cum eo 
praefectus equitum in Germaniam, successor offici patris mei, caeles- 
tissimorum eius operum per annos continuos VIII praefectus aut legatus 
spectator et . . adiutor fui. Ill, 3 sq.: habuit in hoc quoque belle 
(pannonico, a. 759) mediocritas nostra speciosi ministeri locum, finita 
equestri militia designatus quaestor, necdum senator, aequatus senato- 
ribus et iam designatis tribunis plebei partem exercitus ab urbe traditi 
ab Augusto perduxi ad filium eius (Tiberius), in quaestura (a, 760) 
deinde, remissa sorte provinciae, legatus eiusdem ad eundem missus 
sum. 113, 3: hiemis (760 to 761) initio regressus Sisciam legatos, inter 
quos ipsi fuimus, partitis praefecit hibernis. 114, 2: erat . . lectica 
eius (i. e. Tiberius) publicata, cuius usum cum alii tum ego sensi. 121, 
3: triumphus (of Tiberius, January 765), quem mihi fratrique meo (cf. 
II 115, 1) inter praecipuos praecipuisque donis adornatos viros comitari 
contigit. 124, 4: quo tempore (a. 767) mihi fratrique meo, candidatis 
Caesaris, proxime a nobilissimis ac sacerdotalibus viris destinari prae- 

2 



18 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

toribus contigit, consecutis ut neque post nos quemquam divus Augustus 
(merely because he died) neque ante nos Caesar commendaret Tiberius. 
His complete names are given by Priscian VI II, 63 (p. 248, 4 H.): 
M. Velleius Paterculus. In the Schol. Lucan. IX 178 (and schol. ant. 
on VIII 663) only Paterculus. That he never advanced beyond the 
praetorship may be inferred from his silence. The latest fact menti- 
oned in his work is the death of Livia (II 130, 5), a. 782 — 29 A. D., 
and the consulship of M. Vinicius a. 783 = 30. In his leisure subse- 
quent to the praetorship the author seems to have acquired the varied 
knowledge, also of Greek literature, which he displays, after he had 
originally made a merely military career; see II 52, 4: ut militari et 
verbo ex consuetudine utar. 

2. The historical work of Velleius bears the heading: Vellei Pa- 
terculi historiae romanae ad M. Vinicium consulem libri duo. It is 
not, however, strictly confined to Roman history. In imitation of the 
habit of the Annalists, the writer begins with the first settlements of 
Greeks in Italy, passes in rapid survey over the East and Greece, 
and brings in his first book the Roman history down to the fall of 
Carthage. His intention being originally only to give a short abridg- 
ment (I 16, 1. II 41, I. 55, 1. 86, 1. 99, 4. 108, 2. 124, 1 cf. 29, 2. 52, 
3. 86, 1), the work, in conformity with the habit of the Annalists (cf. 
above 252, 11) becomes more extensive the more it approaches the 
historian's own time, though it bears a subjective and rhetorical colour- 
ing even in its summary part and is frequently interrupted by the writer's 
reflections. He is fond of interspersing anecdotes and individual traits, 
in fact his whole manner is personal and consequently arbitrary 
and partial in many places (Sauppe p. 144 sq. 155—160). There are, 
however, numerous instances of excellent observations. Much space is 
devoted to the delineation of the acting characters, the point in which 
our writer excels, though he sometimes appears capricious concerning 
the characters of the Republican period, but frequently also exceedingly 
happy. On the other hand, the characters of Caesar, Augustus and 
Tiberius are enveloped in a cloud of incense (Sauppe p. 161 — 168), 
especially the latter being praised (after II 94) in quite an ecstatic 
manner with a downright extravagant use of superlatives. It is true, 
Velleius had seen Tiberius in his best years and wrote his work before 
his last and worst years; it is, moreover, his habit to exaggerate and 
lay on strong colours (Kritz p. XLVIII sq.). But it is fortunate he 
did not carry out his intention of writing a special work on Tiberius 
and his time (see II 48, 5. 96, 2. 99, 3. 103, 4. 119, 1). That Germanicus 
was a good general, and Agrippina a member of the imperial house, 
is put to their credit; the disgraceful treatment of them by Tiberius 
Velleius knows how to disguise with general phrases. 

3. Concerning his sources Velleius mentions Cato's Origines (I 7, 3) and 
the Annals of Hortensius (II 16, 3). In general Velleius may be sup- 
posed to have followed the current historical works, e. g. the abridg- 
ment of Atticus, also Cornelius Nepos and Pompeius Trogus in all 



Velleius Paterculus. 19 

foreign history and biographical details. He seems not to have quite 
trusted Livy as a disguised Republican, as he disagrees with him more 
frequently than otherwise. The studies of Velleius are not very deep ; 
a large collection of his historical blunders is given by Sauppe p. 147 
— 155. He places the foundation of Rome (I 8, 4) in a. 753 (01. 6, 3), 
following Varro; but then again follows the aera Catoniana (751); the 
year of the consulship of Vinicius (781) being e. g. fixed according to 
it (E 49, 2. 65, 2. cf. I 14, 6. H 103, 3. Kritz p. XLI sqq.). The di- 
vision of the subject-matter into two books according to the destruc- 
tion of Carthage (I 14, 1, cf. H 131, 1) is not at all bad, but in pur- 
suance of the views of Velleius it appears inconsistent to date the 
downfall of the Empire from the decay of Republican feeling. In this 
as well as in other points (Sauppe p. 161 sq. 169 sq.), he simply adopts 
the general practice. But by the addition of personal sympathies and 
antipathies the historical criticism of Velleius is rendered dissonant and 
dissimilar. 

4. The peculiar style of Velleius is explained by Kritz p. XLVI 
— LXXV partly from the general taste of his period, which was fond 
of affectation and artifice, partly from the character of the author, he 
being a mere dilettante, partly from his 'festinatio', which often led him 
into the careless style of conversational language. Especially his pe- 
culiar sentences in which he inserts endless parenthetic aud relative 
sentences between two poor particles of a short period (e, g. II 18, 
1-3. 28, 2. 41, 1 sq. 75, 3. Kritz p. LXI—LXIV), the frequent repetition 
of one and the same idea, and of the same words within a brief inter- 
val (Sauppe p. 175 — 178. Kritz p. LV sqq. LXVI sqq.), the pompousness 
of his diction, betray the writer's want of practice and polish. To the 
general influence of the age we should attribute his vain dallying with 
glittering sentences, pointed contrasts, and affected phrases, his co- 
quettish energy of language and its meretricious colouring. Hence may 
be explained his fondness of poetical expressions and pretentious com- 
binations of words (Sauppe p. 178 sq.). This studied artifice of Velleius 
reminds his reader greatly of Sallust. 

5. The only ms. of Velleius we know is the one found by Beatus 
Rhenanus a. 1515 in the ancient abbey of Murbach (in Alsace), which 
was, however, mutilated both at the end and at the beginning (where 
the preface and the events from the capture of the Sabine women down 
to the time of Perseus are wanting) and contained many corrupt pas- 
sages. After B. Rhenanus had published his edition from it (Basle 1520 
fol.), with as much or as little faithfulness as was usual in his age, the 
ms. was again lost. Only a copy made of it by Bonif. Amerbach was 
recently discovered at Basle, which does not, however, equal the first edition 
in accuracy. See the prefaces of Orelli (p. VII sqq.) and Kritz (c. 3, 
p. LXXVI— CXXV). J. Fröhlich and J. C. M. Laurent, on the value 
of Amerbach's copy of V., Leipzig 1840. D. A. Fechter, on Amerbach's 
copy of V. P. and the relation of the Murbach ms. and editio princeps, 
Basle 1844. Laurent, Serapeum 1847, Nr. 12, and in the Congratulatorjr 
program of the Hamburg town-library (Hamb. 1856. 4.) p. 17—34. 



20 The First Century of the Imperial Epocli 

6. Editions (besides ed. princ, see u. 5) by J. Lipsius (Lugd. B 
1591. Antverp. 1607), J. Gruter (Frankf. 1607), N. Heinsius (Amstelod. 
1678 and elsewhere), P. Burmann (Lugd.B. 1719. 1744. 2 vols.), D. Ruhnken 
(Lugd. B. 1779, 2 vols., reprinted by C. H. Frotscher, Lips. 1830—1829: 
the notae separately Hannover 1815), J. C. H. Krause (Lips. 1800; ed. 
minor 1803), J. C. Orelli (Lips. 1835), J. Th. Kreyssig (recogn., Meissen 
1836), and especially Fr. Kritz (rec, annot. et indd. instruxit. Lips. 1840). 
See his Prolegomena c. 4 (p. CXXV sqq.). 

Texts by F. H. Bothe (Zürich 1837), Fr. Kritz (Lips. 1847), Fr. Haase 
(Lips. Teubner 1851 and 1863) and others. 

7. Treatises on V. P. by H. Dodwell, annales Velleiani, Oxon. 1698. 
C. Morgenstern, comm. critica de fide historica V. P., imprimis de adu- 
latione ei obiecta, Danzig, 1798. H. Sauppe, Swiss. Museum for History^ 
I (Frauenfeld 1837) p. 133—180. L. Speckert, de la sincerite de V. P., 
Toulouse 1848. Alf. Pernices, de V. fide historica, Lips. 1862. 50 pp. 4. 
J. Stanger, de V. fide, Munich. 1863. 38 pp. 8 C. Windheuser, de V. 
fide in iis locis qui ad Tiberii mores spectant, Neuss 1867. 14 pp. 4. 

8. Critical contributions by C. Halm (Emend. Veil., München 1836. 
4.), Laurent (loci Veil., Altena 1836), J. Jeep (emend. V., Wolfenbüttel 
1839. 4), M. Haupt (Trans, of the Saxon Society of Lit. 1849, p. 190—200), 
B. Martin (Contributions etc., Prenzlau 1862, 4), and in the Quaestiones 
Velleianae of N. Alsters (Münster 1866), G. A. Koch (Lips. 1866. 4.) and 
E. Wilhelm (Jena 1866), F. Giese (Münster 1868). 

M. Hertz, on the so-called excerpta Velleii ex historia gallica, in 
Haupt's Journal of German Antiquities X 2 (Berlin 1855) Nr. 10. See 
ibid. p. 587. 

274. An equal amount of servility, but not of talent, ap- 
pears in Valerius Maximus, the author of a collection of 
anecdotes for rhetorical purposes, factorum et dictorum memo- 
rabilium libri novem — a work addressed to Tiberius. It is 
a compilation from few, but good sources, unfortunately in an 
uncritical manner and without taste and discrimination. Dull 
as the author is, he delights in reflection. The diction is de- 
clamatory, the style overloaded, but the lexical part not yet 
considerably invaded by neologisms. A tenth book is not extant 
and was perhaps never finished. Besides the original work we 
also possess two abridgments: one made from a very good 
ms. by Julius Paris, and a very poor one by Januarius Nepo- 
tianus. A short appendix de praenominibus is likewise derived 
from good sources, but has no further connexion with Valerius 
Maximus. 

1. The personal circumstances of Val. Max. appear to have been 
modest; see IV 4, 11 : his adquiescere solaciis debemus qui parvulos 



I 



Valerius Maximus. 21 

census nostros nunquam querelis vacuos esse sinimus. . . quid ergo 
modicam fortunam . . diurnis conviciis laceramus? He was connected 
with Sex. Pompeius, Cons. 767 =: 14 A. D. (see above 271, 7), who 
subsequently (perhaps a. 780, Kempf Prolegg. p. 5 sq.) governed Asia 
as proconsul. Val. Max. II 6, 8: quo tempore Asiam cum Sex. Pom- 
peio petens lulidem oppidum intravi, IV 7. ext. 2: clarissimi ac di- 
sertissimi viri promtissimam erga me benivolentiam expertus. . . Pom- 
peium meum, . . a quo omnium commodorum incrementa ultro oblata 
cepi, per quern tutior adversus casus steti, qui studia nostro ductu et 
auspiciis suis lucidiora et alacriora reddidit, itaque pavi invidiam 
quorundam optimi amici iactura. VI 1, prooem.: tu . . sanctissimum 
luliae genialem torum adsidua statione celebras. This shows that 
Livia (t 782 =^ 29 A. D.) was then still alive. But the declamation 
against Sejanus appears to have been added (at the end of IX 11) im- 
mediately after his downfall (a. 785 =r 32). The author would thus 
seem to have been engaged in his work with certain interruptions, but 
during some time. But when the ninth book was written, the preceding 
books had not yet been 4)ublished, as Sejanus never occurs in them. 
The statement of Matthew of Westminster (above 253,3) is no doubt 
wrong and cannot, therefore, be derived from Suetonius: anno divinae 
incarnationis XIX (=; 772 v. C.) Valerius historiographus Romanorum 
dicta descripsit et facta. Cf. Elschner p. 12 sqq. Rühl, on the circulation 
of Justinus p. 30 sqq. Similarly Radulfus de Diceto (c. 1210): Valerius 
Maximus urbis Romae ceterarumque gentium facta simul ac dicta me- 
moratu digna scripsit a. incarnati verbi XVIII. Rühl 1. 1. p. 32. 

2. The number of books amounted to ten, according to Julius 
Paris (see n. 9) who either erroneously counts in the treatise de nomi- 
nibus (a. 11) or (as Halm thinks) followed a mistaken heading. We, at 
all events, possess only nine; but as at the end of the ninth we do not 
find the otherwise inevitable moral expectorations of the author, it 
appears credible that he did not complete his work or that we do not 
possess the conclusion. It is less probable that a whole book is lost. 
The design and purpose of the composition appear from praef. in. : 
urbis Romae exterarumque gentium facta simul ac dicta memoratu 
digna, quae apud alios latius diffusa sunt quam ut breviter cognosci 
possint, ab inlustribus electa auctoribus digerere constitui, ut documenta 
sumere volentibus longae inquisitionis labor absit. The work would 
thus appear to be a collection of examples for the use of rhetoricians 
and their schools. This accounts for the arrangement according to 
certain terms (e. g. de religione, auspiciis, scmniis, institutis antiquis» 
rejDulsis, testamentis, damnatis aut absolutis), and chiefly moral ones 
(de fortitudine, moderatione, huraanitate, pudicitia, felicitate, luxuria 
etc.). Each chapter is again divided into instances taken from Roman 
and from foreign history, those of the first class being very numerous 
on account of the sources of Valerius and for reasons of national 
vanity. The traits of the Republican period are not weakened, but the 
enemies of Monarchy are constantly treated as traitors (cf. Tac. A. IV 



22 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

34, above 251, 3), Tiberius and the whole Imperial family are through- 
ut, even without any special occasion and without the excuse appli- 
cable to Velleius (above 273, 2), belauded in the coarsest manner and in 
direct opposition to truth. 

3. The inlustres auctores (praef.) employed by Valerius are chiefly 
Livy (especially the first three decads), though he is mentioned only 
once (I 8, ext. 19: serpentis a. T. Livio curiose pariter ac facunde 
relatae); see Kempf p. 15—18. U. Köhler, qua rat. Liv. annal. 1860, p. 
11—23. Fr. Zschech, de Cicerone et Livio Valerii Maximi fontibus, 
Berlin 1865, p. 35 sqq. 23—50) ; then Cicero (Kempf p. 13—15. Zschech 
p. 15—23), who is i likewise mentioned only once (VIII 13, ext. 1.: 
quemadmodum Cicero refert libro quem de senectute scripsit) also Sal- 
lust (Kempf p. 17) and probably in the foreign instances Pompeius 
Trogus (Kempf p. 21). It cannot be proved and is in itself improbable 
that Val. employed other sources, e. g. Varro (on account of III 2, 24: 
see Zschech p. 43, and against him Kettner, Varr. de vita pop. rom. 
p. 12 — 16) or even Greeks (e. g. Diodorus and Dionysius Hal.) : see 
Kempf p. 21 — 25; but he has occasionally ftiterspersed events he had 
himself witnessed (Kempf p. 12). Much may also be derived from si- 
milar collections of the time of Val, e. g. from Pompeius Rufus' collec- 
torum libro, a work once mentioned by our author (IV 4 in.) and 
nowhere else by any other writer. He generally copies his sources, 
especially in quoting sayings ; his changes tend to increase the rhetorical 
effect of an anecdote, especially by exaggerating and embellishing it. 
In other parts he sometimes cuts down, sometimes adds his reflections. 
His thoughtless use of his sources appears from the numerous bad 
mistakes (especially confusions) and errors which may be traced in his 
work; see Kempf prolegg. p. 26—33. Cf. Elschner p. 32 sqq. 

4. In point of style, Val. Max. shares with his period the con- 
viction that ''simplicity and naturalness are trivial and vulgar. Every- 
thing is with him artificial, pompous, and far -fetched in thought as 
well as in diction, in his choice and arrangement of words, and owing 
to all this his style frequently becomes obscure, and even oftener ab- 
surd and tasteless. Confusion of epithets, distortion of verbs, metaphors 
and similar ornaments abound with him. With all this, his manner 
shows great monotony, as he always repeats one and the same favour- 
ite expression over and over again. Kempf p. 34 — 33. Gelbcke p. 8—23. 

5. Plutarch does not appear to have used Val. Max., though he 
mentions him Marcell. 30 and Brut 53; see H. Peter, on the sources 
of Plut. p. 75 sq. 136 note. But his work was used by Pliny (n. h. 
VII), Frontinus Strat., Gellius XII 7, 8), also Lactantius and others (e. 
g. Claud. Mamert. grat. act. 5, 3. 16, 2). Even the abridgments did not 
injure his popularity (n. 9 sq.), and he was not rarely read in the 
Middle Ages (Kempf p. 43—49). This is borne out by the numerous 
mss. in which the work has come down to us (Kempf p. 71—96). Next 
to the one employed by Julius Paris (C. Halm, Emend. Val. p. 4—18), 
the most important is the Bern ms. saec. IX (cf. Halm's edition, p. IV 



Valerius Maxirnvs. 23 

—XXI). The other mss. are of later origin and rarely furnish Ijetter 
readings, though they are in some places more complete than the Bern 
ms. and, therefore, not derived from it. 

6. Editions of Val. Max. simultaneously published a. 1471 at Strass- 
burg and Mayence (fol.), subsequently chiefly Aldus Manutius (Ven. 
1534), St. Pighius (Antverp. 1567; with many arbitrary changes; cum 
notis J. Lipsii, Antv. 1585 and often), J. Vorst (cum notis, Berl. 1672), 
A. Torrenius (cum comm. I. Perizonii et variorum, Lugd. B. 1726, 4). 
J. Kapp (Lips. 1782), C. B. Hase, (Paris 1823. 2 vols.), and especially 
by C. Kempf (rec. et emend., Berlin 1854. 792 pp.) and C. Halm (rec, 
Lips. Teubner 1865). 

7. Critical contributions by Calmberg (novae ed. Y. M. specimen, 
Hamburg 1844. 4), Halm (Münchner Gel. Anz. 1854. I. No. 29-31 and 
Emendationes Val., München 1854. 4), J. Vahlen (Rhein. Mus. XI p. 
586—594), H. J. Heller (Philologus XXVII p. 343 — 348. XXVIH p. 361 
—364), C. Förtsch (Em. Val., I. Naumburg 1855. 4. H. 1864. 4.), C. 
Elschner (Quaest. Val., Berlin 1864), C. Fr. Gelbcke (Quaest. Val., 
Berlin 1865, p. 23—36), C. Kempf (novae quaest. Val., Berlin 1866. 37 
pp. 4.). 

8. On Val. Max. see J, Perizonius, Animadversiones historicae (ed. 
Harles, Altenburg 1771), H. E. Dirksen (on the collection of historical 
examples by V. M., Transactions of the Academy at Berlin, 1847 p. 
99 sqq. = Posthumous Essays I p. 109 — 132), and especially Kempfs 
Prolegomena. 

9. The abridgment (epitoma) of Julius Paris was made about the 
close of the fourth or the commencement of the fifth century (cf. n. 11), 
also for schools. The preface states: luHus Paris Licinio Cyriaco suo 
salutem. Exemplorum conquisitionem cum scirem esse non minus dis- 
putantibus quam declamantibus necessariam, decem Valerii Maximi libros 
dictorum et factorum memorabilium ad unum volumen epitomae coegi. 
This epitomator reduced the collection of Val. to its real contents with 
occasional rectifications from the sources (Kempf p. 51 sq.) and the 
use of a ms. superior and (I 1, ext. 4 — I 4 ext. 1) fuller than those 
extant. It has been preserved in a Vatican ms. saec. X, first edited by 
A. Mai, scriptorum vett. nova coll. Ill 3 (1828) p. 1 sqq. Corrections 
of Mai's text are given by du Rieu, Schedae Vaticanae (Lugd. B. 1860) 
p. 164—200. See Halm's edition (1865). The Vat. (and Bern ms. of 
Val.) bear the subscription : feliciter emendavi descriptum Rabennae 
Rustitius Helpidius Domnulus V. C. (see him below). 

10. The abridgment of Januarius Nepotianus. Preface : lanuarius 
Nepotianus Victori suo salutem. Impensius quam ceteri adolescentes 
litteris studes, quo tantum proficis ut exigas scripta veterum coerceri. 
. . igitur de Valerio Maximo mecum sentis opera eius utilia esse, si 
sint brevia. digna euim cognitione componit, sed colligenda producit, 
4um se ostentat sententiis, locis iactat, fundit excessibus. . . recidam 



24 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

itaque . . eius redundantia et pleraque transgrediar, noiinulla praoter- 
missa conectam. . . et cum integra fere in occiilto sint praeter nos duo 
profecto nemo epitomata cognoscai. The extant abridgment extends 
in 21 chapters as for as Val. Max. Ill 2, 7 and is rather loose and 
meagre, omitting many examples and adding others from other sources. 
Its principal value is in filling up the gap in the first book of Val. 
Max. It exists in the Vatican ms. 1321, saec. XIV, in a very bad text, 
and was first published by A. Mai, scriptorum vett. nova coll. Ill 3 
p. 93 sqq. (see du Rieu, Schedae Vatic. 1860, p. 201—215) and CelFe 
1831. 4.; now in C. Halm's edition of Val. Max. p. 488— 513. See Kempf 
p. 67-69, where the editor comes to the conclusion p. 69 : epitomatoris 
sermo corruptus et interdum fere barbarus dicendique genus rude at- 
que incultum sextum septimumve saeculum prodere videtur. Other 
mediaeval abridgments of Val. Max. are preserved in some libraries; 
see Kempf p. 69 — 71 . 

11. At the end of the ninth book of Val. Max. the Bern ms. gives 
the usual subscription: Valerii Maximi . . liber nonus explc. and then 
(by a later hand and from lulius Paris): lib. X de praenomine. In later 
mss. this book is preceded by a prooemium: decimus atque ultimus 
huius operis liber . . aetati nostrae perditus est. verum lulius Paris, 
abbreviator Valerii, post novem libros explicitos hunc decimum sub 
nfra scripto compendio complexiia est. . . verba quidem lulii Paridis 
haec sunt: Liber decimus de praenominibus et similibus. A more ac- 
curate designation of the contents is given in the ms. of Julius Paris 
(Val./. incipit liber decimus de praenominibus, de nominibus, de cog- 
nominibus, de agnominibus, de appellationibus, de verbis. Yet even 
the Vatican ms. contains only the chapter de praenominibus (Kempf 
p. 740—750, Halm p. 484 — 487), which appears to be derived from good 
sources, especially Varro ; see Th. Mommsen, Rh. Mus. XV p. 181, n. 
24. But if it actually contained originally a chapter de agnominibus 
at the beginning, the whole composition cannot have been made before 
the commencement of the fourth century of the Christian era. At the 
end the Vatican and Bern mss. bear the subscription: C. Titi Probi 
finit epitoma historiarum diversarum exemplorumque romanorum ; which 
is followed by that of Rusticius Helpidius (n. 9). The relation of this 
C. Titius Probus to Julius Paris is obscure. He had, perhaps, composed 
a similar abridgment, which was subsequently combined with that of 
Julius Paris, so that of the latter only the prooemium (n. 9) should be 
assumed to remain, while the grammatical (and antiquarian) work on 
nomen (including the nomina propria) and verbum (Kempf), perhaps 
owing to the similarity of the pedagogic purpose, though after the 
time of the ms. from which the mss. of Val. Max. are derived, was 
joined to the work of Val. Max., considered as the tenth book of it 
and epitomized as such by Julius Paris. The author must certainly 
have lived before Julius Paris, while of C. Titius Probus his very name 
renders it improbable that he belonged to a much later time than the 
first century of the Christian era. Cf. Th. Bergk, Rh. Mus. IV p. 120 



Cornelius Celsus. 25 

sqq. Kempf, p. 53—67, and in the Progr. of the Berlin College 'Graues 
Kloster', 1854. 4. (De incerti auctoris fragmento quod inscribitur de 
praenominibus.) 

275. A. Cornelius Celsus, a man interested in many 
pursuits and possessed of a talent for facile composition, 
followed the example of Cato in writing not only on eloquence 
and jurisprudence, but also on farming, medicine, and military 
art, to which he joined practical philosophy in the sense of 
the Sextii, in an encyclopaedia, of which only the eight books 
treating of medicine have come down to us, being VI — XIII 
of the complete work, the only work of this kind in the good 
age of Roman Literature. It contains an account of the whole 
medicine of the time, especially after Hippocrates and Ascle- 
piades, with sound judgment and in simple, pure diction. 
Especially the parts dealing with surgery are valuable; next 
to them also those on thcrapia. Celsus was alive as late as 
the reign of Nero, and then wrote a treatise on a political 
question of the period. 

1. His praenomen is known from the headings of the extant work. 
On his age see Columella I 1, 14: non minorem tamen laudem (than 
the writers of the past, such as Virgil and Julius Hyginus) meruerunt 
nostrorum temporum viri, Cornelius Celsus et Julius Atticus. Ill 17, 4: 
mox Julius Atticus et Cornelius Celsus, aetatis nostrae celeberrimi auc- 
tores, patrem atque filium Sasernam secuti etc. JV 8, 1: Celsus et 
Atticus, quos in re rustica maxime nostra aetas probavit. Cf. ib. JJI 
1, 8. IV 1, 1. As Columella was a contemporary of Seneca (see below 
288, 1), Celsus cannot have written much before Tiberius, but not even 
later, as Julius Graecinus, who was executed under Caligula, had already 
used his work (Plin. n. h. XIV 2, 33 : Graecinus, qui alioqui Cornelium 
Celsum trans crip sit). Cf. n. 4. Quintil. Ill 1, 21: scripsit de eadem 
materia (rhetoric) . . nonnihil pater Gallio (above 263, 7), accuratius 
vero priores [Gallione] Celsus et Laenas (above 263, 11) et aetatis no- 
strae Verginius Plinius, Tutilius. In this passage Gallione which is 
not correct in point of fact, appears to be a gloss, as the relation to 
Gallio had already been expressed by the comparative accuratius. Fr. 
Ritter in Jahns Jahrb. 28, p. 54—58. 

2. Quintil. XII 11, 24: quid plura (of the possibility of embracing 
all branches useful to an orator) cum etiam Cornelius Celsus, mediocri 
vir ingenio, non solum de his omnibus conscripserit artibus, sed amplius 
rei militaris et rusticae et medicinae praecepta reliquerit, dignus vel 
ipso proposito ut eum scisse omnia ilia credamus? In other passages 
also Quintilian often expresses his disagreement from this predecessor 
of his, e. g. II 15, 22. 32. Ill 6, 13 sq. VIII 3, 47. IX 1, 18: Cornelius 



26 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

tarnen Celsus adicit (to the cx^fxaxa dmvotag and kf^feog) figuras colorum, 
nimia profecto novitatis cupiditate ductus, nam quis ignorasse eruditum 
alioqui virum credat etc. Even when he agrees with him, he does so 
with reserve, e. g. VII 1, 10: non plane dissentio a Celso, qui sine 
dubio Ciceronem secutus instat tamen huic parti vehementius. Cf. 
X 1, 124 (below n. 3). It may be that Quintilian was vexed that a 
subject to which he had devoted an entire life was merely cursorily 
treated by Celsus, and besides an encyclopedia might easily be open to 
technical objections. At all events, Celsus' rhetorical manual was ob- 
scured by that of Quintilian. It is mentioned only by Fortunat. Ill 2 
(p. 121, 10 H.) 

3. Quintil. X 1, 124: scripsit non parum multa (on philosophy) 
Cornelius Celsus, Sextios (above 261, 5 sqq.) secutus, non sine cultu ac 
nitore. Augustin. de haeres. prol. : opiniones omnium philosophorum 
qui sectas varias condiderunt usque ad tempora sua . . sex non parvis 
voluminibus quidam Celsus absolvit; nee redarguit aliquem, sed tantum 
quid sentirent aperuit, ea brevitate sermonis ut tantum adhiberet eloquii 
quantum aperiendae indicandaeque (sententiae) sufficeret. 

4. Veget. r. milit. I 8 (p. 12, .12 sqq. Lang): haec necessitas com- 
pulit evolutis auctoribus ea me . . fidelissime dicere quae Cato ille 
Censorius de disciplina militari scripsit, quae Cornelius Celsus, quae 
Frontinus perstringenda duxerunt. Lydus de magistr. I 47 : fxuQivQfg 
Kikaog etc. Cf. ib. Ill 33 : xal avyyQa(fijp ttsqI toviov (on the recent 
war with the Parthians) fiovi^qr} Kskaog o ^(afxuTog TaxTiXog, ccnokikotTif. 
34: (oars aQ/uodiov, (ftjotv o Kikaog, ccdoxtjTCjg avtoTg infk^sTi/. . . Or^fy 
ecffOQtjTog ciVTolg o KovQßokoiu tut rov NiQMVog i(fcij/t]. This tactical 
pamphlet appears, therefore, to have been written at a later period than 
his encyclopedia, see above n. 1. 

5. Columella I 1, 14 (cf. n. 1): Cornelius (Celsus) totum corpus 
disciplinae (of husbandry) quinque libris complexus est. IX 2, 1 : de 
quibus (bee-hives) neque diligentius quidquam praecipi potest quam ab 
Hygino (above 257, 3) . . nee elegantius quam Celso. . . Celsus utrius- 
que memorati (Hygiuus and Virgil) adhibuit modum. II 2, 15: Cornelium 
Celsum, non solum agricolationis sed universae naturae prudentem virum. 
As such he may have proved himself, like Sextius, also in the philo- 
sophical parts of his work (see n. 3). The parts treating of agriculture 
are quoted e. g. by Pliny (n. h. X 53, 150) who also mentions him in 
his ind. auct. on b. 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20 sqq., 29 sq., 31, 
sometimes as Cornelius Celsus, sometimes merely as Celsus. 

6. Of the eight books de medicina the first, after a short history 
of medical science among the Greeks, treats first of diaetetics and pro- 
phylactics; the second of semiotics and general pathology and therapy; 
book III aud IV of special illnesses; V of remedies with a great number 
of prescriptions; VI of surgical illnesses, VII of surgical therapy, VIII 
of the illnesses of bones. The numerous mss. all show the same gaps 
(especially IV 27), and are therefore of common origin. The earliest and 
best are Vat. VIII saec. X and Med. I saec. XII, also Paris. 7028, saec. 



Coi^nelms Celsns. The Jurists. 27 

XI; the others are of saec. XV and XVI. For the editions see L. 
Choulant, bibliography of ancient medicine p. 167 — 180. Ed. princeps 
Florentiae 1478 fol. Aldina Venet. 1528. 4. Cum not. ed. J. Caesarius, 
Hagenau 1528. An arbitrary text by Ant. v. d. Linden, Lugd. Bat. 1657 
Cum not. varr. ed. Th. J. ab Almeloveen, Amsterd. 1687. 1713. Ed. C- 
Ch. Krause, Lips. 1766. Ex rec. L. Targae, Patav. 1769. 4. and especi- 
ally Veron. 1810. 4. (with a lexicon Cels.). Ed. F. Ritter et H. Albers, 
Cologne 1835. Ed. S. de P.enzi, Naples 1851. Ad fidem opt. libr. denuo 
rec. Daremberg, Lips. 1859 (Bibl. Teubner.). 

7. He refers to preceding books V 28, 16: sicut in pecoribus pro- 
posui. The five books de agricultura (n. 6) were, therefore, premised 
to those on medicina, and in fact many mss. hear the heading : Cornelii 
Celsi artium lib. VI. item medicinae I. He had dealt more summarily^ 
with military art; see n. 4; but philosophy was in 6 volumina n 3) 
and rhetoric also (n. 2) must have been treated extensively as we may 
infer from Quintiltan. It seems to have embraced 7 books; see Schol. 
luv. VI 245: Celso, oratori illius temporis (not correct), qui Septem 
libros institutionum scrijjtos reliquit. The latter statement is possibly 
right, though Juvenal did not mean this Celsus (who was not then the 
first authority on rhetoric), but his contemporary, the jurist luventius 
Celsus. The imitation of Cato (above llO, 1 — 3) is plainly visible in 
the selection of the branches treated. Their connexion in Celsus appears 
also from the similarity of the judgments on their style, which shows 
in the books on medical science the same 'cultus ac nitor', the same 
elegance as in the philosophical and agricultural parts. Celsus was 
saved from the absurd diction of his period by his sound common 
sense, and also by the fulness of the material he had to grapple with, 
perhaps also by the style of his sources. Schol. Plaut. Bacch. 69: 
Celsus libros suos cestos vocavit. 

8. 0. Jahn, Trans, of the Saxon Society of Lit., 1850, p. 273—282. 
H. Pal damns, de Cornelio Celso (Greifswald 1842. 4.) and on it also Fr. 
Ritter in Jahn's Jahrb. 38, p. 52 — 66. C. Kissel, on Celsus, an historical 
monography; I. Life and Works of C., Giessen 1844. 179 pp. 

276. Among the Jurists of this time a prominent position 
was held by Capito's pupil Masurius Sabinus, from whom 
the school of the Sabinians takes its name; the author espe- 
cially of libri III iuris civihs, which subsequently became the 
subject of numerous commentaries and thus influenced the 
Digest. But M. Cocceius Nerva, Cons. 775, was a pupil of 
Labeo, and himself the teacher of Pro cuius, from whom the 
Proculians obtained their name. In literary fertility and signi- 
ficance Proculus surpassed his master. 

1. Pompon, de orig. iur. Dig. I 2, 2, 48: Ateio Capitoni (above 
260, 3 sq.) Masurius Sabinus, Labeoni Nerva, qui adhuc eas dissen- 



28 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

siones auxerimt. . . Masurins Sabinus in equestri ordine fuit et publice 
primus respondit, posteaquam hoc coepit beneficium dari; a Tiberio 
Caesare hoc tarnen illi concessum erat. (50.) ergo Sabino concessum 
est a Tiberio Caesare ut populo responderet; qui in equestri ordine iam 
grandis natu et fere annorum quinquaginta (?) receptus est; huic nee 
amplae facultates fuerunt, sed plurimum a suis auditoribus sustentatus 
est. He was alive as late as Xero; see Gai. 11 218: ut Sabinus existi- 
maverit ne quidem ex SC. Neroniano posse convalescere. That he was 
born at Verona, was the conjecture of Borghesi (Bull. d. inst. arch. 
1836, p. 144) founded on an inscr. discovered there: C. Masurius C. f. 
Sabinus (0. Jahn on Persius p. 195). Gellius TV 1, 21 and 2, 15 (Ma- 
surii Sabini ex libro iuris civilis secundo, cf. XI 18, 12 sqq. 20 sqq.). 
V 13, 5 (M. S. in libro i. c. tertio). Pers. V 90 (Masuri rubrica). Arrian. 
Epict. IV 3 (MccGovQiov vo/uioi). His design seems to have been the 
same as that of Q. Mucins (above 141, 2). This manual was commented 
on by Pomponius in at least 36, by Ulpian in at lest 52, by Paulus in 
at least 17 books, three commentaries which form the substance of the 
Sabinian third (on civil law) of the Digest. Notes on Sabinus were 
also written by Fufidius and Aristo. Other works of Masurius Sabinus: 
commentarii de indigenis (Gell IV, 9, 8 sq.), memorialium libri, at least 
11 (Gell. V, 6, 13 sq. cf. IV 20, 11. VII 7, 8. Macrob. HI 6, 11. Dig. 
L 16, 144 and others), fasti in at least two books (Macrob. I 4, 7. 15. 
10, 8), libri responsorum in at least two books (Dig. XIV 2, 4 pr. u. 1. 
Fragm. Vat. 75), libri ad edictum praetoris urbani in at least five (Dig. 
XXXVIII 1, 18), libri ad Vitellium (ib. XXXH 45. XXXIH 7, 8 pr. 12, 
27. XXXin 9, 3 pr.), also an assessoriura (ib. XLVH 10, 5, 8: Sabinus 
in assessorio cf. ni2, 12: Puteolanus libro primo assessorium). Quotations 
from anonymous works of M. Sab. also in Pliny (probably from the 
memorialia) n. h. VH 5, 40. X 7, 20. XV 29, 126. 30, 135. XVI 18, 75. 
44, 236. XXVHI 9. Gellius HI 16, 23. V 19, 11 sqq. X 15, 17 sq. P. 
N. Amtzen, de Mas. Sabino. Utrecht 1768 = Oelrichs Thesaur. nov. 
in 2. p. 1 sqq. Zimmern, History of Roman private law I 1. p. 312 
— 315. Rudorff, Hist, of Roman law I p. 168 sq. 237. 

2. Pompon. 1. 1. (n. 1) 48: ,hic etiam Nerv a (grandfather ^to the 
later Emperor) Caesari (i. e. Tiberius) familiarissimus fuit. Tac. A. 'IV 
58: profectio (of Tiberius to Campania) arto comitatu fuit: unus sena- 
tor consulatu functus (A. 786 = 33 A. D.) Cocceius Nerva, continuus 
principis, omnis divini humanique iuris sciens . . moriendi consilium 
cepit etc. Dio LVHI 21. He is quoted, though without mention of 
any special works, in Dig. XLHI 8, 2, 28 cf. VII 5, 3. XVI 3, 32. 
Zimmern 1. 1. p. 315 sq. 

3- Dig. XXVIII 5, 69: Proculus: Cartilio assentio et . . puto. Cf. 
Ulp. ib. XIII 6, 5, 13: Cartilius ait. 

277. The principal g r a m m a r i a n s of this period are Julius 
Moflestus who, like his master Hyginus, embraced the real as 



Jmists and Grammarians. 29 

well as linguistic side of grammar, the severe M. Pomponius 
Marcellus, and the talented, but vain and dissolute Q. Rem- 
mius Palaemon of Vicenza, the author of a famous and widely 
used grammar (Ars). The grammarian Nisus taught and wrote 
in this period or soon afterwards. 

1. Suet, gramm. 20: huius (i. e. Hyginus, above 257) libertus fuit 
lulius Modestus, in studiis atque doctrina vestigia patroni secutus. 
Martial. X 21, 1: scribere te quae vix intellegat ipse Modestus. Gellius 
III 9, 1 : Gavius Bassus (above 207, 6) in commentariis suis, item lulius 
Modestus in secundo quaestionum confusarum liistoriam de equo Seiano 
tradunt. Macrob. I 4, 7 (of. 10, 9. 16, 28) : lulius Modestus de feriis. 
He wrote a commentary on Horace, see above 235, 3. Grammatical 
treatises (or commentaries) may be inferred from the quotations in 
Quintilian I 6, 36. Charis. p. 73. 75. 101. 103. 125. 204. Diom. p. 365. 
K. Bunte in his edition of Hyginus' fab. p. 6 — 9. Ribbeck, prolegg. 
Verg. p. 121—123. 

2. Suet, gramm. 22: M. Pomponius Marcellus, sermonis latini 
exactor molestissimus, in advocatione quadam — nam interdum et 
causas agebat — soloecismum etc. hie idem, cum ex oratione Tiberium 
reprehendisset, . . tu (inquit) Caesar civitatem dare potes hominibus, 
verbis non potes. pugilem olim fuisse Asinius Gallus hoc in eum epi- 
grammate ostendit etc. 

3. Q. Remmius (not Fannius, see W. Christ, Rhein. Mus. XX. 
p. 69 sq.) Palaemon Vicetinus mulieris verna primo . . textrinum, 
deinde, erilem filium dum comitatur in scholam, litteras didicit. postea 
manumissus docuit Romae ac principem locum inter grammaticos tenuit, 
quamquam infamis omnibus vitiis palamque et Tiberio et mox Claudio 
praedicantibus, nemini minus institutionem . . invenum committendam. 
sed capiebat homines cum memoria rerum tum facilitate sermonis; nee 
non etiam poemata faciebat ex tempore, scripsit vero varus nee vol- 
garibus metris. arrogantia fuit tanta ut M. Varronem porcum appellaret 
etc. luxuriae ita indulsit ut etc. sed maxime flagrabat libidinibus in 
mulieres etc. Plin. n. h. XIV 4, 49: Remmio Palaemoni, alias gram- 
matica arte celebri, in hisce XX annis mercato rus etc. ib.50: vanitate, 
quae nota mire in illo fuit. 51: inviso alias (to Seneca). Juv. VII 215 
sqq. (docti Palaemonis). Hieronym. chron. ad. a. Abr. 5064 = Claud. 
8 (48 A. D.): Palaemon Vicetinus insignis grammaticus Romae habetur, 
and: M. Antonius Liberalis, latinus rhetor, gravissimas inimicitias cum 
Palaemone exercet. VitaPersii: studuit Flaccus . . Romae apud gram- 
maticum Remmium Palaemonem. Schol. Juv. VI 452 (Palaemonis Artem): 
grammatici, magistri QuintiHani oratoris. Quintil. I 4, 20: ut . . aetate 
nostra Palaemon. Gellius does not mention him, but Charisius quotes 
him repeatedly (p. 187. 225 sq. 231 sq. 238 K.) and has taken from him 
his own chapters on conjunctions, prepositions, interjections (and adverbs): 
Keil, gramm. lat. I p. XLIX. The Excerpts from Charisius may also 



30 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

be supposed to rest on Palaemon to the extent of at least one half 
(W. Christ, Philol. XVIII p. 136 sq.)- His instances are derived from 
Terence, Virgil, Horace, and Cicero, and always introduced by velut 
(A. Schottmüller, de Plin. libr. gramm. p. 8 sqq.). Against Schottmüller 
who (1. 1. p. 26 — 32) would remove that Palaemon whom Charisius used 
to the fourth century, see Christ 1. 1. p. 125 — 127. Besides Charisius 
also Diomede (p. 403. 415 K.), Consentius (p. 375 K.), Phocas and others 
have availed themselves of Palaemon. His name is wrongly prefixed (Keil 
gramm. V p. 528 sq.) to a trivial Ars, first published by Jovianus Pon- 
tanus, also in Keil's Gramm. lat. V. p. 533 — 547, in Putsche p. 1366 sqq. 
The assignation to him of other works, e. g. the versified treatise de 
ponderibus et mensuris, the differentiae sermonum (see Roth's edition 
of Suetonius p. 306 — 320, cf. p. XCV— C), de potestate literarum, has 
no safe foundation. Reifferscheid's Suetonius p. 274—296, and p. 450 
—452. Brambach, on Latin Orthogr. p. 29 sq. 

4. Donat. (= Sueton.) vita Vergil. 42 = 60: Nisus grammaticus 
audisse se a senioribus (the contemporaries of Varius) aiebat Varium 
duorum librorum (of Virgil's Aeneid) ordinem commutasse etc. Cf. Rib- 
beck, prolegg. verg. p. 90 sq. Velius Longus also quotes him repeatedly 
(p. 2235. 2236. 2237 P.), and also Charis. I p. 28, 9 K. (Nisus eleganter 
. . ait), Priscian X 11, (p. 503, 16 Htz.) Nisus et Papirianus et Probus 
. . dicunt, Arnob. ad. g. I 59 (Caesellios, Verrios, Scauros et Nisos) 
and Cassiod. p. 2287 P. Comp. Macrob. S. I 12, 30: Nisus in commen- 
tariis factorum dicit etc. Gräfenhan, Hist, of classical philology IV p. 
83 sqq. 

5. Greek grammarians under Tiberius were at Rome e. g. Philo- 
xenus of Alexandria, Apollonides (Diog. La. IX 109). Also Attains 
Stoicus was a Greek, qui solum vertit a Seiano circumscriptus, magnae 
vir eloquentiae, ex his philosophis . . longe et subtilissimus et facun- 
dissimus (Sen. suas. 2, 12), the teacher of the philosopher Seneca (W. 
Teuffel in Pauly's Encycl. I 2 p. 2055 sq. nr. 10). 

278. In this period wrote also the botanists Caepio and 
Antonius Castor, also the gourmand Apicius, under whose 
name we possess a work on cookery, which is, however, of 
the third century of the Christian era. Also Julius Atticus 
and Juhus Graecinus who wrote on the culture of vine, belong 
to the time of Tiberius. 

1. Plinius n. h. XXI §. 18: Caepio Tiberi Caesaris principatu nega- 
vit etc. He probably was a Servilius. 

2. Plinius n. h. XXV 5 speaking of plants: nobis certe, exceptis 
admodum paucis, contigit reliquas contemplari scientia Antoni Cast oris 
cui summa auctoritas erat in ea arte (botany) nostro aevo, visendo hor- 
tulo eins, in quo plurimas aiebat, centesimum aetatis annum excedens, 



Apicius and others. 31 

nullum corporis malum expertus ac ne aetate quidem memoria aut vigore 
concussis. He also wrote on botany, and Pliny mentions him as his 
source in b. 20 — 27; cf. XX 174 (Castor taliter demonstrabat). He was, 
perhaps, the freedman of some Antonia or of Mark Antony. 

3. On Asellius Sabinus see above 269, 1 ; on Petronius Musa above 
258, 10. 

4. The glutton M. Apicius under Tiberius (Tac. A. IV 1 Dio 
LVII 19. Athen. I p. 7 A., cf. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Encycl.ll p. 1241. 
nr. 2) wrote also on his culinary experience. Sen. cons, ad Helv. 10, 8. 
Apicius nostra memoria vixit, qui . . scientiam popinae professus disci- 
plina sua saeculum infecit. Schol. Juv. IV 23: Apicius auctor prae- 
cipiendarum cenarum, qui scripsit de iuscellis. Isidor. orig. XX 1, 1: 
coquinae apparatum Apicius quidam primus composuit. But the quo- 
tations of Pliny (n. h. VIII 209. IX 66. X 133. XIX 137. 143) concerning 
some culinary ideas of Apicius, do not agree with the extant work de re 
coquinaria under the name of Caelius Apicius (which probably was 
Caelii Apicius, Apicius being the title of the work, like Ciceronis Lae- 
lius). This work contains a collection of kitchen-receipts in ten books, 
each of which has a Greek heading, the numerous Greek words and 
phrases also proving that the work was derived from a Greek work 
COip((QTVTr/(cc). The mention made of Varianus pullus (VI 9) seems to 
prove that the work was written after^ Heliogabulus (= Varius), but 
various periods may have furnished contributions to this collection 
Schuch has added new receipts from a Paris ms. saec. VII. Editions 
e. g. by Hummelberg (Turic. 1542. 4.), M. Lister (Londin. 1705), Alme- 
loveen (Amstelod. 1709), J. M. Bernhold (Baireuth 1787) and C. Th. ' 
Schuch (auxit, emend, explanavit e^tc, Heidelberg 1867. 202 pp.). F. 

H. Dierbach, Flora Apiciana, Heidelberg 1831. E. Meyer, History of 
Botany II (Königsberg 1855) p. 236—249. 

5. Columella I 1, 14: nee minorem laudem meruerunt nostrorum 
temporum viri, Cornelius Celsus et lulius Atticus. quippe Cornelius 
etc. (above 275, 5) ; hie (Atticus) de una specie culturae pertinentis ad 
vites singularem librum edidit. cuius velut discipulus duo volumina 
similium praeceptorum de vineis lulius Graecinus, composita facetius 
et eruditius, posteritati tradenda curavit. Quotations from Atticus are 
given by Columella HI 3, 11. 11, 9 sq. 16, 3. 17, 4 (above 275, 1). 18,1 
sq. IV 1, 1. 6. 2, 2. 8, 1 (above 275, 1) 10, 1 (Celsus et Atticus). 13, i- 
28, 2 (Celsus quoque et Atticus consentiunt). 29, 1. 4. 30, 1 sq. 33, 4. 
He is mentioned by Pliny in his ind. auct. on book XIV, XV, XVH. 

6. lulius Graecinus, see n. 5. He is quoted by Columella III 
2, 31. 3, 4. 7. 9. 11. 12, 1. IV 3, 1. 6 (Graecinus eo libro quem de vineis 
scripsit). 28, 2 and by Pliny XIV 33 (Graecinus, qui alioqui Cornelium 
Celsum transscripsit). XVI 241, also in the ind. auct. on book XIV to XVH. 
He may have been the son of that Graecinus to whom Ovid addressed 
Amor, n 10 and ex Pont I 6 (above 242, 2) and no doubt the same as 
lulius Graecinus who was the father of lulius Agricola and was exce- 



32 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

cuted under Caligula, perhaps A. D. 39; see Tac. Agr. 4 (senatorii ordinis, 
studio eloquentiae sapientiaeque notus etc.). Sen. de benef. 11 21, 5 
(vir egregius, quern C. Caesar occidit ob hoc unum quod melior vir 
erat quam esse quemquam tyranno expedit). Epist. 29, 6 (vir egregius). 

279. Partly under Tiberius and partly under his successor 
the freedman Phaedrus from Pieria published his books of 
Aesopean fables in well-made iambic senarii. To his fables 
he also added anecdotes of contemporary history. The various 
persecutions which he suffered contributed to raise his idea 
of his worth. His style is fluent and frequently garrulous in 
the later books; his tone cheerful, and sometimes rude; his 
diction correct, though not without traces of the influence of 
his age. The work has not, however, come down to us in its 
complete form. A contemporary of Phaedrus is the tragic 
writer Pomponius Secundus, whose works seem to have been 
published after the death of Tiberius. 

1. Title: Phaedri, Augusti liberti, fabularum aesopiarum hbri. His 
patron appears to have been Augustus (divus Aug., Phaedr. Ill 10, 39), 
as Tiberius is called Caesar Tiberius II 5, 7. The circumstances of 
his life are known to us only from his poems. Ill prol. 1 : Phaedri 
libellos. 17: ego, quem pierio mater enixa est iugo . . (20:) quamvis 
in ipsa paene natus sim schola. (54:) ego, litteratae qui sum propior 
Graeciae. He was at an early time brought to Italy and there became 
acquainted with Roman literature. Ill epil, 33 sq.: ego quondam legi 
quam puer sententiam „palam mutire plebeio piaculumst" (Ennius trag. 
376 V.) etc. He suffered persecution. Ill prol. 34 sqq. : servitus ob- 
noxia, quia quae volebat non audebat dicere, adfectus proprios in fa- 
bellas transtulit, calumniamque fictis elusit iocis. ego porro illius (i. e. 
Aesop) semita feci viam et cogitavi plura quam reliquerat, in calami- 
tatem deligens quaedam meam. quod si accusator alius Seiano foret, 
. . dignum faterer esse me tantis malis. Some passages of the first 
two books, if not the anecdote of Tiberius (II 6, 7 sqq.), at all events 
I 1, 15 (qui fictis causis innocentes opprimunt) and 2, 30 sq. (vos quo- 
que, cives, . . hoc sustinete, mains ne veniat malum) and others 
would seem to have been charged against him as malicious allusions 
to contemporary events. It is not known what the mala were. He 
frequently mentions envy and jealousy: H epil. Ill prol. 23 sqq. and 
9, 4. IV prol. 15 sqq. 21, 1 sqq. cf. HI epil. 29 sqq. difficulter con- 
tinetur spiritus integritatis qui sincerae conscius a noxiorum premitur 
insolentiis. He was poor; IH prol. 21 (quamvis . . curamque habendi 
penitus corde eraserim) cf. epil., in which Eutychus is pretty openly 
asked for some recompense. The poet's conviction of his own value 
appears II epil. Ill 1 and 12. IV epil. 

2. For his relation to Aesop see I prol. 1 sq. (Aesopus auctor 



i 



Phncdrvs. 33 

quam materiam re})perit banc ego polivi versibus senariis). IV. prob 
11 sqq. (fabuHs, quas aesopias, non Aesopi, nomino, quia paucas ille 
ostendit, ego plures fero etc.). IV 21. V prob Tbougb the accounts 
of Simonides (IV 22. 25), Socrates (III 9), Menander (V 1) may be derived 
from some later Attic collection, this cannot apply to the fable on Cn. 
Pompeius (App. 8), on the time of Augustus (III 10 and V 7) and Ti- 
berius (II 6, 7 sqq.). The first two books seem to have been published 
conjointly (under Tiberius), as the first has no separate epilogue and 
as the fate (prol. 38 sqq.) and reception of his first fables (III 10, 59 
sq. cf. IV 7, 1 sqq.) are mentioned in the second part. After the death 
of Tiberius (cf. Ill prol. 33 sqq. and dulcis libertas III 7, 1) he pu- 
blished the third book with prologue and epilogue, dedicated to Eu- 
tychus and intended to finish his collection (cf. epil. and IV prol.). 
There followed, however, a fourth book, addressed to Particulo who 
is in the prologue mentioned as an author (17 sq.: mihi parta laus est, 
quod tu, quod similes tui vestras in Chartas verba transfertis mea) and 
in the epilogue called vir sanctissimus ; and when the poet had already 
grown old (V 10) a fifth book succeeded, in which (10, 10) Philetes is 
addressed. The epilogue of the Appendix (n. 4) might belong to the 
first or fifth book. 

3. Martial III 20, 5: an aemulatur improbi iocos Phaedri? This 
epithet may denote the various improper and rude expressions (e. g. 
I 20. 31. Ill 3. IV 15) and vulgarisms (especially IV 18) which occur in 
this collection. Some abstract turns of expression, e. g. ingemuit corvi 
deceptus stupor (I 13, 12) remind us of the manner of Valerius Maximus. 
He personifies Religio IV 11, 4. The brevity he had originally studied 
to attain (II prol. 12. cf. Ill epil. 8. IV epil.) is considerably enlarged 
upon in the third book (cf. Ill 10, 60). In choosing senarii the poet 
was probably influenced by the example of Publilius Syrus (L. Müller 
p. VIII). In admitting spondees in the second and fourth foot Phaedrus 
agrees with him and with the poets before Catullus. In all other 
respects his verse is polished in careful observation of metrical laws; 
see L. Müller's praef. p. VIII— XII. P. Langen, Rh. Mus. XIII p. 197 
— 208. That he could manage higher style, appears from IV 7, 6 sqq. 
App. 6. Seneca (see above 27, 2) does not know Phaedrus, and though 
Quintilian (1 9, 2) speaks of versified Aesopian fables, he does not mention 
his name. After Martial, Phaedrus is not mentioned again before Avi- 
enus (Epist ad Theodos.: Phaedrus etiam partem aliquam quinque in 
libellos resolvit). 

4. The fragmentary state of the extant collection appears from 
the unequal number of fables in each book (I: 31, III: 19, Appendix: 
31, but II only 8, and V only 10), from the absence of a fable in which 
arbores loquuntur (I prol. 6), from the gap IV 13 sq. and especially 
from the existence of the appendix. The latter contains the fables 
which Nie. Perotti in the middle of the 15th century published from a 
ms. more complete than the cod. Pithoeanus (saec. X) and Remensis 
(saec. X, burnt 1774) which are our principal sources in the rest of 

3 



34 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

the fables; see Orelli's edition p. 5 — 17. It should, however, be added 
that Perotti interpolated these fables, according to his own confession: 
non sunt hi mei quos putas versiculi, sed Aesopi sunt (cf. nr. 809 sq. 
814. 817 R.), Avieni et Phaedri. quos collegi, . . saepe versiculos inter- 
ponens meos. The Appendix was last of all printed in Riese's anthol. 
lat. II 799—830, cf. ib. p. XXXI sq. In some pieces the chartula Da- 
nielis saec. XII in the Vatican library (cf. du Rieu, Schedae Vatic. 1860^ 
p. 137 — 39) is of importance. The prosaic paraphrases by Romulus and 
the Anonymus first published by Nilant likewise presuppose the existence 
of a fuller collection of Phaedrus. The mediaeval collections of fables 
started from Romulus. 

5. Ed. princeps by P. Pithoeus, Autun 1596. Editions by N. Ri- 
galtius (1617. 4.). in the mythologia aesopica of J. Nevelet (Francof. 
1610), by P. Burmann (Amstelod. 1698. Hag. 1718; cum novo comm. 
Lugd. B. 1727. 4.), Bentley (with Terence), J. G. S. Schwabe (cum 
comm. perp. Halle 1779 — 1781, 3 vols., and Brunsvig. 1806. 2 vols.), 
N. Titze (Prague 1813), J. Berger de Xivrey (Paris, Didot, 1830), J. C. 
Orelli (Turic. 1831; supplementum ib. 1832), C. G. Dressier (recogn., 
Bautzen 1838 and Lips. Tenbner 1850), Fr. Eyssenhardt (recogn., Berlin 
1867), L. Müller (recogn. et praef. est. Lips. Teubner, 1868). 

6. On Phaedrus see F. Jacobs, supplement to Sulzer VI. p. 34 sqq 
L. Preller in Ersch and Gruber's Encycl. Ill, 2L p. 363 sqq. Glase- 
wald, spec. disp. de Ph. fabulis, Greifswald 1828. 4. CoUmann, index 
Phaedrianus, Marburg 1841. 4. Kunkel, on some difficult passages in 
Phaedrus, Bensheim 1861. 4. 

7. Tac. A. V 8: relatum (A. 784 = 31 A. D.) inde de . . P o m 
ponio Secundo. . . huic obicetabatur Aelii Galli (the son of Sejanus 
amicitia. . . Pomponius, multa morum elegantia et ingenio inlustri, . . 
Tiberio superstes fuit (after an imprisonment of several years in his 
brother's house, during which time he occupied himself with literary 
pursuits). XI 13: Claudius (a. 800 =; 47) . . theatralem populi lasciviam 
severis edictis increpuit, quod' in Publium Pomponium consularem (cons^ 
sufi. 776 V. C?) — is carmina scenae dabat — . . proba iecerat. XII 
28: apud posteros . . carminum gloria praecelht. Cf. dial. 13. Plin. n 
h. VII 19, 80: in Pomponio consulari poeta, and XIII 12, 83: apud 
Pomponium Secundum, vatem civemque clarissimum, vidi. Plin. Ep. VII 
17, 11 : Pomponius Secundus (hie scriptor tragoediarum) . . dicere so- 
lebat. Quintil. X 1, 98: eorum (writers of tragedies) quos viderim longa 
princeps Pomponius Secundus, quern senes quidem parum tragicum 
putabant, eruditione ac nitore praestare confitebantur. VIII 3, 31 : me- 
mini iuvenis admodum inter Pomponium ac Senecam etiam praefati- 
onibus esse tractatum an 'gradus eliminat' in tragoedia dici oportuisset. 
There are also traces of other reflections on language; Charis. I p. 
137, 23 sq. K. : Pomponius Secundus poeta, ut refert (in his life of 
Pomp. Sec.) Plinius (preferred omneis to omnes). He may have treated 
of these matters in his letters; ib. p. 125, 23 K. : cetariis Pomponius 



I 



Phaedrus. Pomponius Secitndus. 35 

Secundus ad Thraseam. Other intentional peculiarities of his style are 
mentioned by Diotned I p. 371 K. and Priscian X p. 538 H. (Pompo- 
nius Secundus ad Thraseam: sancierat ius). Terentian. Maur. 2135 sq.: 
in tragicis iunxere choris hunc (a dactylic tetrameter) saepe diserti 
Annaeus Seneca et Pomponius ante Secundus. As one of his titles, only 
Aeneas is known (Charis. I p. 132 K.: P. S. in Aenea), which would 
appear to have been a praetexta (see Aero above 17, 4). Armorum 
iudicium (Lactant. on Stat. Theb. X 841) is probably by Pacuvius or 
L. Attius or also by Pomponius Bononiensis (above 135, 4 sq.), and 
perhaps also Atreus (ap. Non. p. 144, 24) ; see B. Schmidt, Rh. Mus. 
XVI p. 588—597. M. Hertz de Scaevo, Breslau 1869. 4, p. 4, note 3. 
See also Ribbeck, Trag. lat. p. 197 sq. (p. 231 sq. 386 ed. 11). Welcker, 
Rh. Mus. Suppl. II 3 p. 1440—1442. Haakh in Pauly's Encycl. VI 1 p. 
1879, nr. 34. 



b. The reigns of Caligula, Claudius, and Nero 
A. D. 37—68. 

280. While in the reign of Tiberius the novelty of un- 
disguised despotism and the strange manner of the ruler 
caused in most minds a peculiar depression, we notice under 
his successors of the JuUan dynasty an unwholesome vivacity, 
nay sometimes sprightliness. A number of the most stirring 
scenes were enacted before the eyes of the period: rulers and 
their minions were seen to rise, madly to exhaust the resour- 
ces of their positions, and fall down precipitately. The most 
rapid changes and the maddest conduct became usual, and 
were witnessed with the intense curiosity created by an 
interesting performance, and this feeling would scarcely 
disappear in case the spectator himself was personally con- 
cerned in the exhibition. Reason was not conspicuous any- 
where ; all changes were wrought by intrigue, malice, wicked- 
ness or brutal force; the consequence was that all gave them- 
selves up to a kind of nihilistic resignation which tasted the 
time to the dregs, was prepared for everything and anything 
for to-morrow and, at the best, sought comfort in future hopes. 
The chief character of this age is Seneca; but even Persius, 
Lucanus, and Petronius represent only the different effects of 
the same causes. Men of deeper character, e. g. Paetus 
Thrasea and Helvidius Priscus, clung to Stoicism and sought 
in the self-consciousness of this system some compensation 
of the cheerless condition of their time. The character of 



36 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

the period is most faithfully expressed in the reflecting part 
of literature, the philosophical writings of Seneca. The age 
was not very favourable to impartial historical composition, 
though Claudius evinced personal interest in history, whence 
we find in his reign both historians with rhetorical tendencies, 
e. g. Servilius Nonianus and Curtius Rufus, and such sober 
investigators as Cornelius Bocchus, Columella, Asconius, and 
Pomponius Mela. Nero favoured poetry which also offered 
opportunities of satisfying one's thirst after applause in the 
pubhc recitations and held out a hope of immortality. Hence 
the most different kinds of poetry were cultivated, tragedy by 
Seneca and Curiatius Maternus, historical epics by Lucan, 
idyl by Calpurnius Siculus, didactic poetry by the author of 
Aetna, Satire by Persius, lyric poetry by Bassus, and schol- 
astic poetry by Homerus Latinus. Only comedy would not 
prosper owing to the Mimus and Pantomimus, but Petronius 
wrote a very ironical novel describing manners and customs. 
Scholastic rhetoric was studied with much zeal, but the pre- 
vailing unifonnity and the absence of wholesome food gradu- 
ally deprived it of its power. Jurisprudence was steadily con- 
tinued, and grammar was excellently represented by Valerius 
Probus. 

1. To this period belongs the Mimus Laureolus of a certain Ca- 
tullus. TertulHan. adv. Valentin. 14: nullum Catulli Laureolum fuerit 
exercitata. Juv. XIII 111: mimum agit ille, urbani qualem fugitivus 
scurra Catulli. Sueton. Calig. 57: in Laureolo mimo . . cruore scena 
abundavit. Joseph. Antiq. XIX 1, 13 (p. 104, 13 sq. Bk.) : juTuog flaayncct 
(shortly before Caligula's assassination) xa^' ov otccvqovtcu krjGi(Zv ^ysucov. 
Martial, de spect. 7. Juv. VIII 187 with the Schol. The same Catullus 
wrote a Mimus entitled Phasma (luv. VIII 186 and Schol.). Others see 
above 8, 1. 

2. Suidas I p. 626 Bernh. : Eiiodog '^Podtog inonoiog, y^yoviog tnl 
N(Q(t)yog, o ,9ccv(nccCo/usi/og (ig ocj/uaixijy noirjaty. tovtov ret ßtßkr'a ov 
q>aiy&Tai. 

3. H. Lehmann, Claudius and Xero and their time. I. Claudius 
and his time, Gotha 1858. 368 and 66 pp. 

281. Of the Emperors of this period, CaUgula (a. 765 
— 794) was the only one who did not publish works of his 
own. Claudius (a. 744 — 807) wrote much, both before and 
after his accession to the throne, especially on history, and 
attempted to reform the Latin alphabet. But the unlimited 



I 



The Emperor Claudms. 37 

weakness of his mind and character allowed none of his lite- 
rary compositions to come down to posterity. We possess in 
inscriptions some specimens of his doings. Nero (a. 790— 821 
= 37 — 68 A. D.) was less educated for eloquence, but com- 
posed with much zeal verses in epic (Troica), elegiac and melic 
metres, the public recitation of which formed one of the more 
innocent sides of his madness. His mother Agrippina, the 
wife of Claudius, wrote Memoirs, no doubt as a means of 
promoting the purposes of her ambition. 

1. Sueton. Calig. 53: ex disciplinis liberalibus minimum erudi- 
tioni, eloquentiae plurimum attendit, quantumvis facundus et promptus, 
utique si perorandiim in aliquem esset, irato et verba et sententiae 
snppetebant. . . lenius comptiusque scribendi genus adeo contemnens 
ut Senecam turn maxime placentem commissiones meras componere et 
arenam esse sine calce diceret. ; / :bat etiam prosperis oratorum acti- 
onibus rescribere et magnorum in senatu reorum accusationes defen- 
sionesque meditari ac, prout stilus cesserat, vel onerare senlentia 
quemque vel sublevare, equestri quoque ordine ad andiendum invitato 
per edicta. 34: cogitavit etiam de Homeri carminibus abolendis. . . 
sed et Vergilii ac Titi Livi scripta et imagines paulum afuit quin ex 
omnibus bibliothecis amoveret, quorum alterum ut nullius ingenii mini- 
maeque (C. Peter: nimiaeque) doetrinae, alterum ut verbosum in historia 
neglegentemque carpebat. de iuris quoque consultis, quasi scientiae 
eorum omnem usum aboliturus, saepe iactavit se mehercule effecturum 
ne quid respondere possint praeter eum. 

2. Suet. Claud. 33: aleam studiosissime lusit, de cuius arte librum 
quoque emisit. Suet. Claud. 40: principi neque infacundo neque in- 
docto, immo etiam pertinaciter liberalibus studiis dedito. 41 : historiam 
in adulescentia, hortante T. Livio, Sulpicio vero Flavo etiam adiuvante, 
scribere adgressus est. et cum primum frequenti auditorio commisisset 
aegre perlegit, refrigeratus saepe a semet ipso. . . in principatu quoque 
et scripsit plurimum et assidue recitavit per lectorem. initium autem 
sumpsit historiae post caedem Caesaris dictatoris, sed et transiit ad 
inferiora tempora coepitque a pace civili etc. (above p. 386, n. 2). prioris 
materiae duo volumina, posterioris XLI reliquit. composuit et De vita 
sua VIII volumina, magis inepte quam inele^anter; item Ciceronis de- 
fensionem adversus Asini Galli libros (above 271, 3) satis eruditam. 42: 
nee minore cura graeca studia secutus est, amorem praestantiamque 
linguae occasione omni professus. . . denique et graecas scripsit historias, 
TvQQTjvixvJv XX, Kaqx^f^ovtaxoiv VIII. Cf. Sen. Apocol. 5: Claudius 
gaudet esse illic philologos homines, sperat futurum aliquem historiis 
suis locum. The lex agrorum ex commentario Claudi Caesaris is men- 
tioned in the liber coloniarum, Writings of the Roman Gromatics, I p. 
211, 13 L., instead of which Mommsen (ib. II p. 160, n. 16) reads C. 
luli Caesaris. 



38 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

3. Suet. Claud. 41 : novas etiam commentus est literas tres ac nu- 
mero veterum quasi maxime necessarias addidit; de quarum ratione cum 
privatus adhuc volumen edidisset mox princeps (but not till the close 
of 800 = 47 A. D. as Censor, Tac. A. XI 13) non difficulter optinuit ut 
in usu quoque promiscuo essent. extat talis scriptura in plerisque libris 
ac diurnis titulisque operum. Tac. A. XI 13: novas literarum formas 
addidit volgavitque. 14: Claudius tres literas adiecit, quae usui impe- 
ritante eo, post obliteratae, aspiciuntur etiam nunc in aere publico per 
fora ac templa fixo. These are the three letters J for consonant u, 3 
(antisigma) to denote bs and ps, and j* to denote a sound between i 
and u (Y). He also reintroduced AI instend of the diphthong AE, ac- 
cording to Greek habit. This increase of the Latin alphabet, which 
was in itself of doubtful necessity or utility (only of the first innovation 
Quintilian says I 7, 26 : nee inutiliter Claudius . . illam . . literam adie" 
cerat, and Priscian. I 4, 20. p. 15 H. : quod quamvis illi recte visum est, 
tarnen consuetudo antiqua superavit), would not have had much chance, 
even if it had been started by a nrince generally respected; it also 
seems that Claudius merely recommended it. Even in his life-time it 
was almost never used in the distant parts of the Empire and on coins, 
near the Capital only moderately. The antisigma can be produced on 
only one inscription and even there without absolute certainty. On the 
whole subject see Fr. Bücheier, de Ti. Claudio Caesare grammatico, 
Elberfeld 1856. 54 pp., where the inscriptions are collected. Cf. Rhein. 
Mus. XUI p. 155—157. 

4. We possess of Claudius, on two iron tablets, which belong to- 
gether, and which were dug up at Lyons a. 1524, part of a speech he 
delivered a. 801 = 48 A. D. in the Senate in favour of the admission 
of the Gallic nobility to Roman offices, and from which Tacitus A. XI 
24 gives an extract. This curious relic is printed in many editions of 
the Annals of Tacitus, e. g. in those of J. Lipsius, Nipperdey, Orelli- 
Baiter (I p. 341—343), and also frequently by itself. E. g. by C. Zell, 
Freiburg 1833. 4 = Opusc. acad. lat. (1857) p. 96—156. 245 sq. A. 
Boissieu, Inscriptions antiques de Lyon, Lyon 1846. A. Comarmohd, 
Description . . des tables de Claude, Lyon 1847. 4. J. B. Monfalcon, 
Monographie de la table de Claude, Paris 1853. fol. 

5. On April 29, 1869, an edict of Claudius concerning the citizen- 
ship of the Anaunians, of 15 March 46 A. D., was discovered in the 
Tyrol. F. Kenner, on an edict of the Emperor CI., Vienna 1869. 
Mommsen, Hermes IV p. 99—131, where he says p. 107: "the beginning 
of the Edict with its confused relative sentences and the awkward rele- 
gation of the principal subject to a secondary sentence, and above all 
with its unheard-of anacoluthias, is highly characteristic of the crowned 
pedant. . . We see here distinctly that strangest of Roman rulers, in 
whose mind the germs of naive honesty, humour, feeling of justice 
and honour, nay even sagacity and energy, were strangely confused; 
but unfortunately neither his head nor heart was conbistent, so that 



Claudms and Nero. 39 

all those qualities, distorted and caricatured as it were in a concave 
mirror, resulted in a portrait of frightful comicality." 

6. Tac. A. IV 53: id ego . . repperi in commentariis Agrippinae 
filiae, quae Neronis principis mater vitam suam et casus suorum posteris 
memoravit. Plin. n. h. VII 8,46: Neronem . , pedibus genitum scribit 
parens eius Agrippina, and in the ind. auct. of b. VII: Agrippina Claudi. 
She lived 16—59 A. D., see A. Preuner in Pauly'sEnc. II. p. 613-616. 
A. Stahr, Agrippina, Nero's mother, Berlin 1867. As the historians 
never appeal to these Memoirs for a single fact of Nero's reign, they 
seem to have been written and published before her son's accession to 
th« throne. Cf. Lehmann, Claudius p. 5 sq. 

7. Suet. Nero 52: liberales disciplinas omnes fere puer attigit. 
sed a philosophia eum mater avertit, monens imperaturo contrariam 
esse, a cognitione veterum oratorum Seneca praeceptor, quo diutius in 
admiratione sui detineret. (But Tac. A. XIV 55 lets Nero say to Seneca: 
quod meditatae orationi statim occurram, id primum tui muneris habeo, 
qui me . . subita expedire docuisti) itaque ad poeticam pronus carmina 
libeiiter ac sine labore composuit. . . venere in manus meas pugillares 
libellique cum quibusdam notissimis versibus ipsius chirographo scriptis 
ut facile appareret non tralatos aut dictante aliquo exceptos, sed plane 
quasi a cogitante atque generante exaratos ; ita multa et deleta et in- 
ducta et siiperscripta inerant. ib. 10: declamavit saepius publice, re- 
citavit et carmina, non modo domi sed et in theatro, tanta universorum 
laetitia (at the beginning of his reign) ut ob recitationem supplicatio 
decreta sit eaque pars carminum aureis Uteris lovi Capitolino dicata. 
Tac. A. XIII 3: contractis quibus aliqua pangendi facultas necdum 
insignis erat, hi cenati considere simul et adlatos vel ibidem repertos 
versus conectere atque ipsius verba quoquo modo prolata suj)plere. 
quod species ipsa carminum docet, non impetu et instinctu nee ore 
pleno fluens. Nero . . aliquando carminibus pangendis inesse sibi ele- 
menta doctrinae ostendebat. XIV 16: carminum quoque Studium ad- 
fectavit. 

8. Dio LXII 29: tV nat^d^/uu) nvl d^ia (on the quinquennalia of a. 
818 V. C.) . . aviyvoi TQOj'Cxa nvcc savTOv noirjuciTct, Dio LXII 29. Cf. 
Juv. VIII 321. Schol. Pers. I 121 Anth. lat. 725, 38 sqq. R. Quotations 
from this epic poem by Serv. Georg. Ill 36. Aen. V 370. To the same 
may have belonged the three hexameters (quoted by Schol. Lucan III 
261 (de hoc ait Nero in primo libro : Quinque ete.) and also the po- 
lished, but utterly unmeaning hexameters in Persius I 93 — 95. 99—102, 
on which the Schol: dicit hos versus Neronis (p. 269 J.), and: hi 
versus Neronis sunt (p. 271, 1 sq. J.), cf. 0. Jahn's prolegg. to Pers. p. 
LXXVIII— LXXXI. W. Teufifel, Translation of Persius (Stuttg. 1857) p. 
44 sq. But in these Troica was probably the "Akioaig ^Ikiov recited by 
Nero on the occasion of the conflagration of Rome (A. D. 64). Dio LXII 
18 : jrjv Gxfviju T>/V xiB^aQM^ixriv kaßaiy ijafy "AkoiOiv . . ^Ikfov. Suet. 
Ner. 38 : halosin Ilii in illo suo scenico habitu decantavit, cf. Tac. A. XV 



40 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

39. Dio LXII 29: TiciQfa/.fvaCfTO ds o)g xul rag i(äv PvouuCoiv n^a'^dg 
anuoag övyyQCiipiou iv k'nfotv X(u tuqC yf rov nkrjO-ovg loiv ßißkicoy, 
TiQiy xcd OTtovy avioiv Gvv&i'ivui, iaxit/'aro. 

9. Of a different kind were those poems of Nero's which were in- 
tended for recitation to the cithara. Dio LXI 20: txid^aQojdtjGi 
7f \4rTiv nyc( t] Bccx^ag. Neroniana cantica in Suet. Vitell. 11. He took 
his subjects from Greek tragedies. Philostrat. Apoll. Tyan. lY 39 
atfcor nc jov NfOMyog fj.ü.r}. . . Inrjys fÄtkrj r« f^sv *| OQfareiag, rd d'& 
*§ Jlt^Tiyoyrjg, rd ö" ono&^vovv imv TQayco&ovfj,ivoiv uvtm, xal (odccg txcc^u- 
TiTfy onooag N^Qioy ikvyii^^ rf xcd xaxöig tGTQSi^fy. Cf. Suet. Ner. 21. 
Plin. n. h. XXXVII 3, 12: Domitius Nero . . quodam carmine. Poems 
(elegies?) on lascivious subjects, Martial. IX 26,9 sq. (Nero . . lascivum 
iuvenis cum tibi lusit opus) cf. VIII 70, 8. Plin. Epp. V 3, 6 (above 
25, 1). Similar to this was probably poema Neronis quod inscribitur 
Luscio against Clodius Pollio (Suet. Domit. 1) and the one against Quin- 
tianus (mollitia corporis infamis et a Nerone probroso carmine diffa- 
matus, Tac. A. XV 49). 0. Jahn's Prolegg. to Pers. p. LXXV— LXXVIII. 
A. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. V. p. 579 sq. note. Lehmann, Claudius p. 6 sq. 

10. Tac. A. XIII 3: adnotabant seniores . . primum ex eis qui 
rerum potiti essent Neronem alienae facundiae eguisse. Cf. n. 7 and 
282, 2. Dio LXI 3: rooavra xcd n^og ttjv ßovkrjp. nqog jov 2fv^xov xcd 
fivrcc yqcn^>hvra, ccvhyvoi. The speeches mentioned by Suet.Ner. 7, the 
gratiarum actio in the Senate, pro Bononiensibus latine, pro Rhodiis 
atque Iliensibus graece, were probably also written by Seneca. Fronte 
ad Ver. II 1 p. 124 says inaccurately on the Emperors from Tiberius 
to Vespasian: quis eorum oratione sua populum aut senatum adfari, 
quis edictum, quis epistulam suismet verbis componere potuit? See 
above n. 1. 4. 5. 7. 

282. To the reigns of all these three Emperors extends 
the literary activity of L. Annaeus Seneca, (c. 750 — 818 v. 
c), who was Senator under Caligula and Claudius, though 
exiled to Corsica soon after his accession, owing to Messalina 
(a. 41), whence he was recalled eight years afterwards through 
the influence of Agrippina (a. 57); he was then entrusted with 
the education of Nero and appointed praetor; under Nero he 
was Consul (a. 57) and for some time the actual ruler of the 
Monarchy, finally, however, (a. 65) forced to commit suicide, 
being charged with participation in the conspiracy of Piso. 
Seneca is the most brilliant figure of this time. In point of 
esprit and formal perfection, he may be compared with Ovid. 
He was fully aware of his talents, but did not always resist 
the temptations held out by opportunities and power and the 
suggestions of the moment. It can, however, but rarely be 



Nero. L. Annaens Seneca. 41 

shown that he put his great talents and high position to 
perverse use: though his life only exhibited wisdom frequently 
in the weakened form of prudence, his death proved his reso- 
lute renunciation of the goods of this life. 

1. Seneca was born at Corduba (see above 264, 1. Cordubenses 
nostri, III p. 434 Hse.), the second of three brothers (above 264, 
2). His mother's name was Helvia; see the Consolatio addressed to her 
and above 264, 1. Of her sister (subsequently the wife of a man who 
governed Egypt for 16 years, probably Vitrasius Pollio) he says cons. 
ad Helv. 19, 2: illius manibus in urbem perlatus sum, illius pic mater- 
noque nutricio per longum tempus aeger convalui ; ilia pro quaestura 
mea gratiam suam extendit. At Rome he was instructed by the philo- 
sophers Attains (above 277, 5) and Sotion (Epist. 49. 98. 108), also by 
Papirius Fabianus (above 261, 10). Seneca remembered also Asinius 
Pollio (t 758, above 210, 1): de tranq. 17, 1. Epist. 49, 2: quid non 
'modo' est si recorderis ? modo apud Sotionem puer sedi, modo causas 
agere coepi, modo desii velle agere, modo desii posse, ib. 108, 22: in 
Tiberii Caesaris principatum iuventae tempus inciderat. Dio LIX 19, 7 
(a. 39) : o ^susxag o Avvtog o Aov/.iog . . d'tSi^x^-ccQt] na^ okiyov . . ojt 
dixtji/ Ttya iv tm ovpi&Qtto nccQoyrog avTOv (Caligula) xaliog flnfv. 
When a. 4r the youngest daughter (born a. 18) of Germanicus and 
sister of Caligula, lulia Livilla, was exiled through the influence of 
Messalina, Seneca, being her lover, shared her fate. (Tac. A. XIII 42. 
Dio LXI 10. Schol. Juv. V 109). Caesonius Maximus followed him to 
Corsica (Martial. VII 44 sq.). Tac. A. XII 8 a. 49 : Agrippina . . veniam 
exilii pro Annaeo Seneca, simul praeturam impetrat, . . ut Domitii 
pueritia tali magistro adolesceret et consiliis eiusdem ad spem domi- 
nationis uterentur, quia Seneca fidus in Agrippinam memoria beneficii 
et infensus Claudio dolore iniuriae credebatur. Suet. Nero 7: undecimo 
aetatis anno a Claudio adoptatus est Annaeoque Senecae iam tunc se- 
natori in disciplinam traditus. Schol. Juv. 1. 1. (p. 254 J.) : revocatus 
. . etsi magno desiderio Athenas intenderet ab Agrippina tamen erudiendo 
Neroni in palatium adductus. Dio suspects even his relations to Agrip- 
pina, LXI 10: 01» yd() (cjif^QfjGfi/ (cvtm T)]y ^lovlCav uot/fvaai, ovds 
ßfkjtiüv ix Tijg ifjvyijg iyiysTo, dkkcl xcd TJj ^Ay^imiCvi^ . . iukrjaCctCfy- 
But in this case it is possible that he was seduced by the lady. Cons, 
suff. 57, see Hermes II. p. 45. Seneca shows in several passages how 
he thought of the conduct to be adopted in a difficult time, e. g. de 
otio 3, 3: si resp. corruptior est quam ut adiuvari possit, si occupata 
est malis, non nitetur sapiens in supervacuum nee se nihil profuturus 
impendet. See below 328, 8 fin. 

2. Seneca influenced Nero in the good beginning of his reign, 
an influence maintained partly by dangerous means. Dio LXI 4: (cvrol 
(Seneca and Burrus) tj^V ciQ/Jjy ccnaoav nccQikaßoy xtd OMxyjOHv i(f>^ 
oGov i^i^wrid^rjouv ct^ioxci xal dixcuoTccr«. Tac. A. XIII 2: ibatur in caedes 



42 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

nisi Afranius Burrus et Annaeus Seneca obviam issent. hi rectores im- 
peratoriae iuventae et . . Concordes diversa arte ex aequo pollebant, 
. . Seneca praeceptis eloquentiae et comitate honesta, iuvantes invicem, 
quo facilius lubricam principis aetatem, si virtutem aspernaretur, volup- 
tatibus concessis retinerent. (Against the latter see Dio LXl 4). ib. 11: 
clementiam suam obstringens (Nero) crebris orationibus, quas Seneca, 
testificando quam honesta praeciperet vel iactandi ingenii, voce prin- 
cipis vulgabat. ib. 13: donee . . exueret obsequium in matrem seque 
Senecae permitteret, ex cuius familiaribus Annaeus Serenus simulatione 
amoris adversus eandem libertam (Acte) primas adolescentis (Nero) 
cupidines velaverat. Plin. n. h. XIV 51 : Annaeo Seneca, principe tum 
eruditorum ac potentia, quae postremo nimia ruit super ipsum, minime 
utique miratore inanium. Seneca knew how to make use of favourable 
opportunities. Tac. A. XIII 42: qua sapientia, quibus philosophorum 
praeceptis intra quadriennium regiae amicitiae ter millies sestertium 
paravisset (Seneca)? Romae testamenta et orbos velut indagine eius 
cai)i, Italian! et provincias immenso fenore hauriri. An instance of 
such speculations is given by Dio LXII 2. Cf. ib. LXI 10: xal kv akkoig 
navT(t TU kvavTKOTara of.g irfikoaofid noKOV ^^iy^^V- ^f^* yccQ TVQCivvf- 
dog xciTrjyoQuiy . . ovx 'ctqiffTcao lov ncfkarfov . . lolg t( nkoviovafv 
iyxakoiy (? of. Sen. vit. beat. 17) ovcfav (TiTaxiaxikiooy xid nfvTccxoGfiav 
fjLVQiccdUor ixTijaaio, xccl rcig nokvTfkffag tmv akkoiv alruofxivog nfyrci- 
xoGiovg jQi.Tio&ag . . *?/#. . • rccg aaskyfiag ag TiQazTioy yafAov t* tni- 
(^uptaraTov iyt]^u€ (with Pompeja Paulina, Tac. A. XV 60) xcd /ufiQaxioig 
i^oiQoig t'/cuQf xcd tovto xcd top- NiQcavcc noislv icfida'^f. But in Tac. 
A. XIV 53 Seneca says to Nero : tantum bonorum atque opum in me 
cumulasti ut nihil felicitati meae desit nisi moderatio eius. In general 
it may be said that Tacitus understood Seneca much better than Dio 
who frequently merely reproduces the jealous gossip of the Town and 
even (LXII 25) attempts to depreciate his death (Tac. A. XV 60—65). 
In comparing himself with others and reconsidering his actions and 
omissions, Seneca could afford to look back on his life with satisfaction : 
Tac. A. XV 62: imaginem vitae suae relinquere. 63: contemplatione 
vitae per virtutem actae. It is true that there is a certain study of 
effect even in the manner of his death, but this scarcely decreases the 
actual merit of the act. 

3. Volquardsen, a vindication of Seneca's character, Hadersleben 
1839. 4. E. F. Gelpke, de Senecae vitae et moribus, Bern 1848, 4. 
Peter, History of Rome III. p. 344—351. A. Martens, de Senecae vita 
et de tempore quo scripta eius philosophica . . composita sint, Altona 
1187. 62 pp. 

283. Seneca is as a writer also a faithful picture of his 
period, in which briUiancy was placed above accuracy; he 
purposely wrote in harmony to the prevailing taste and 
thus forfeited the applause of the succeeding generations. In 



L. Annaevs Seneca. 43 

respect of his subjects, he was most varied; yet he was always 
and at last exclusively fond of quiet meditations on nature 
and human life. He started from the Stoic system, but al- 
loyed it with additions from other systems, by which the ori- 
ginal austerity was toned down, the ethic severity of the system 
softened and its crotchets left aside. These popular phi- 
losophical writings charm the reader by fulness and fineness 
of observation, abundance of knowledge unalloyed with pe- 
dantry, nobility of thought and a glittering style, decked out 
with all means of rhetoric. But the absence of definite plan and 
the constant repetition of the same manner will tire us at 
last, we are displeased with the author's persistent endeavours 
to please and even serious passages cause suspicion of the 
writer's sincerity. This manner, retained by Seneca through- 
out his life, had become part and parcel of his being and 
appears equally in all his works, both in prose and poetry, 
though in the latter the rhetorical element has entirely over- 
powered the contents. 

1. Tac. XIII 3: fuit illi viro (Seneca) ingenium amoenum et tern- 
poris eius auribus accommodatum, Quintil. X 1, 125: ex industria 
Senecam in omni genere eloquentiae distuli, propter vulgatam falso de 
me opinionem qua damnare eum et invisum quoque habere sum creditus. 
quod accidit mihi dum corruptum et omnibus vitiis fractum dicendi 
genus revocare ad severiora iudicia contendo. (126.) tum autem sohis 
hie fere in manibus adulescentium fuit. quern . . potioribus (especially 
Cicero) praeferri non sinebam, quos ille non destiterat incessere. . . 
(127.) placebat propter sola vitia. . . (128.) cuius et multae alioqui et 
magnae virtutes fuerunt, ingenium facile et copiosum, plurimum studii, 
multa rerum cognitio. . . tractavit etiam omnem fere studiorum materiam. 
(129.) nam et orationes eius et poemata et epistolae et dialogl feruntur. 
in philosophia parum diligens, egregius tamen vitiorum insectator fuit. 
multae in eo claraeque sententiae, multa etiam morum gratia legenda; 
sed in eloquenr'o corrupta pleraque atque eo perniciosissima quod 
abundant dulcibus vitiis. (130.) . . si non omnia sua amasset, si rerum 
pondera minutissimis sententiis non fregisset, consensu potius eruditorum 
quam puerorum amore comprobaretur. (131.) . . multa . . probanda in 
60, multa etiam admiranda sunt: eligere modo curae sit: quod utinam 
ipse fecisset. Even stronger are the expressions used by Seneca's an- 
tipodes in mannerism, Fronto and his adherents. E. g. Fronto p. 155 
N. : eloquentiam . . Senecae mollibus et febriculosis prunuleis insitam 
subvertendam censeo radicitus. (156.) . . neque ignoro copiosum sen- 
tentiis et redundantem hominem esse; verum sententias eius . . video 
nusquam pugnare etc. (157.) at eandem sententiam miliens alio atque 
alio amictu indutam referunt. (158.) . . quid ego verborum sordes et 



44 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

illiivies, quid verba modulate collocata et effeminate fluentia? Gellius 
XU 2, 1 : de Annaeo Seneca partim existimant ut de scriptore minima 
utili, cuius libros attingere nullum pretium operae sit, quod oratio eius 
vulgaris videatur et protrita, res atque sententiae aut inepto inanique 
impetu sint aut levi et quasi dicaci argutia, eruditio autem vernacula 
et plebeia nihilque ex veterum scriptis habens neque gratiae neque 
dignitatis, alii vero elegantiae in verbis parum esse non infitias eunt, 
sed et rerum quas dicat scientiam doctrinamque ei non deesse dicunt 
et in vitiis morum obiurgandis severitatem gravitatemque non invenustam. 
After this, Seneca's depreciating criticisms on Ennius, Cicero and 
Virgil are quoted from Epist. XXII with much indignation. 

2. The dates of the composition of Seneca's works. Previous to 
his exile, i. e. under Caligula, he wrote, besides speeches (above 282, 
1) the works on Egypt and India, and also the consolatio ad Marciam. 
nl the time of his exile he composed epigrams, perhaps also part of 
his tragedies, and the consolatio ad Helviam and ad Polybium (a. 43 
or 44). and also the panegyric on Messalina, though he subsequently 
withdrew the latter, Dio LXI 10. Soon after his return he appears to 
have published the works de tranquillitate animi (Lehmann, Claudius 
p. 321 sq.), de ira (Lehmann ibid. j). 315 — 321) and de brevitate vitae 
(cf. 13, 8). After the death of Claudius he composed the anoxokoxvy- 
jtoatg ; in the first years of Nero's reign the books de dementia (which 
are also addressed to the Emperor), the work de vita beata, addressed 
to Novatus, who had meanwhile changed his name to Gallio, the books 
de beneficiis and de constantia sapientis. In this time he seems to 
have composed another part of his tragedies (below 285, 2). After 
Seneca had retired from the Court and from public life (a. 62), he 
wrote de otio ad Serenum, and also the works addressed to Lucilius 
de Providentia, the quaestiones naturales and the letters (a. 62— 65). H. 
Lehmann, Philologus VIII p. 309 — 328 = Claudius and his time p. 8 
— 17. Fr. Jonas, de ordine librorum Senecae philosophi, Berlin 1870. 
74 pp. A. Martens, see above 282, 3. 

3. Volkmann, on Seneca, a literary sketch, Mager's Revue 1857, 
p. 259 — 267. F. Böhm, Seneca and his importance for our time, Berlin 
1856. 47 pp. 4. 

4. E. F. Werner, de Sen. philosophia, Breslau 1825. B. ten Brink, 
de Seneca eiusque in philosophiam meritis, Gandav. 1827. 4. G. Herzog, 
de Senecae philosophia, Bernburg 1828. H. Borgens, Senecae disciplinae 
morales cum Antoniniana comparatio, Lips, s. a. (1857). F. Chr. Baur, 
Seneca and Paulus ; the relation of Stoicism to Christianity, according 
to the works of Seneca, in Hilgenfeld's Journal of Theology I (1858) p. 
171—246. 441 — 463. Holzherr, the philosopher Seneca; a contribution 
towards the appreciation of his general merit and philosophy etc. I. 
Programm of Rastatt 1858. 122 pp. II. 1857. 76 pp. C. Martha, les mo- 
ralistes sous I'empire romain (Paris 1865) p. 20 sqq. G. Boissier, le 
christianisme et la morale de S., Revue des deux mondes, T. XCII 
(1871) p. 40-71. 



L. Annaens Seneca. 45 

Baarts, Seneca de deo, Marienwerder 1848. 4. C. R. Fickert, Sen. 
de natura deorum, Breslau 1857. 4. Siedler, on the religious and moral 
views of Seneca, Fraustadt 1863. 4. W. Bernhardt, Seneca's views of 
the Universe, Wittenberg 1861. 4. 

De latinitate Senecae Böhmer (Öls 1840. 4) and E. Opitz (Naumburg 
1871. 33 pp. 4.) 

284. Many of the prose-works of Seneca are known only 
in fragments or from quotations. Among those extant we 
notice chiefly the collection of Letters addressed to liUcihus, 
the richest and fullest image of the individual peculia- 
rities of Seneca. The libel on the defunct Emperor Claudius 
does, indeed, arise from malice, but is remarkable for being 
the only instance of the satira menippea. The estimation in 
which the ethic writings of Seneca were held caused them to 
be frequently copied, but also produced at an early time such 
forgeries as the fictitious correspondence with the Apostle Paul. 

2. Lost prose-works of Seneca's, a) On Natural science. De motu 
terrarum (volumen edidi iuvenis, nat. quaest. VI 4, 2), de lapidum na- 
tura, perhaps also de piscium natura, monographs de situ Indiae and 
de situ et sacris Aegyptiorum, both works being probably the results 
of Seneca's sojourn with the husband of his aunt (282, 1), de forma 
mundi. b) On moral philosophy. Exhortationes, de officiis, de irama- 
tura morte, de superstitione (against the Anthropomorphism and An- 
thropopathy of popular superstition) dialogus, de matrimonio (very in- 
teresting and piquant), probably also de amicitia; then moralis philo- 
sophiae libri; de remediis fortuitorum ad Gallionem; de paupertate, and 
perhaps de misericordia. c) Historical works: de vita patris, see above 
264, 3. d) Speeches written for Nero; see Tac. A. XI 3. 11. XIV 10 sq. 
Quintil. VIII 5, 18. Dio LXI 3. See above 281, 10. e) a Panegyric on 
Messalina, Dio LXI 10. f) Letters, in decimo epistolarum ad Novatum 
(Priscian. II p. 410, 6 sq. H.). Martial. VII 45, 3 sq. (to Caesonius 
Maximus). The best collection of the fragments is given in Haase's 
edition III p. 419—467. cf. p. XV— XXL F. Osann, de Sen. scriptis 
quibusdam deperditis, Giessen 1846 — 1848. 4. 

2. There are indeed many mss. of the prose-works of Seneca in 
existence, but most of them are very late. The oldest are the Medio- 
lanensis saec. IX containing dialogorum libros XII, Gruter's Nazarianus 
containing de benefic. and de dementia; in the natur. quaest., besides 
the now lost Memmianus and Bongarsianus, a Berolinensis saec. XIII; 
in the first half of the Letters especially Parisinus 8540, p in Haase's 
edition, in the second part the Bamberg and Strasburg mss. saec. IX 
or X. L. v. Jan, symbolae ad notitiam codd. atque emend, epist. Se- 
necae, Schweinfurt 1839. 4. C. R. Fickert, prolegomena in novam Sen. 



46 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

editionem, Naumburg 1839. 4. See also the prefaces in the editions by 
Fickert and by Haase (especially III p. VI — XIII). 

3. Complete editions of the prose-works of Seneca. The princeps, 
Naples 1475. fol. 2 vols. Ex recogn. D. Erasmi, Basil. 1515. 1529. fol. 
Cum notis Mureti, Rom. 1585. fol. Ad mss. Palat. rec. J. Gruter, Hei- 
delberg 1593. fol. Cum notis J. Lipsii, Antverp. 1605. fol. Cum comm. 
J. Fr. Gronovii (whose Notae ad L. et M. Ann. Senecas appeared Lugd. 
Bat. 1649) et aliorum. Amst. 1672. 2 vols. Recogn. et illustr. F. E. Ruh- 
kopf, Lips. 1797 — 1811. 5 vols. Recensuit, comm. adiecit etc. C. R. 
Fickert, Lips. 1842—1845. 3 vols. An edition of the text alone by Fr. 
Haase, Lips. Teubner, 1852 sq. 3 vols. 

Fr. Haase, adnotationes criticae ad Sen., Breslau 1852 sq. 1859. 4. 
K. Schenkl, Contributions to the criticism of Seneca, Vienna 1864. 67 
pp. (Reports of the meetings of the Academy at Vienna XLIV p. 3 sqq.). 
M. Haupt, emendationes (Berol. 1864. 4.) and adnotationes ad L. A. S. 
opera, Berlin 1866. 21 pp. 4. C. F. W. Müller, Critical observations 
on either Seneca, Fleckeisens Jahrb. 93, p. 483—503. 0. Matthiä, Ob- 
servationes criticae in Sen., Berlin 1865. E. Bährens, lectiones latinae 
Bonn 1870) p. 40 46. J. J. Cornelissen, Coniectanealatina,Daventr. 1870. 4. 

4. The works called dialogi in the Milan ms. deserve this name 
on account of the frequent introduction of a second speaker in the 
manner of the Stoics. There are twelve of them: 1) the Essay addres- 
sed to Lucilius on the question quare aliqua incommoda bonis viris 
accidant cum providentia sit. Edited by B. A. Nauta, Lugd. Bat. 1825. 
2) ad (Annaeum) Serenum: nee iniuriam nee contumeliam accipere sa- 
pientem. 3 — 4. Three books de ira, adNovatum, Seneca's elder brother, 
evidently written after Caligula's death, see I 16, 29. II 33, 3. HI 18, 3. 
22, 1. 6) ad Marciam (the daughter of Cremutius Cordus) de consolatione, 
on the death of her son which had, however, taken place more than 
three years previously. See an Essay on this by Fr. Heidbreede, Biele- 
feld 1839. 4. Edited by H. C. Michaelis, Harlem 1840. 7) ad Gallionem 
de vita beata. Prolegomena to this by C. F. Schulze, Lips. 1797. 4. 
8) ad Serenum de otio. 9) ad Serenum de tranquillitate animi. A 
special treatise on this by A. Hirschig, Lugd. Bat. 1825. 10) ad Pau- 
linum (Seneca's father-in-law?) de brevitate vitae. Adnotationes on it 
by Clumper, Lugd. Bat. 1835. 11) ad Polybium (cf. 226, 5) de consola- 
tione, a consolation addressed to a gentleman of the bed-chamber at 
the court of Claudius concerning the loss of his brother, full of flattery 
towards Claudius (especially c. 13 sq.), in order to obtain his own re- 
peal; Volkmann in Mager's Revue 1858, p. 104—135. 12) ad Helviam 
matrem de consolatione, intended to console her about the writer's 
exile, but in reality calculated to promote his recal. An Essay on 
this by H. C. Michaelis, Harlem 1841. Of similar contents, but not 
included in the collection of dialogi, are 13) the books addressed to 
Nero de dementia; 14) the seven books de beneficiis, addressed to his 
friend Aebutius Liberalis of Lugdunum, and 15) the Letters (n. 5). 

5. The letters to his young friend Lucilius, the procurator Siciliae, 



L. Annaeits Seneca. 47 

were commenced c. 810, and written from the very first with the in- 
tention of being published; the first three books also appear to have 
been published by Seneca himself (Jonas). The rest were not, as it 
seems, quite ready for publication by the time of Seneca's death and 
were, therefore, published from his papers (perhaps by Lucilius) in 
general accordance with the order in which they were composed 
(Haase's praef. p. Ill — VI, R. Peiper, praef. suppl. p. 14 — 17). We 
possess 124 letters, divided into 20 books; but Gellius XII 2, 3 sqq. 
gives several literary criticisms of Seneca ex libro XXII epistularum 
moralium quas ad Lucilium composuit (above 283, 1 fin.) Edition of 
the letters by J. Schweighäuser (Strasburg 1809. 2 vols). On the cri- 
ticism see also J. Bartsch, Rhein. Mus. XXIV p. 271—288. 

6. The seven books naturalium quaestionum, likewise de- 
dicated to Lucilius, chiefly from Stoic sources, with the addition of 
moral meditations, were used in the Middle Ages as a text-book of 
physical science. Editions by G. D. Köler, Götting. 1819. J. Fr. Gro- 
novii notae in S. n. q. ed. Fickert, Breslau 1846. 1848. 4. H. C.Michaelis, 
notae ad Sen. n. q. . . coll. cum cod. Vossiano, Philologus VIII p. 445 
—460. IX p. 324—345. L. Crousle, de Sen. n. q., Versailles 1863. 146 pp. 
Larish, diss. Breslau 1865, and on the criticism of b. I, Sagau 1870. 4. 

7. Dio LX 35: Aovxtog lovviog rcckkiiov o tov 2(v^A(t ccö'(k(f6g 
itcKioruTov TV anfi^d^iylccTo (on the apotheosis of Claudius). Gvvi{hr}X8 
[Xfv yaq xal 6 JSfyixag Gvyy^a/n/na anoxokoxvvT(oati/ ccvro (aonfq 
uyd unoS-civcttoiait/ oyo/udoag. The extant work does not, however, bear 
this title, but in the St. Gall ms. : _47IO0HO^/2' Annaei Senecae per 
saturam, perhaps because the original title given by Dio was no longer 
understood. Nor does this work contain anything of Claudius' change 
into a gourd {xokoxvyrr]), this witticism being limited to the title. It is 
a venomous political Satire, written in vivid recollection of Claudius' 
personal appearance and reign and with deep hatred against him. 
The official lie concerning his death is simply adopted, Agrippina 
greatly spared and the new Emperor glorified. The origin of the work 
in this time and in the Court circles is therefore undoubted, and the 
tradition as to Seneca's authorship all the less to be doubted, as the 
metrical treatment of the lines interspersed is certainly in agreement 
with his manner. The old doubts of Seneca's authorship were revived, 
not strengthened, by A. Stahr, Agrippina (Berlin 1867) p. 330—343. 
Cf. A. Riese, Philol. XXVII p. 321—323. The absence of mention in 
other writers proves only that the work was originally published with- 
out Seneca's name and added to his writings from his papers. Prose 
and verse are mixed up, see above 28 and 28, 3. The numerous mss. 
of this Satire are derived from one ms. which seems, apart from Seneca's 
other works, to have formed part of a miscellaneous collection, and 
from which, in the middle of the work, a leaf was lost. This tradition 
is most faithfully represented by the Sangallensis saec. X or XI; see 
Bücheier p. 72 — 76. A separate edition by C. E. Schusler (denuo rec, 
Utrecht 1844) and especially by Fr. Bücheier, in the Symbola philol. 
Bonn. p. 31 — 89. Contributions to criticism by Fr. Lindemann( Emen- 



48 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

dationes ad etc. Zittau 1832. 4.), A. Baumstark (Philologus XVIII p. 
543 — 649)^ K. Schenkl (Contributions to the criticism of Seneca, Reports 
of the meetings of the Academy at Vienna XLIV. Vienna, 1864 p. 3-30). 

8. Seneca was also supposed to have a share in the notae Tiro- 
nianae, see above [178, 4, and W. Schmitz, Symb. phil. Bonn. p. 538 
— 540. To him as the representative of wisdom even this kind of it 
was attributed, though quite against his mind ; see Epist. 90, 25 : quid 
loquar . . verborum notas, quibus quamvis citata excipitur oratio et 
celeritatem linguae manus sequitur? vilissimorum mancipiorum ista 
commenta sunt. 

9. Spurious works. The observation that in his opposition to 
popular belief and many details of moral doctrine Seneca approached 
the Christian doctrine, led to the assumption that he was actually 
a Christian, and caused the fiction of a correspondence between 
Seneca and St. Paul, which was known to St. Jerome and considered 
genuine by him (de scriptor. eccles. 12: quern non ponerem in catalogo 
sanctorum nisi me epistolae illae provocarent quae leguntur a plurimis, 
Pauli ad Senecam et Senecae ad Paulum). Cf. Augustin. Epist. 153 
(ad Maced. 74): Seneca, . . cuius etiam quaedam ad Paulum apostolum 
leguntur epistolae. These 14 shallow and insignificant letters were last 
printed in Haase's edition III p. 476—481 cf. p. XXII. See also C. 
Wachsmuth, Rhein. Mus. XVI p. 301—303, and Fr. X. Kraus, in the 
Tubing. Quartalschrift XLIX (1867) p. 609—624. A. Fleury, St. Paul et 
Seneque, Recherches sur les rapports du philosophe avec I'apotre etc- 
Paris 1858. 2 vols. F. C. Baur, Hilgenfeld's Journal of Theology I p. 
161 — 170. 463 — 470. C. Aubertin, etude critique sur les rapports sup- 
poses entre Seneque et St. Paul, Paris 1857. 444 pp. and Seneque et 
St. Paul, Paris 1869. F. X. Kraus 1. c. p. 603—609. J. B. Lightfoot, 
St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians (London 1868) p. 260-331. 

10. In the Middle Ages Seneca was also considered the author of 
the treatise de formula honestae vitae or de quattuor virtutibus cardi- 
nalibus, though according to the preceding dedication (gloriosissimo . . 
Mironi regi Martinus humilis episcopus) it was written by the bishop 
Martinus Dumiensis (c. 560) : last printed in Haase's edition III p. 468 
— 475, cf. p. XXI sq. In the mss. this treatise is frequently found to- 
gether with sententious Excerpts from Seneca's letters and proverbia 
Senecae per ordinem alphabeti, mostly in senarii; see above 208, 3. 
Excerpts of this kind, many of them quite identical, and likewise mixed 
up with sentences from other sources, chiefly Christian (cf. e. g. 55: 
eleemosyna non tam accipientibus quam dantibus prodest) are also 
contained in the liber de moribus to which Seneca's name is pre- 
fixed in the mss. (in Orelli's opusc. sent. I p. 269—276, in Haase's 
edition III p. 462-467, in WölffHn's Publilius Syrus p. 136—148, al- 
together 145 sentences), a collection which existed as early as a. 567 
in its present form; see Haase HI p. XX sq. E. Wölff'lin, Philologus 



L. Annaeifs iSeneca. 49 

VIII p. 184—187. IX p. 680 sqq. K. Schenkl, Contributions etc. (see n. 
7 fin.) p. 38—62. 

285. We possess of Seneca in verse both epigrams relating 
to his exile and tragedies. There are eight of the latter: 
Hercules furens, Thyestes, Phaedra, Oedipus, Troades (Hecuba), 
Medea, Agamemno, Hercules Oetaeus, also two scenes of a 
Thebais which form part of an Oedipus (Coloneus) in 802 
lines, and Phoenissae in 302 lines. There is no doubt as to 
the later origin of a praetexta entitled Octavia. These trage- 
dies agree in their chief peculiarities both with one another 
and with the prose-works of Seneca. There is throughout the 
same abundance of words, rhetorical figures and sentences, 
though in these tragedies it is often so much exaggerated as 
to be scarcely bearable. Owing to the nature of the subject- 
matter, the pompousness of the style is but rarely a substi- 
tute for the absence of deep thought. The metrical treat- 
ment of these tragedies is very strict, but wanting in variety. 

1. Concerning the nine epigrams (e. g. in Haase's edition I p. 261 
— 263) Seneca's authorship is attested by the mss. only in nr. 1, 2 and 7; 
in all the rest it is neither attested nor credible. See A. Eiese in Fleck- 
eisen's Jahrb. 99 p. 279 sq. 

2. The time when Seneca wrote his tragedies cannot be fixed with 
certainty. See various conjectures in Peiper's praef. suppl. p. 11 — 27. 
32. In Corsica Seneca could easily find time and quiet for works of 
this kind, cf. consol. ad Helv. 20, 1 sq. There he may have composed 
his Medea, and under Claudius also his Troades. Then, a. 57 sqq., 
after an interval of some time, he wrote Oedipus, Hercules, and Phaedra. 
Tac. A. XIV 52 (obiciebant . . carmina crebrius factitare postquam 
Neroni amor eorum venisset), in a. 62, points to occupation of this kind, 
as Nero also chose subjects of Greek tragedy; see above 281, 9. Medea 
is mentioned by Quintil. 1X2, 8 (ut Medea apud Sene^am, also Diomedes 
III p. 511, 23 K. anapaesticum choricum habemus in Seneca = Med. 
301); Phaedra by Priscian. YI 13, 68 (p. 253 H. : Seneca in Phaedra), 
Hecuba (Troades) by Ps. Probus p. 224, 246 K. (Seneca in Hecuba); 
Seneca in Thyeste by Lactant. on Stat. Theb. IV 530. Serv. Aen. XII 
395 confounds Statius and Seneca owing to the identity of the titles 
(Statins in Thebaide = Sen. Oedip. 1079). A similar error in Sidonius 
Apoll, carm. IX 229 — 231 (quorum unus coht hispidum Platona, . . or- 
chestram quatit alter Euripidis), perhaps misled by Martial I 61, 7 duos- 
que Senecas (father and son) unicumque Lucanum, in making a dis- 
tinction between the tragic poet Seneca and the philosoiDher. The 
identity of manner and thought, as well as of numerous detailed sen- 
tences, which can be proved, admits of no doubt on this point; see F. 

4 



50 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

G. C. Klotzsch, prolusio de Annaeo Seneca uno tragoediarum quae 
supersunt omnium auctore, Wittenberg 1802. 4. G. Richter, de Seneca 
tragoediarum auctore, Naumburg 1862. p. 1—17. 32— 41. After G. Richter 
has given up his doubts of the genuineness of the Oedipus, it remains 
still a matter of controversy, whether^Agamemno and Hercules II (Oe- 
taeus) are by the same writer as the other plays. R. Peiper and G. 
Richter (1. 1. p. 18 — 32) deny this, on account of many peculiarities of 
these two plays which they consider as indications of the influence of 
Fronto; but L. Müller, B. Schmidt, J. Köhler and others do not think 
these deviations so important as to justify the assumption of different 
antliorship. 

3. These tragedies also show considerable formal talent, fertility 
and vivacity of fancy, and sagacity in psychological observation, though 
these qualities are overlaid by rhetorical phrases. There is no attempt 
at delineating characters, the persons of the drama being merely the 
vehicles of delivering speeches and reciting descriptions. On acount 
of the want of artistic restraint and moderation, this fertility degenerates 
into tiresome loquacity and repetitions, and talent for invention unguided 
by artistic refinement and tact often causes absurdities and nonsense. 
It is quite an error of taste that locaste, in Oedipus 1026 sqq., appears 
once more after the discovery of the terrible secret, converses with 
Oedipus, makes up her mind to die, but then begins a new discussion 
where to strike herself, whether in her chest or neck, but finally de- 
cides for her womb (1060 sq.: hunc, d extra, hunc pete uterum capacem, 
qui virum et gnatos tulit). The metrical treatment deserves most praise 
for following the strictest writers of the Augustan age, especially in 
the senarii. Besides these, anapaestic and Sapphic lines, glyconeans 
and Asclepiadeans are especially frequent. But there are not many 
traces of any perception of connexion between the metre and its dra- 
matic signification. This blemish would be greatly exaggerated, if the 
recent editors were right in assuming strophic arrangement through- 
out the tragedies of Seneca, even sophistical discussions and agitated 
conversations (e. g. Here. fur. 426 — 441) being divided into correspon- 
ding strophes in their text. But this is, after all, but an unfortunate 
crotchet on the part of the editors, who in order to carry out their 
assumption have been obliged to leave aside parts of lines and mono- 
meters, and even to strike out a considerable number of lines. See 
some sensible observations on this point by B. Schmidt in Fleckeisen's 
Jahrb. 99 p. 769—791. 

4. On the character of these tragedies see, besides earlier works 
(e. g. D. H. G. Pilgramm, de vitiis tragoediarum quae v. Senecae tri- 
buuntur, Götti. 1765. 4.) especially F. Jacobs, Supplements to Sulzer IV 
p. 343 sqq. F. G. Welker, Rhein. Mus. Suppl. H 3. p. 1447—1456. L. 
Müller in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 89, p. 409—422. R. Peiper, praefationis 
in Sen. tragoedias nuper editas supplementum (Breslau 1870. 4.) p. 
8 — 27. 



J 



L. Anna ens Seneca. 51 

On the metres of Seneca see F, A. Lange, Quaestiones metricae 
(Bonn 1851) p. 23 sqq. B. Schmidt, de emendandarum Sen. tragoediarum 
rationibus prosodiacis et metricis, Berlin 1860. 73 pp. M. Hoche, the 
metres of Seneca, Halle 1862; cf. L. Müller in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 89, 
p. 473—492 and de re metr. p. 118 — 130. G. Richter, on the compo- 
sition of the choric songs in the tragedies of Seneca, Rh. Mus. XIX p. 
360-379. 521-527. R. Peiper, Berl. Ztschr. f. Gymn. XVIII p. 694 sqq. 

5. It may be asked whether Seneca's tragedies were intended for 
the stage or merely for recitation. The former is not proved by the 
observation, that Seneca keeps within the number of three actors (H. 
Weil, Revue archeol. 1865. I. p. 21 — 35), as this may be the result 
of his general imitation of Greek tragedy, and as the Roman stage did 
not in general observe this limitation (above 16, 3). But on the 
other hand, the period of Nero does not entirely exclude the idea of 
public performance, and several scenic hints (e. g. Phaedr. 392 sq.) 
might relate to this. What could, however, safely be expected was 
recitation and being read by the public, and in fact no other public 
might well have been treated to such lengthy speeches but the Roman 
public of that age. G. Boissier, les tragedies de Seneque ont-elles ete 
representees? Paris 1861. 22 pp. 

6. Most of the Greek plays by Sophocles and Euripides, from which 
Seneca's tragedies are derived, being still extant, we are enabled to 
trace the great exaggeration on the part of the Roman rhetorician. In 
Phaedra he appears to follow a play by Sophocles; C. W. Swahn, de Hip- 
polyto Senecae fabula, I. Holm 1857. Sophocles' Oedipus has been turned 
by Seneca into monotonous horror, a play devoid of all refinement 
but enriched with abundant declamation. J. Köhler, Sen. tragoedia 
quae Oed. inscribitur cum Soph. 0. R. comparata, Neuss 1865. 16 pp. 
4. W. Braun, Seneca's Oedipus compared with Sophocles and Euripides 
and the Thebaid of Statins, Rh. Mus. XXII p. 245—275. On the other 
plays see Widal, etudes sur trois tragedies de Seneque imitees d'Euri- 
pide, Paris 1854. W. Braun, Rh. Mus. XX p. 271—287 (on Seneca^s 
Phoenissae) ; de Sen. fab. q. inscrib. Troades, Wesel 1870. 12 pp. 4. 
Medea et Troades cum adn. Gronov. ed. A. Matthiae, Lips. 1828. 

7. Octavia cannot be by Seneca, because in it Nero's downfall 
is mentioned — an event posterior to Seneca's death by three years. But 
all attempts at discovering the author (e. g. Curiatius Maternus, or the 
author of recensio A) have been fruitless. The play is not contained 
in the principal ms., the Florentine (n. 8), but in all the others, and 
as its text is corrupt, it does not appear advisable to follow W. Braun 
(on the tragedy of Octavia and the time of its composition, Kiel 1863, 
cf. Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 99 p. 875—879) in assigning it to the close of 
the Middle Ages (12—14 century), against which there are also other 
reasons (G. Richter, Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 95 p. 260—264. Edition p. XH). 
It was probably written between the second and fourth century oi the 
Christian era, (incerta post Traianum aetate, Fr. Vater p. 613). Besides 



52 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch, 

Tacitus (and Dio) also Seneca de dementia is used as a source of the 
subject-matter. It is not as pompous and bombastic in diction as the 
tragedies of Seneca, nor is the action confined to three actors, besides 
which it also differs from him in style and metrical peculiarities. It 
may be supposed to have been joined to the plays of Seneca on ac- 
count of its general similarities, and because Seneca himself appears in it. 
F. G. C. Klotzsch, prolusio de Octavia Senecae, Wittenberg 1804. Oc- 
tavia praetexta. Curiatio Materno vindicatam, ad libros antiques re- 
cognitam, brevi adnotatione instructam ed. Fr. Ritter, Bonn 1843. 53 pp. 
Fr. Vater in Jahn's Archiv XIX (1853) p. 565—618. G.Richter, de Sen. 
tragg. auctore (1862) p. 2 — 6. An analysis of this play is given by A. 
Stahr, Agrippina (Berlin 1867) p. 27 L— 303. 

8. The text of the tragedies of Seneca has come down to us in 
two recensions. The better one (E) is represented by the Etruscus 
{==: Florentinus =■ Mediceus r= Laurent.) saec. XI or XII, and by the 
scanty excerpts in the Miscellaneous ms. of Thuanus (above 211, 9) 
saec. IX— X. All the other mss., none of which is older than saec. XIV, 
belong to the inferior class (A); the best representatives of this are 
the Melisseus (now lost) and a Vossianus. Also the arrangement of 
the plays differs in these two classes. The deviation probably arose 
from the emendations of a copyist who experienced difficulties in de- 
cyphering the original ms., but was as a rule satisfied with merely re- 
covering something like sense and metre. But that even A arose in 
a comparatively early time (perhaps saec. IV) appears from the leaves of 
the Ambrosian palimpsest of Plautus (above 86, p. 119), which contain 
parts of Medea and Oed. in this recension. See, in general, the preface 
of the edition of R. Peiper and G. Richter p. XIV— XL. 

9. Editions. Editio princeps, Ferrara c. 1484 fol. Ascensiana (cum 
comm.) Paris 1514 fol. Among later editions we notice those by M. 
A. Delrio (Antverp. 1576. and in t. 11 of his Syntagma tragg. latt., Antv. 
1594. Paris 1620. 4.), J. Lipsius (Lugd. B. 1588), J. Gruter (Heidelberg 
1604), P. Scriverius (Lugd. B. 1621. 1651) and chiefly J. Fr. Gronövius 
(Lugd. B. 1661. Amsterd. 1682). cum notis variorum by J. C. Schröder 
(Delft 1728. 4. 2 vols.). Recent editions by F. H. Bothe (Lips. 1819 
and Lips. 1834), T. Baden (Lips. 1821. 2 vols.), J. Pierrot (1829—1832, 
3 vols,), and especially : recensuerunt R. Peiper et G. Richter, Lips. 
(Teubner) 1867; on which see B. Schmidt, Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 97, p. 
781—800. 855—880. 

10. Contributions to the criticism of these tragedies by J. H. Wit- 
hof (praemetium crucium crit., Lugd. B. 1749. 4.), A. Henneberger (adn. 
ad Sen. Med. et Troad., Meiningen 1862. 4.), R. Peiper (observation, in 
Sen. tragg., Breslau 1863. 4.), G. Richter (Instances of transposition of 
lines and interpolations in the tragedies of Seneca, Rhein. Mus. XVIII 
p. 29—46; de cantico quodam in Oed. Sen., Symbola philol. Bonn. p. 
557 — 580), B. Schmidt (Observationes criticae in Sen. tragg., Jena 1865; 
also Rhein. Mus. XVI p. 589—591). 



L. Annaens Seneca. Historinns under Caligula and Nero. 53 

286. The historians of this age were most of them 
deeply imbued with rhetoric and, as a rule, actually were 
rhetoricians or orators. Such seem to have been the poet 
Gaetulicus under Caligula, and such was Servilius Nonianus 
under Claudius. They wrote on subjects of contemporary 
history or recent events, but are merely known to us from 
quotations. It is the same with Domitius Corbulo under Ca- 
ligula and Nero, who described his personal adventures in 
Asia. Cornelius Bocchus wrote under Claudius a work on 
chronography. 

1. Suet. Calig. 8: Cn. Lentulus Gaetulicus Tiburi genitum scribit 
(of Caligula). . . Gaetulicum refellit Plinius quasi mentitum per adula- 
tionom etc. Consul 779 (Tac. A. IV 46 cf. 42 and VI 30), killed by 
Caligula a. 792 (according to the Fasti Arvales Dio LIX 22 cf. Suet. 
Claud. 9). Mentioned as an erotic poet by Pliny Ep. V 3, 5 (above 26, 1) 
before Seneca, and by Martial praef. (above 238, 2), cf. Sidon. Apoll- 
epp. II 10 (saepe versum . . complevit . , Caesennia cum Gaetulico). 
carm. IX 256 (non Gaetulius hie tibi legetur, non Marsus, Pedo, Silius, 
Tibullus). Probus on Georg. I 227 (p. 38, 12 sqq. K.) : cuius rei testis 
est Gaetulicus, cum ait de Britannis: non aries etc. (three hexameters). 
And as Gaetulicus governed Germany for three years, (Dio 1. 1. rairov- 
ktxoy JivTovkov Tcc Tf akka fvdoxi/uoi/ ovia xal Ttjg rf^f-ictviag dfxcc 
i'lfGtv aQ^avTcc, cf. Suet. Galb. 6), 0. Jahn (Prolegg. to Persius p. CXLII 
not. 1) conjectures that Gaetulicus did not compose an historical work 
but a carmen de expeditionibus Romanorum contra German os et Bri- 
tannos, fortasse Germanici. To the nine epigrams rcarovkixov or r«t- 
rovkixtov or riurvkkiov etc. in the Greek Anthology (11 p. 151 ed. Jacobs) 
we cannot apply the reports concerning the poetry of Gaetulicus; see 
Jacobs Anth. gr. XIII p. 896. 

2. Plin. n. h. XXVIII 2, 5: M. Servilius Nonianus, princeps 
civitatis (employed a superstitious remedy against lippitudo). XXXVII 
6, 21 : avus Servilii Noniani, quern consulem (a. 788, Tac. A. VI 31) 
vidimus. Was he an adopted son of the Consul 756 (W. Teuffel in 
Pauly's Enc. VI 1. p. 1122, Nr. 78)? f 812 = 59 A. D., see Tac. A. XIV 
19 (above 271, 5). Quintil. X 1, 102: Servilius Nonianus, . . qui et ipse 
a nobis auditus est, clari vir ingenii et sententiis creber, sed minus 
pressus quam historiae auctoritas postulat. Cf. Tac. dial. 23 (eloquentia 
. . Servilii Noniani). Plin. Ep. I 13, 3: memoria parentum Claudium 
Caesarem ferunt, cum in palatio spatiaretur audissetque clamorem, cau- 
sam requisisse, cumque dictum esset recitare Nonianum, subitum reci- 
tanti inopinatumque venisse. On his relation to Persius see below 297, 2. 

3. Tac. A. XV 16: prodiderit Corbulo etc. This may have been 
in the Memoirs composed by Cn. Domitius Corbulo (Cons. suff. under 
Caligula a. 39 — 792, executed by Nero a. 67 = 820); cf. Plin. n. h. 



54 . The First Centuiy of the Imperial Epoch. 

V 24, 83 : oritur (Euphrates) etc., ut prodidere ex iis qui proxime 
viderant Domitius Corbulo. VI 8, 23 : anxia perquisita cura rebus nuper 
in eo situ gestis a Domitio Corbulone. II 70, 180: Corbulo dux in Ar- 
menia . . prodidit. On him see A. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. II p. 1218 
sq. Held, de Cn. Dom. Corb., Schweidnitz 1862. 27 pp. 4. E. Egli in 
M. Büdinger's Essays on Roman Imperial history (1868) I p. 336—343. 

4. Cornelius Bocchus is mentioned by Pliny in his ind. auct. in b. 
16 and 37, also (as Bocchus) in b. 33 and 34, and is quoted XV 216. 
XXXVII 24. 97. 127 in statements concerning Spain, perhaps from a 
work de admirandis Hispaniae (Mommsen). Solinus p. 27, 3 (ut Bocchus 
auctor est) and p. 38, 22 (Bocchus autumat), cf. p. 37, 8 M., quotes him 
in chronological statements which are not found in Pliny himself; 
whence Mommsen, Solin. p. XVII, supposes that Solinus' source (see 
below 307, 7) employed also a chronicle by Bocchus (of the time of 
Claudius). E. Hübner (Hermes I p. 397) identifies him with L. Corne- 
lius C. f. Bocchus, flamen prov., trib. mil., to whom the colonia Scalla- 
bitana ob merita in coloniam erected a monument, according to an 
inscription C. I. lat. II 35. 

287. Q. Curtius Rufus who wrote under Claudius ten 
books historiae Alexandri Magni, of which, however, the first 
two have not come down to us, was also a rhetorician. His 
work bears small traces of historical criticism, but more of 
rhetoric, and attests great predilection for speeches andsentences. 
His style bears a certain resemblance to that of Seneca: short 
and antithetically pointed sentences, a sparing use of particles, 
rhetorical order of words, and numerous phrases of poetical 
colouring. 

2. Suetonius had mentioned Q. Curtius Rulus among hisrhetores 
after M. Porcius Latro and before L. Valerius Primanus, Verginius 
Flavus and others; see Reifferscheid's edition p. 99, cf. 128. This agrees 
with assuming the date of the work in the reign of Claudius, in con- 
sequence of X 9 (= 28), 3 — 6: quod imperium sub uno stare potuisset, 
dum a pluribus sustinetur, ruit. proinde iure meritoque pop. rem. sa- 
lutem se principi suo debere profitetur, qui noctis quam paene supre- 
mam habuimus novum sidus inluxit. (4.) huius, hercule, non solis ortus 
lucem caliganti reddidit mundo, cum sine suo capite discordia mem- 
bra trepidarent. (5.) quot ille tum extinxit faces, quot condidit gladios ! 
quantam tempestatem subita serenitate discussit! non ergo revirescit 
solum sed etiam floret imperium. (6.) absit modo invidia, excipiet huius 
saeculi tempora eiusdem domus utinam perpetua, certe diuturna, poste- 
ritas. (7.) ceterum, ut ad ordinem a quo me contemplatio publicae 
felicitatis averterat redeam, Perdicca etc. This passage is most con- 
veniently understood of the events in the night of January 24/25 41, 
when Caligula was assassinated, his German guard killing peaceful 



citizens, and the Senate thinking of the resuscitation of the Republic, 
until Claudius' elevation to the throne restored everything- to the old 
order of things. Miitzell's edition I p. XLVII— LXXXI. W. Teuffel, 
Studies and Characteristics p. 387 — 390. So also BrissoniuSj J. Lipsius, 
Tellier, St. Croix. J. D. Gerlach, Th. Wiedemann (who renders it pro- 
bable that Curt. VIII 10, 27 sqq. was the source of Sen. ep. VI 7 (59), 
12), A. Hug, and A. Eussner. 

2. With regard to other assumptions concerning the age of Cur- 
tius, we may mention that placing him under Augustus (recently de- 
fended by A. Hirt, C. G. Zumpt, R. Klotz) and the one according to 
which he lived under Vespasian (Rutgers, P'reinsheim, G. J. Voss, F. 
A. Wolf, Ph. Buttmann, G. Pinzger, A. Baumstark, Fr. Ritter, Fr. Kritz, 
W. Berger). But placing him under Augustus is incompatible with the 
style of Curtius which does indeed resemble that of Livy owing to his 
elaborate imitation of that writer's manner, but the affected, poetical 
and rhetorical manner of which clearly points to the silver age. Curtius' 
political notions are based on hereditary monarchy. He repeatedly 
mentions (V 7, 9. VI 3, 12) the Parthian Empire without speaking of 
Augustus' successes, as the Augustan writers invariably do. Last of all, 
it would on this assumption be impossible to explain the full purport 
of the principal passage X 9, 3 sqq. If we were to understand it of 
Vespasian, we should have to refer it to combats on the Capitol, though 
subita would then be left unexplained. Auother passage, IV 4, 21 on 
Tyrus, is less favourable to this assumption : nunc tandem, longa pace 
cuncta refovente, sub tutela romanae mansuetudinis adquiescit. Nie- 
buhr's (Trans, of the Ac. at Berlin, 1822 =^ Minor Writings I p. 305 
— 337) opinion that Curtius wrote in the reign of Septimius Severus, 
was paradoxical. A. Hirt, on the life of the historian Q. Curtius Rufus, 
Berlin 1820. Ph. Buttmann, on the reading of C. R., Berlin 1820. G- 
Pinzger, on the age of C. R., in Seebode's Archiv I (1824) p. 91—104. 
Fr. Kritz in the Halle AUg. Lit. Ztg. 1844 p. 326 sq. 733 sqq. W. Berger, 
de Q. C. R. aetate, Carlsruhe 1860. 31 pp. Th. Wiedemann, on the age 
of C. R., Philologus XXX p. 241-264, cf. p. 441—443. L. Enssner, 
ibid. XXXII p. 157—160. 

3. Among his sources Curtius mentions Clitarchus (IX 5, 21. 8, 15. 
Cf. Schöne, Anal, philol. 1 p. 50), Timagenes and Ptolomaeus (IX 5, 21). 
Cf. R. Petersdorff, Diodorus, Curtius, Arrianus quibus ex fontibus expe- 
ditiones ab Alexandre . . factas hauserint (Danzig 1870. 32 pp.), and 
A. Eussner, Philol. XXXII p. 161 sq. (who shows that C. used Clitar- 
chus only at second hand). Curtius does not lay claim to historical 
criticism; see VII 8, 11 (utcumque sunt tradita incorrupta perferemus). 
IX 1, 34 (equidem plura transscribo quam credo; nam nee adfirmare 
Bustineo de quibus dubito, nee subducere quae accepi.) A feeble at- 
tempt at criticism is made IX 5, 21. The chief parts are speeches, de- 
scriptions and ornamental pieces (such as IV 10, 25 sqq. V 12). He 
treats history like a novel. A. Chassang, histoire du roman (Paris 
1862) p. 323-322. His descriptions of battles manifest small technical 



56 The tirst Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

knowledge, whence it appears improbable that the author was identical 
with that Curtius Rufus who was procos. Africae under Tiberius. An iden- 
tity of this kind would also be incompatible with the historian's pro- 
portionate candour and frequently (e. g. VIII 10, 12) pronounced liberty 
of thought. He speaks against superstition, magic etc: IV 3, 23. 6, 12. 
7, 26. 29. V 4, 1 sq. VII 4, 8. 7, 8. His positive belief is the usual 
fatalism (inevitabile fatum IV 6, 17). Adulatio, perpetuum malum regum, 
quorum opes saepius adsentatio quam hostis evertit, VIII 5, 6. 

4. The diction of Curtius with regard to etymological, lexical and 
syntactical treatment, and excepting a few insignificant peculiarities, 
retains the character of classicality, but its rhetorical colouring evidently 
betrays the bad influence necessarily attending the writer's course of 
study and the depraved taste of his time (Mützell p. LXXXVI). Mützell, 
de translationum quae vocantur apud Curtium usu, Berlin 1842. 4. J. 
H. Ernesti, usurpata a Curtio in particulis latinitas, tarn in se spectata 
quam cum Corneliana dictione collata, Lips. 1719. See the comparison 
with Quintilian's diction in Bonnell's Lex. Quintil. p. LXV. LXVIII. On 
the peculiarities shared by Curtius and Tacitus with Livy see Th. Wie- 
demann, Philol. XXXI p. 342—348. See E. Krah, Curtius as a school- 
author, I Instorburg 1870. 30 pp. 4. IL 1871. 24 pp. 4. 

5. The about 80 mss. of Curtius are divided into two classes, an 
older one (saec. IX— XI) represented by Paris. 5716 saec. IX (or X) 
and some fragments at Zurich (Rheinau), Darmstadt, Vienna, and Würz- 
burg, and also by Leidensis, Vossianus I, Flor. A and Bern. A ; see E. 
Hedicke, Quaestionum Curtianarum specimen (Berlin 1862) and praef. 
of his edition, and De codicum Curtii fide atque auctoritate, Bernburg, 
1870. 32 pp. 4., also A. Eussner, specimen criticum (Würzburg 1868) p- 
4—25, and on the criticism of Curtius, in the Trans, of the Philol. 
Congress at Würzburg (Leipzig 1869) p. 158 — 160. All these mss. are 
derived from an archetype which was both defect and corrupt. The 
second class embraces the large number of late (saec. XIV sq.) cor- 
rected and interpolated mss. without independent value. Besides the 
absence of b. I and II we have also other gaps in the extant text, 
e. g. at the end of b. V and beginning of VI, also X 3 sq. Fragments 
of b. X are contained in Pseudo-Callisthenes; see Jeep in Jahn's Jahrb. 
LXXI p. 125 — 132. On the Einsiedeln fragment see A. Hug, Philol. 
XXXI p. 334 sq. Cf. Eussner ibid. XXXH p. 162-165 (on C. in the 
Middle Ages) and 165—171. 

6. Ed. princepp, Venet. c. 1471 fol. luntina 1507 sqq. Aldina 1520. 
Editions by Erasmus (1518), Fr. Modius (Colon. 1579), J. Freinsheim 
(cum conim. et suppl., Strasburg 1648, 2 vols, and 1670. 4.), H. Snaken- 
])urg (cum notis var. Delft 1724. 4.), Fr. Schmieder (cum comm. 
Getting. 1803), J. Mützell (with crit. and exeget. notes, Berlin 1841, 
2 vols.) and especially by C. G. Zumpt (ad fidem codd. rec. et comm. 
instr., Brunswick 1849 and even before an unfinished edition Berol. 
1826). School-editions by J. Mützell (Berlin 1843) and C. G. Zumpt 



I 



Curtius Rufiis. Colvmella. 57 

(Brunswick 1849. 1864). Texts by A. Baumstark (Stuttgart 1829), H. E. 
Fobs (Lips. Teubner 1851) and especially (with brief critical notes) by 
E. Hedicke (Berol. Weidmann 1867). 

7. Contributions to the criticism of the text by Acidalius (Animad- 
vers., Frankfurt 1594), H. E. Foss (Epist. crit. ad Mützell., Altenburg 
1846. 4. Quaestiones Curt., Altenburg 1852. 50 pp. 4.), J. Schmidt 
(Quaest. Curt. I. Schweidnitz 1853. 4.), A. Hug (in the Contributions to 
the criticism of Latin prose-writers, Basle 1864, p. 1 — 20; and Rhein. 
Mus. XX. p. 117—129) also Quaestionum Curt, pars I, Zurich 1870. 4. 
U. Köhler (Rhein. Mus. XIX p. 184—196), J. Jeep (Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 
91, p. 189—196), H. Alanus (Observationes in Curt., Dublin 1865), E. 
Hedicke and A. Eussner (n. 5), E. Grünauer (Frauenfeld 1870. 4.), Th. 
Vogel (Fleckeisen's Jahrb. lOl, p. 547-561), A. Eussner (Philol. XXXII 
p. 172-178). 

288. The contemporary and compatriot of Seneca L. 
Junius Moderatus Columella of Gades, is known to us by 
his twelve books De re rustica, addressed to P. Silvinus. They 
are his second work on this subject-matter, while of the first we 
still possess a book de arboribus. Columella is an enthusiast 
for his subject and complains of its being neglected by his 
age which had deserted nature. Hence he uses his ut- 
most endeavour to treat his subject in a worthy manner. The 
tenth book, on horticulture, he has even, in imitation of Virgil, 
written in verse; it consists of 436 well-made hexameters, in 
which, however, the author has not even approached his model 
as regards the artistic arrangement of his materials. 

1. An inscription from Tarentum in Mommsen 1. R. N. 578 = 
Orelli-Henzen 5598: L. lunia L. f. Gal. Moderato Columellae, trib. mil. 
leg. VI ferratae. And indeed Columella's native town, Gades (Colum. X 
185: mea quam generant Tartessi littore Gades, cf. VH 2, 4), belonged 
to the tribus Galeria, and the legio VI ferrata was stationed in Syria 
(Grotefend in Pauly's Enc. IV p. 883 sq.), where Columella staid for 
some time (II 10, 18: hoc quidem semen Ciliciae Syriaeque regionibus 
ipse vidi mense lunio lulioque conseri et per autumnum . . tolli). C. L. 
Grotefend, Zeitschr. f. d. Alt. Wiss. 1835, p. 179. His patruus was M. 
Columella, doctissimus et diligentissimus agricola (II 16, 4), vir illustribus 
disciplinis eruditus ac diligentissimus agricola Baeticae provinciae (V 
5, 15), acris vir ingenii atque illustris agricola in the municipium Ga- 
ditanum (VII 2, 4). Cf. XII 21, 4 sq. 40, 2. 43, 5. He was a contem- 
porary of Seneca's; see III 3. 3: Nomentana regio, . . quam possidet 
Seneca, vir excellentis ingenii atque doctrinae. Hence it appears that 
Columella wrote before the death of Seneca (a. 65), and probably after 
his retirement from Court, i. e. perhaps a. 62; cf. Plin. n. h. XIV 49—51. 



58 The First Centui^ of the Imperial Epoch. 

E. Meyer, Hist, of Botany II p. 59—62. At all events, Columella wrote 
after Celsus and Graecinus, both of whom he quotes (see above 275, 1 
and 278, 5 sq.) and before Pliny the Elder, by whom he is frequently 
quoted (VIII 153. XV 66. XVII 51 sq. 137. 162. XVIII 70. 303. XIX 68). 
See also Colum. I. praef. 15: sicut M. Varro iam temporibus avorum 
conquestus est. I 7, 3: ipse nostra memoria veterem consularem (A. 
D. 3) virumque opulentissimum L. Volusium (f 56 A. D.) asseverantem 
audivi. V 1, 2: cum M. Trebellius noster a me requireret (perhaps the 
lieutenant of a. 36 mentioned by Tac. A. VI 41?). IX 16, 2: Gallioni 
nostro (f 65 A. D., see above 263, 7 fin.) P. Silvinus seems to have been 
a countryman and neighbour of Columella's; see III 3, 3 (in nostris 
Ceretanis). 9, 6 (a me . . ex una vite quam in Ceretano tuo possides 
. . consummata). Columella possessed estates in Italy, see III 9, 2 (cum 
et in Ardeatino agro quem multis temporibus ipsi ante possedimus et 
in Carseolano itemque in Albano . . vites . . habuerimus). 

2. His works. XI 1, 31 : contra quam observationem multis argu- 
mentationibus disseruisse me non infitior in iis libris quos adyersus 
astrologos composueram. II 22, 5 sq. : certum habeo quosdam . . desi- 
deraturos lustrationum ceterorumque sacrificiorum quae pro frugibus 
fiunt morem priscis usurpatum. nee ego abnuo docendi curam, sed 
dififero in eum librum quem componere in animo est cum agricolationis 
totam di«ciplinam perscripsero. We do not know whether this intention 
was carried out. At all events we should not connect with it the 
mistake XVI instead of XII in Cassiod. div. lect. 28 (Columella XVI libris 
per diversas agriculturae species eloquens ac tacunde illabitur). Colum. 
II 11, 1 (excepta cytiso, de qua dicemus in iis libris quos de generibus 
surculorum conscripsimus) relates to b. IH— V (especially V 12) which 
in the Florentine (Medic.) ms. bear the heading: Surcularis I, II, IH. 

3. Both b. Ill treats de arboribus (III 1, 1: sequitur arborum cura 
etc.) and also a book specially so entitled and which is designated as 
the second (quoniam de cultu agrorum abunde primo volumine prae- 
cepisse videmur, non intempestiva erit arborum . . cura) but contains 
in a shorter form the same as the books III — V, and is not dedicated 
to Silvinus. That is does not belong to the twelve books appears, more- 
over, from the consistent and accurate disposition given in them, e. g. 
VIII 1, 1 (quae exigebat ratio septem memoravimus libris). X. praef. 
1 (superioribus novem libris). XI 1, 2 (hoc undecimum praeceptum 
rusticationis tradidi). XII 13, 1 (cui septimo libro praecepta dedimua 
= VII 8). The extensive work was no doubt intended to fill the place 
of the shorter one, and it is mere accident that we possess also part of 
the latter. It seems to have been dedicated to Eprius Marcellus 
(Schneider's edition p. 19. and II 2. p. 673 sq.). 

4. The twelve books have come down to us in their complete form 
and in the order chosen by the author himself, as appears from the 
regular prefaces: see n. 3 and the closing words XII 57, 6 (clausulam 
peracti operis mei). The first ten corresponded perhaps to four of the 



Columella. 59 

first edition (n. 3), and to these two further books were added owing 
to personal causes; see XI 1, 2: quod nunc aggredior . . primo rei 
rusticae libro (I 8 sq.) videbar aliquatenus executus ; . . tarnen . . nu- 
merum quern iam quasi consummaveram voluminum excessi etc. XJI 

1, 1 : ut institutum ordinem teneamus quern priore volumine (XI) incho- 
avimus. But also the preceding books would seem to have been sent 
to P. Silvinus one after the other, as the prefaces prefixed to b. II, 
IV and V relate to observations made on the former books. The author 
does not consider his subject exhausted; see V 1, 1 neque infitior ali- 
qua me praeteriisse, quamvis inquirentem sedulo quae nostri saecuH 
cultores quaeque veteres litterarum monumentis prodiderunt; sed . . 
non asseveraveram quae vastitas eius scientiae contineret cuncta me 
dicturum, sed plurima. . . (2.) nobis satis abundeque est tarn diffusae 
materia . . maximam partem tradidisse. XII 57, 6: nihil dubitasse me 
paene infinita esse quae potuerint huic inseri materiae, verum ea quae 
maxime videbantur necessaria memoriae tradenda censuisse. But he 
also takes a very comprehensive view of his task; see I praef. 21 sqq.: 
ego cum aut magnitudinem totius rei . . aut partium eius . . numerum 
recenseo vereor ne supremus ante me dies occupet quam universam 
disciplinam ruris possim cognoscere. nam qui se in hac scientia per- 
fectum volet profiteri sit oportet rerum naturae sagacissimus etc, (32.) 
ille quem nos perfectum esse volumus agricolam . . multum tarnen pro- 
fecerit si usu Tremellios Sasernasque et Stolones nostros aequaverit. 
(33.) . . illud procul vero est . . facillimam esse nee ullius acuminis 
rusticationem. Quite in the true Roman style is IX 2, 5: haec et his 
similia magis scrutantium rerum naturae latebras quam rusticorum est 
inquirere. studiosis quoque litterarum gratiora sunt ista in otio legen- 
tibus quam negotiosis agricolis, quoniam neque in opere neque in re 
familiari quidquam iuvant. But Columella appears throughout as a 
well-educated person fully capable of treating his subject in a dignified 
and worthy manner (Isidor. Orig. XVII, 1, 1: Columella insignis orator, 
qui totum corpus disciplinae eiusdem complexus est). He is also fully 
alive to its moral bearing. He repeatedly praises ancient Rome and 
complains of the spreading of unnaturalness (I praef. 14 sqq. X praef. 

2. XII praef. 8 sq.). The depravation of the soil is, in his opinion, 
due to man himself (II 1, 7: non fatigatione . . nee senio, sed nostra 
inertia minus benigne nobis arva respondent). 

5. Colum. IX 16, 2: quae reliqua nobis rusticarura rerum pars su- 
perest, de cultu hortorum, P. Silvine, deinceps ita ut et tibi et GalHoni 
nostro complacuerat in carmen conferemus. X praef. 3 : cultus hortorum 
. . diligentius nobis quam tradiderunt maiores praecipiendus est; isque 
. . prosa oratione prioribus subnecteretur exordiis, nisi propositum 
meum expugnasset frequens postulatio tua, quae pervicit ut poeticis 
numeris explerem Georgici carminis omissas partes, quas tamen et ipse 
VergiHus significaverat (Georg. IV 148) posteris post se memoranda» 
relinquere. neque enim aliter istud nobis fuerat audendum quam ex 
voluntate vatis maxime venerandi. (4.) cuius quasi numine instigante 



60 The first Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

. . aggressi sumus tenuem admodiim . . materiam. X 433 sq.: hactenus 
arvorum cultus, Silvine, docebam, siderei vatis referens praecepta 
Maronis. 

6. Columella's work is not often quoted ; besides Pliny and Gar- 
gilius Martialis only by Serv. Aen. Ill 540. It was copied by Palladius, 
whose work was more suited to the rough taste of a later time. There 
are, however, not a small number of mss. of Columella's work extant, 
though they have not yet been properly employed. The best are the 
Sangermanensis at Paris and the Florentine. See the prefaces of Gesner 
(p. IX sq.) and J. G. Schneider. 

7. Editions in the collections of the scriptores rei rusticae; see 
above 44, 2. A separate edition by J. H. Ress, Flensburg 1795. Book 
X also in Wernsdorf s poetae lat. min, VI p. 31 — 134. 

8. On Columella see E. H. F. Meyer, Hist, of Botany 11 p. 58— 
67, and a list of the more than 400 plants mentioned by Columella 
ibid. p. 68—80. 

289. Famous physicians in the reign of Claudius were 
Stertinius and Vettius Valens. As a writer on this subject we 
know Scribonius Largus, of whom we possess a treatise 
(dedicated to Callistus c. a. 47) on approved remedies (com- 
positiones medicamentorum or medicae), which though not fi'ee 
from the general superstition of the period, is still not alto- 
gether nonsensical and in tolerable style. 

1. Plin. n. h. XXIX 1,7: multos praetero medicos, celeberrimosque 
ex his Cassios, Arruntios, Rubrics, ducena quinquagena HS annua his 
mercedes fuere apud principes. Q. Stertinius imputavit principibus 
quod sestertiis quingenis anuuis contentus esset, sescena enim sibi 
quaestu urbis fuisse enumeratis domibus ostendebat. (8.) par et fratris 
eius merces a Claudio Caesare infusa est. . . exortus deinde est Vet- 
tius Valens, adulterio Messalinae Claudii Caesaris nobilitatus pari- 
terque eloquentia. adsectatores et potentiam nanctus novam instituit 
sectam. Cf. Tac. A. XI 31. 35 (Vettium Valentem confessum . . tradi 
ad supplicium iubet, A. D. 48). Sen. apocol. 13, 4 (Vettius Valens, 
Fabius, eq. rom. quos Narcissus duci iusserat.) Cf. n. 2. He was no 
doubt a native of Ariminum; see Pauly's Enc. VI 2 p. 2533 sq. nr. 24 
sqq. Cael. Aurel. Ill 1 : Valens physicus libro HI Curationum. 

2. Scribon. Larg. 23, 97: Tiberio Caesari per libellum scriptum 
. . venit in manus nostras, cf. 28, 120. 42, 163: vidi . . cum Britanniam 
peteremus (a. 43) cum deo nostro Caesare. 11, 60: Messalina dei nostri 
Caesaris hoc utitur (f 48). 22, 94: hoc medicamentum Apuiei Ceisi 
fuit, praeceptoris Valentis et nostri, et nunquam ulli se vivo compositi- 
onem eius dedit. 43, 171 : antidotus Apuiei Celsi praeceptoris, quam 
. . mittebat Centuripas, unde ortus erat. See E. Meyer, Hist, of Botany 



1 



8cribonnif Laran,«. 61 

II p. 21 — 23. 28. Scribon. 44, 175: accepimus a Tryphone, praeceptore 
nostro. The agnomen of Designatianus rests on a doubtful combination. 

3. Scrib. Larg. praef. : (1) . . Heropliilus, Cai luli Calliste, fertur 
dixisse etc. (22) . . a me compositiones qaasdam petiisti. (23) cupio 
medius fidius . . tuae in me . . benevolentiae respondere, adiutus omni 
tempore a te, praecipue vero his diebus. . . tradenda scripta mea 
latina medicinalia deo nostro Caesari. (24) . . divinis manibus lau- 
dando consecrasti. . , (25) ignosces autem si paucae visae tibi fuerint 
compositiones et non ad omnia vitia scriptae, bumus enim, iit scis, 
peregre nee sequitur nos nisi necessarius admodum numerus libellorum. 
. . (26) initium a capite faciemus, . . dantes operam ut simplicia primo 
ponamus. (37) . . deinde medicamentorum quibus compositiones con- 
stant nomina et pondera vitiis subiunximus. 4, 38 : neque illud dico 
novas et non aliquibus notas in hoc libro congesturum compositiones 
verum etiam quasdam divulgatas et, ut ita dicam, publicatas. Epilogue: 
harum compositionum . . ipse composui plurimas, . . valde paucas ab 
amicis. . . illud autem te meminisse oportet, mi Calliste, . . eadem 
medicamenta in iisdem vitiis interim meHus deteriusve respondere, 
propter corporum varietatem differentiamque aetatum, temporum aut 
locorum. 

4. The following passages may serve to furnish a general charac- 
teristic of the author. Scrib. Larg. praef. 9: medicis, in quibus nisi 
plenus misericordiae et humanitatis animus est . . diis et hominibus 
invisi esse debent. (10) . . quia medicina non fortuna neque personis 
homines aestimat, verum aequaliter omnibus implorantibus auxilia sua 
succursuram se pollicetur. His sources were for the most part Greek 
writers, chiefly Soranus ; he mentions Hippocrates, Herophilus, Ascle- 
piades (noster e. g. 75), Andron, among the Romans Cassius, Paccius 
Antiochus and others (n. 2). Some peculiarities of popular superstition 
are also mentioned by him; cf. e. g. 2, 17: item ex iecinore gladiatoris 
iugulati particulam aliquam novies datam consumant (epilectic patients), 
quaeque eiusdem generis sunt extra medicinae professionem cadunt, 
quamvis profuisse quibusdam visa sunt. 28, 122: hoc medicamento 
muliercula quaedam Romae ex Africa multos remediavit. postea nos 
. . compositionem accepimus, pretio dato quod desideraverat, et ali- 
quot non ignotos sanavimus. 43, 172: hoc ego cum quaererem ab 
hospite meo, legato inde (from Crete) misso, nomine Zopyro, Gordiense 
medico, quid esset pro magno munere accepi. 23, 105: stomachi vitium 
quod . . inrequiebili, ut ita dicam, et inextinguibili siti consistit arovov 
Graeci vocant. One of his usual expressions is facit bene. "We possess 
271 prescriptions, but the text has been preserved in one only ms. in 
a corrupt condition with many gaps (cf. 72. 177. 236), which may 
however be filled up from Calenus and Marcelius who have employed 
Scribonius, the latter even merely copying him. 

5. Editions, besides the collections of Aldus (1547) and Stephanus 
(1567) by J. Ruellius (ap. Wechel, Paris 1529 fol.) and especially J. 



62 The first Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Rhodius (Patav. 1655. 4.), also J. M. Bernhold (ad edit. Rhod., Argen- 
torati 1786). 0. Sperling's ms. notes ad Scrib. are at the Royal library 
at Copenhague ; specimens of them have been published by Kühn in 
three programs. Lips. 1825 sq. 4. 

6. Choulant, Manual of Bibliography, sec. ed., p. 180 sq. E. H. 
F. Meyer, Hist, of Botany II (Königsb. 1855) p. 26—39. 

290. The learned Q. Asconius (c. 3.-88 A. D.) devoted 
his studies to the classical writers, especially Cicero, Sallust, 
and Virgil. We still possess, though in a somewhat impaired 
condition, his historical commentaries on five speeches of 
Cicero, works of high value and which are written in a very 
good style. This cannot at all be said of the Scholia on 
Cicero's Verrinae, which bear his name unjustly. The Scholia 
Bobiensia, in which the original commentary of Asconius was 
perhaps used, are more useful. 

1. Hieron. on Eus. cliron. ad a. Abr. 2092 = Vespas. 8 (Freher. 
as early as 2091) : Q. Asconius Pedianus scriptor historicus (Suetonius 
had treated of him among the historici, between Fenestella and the 
elder Pliny, p. 91 Rfisch.) clarus habetur, qui LXXIII aetatis suae 
anno captus luminibus XII postea annis in summo omnium honore con- 
senescit. This date necessarily applies to the loss of his eyesight, but 
Asconiusj must have flourished under Claudius and Nero. In Suidas, v. 
'AnCxiog, Idaxojt/iog, Uatdiapog appears as early as a. 781 = 28 A. D. 
(under Tiberius), together with Junius Blaesus; cf. Ascon. ad Scaur, 
p. 27 Or. : possidet (Scaurus' house) nunc Largus Licinius, qui cos. fuit 
cum Claudio (a. 795 = 42 A. D.). He is quoted by Plin. n. h. VII 48, 
159 (auctor est Pedianus Asconius) and Quintil. I 7, 24 (ex Pediano 
comperi, cf. V 10, 9). Ascon. ad Cornel, p. 76 Or. (Livius noster) ; 
which seems to indicate that he was a native of Patavium. Serv. on 
Vergil. Eel. Ill 105 (Asconius Pedianus dicit se Vergilium dicentem 
audisse) is rectified by Philargyr. and Schol. Bern. ibid, (dicit Cornif» 
or Cornel, se audivisse Vergilium etc.); Ribbeck Prolegg. Vergil, p. 97 sq, 

2. Aero on Hor. S. I 2, 41 (p. 29 Hth.) : quem (Sallust) Asconius 
Pedianus in vita eius significat. A work contra obtrectatores Vergilii; 
see above 221, 3 fin. 224, 6. To this may be referred all statements of 
Asconius on Virgil, without assuming a real commentary on Virgil ; 
Suringar hist. cr. schol. lat. II p. 206 — 212. His commentary on the 
speeches of Cicero was addressed to his sons (p. 44 Or.: vestra aetas, 
lilii, facit; cf. vos ib. p. 12. 14 sq. 26 sq. 45. 68 and elsewhere) chiefly 
in explanation of the subject-matter and historical relations and derived 
from the best sources (Madvig p. 63 sqq. Klotz. Lat. lit. I. p. 109 — 111) 
with much accurary and sagacity. From the references made in the 
extant parts Asconius appears to have commented on most (or all) of 



Asconius. 63 

the speeches of Cicero in the same manner; cf. Gell. XV 28, 4. We 
possess — though in a fragmentary shape — commentaries on the 
speeches in Pisonem, pro Scauro, pro Milone, pro Cornelio and in toga 
Candida. Poggio found them at St. Gall a. 1416 and made of them 
a hasty copy now at Florence, the St. Gall original being soon after- 
wards again lost. The editions from this copy (Madvig p. 33 sqq., in 
Orelli V p. I — XIII) are mostly interpolated: Ed. princeps Venet. 1477; 
others by P. Manutius (Ven. 1547 etc.), Fr. Hotomannus (Lugd. 1551), 
T. Popma (Colon. 1578), Th. Crenius (Lugd. 1698), Jac. Gronovius (Lugd. 
Bat. 1692. 2 vols. 4.) and in the editions of Cicero by C. G. Schütz and 
Orelli-Baiter (V 2. p. 1—95). Critical contributions by Rinkes, Mne- 
mosyne X and XI. 

3. The commentaries on the Verrinae (including the divinatio) are 
principally grammatical, while the others are historical; besides which 
difference, the notes on the Verrinae contain little not known to us 
from other sources or even deserving of special notice ; they are 
moreover, written in a discursive style and unclassical diction, nor are 
they are addressed to a plurality of persons (e. g. p. 119 Or.: primarum, 
subaudi partium). If the author of those notes (at the very earliest in 
the fourth century of the Christian era) had employed Asconius' com- 
mentary on these speeches, he would appear to have used him with- 
out discrimination and translated him into his own manner of style. 
Cf. Madvig p. 84 sqq. The commentaries are printed in Orelli's edition 
V. 2 p. 97-213. 

4. Much less poor (a circumstance in favour of the assumption 
that they are partly derived from Asconius), but not at all to be com- 
pared with the genuine Asconius in historical and exegetical importance 
and polished diction are the fragments first published by Aug. Mai 
from a palimpsest of Bobbio (the first part of which is at present in 
the Vatican, the second in the Ambrosian library) containing notes on 
some Ciceronian speeches (pro Flacco, cum in senatu gratias egit, cum 
populo gratias egit, pro Plancio, Milone, Sestio, in Vatinium, in Clodium 
et Curionem, de acre al. Milonis, de rege alexandrino, pro Archia, 
Sulla, in Catil. IV, pro Marcello, Ligario, Deiotaro, Scauro), generally 
called Scholia Bobiensi a. A. Mai in his first edition (Mediol. 1814 
= Frankf. 1815; cum Maii notis edid. Cramer et Heinrich, Kiel 1816. 
4.) attributed them to Asconius (comm. antiquus ineditus qui videtur 
Asconii Pediani), but recalled this in the second edition (Auctores 
classici e vaticanis codd. editi. Vol. II. Rome 1828). It is indeed im- 
possible to place these Scholia in an earlier period than the fourth 
or fifth century. See e. g. p. 286 Or.: quos nunc vulgo muliones di- 
cimus, . . eos veteres, ut animadvertis, redarios dicebant. That the 
author belonged to the Christian rehgion, appears from p. 256, 9 Or. 
(secundum veterem superstitionem). Edited by Orelli V 2 (Mai's prae- 
fatio etc. p. 217—228) p. 228—376. Cf. Madvig p. 142 sqq. 

5. Suringar, historia critica schol. lat. I p. 116—146. The principal 
work on A. is: J. N. Madvig, de Q. Asconio Pediano et aliorum veterum 



64 The first Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

interpretum in Cic, orationes commentariis disp. critica, Copenhagen 
1828; with an Appendix critica, ib. 1828. Gräfenhan, History' of clas- 
sical philology IV p. 292—298. 

29l. Under Caligula or Claudius, Pomponius Mela of 
Tingentera in Spain wrote his three books de chronographia, 
the earliest account of the ancient world which we possess. 
This brief treatise is derived from good sources, well-arranged 
and very complete. Besides geography, the author has paid 
much attention to statements on manners and customs. His 
style shows the influence of rhetorical training, and his arrange- 
ment of words, his constructions and the somewhat abrupt 
formation of his sentences clearly attest the contemporary 
of Seneca. 

1. Mela II 96: Carteia . . atque unde nos sumus Tingentera. Ill 
49: Britannia qualis sit . . mox certiora dicentur. quippe tamdiu clausam 
aperit ecce principum maximus, nee indomitarum modo ante se verum 
ignotarum quoque gentium victor propriarum rerum fidem ut bello ad- 
fectavit ita triumpho declaraturus portat. This is an allusion either 
to Caligula's triumph on Britain (A. D. 40), or (more probably) to that 
of Claudius (a. 44). Ill 90: Eudoxus quidam avorum nostrorum 
temporibus cum Lathyrum regem (A. D. 117 — 81). Alexandriae pro- 
fugeret. 

2. Phny quotes Mela, Pomponius Mela, and Mela Pomponius among 
his sources in b. Ill — VI, VIII, XII sq., XXI sq. of his nat. hist. He 
is also cited by Schol. luv. II 160 and Serv. Aen. IX 31, and employed, 
though never mentioned, by Solinus. Mela himself mentions as his 
sources Hipparchus (III 70), Hanno (HI 90, 94) and Cornelius Nepos 
(HI 45: Corn. N. ut recentior, auctoritate sic certior; cf. ib. 90). The 
number of the geographical names mentioned by him amounts to more 
than 1500. In spite of his usual brevity, he adds lengthy descriptions on 
memorable points, e. g. on the specus Corycius I 72 — 76, mount Ida I 
94 sq., and statements concerning the customs of Egypt (I 57 — 59), and 
Britain HI 49—52. The arrangement of the work shows that the writer 
had a map of the world before his eyes. He does not seem to have 
carried out his intention of giving a fuller account of the subject: see 
I 2: dicam autem alias plura et exactius, nunc ut quaeque sunt clarissima 
et strictim. 

3. Tzschucke (cf. Parthey p. IX— XXVII) enumerates about 60 mss. 
of Mela, and 104 editions. Among the first the oldest and most im- 
portant is Vaticanus 4929 saec. IX or X, all the others being of saec. 
XIV sqq. Among the editions principal importance attaches to those 
of Is. Voss (Hag. Com. 1658. 4. Franeker 1700. 8.), C. H. Tzschucke 
(Lips. 1806 sq. 6 vols, with critical and exegetical notes), G. Parthey 



Orators and rhetoricians. 65 

(ad librovum mss. fidem edidit notisque criticis instruxit, Berlin 1867). 
We may also mention the edition of J. Gronovins (Lugd. Bat. 1685. 
1696. 1722. 1748. 1782). 

292. The principal orators of this period were such as 
made a profession of political accusations, e. g. P. Suillius, 
Vibius Crispus of Vercellae, who on account of his sedate 
character attained to a high old age and hved until the time 
of Domitianus, also the more lively Eprius Marcellus; Julius 
Africanus and the solicitor Galerius Trachalus (Cons. a. 68), 
a man also distinguished by his sonorous voice, were trained 
speakers. Others exhibited their eloquence chiefly in the 
Senate, e. g. the Stoic Paetus Thrasea and Helvidius Priscus. 
We know also the names of a number of professors of elo- 
quence in this period, e. g. Verginius Flavus, Clodius Quiri- 
nalis, Antonius Liberalis, and others. 

1. Tae. A. XIII 42: P. Suillius, imperitante Claudio terribilis (as 
accuser) ac venalis. . . eius opprimendi gratia repetitum credebatur 
SC. poenaque Cinciae legis adversum eos qui pretio causas oravissent. 
Suillius . . praeter ferociam animi extrema senecta liber etc. ib. 43 
he is accused among others of equitum rom. anima damnata He was 
exiled to insulas baleares, A. D. 58. His wife was a step-daughter of 
Ovid's, ex Pont. IV 8, A. D. 15. A. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. VI 2. p. 
1458 sq. nr. 1. 

2. Tae. dial. 8 : ausim contendere Marcellum Eprium (see n. 3) . . 
et Cri spurn Vibium . . notos noii minus esse in extremis partibus 
terrarum quam Capuae aut Vercellis, ubi nati dicuntur (of. Schol. Juv. 
IV 81: Crispus, municeps Viselliensis ; but the Schol. of Valla ib., 
mixing him up with Passienus Crispus above 263, 5 : V. Cr. Placentinus). 
hoc illis praestat . . ipsa eloquentia. . . sine commendatione natalium, 
sine substantia facultatum, neuter inoribus egregius, alter habitu quoque 
cor|)oris contemptus, per niultos iam annos potentissimi sunt civitatis 
ac donee libuit principe^ fori, nunc principes in (]aesaris (i. e. Vespa- 
siani) amicitia agunt genintque cuncta. Hist. II 10: Vibius Crispus, 
pecunia, potentia, ingenio inter claros magis quam inter bonos. . . 
Crispum easdem nccusntiones cum praemio exercuisse meminerant. Juv. 
IV 81 93: venit et Crispi iucunda senectus, cuius erant mores qualis 
facundia, mite ingenium. . . sic multas hiemes atque octogesima vidit 
solstitia, his armis ilia (of Domitian) quoque tutus in aula. He appears 
to have lived about A. D. 10 — 90, whence we may perhaps accept the 
statement of Schol. Vail, on Juv. 1. 1.: et manu promptus et lingua sub 
Claudio et consulatum adeptus. Cf. Plin. n. h. XIX. prooem. 4: C. 
Flavio legato Vibi Crispi procos. (of Africa). The year of his consul- 
ship is unknown. Cf. Borghesi, Oeuvres IV p. 529—538. He was a 

5 



66 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

boon comrade of Vitellius (Suid. v. Bnikkiog). Quintil. V 13, 48: quod 
factum venuste nostris temporibus elusit Vibius Crispns, vir ingenii 
iucundi et elegantis. X 1, 119: erant clara et nuper ingenia. et Tra- 
chalus (n. 6) . . fuit . . et Vibius Crispus compositus et iucundus et 
delectationi natus, privatis tarnen causis quam publicis melior. XII 10, 11 
(iucunditatem Crispi). VIII 5, 17 (pro Spatale Crispus, cf. ib. 19: 
Trachalus contra Spatalen). 

3. An inscription from Capua in Orelli-Henzen 5425: T. Clodio 
M. f. Pal. (the gaudy tinsel of an upstart) Eprio Mar cello cos. II 
(a. 827 =rr 74; I between 811 and 814), auguri curioni maximo, sodali 
augustali, pr(aetori) per(egr., a. 48 see Tac. A. XII 4), procos. Asiae III 
(a. 824—826) provincia Cypros; cf. Borghesi Oeuvres III p. 285 sqq. 
He was born at Capua of humble parents (see n. 2), was delator under 
Nero (Tac. A. XVI 22 extr. : Marc. Epr. acri eloquentia. ib. 29: cum 
Marcellus, ut erat torvus ac minax, voce, voltu, oculis ardesceret), e. g. 
against Thrasea, and was as such repeatedly accused by Helvidius 
Priscus (Tac. dial. 5 : quid aliud infestis patribus nuper Eprius Mar- 
ceUus quam suam eloquentiam opposuit? qua accinctus et minax 
disertam quidem sed inexercitatam et eiusmodi certaminum rudem 
Helvidi sapientiam elusit: see below 294, 12), but retained his influence 
even under Vespasian (see n. 3); a. 79, however, he was convicted of 
conspiring against the Emperor and forced to commit suicide. Cf. 
A. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. Ill p. 207 sq. Tac. hist. IV 7 : esse Uli (i. e. 
E. M.) pecuniam et eloquentiam, quis multos anteiret, ni memoria fla- 
gitiorum urgeretur. The defence of E. M. ib. 8. Comp, also below 
288, 3 extr. 

4. Quintil. X 1, 118: eorum quos viderim Domitius Afer (f A. D. 
59, see above 271, 5) et lulius Africanus longe praestantissimi. . . 
hie concitatior (than Afer), sed in cura verborum nimius et composi- 
tione nonnumquam longior et translationibus parum modicus. Cf. ib. 
XII 10, 11 (above 37, 2). Tac. dial. 15. Plin. Ep. VII 6, 11. Quintil. 
VIII 5, 15 (insigniter Africanus apud Neronem de morte matris, A. D. 
59). His father was probably Julius Africanus e Santonis, gallica civitate 
(Tac. A. VI 7), sentenced a. 32. 

5. Quintil. X 3, 13: patruus lulii Secundi fuit lulius Forus, in 
eloquentia Galliarum (quoniam ibi demum exercuit earn) princeps, alio- 
qui inter paucos disertus. 

6. Tac. Hist. I 90: in rebus urbanis Galerii Trachali (Cons. 
821 =: 68 with Silius Italiens) ingenio Othonem uti credebatur. et erant 
qui genus ipsum orandi noscerent crebro fori usu celebre et ad im- 
plendas populi aures latum et sonans. Quintil. X 1, 119: erant clara 
et nuper ingenia. et Trachalus plerumque sublimis et satis apertus fuit 
et quem velle optima crederes, auditus tarnen maior; nam et vocis 
quantam in nullo cognovi felicitas et pronuntiatio vel scenis sufifectura 
et decor, omnia denique ei quae sunt extra superfuerunt. The latter 



Orators and rhetoricians. 67 

is detailed XII 5, 5 sq., cf. 10, 11 (sonum Trachali). He had publishod 
his speech contra Spatnlen (Quintil. VIII 5, 19). See also Quintil. 
VI 3, 78. 

7. A. Fabricius Veiento (praetorius, Dio LXI 6) was accused A. D. 
62 quod multa et probrosa in patres et sacerdotes composuisset iis 
libris quibus nomen codicillorum dederat (Tac. A. XIV 50). This seems 
to have been a prose satire in the form of a last will (comp, above 
24, 4). Convictum Veientonem Italia depulit (Nero) et libros exuri 
iussit, conquisitos lectitatosque donee cum periculo parabantur (Tac. 
1. 1.). Under Domitian he is mentioned as a servile flatterer and de- 
lator by Juv. Ill 185. IV 113. 123 sqq. VI 113. He survived even Nerva 
(Plin. E. IV 22, 4 cf. IX 13, 13). 

8. L. Valerius Primanus, was mentioned by Suetonius (p. 99 Rffsch.) 
after Q. Curtius Rufus and before Verginius Flavus among the clar 
rhetores. 

9. Tac. A. XV 71: Verginium Flavum . . claritudo nominis 
expulit (A. D. 65); nam Verginius studia iuvenum eloquentia . . fovebat. 
Among these was also the youthful Persius Flaccus' (vita Pers.). In 
Suetonius' list of rhetoricians (Suetonius p. 99 Rffsch.) he is the tenth 
Quintil. Ill 1, 21: scripsit de eadem materia (rhetoric) . . aetatis nostrae 
Verginius. VII 4, 40: Flavum, cuius apud me summa est auctoritas, 
cum Artem scholae tantum componeret etc. In this he followed Greek 
originals; see ib. VII 4, 24. He is mentioned ib. Ill 6, 45. IV 1, 23. 
XI 3, 126. 

10. Hieronym. on Eus. chron. a. A])r. 2063 = Claud. 7 = 47 A. D. from 
Suetonius (cf. p. 99 Rffsch.) : P. Clodius Quirinalis rhetor Arelatensis 
Romae insignissime docet. 

11. Hieronym. ib. ad a. 2064 =zClaud. 8 = 48 A. D. : M. Antonius Li- 
beralis, latinus rhetor, gravissimas inimicitias cum Palaemone (above 
277, 3) exercet. But Liberalis noster from Lugdunum in Sen. Epist. 91, 1.3. 
13 seems to be Aebutius Liberalis (above 284, 4). 

12. Hieronym. ib. ad a. 2073 = Neron. 3 = 57 A. D. : L. Statins 
Ursulus Tolosensis celeberrime in Gallia rhetoricam docet. 

13. Vita Lucani: matrem habuit Aciliam, Acilii Lucani filiam, ora- 
toris (solicitor) opere apud proconsules (in Spain) frequentis et apud 
clarissimos viros non nullius ingenii. adeo non improbandus fuit ut in 
scriptis aliquibus hodieque perduret eius memoria. 

14. On Passienus Crispus the younger see above 263, 5; on Junius 
Gallio above 263, 7; on Paetus Thrasea and Helvidius Prisons below 
294, 7 and 12; on Cluvius Rufus below 308, 2; on Curiatius Maternus 
below 312, 1; on Silius Italiens below 314, 1; on Statins' father 
below 312, 3. 

15. On the rhetorical writings of L. Annaeus Cornutus see below 
294, 2. 



68 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

293. Eminent jurists of this time were Proculus, from 
whom the Proculians derived their name, and the younger 
Nerva (father to the Emperor); among the Sabinians C. Cassius 
Longinus (Cons. 30 A. D.). A younger contemporary of Pro- 
culus is Atilicinus, and also Fufidius and Sex. Pedius seem to 
belong to this period. 

1. Pompon. Dig. 1 2, 2, .52: >Jervae (above 276, 2) successit Pro- 
culus. fuit eodem tempore et Nerva filius (note 2) . . sed Proculi au- 
ctoritas maior fuit. nam etiam plurimum po'uit, appellatique sunt 
partim Cassiaui (cf. n. 3) partim Procuiiani. Dig. XXXVII 14, 17 (decree 
of the Divi fralres): Proculum, sane non levem iuris auctorem. Cf. 

XVIII 1,1,1 (Sabinus et Cassius, . . Nerva et Proculus . . verior Nervae 
et Proculi sententia). His complete name was probably Sempronius 
Proculus, cf. Dig. XXXI 47 sq. Rudorif, Ztschfr. f. gesch. Rechtsw. XII 
p. 336 - 339. One of his juridical writings was in epistolary shape 
(questions and answers): Epistolarum libri, at least 11 books; see Dig. 

XIX 5, 12 and XXIII 4, 17: Proculus libro XI epistolarum; cf. n. 4 and 
Dig. XVIII 1, 69. Besides this, Proculus libro III ex Posterioribus 
Labeonid (ib. XXXIII 6, 16), probably identical with his Notae on Labeo 
(ib. Ill 5, 10, 1 and XXXV 1, 69: apud Labeoaera Proculus notat, cf« 
ib. XVII 2, 65, 5). Altogether 37 excerpts from Proculus have been 
admitted into the Digest. A collection of. them in Hommel's Palin- 
genesia II p. 389—396. 

2. Pompon. Dig. I 2, 2, 52: fuit eodem tern-pore et Nerva filius 
(for the father see a!)ove 276, 2). fuit et alius Longinus (than the one 
mentioned n. 3) ex equestri quidem ordine, qui postea ad praeturam 
usque pervenit. Dig. Ill 1, 1,3; qua aetate (pueritia, w^hich extended to 
the 17th year) aut paulo maiore fertur Nerva filius et publice de iure 
responsitasse. XLI 2, 47: idque Nerva filius libris De usucapionibus 
retulit. He was a Pioculian. Of him we should probably understand 
Tac. A. XV 72: triumphale decus . . Cocceio Nervae, praetori designato, 
. . tribuit (Nero, A. D. 65). 

3. Pomponius 1. 1. (n. 1) 51 : huic (i. e. Masurius, above 276, 1) 
successit Gains Cassius Longinus, natus ex tilia Tuberonis (above 
205, 1), quae fuit neptis Servii Sulpicii (above 171, 2 sqq.) et ideo 
proavum suum Servium Sulpicium appellat. hie consul fuit cum Quar- 
tino (Surdino? Orelli 4034; a. 783 = 30 A. D.) temporibus Tiherii, sed 
plurimum in civitate auctoritatis habuit, eo usque donee eum Caesar 
(Nero, A. D. 65, see Suet. Ner. 57: Cassio Longino iuris consult© ac 
luminibuG orbato etc., cf. Tac. A. XVI 7, 9) civitate pelleret. expulsus 
ab eo in Sardiniam, revocatus a Vespasiano diem suum obiit. Cf. Tac. 
A. XII II (a. 49). Gaio Cassio, qui Suriae praeerat. 12: ea tempestate 
Cassius ceteros praeminebat peritia legum. XIII 41. 48. XIV 43 sq. 
Gromat. vet. p. 403, 29: Cassius Longinus, prudentissimus vir, iuris 
auctor. Plin. epist. VII 24, 8: domus C. Cassi, huius qui Cassianae 



Jurists. 69 

scholae princeps et parens fuit (cf. n. 1). Dig. IV 8, 19, 2: Cassius 
sententiam magistri sui (i. e. Sabinus, see also Arrian. Epict, IV 3) bene 
excusat,. He wrote also a large work on ius civile (Dig. VII 1, 7, 3. 
9, 5 and 70, 2: C. Cassius . . libro octavo iuris civilis; cf. ib. XXKV 
1, 54: in commentariis Gaii, XLVI 3, 78: in libris Gaii), commented on 
by his pupil Aristo and excerpted by lavolenus Priscus in 15 books; 
besides this notes on Vitellius (Dig. XXXIII 7, 12, 27: Cassius apud 
Vitellium notat). 

4. Dig. XXIII 4. 17: Proculus (n. 2) libro XI epistolarum. A ti- 
li ein us Proculo suo salutem. This is follovi'ed by a juridical query, 
to which Proculus 'respondit'. He is mentioned ib. X 3, 6, 4 (Sabinus 
et At. responderunt). XII 4, 7 (Nerva, At. responderunt). XLV 2, 17 
(At., Sabinus, Cassius . . aiunt). Inst. lust. II 14 (Atilicino placuisse 
Paulus . . refert). Fragm. Vat. 77 (Atilicinura respondisse Aufidius — 
or Fufidius, see n. 5 — refert). 

5. Dig. XXXIV 2, 5 (from Africanus) : apud Fufidium Quaestionum 
libro II ita scriptum est etc. XL 2, 25 (from Gaius) : Fufidius aitj 
Nerva filius (n. 2) contra sentit, quod verius est. XLII 5, 29 (from 
Paulus): Fufidius refert etc. 

6. Sex. Pedius (Dig. IV 8, 32, 20 and IX 2, 33 from Paulus; ib. 
XXXIX 1, 5, 9 fiom Ulpian), the author of a work in several books de 
stipulationibus (P;:ul. ib. XII 1, 6: Pedius libro primo de st.) and of a 
large work of at least 25 books, ad edictum; see Paul. ib. XXXVII 1, 
6, 2: notis scriptae tabulae non continentur edicto, quia notas littei-as 
non esse Pedius libro XXV ad edictum scribit. In the notae Einsid- 
lettses on legal subjects we find also at the end 8. P. M., which is 
explained Sexti Pedii Medmani (according to Huschke's emendation, 
from Medma or Medama in Bruttium). He would apj^ear to have lived 
before Probus (below 295, 4). From the Digest we learn that he wrote 
after Ofilius (Dig. XIV 1, 1, 9 from Ulpian: unde quaerit Ofilius. . . quam 
distinctionem Pedius probat) and Masurius Sabinus (ib. L IG, 13, 1 from 
ulpian: ut Sabinus ait et Pedius probat), and before Julian (ib. Ill 5, 
6. 9 — II from Julian: item quaeritur apud Pedium libro VII etc.) and 
Pomponius (ib. IV 3, 1 4 from Ulpian: ut et Pedius libro VIII scribat. 
• . idem et Pomponius libro XXVIII et adicit etc.). Cf. Huschke, iuris- 
prud. anteiust.'^ p. 67 sq. 77. Tijdemann, de Pedio icto, Lugd. Bat. 1822. 

294. The professors of philosophy in this age wrote for 
the most part in Greek; e. g. Sextius, Cornutus, Musonius 
Rufus, and Epictetus. Cornutus, a very influential man, com- 
posed also rhetorical and grammatical works, part of which 
we know from abridgments. Among those philosophers who 
wrote in La;in, we may mention Celsus, Papirius Fabianus, 
Plautus, and especially Seneca. The best characters embraced 
the Stoic system, which enabled them to live with dignity and 



70 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

die with courage Such were Julius Canus, Thrasea Paetus, 
Barea Soranus, Rubellius Plautus, Helvidius Priscus, and the 
poets Persius and Lucan. As all these avoided any mani- 
festations of servility and some even candidly avowed their 
aversion to it, the StQic system became politically obnoxious. 
Only P. Egnatius Celer combined Stoicism and the character 
of delator. The Stoic doctrine was, however, but rarely kept 
pure by its adherents; some diluting it so that it became a 
mere system of practical wisdom (e. g. Seneca, Musonius, and 
Epictetus), others exaggerating it by ascetic additions derived 
from the Pythagorean system and from Cynicism, without heeding 
the inroads thus made upon the Stoic system as such. 

1. On Sextius see above 261, 5 — 8. 

2. Suidas s. v. KoQvovTog: AfnTiTrjg (fikoao^^og, . . ytyouag tv 
P(o/ut] tni N^QOivog xul UQog avTov ai/at^ftf^fig gvp t(0 Movaoytu) (n. 3). 

f-'yQCiifjf nokkd t^iköooffä Tf xal QrjjoQixa. Hieronyrn. chron. ad a. Abr- 
2084 r= Ner. 14: Nero. . Cornutum philosophum, praeceptorem Persii 
(see below 297, 2), in exsilium fugat. Dio LXII 29 (Ayycdoy Koqvovtov 
fvdoxt^uovi^Tu TOT( yf tnl naidfici). He composed philosophical treatises 
TiQog -4^tji/od(OQoy xal j-lQtaTOTfkriv, nfQt rijg tmv d^fMV <^vaf(og, which 
latter work is extant (Corn, de natura deorum, ex schedis C. de Villo- 
isonis rec. et comm. instr. Fr. Osann, Gotting. 1844), perhaps an 
abridgment of the original work. He also wrote on subjects of rhetoric- 
i^/vag QtjTOQixdg in Greek and de figuris sententiarum in Latin (Gell. 
IX 10, 5: Annaeus Cornutus, homo sane pleraque alia non indoctus 
neque imprudens, in secundo librorum quos de figuris sent, composuit)? 
Also grammatical writings : Gell. II 6, 1 : nonnulli grammatici aetatis 
superioris, in quibus est Cornutus Annaeus, haut sane indocti neque 
ignobiles, qui commentaria in Vergilium composuerunt, reprehendunt 
etc. Charis. I p. 127, 20 K.: L. Annaeus Cornutus in Maronis commen- 
tariis X, no doubt identical with ib. p. 125, 16: Annaeus Cornutus ad 
Italicum de Vergilio libro X; cf. 0. Jahn, Pers. p. XV— XIX. Ribbeck 
Proleg. Vergil, p. 123 — 128. From his work de enuntiatione vel ortho- 
graphia excerpts are given by Cassiod. p. 2281 sqq. P. Charis. Up. 201- 
12 K. is corrupt and unintelligible. Annaeus Cornutus libro tab. cas- 
tarum patris sui. It is doubtful whether Cornutus wrote also tragedies. 
It is indeed stated in the vita Persii (p. 234 sq. J.) : cognovit per Cor- 
nutum etiam Annaeum Lucanum, aequaevum auditorem Cornuti. nam 
Cornutus illo tempore tragicus fuit, sectae stoicae, qui libros philo- 
sophiae reliquit. sed Lucanus etc. But the words nam — rehquit are 
a foreign addition, as Cornutus had been previously mentioned in the 
vita, and moreover his quality as tragicus could not be brought up in 
describing his instruction. It is, however, improbable that these words 
(as it is maintained by M. Hertz, de Scaevo p. 4 sq. not. 4) should be 



Philosophers^ : Cornutus and Musonius. 71 

referred to Seneca, who is mentioned directly afterwards, their present 
illogical arrangement excluding the assumption of their having come 
from Probus himself, while a later grammarian would not have thought 
of Seneca as a tragic poet in the first place. In general see G. J. v. 
Martini, disp. lit. d. L. Annaeo Cornuto, Lugd. Bat. 1825. 0. Jahn, 
Prolegg. to Pers. p. VIII XXIV. 

3. C. Musonius (Plin. Ep. Ill 11, 5, 7) Rufus. Tac. A. XV 71 : 
(Musonium) Rufum claritudo nominis expulit (A. D. 65, cf. Dio LXII 27 : 
Pov(iog Movooivtog 6 <ii,koGo(^og . . i(f>vy(cd'fv&r]). nam . . Musonius 
praeceptis sapientiae fovebat (iuvenes.) XIV 59: doctores sapientiae, 
Coeranus graeci, Musonius tusci (from Volsinii) generis. Hist. HI 81: 
miscuerat se legatis (a. 69) Musonius Rufus, equestris ordinis, studium 
philosophiae et placita stoicorum aemulatus. Hence Hieronym. errs 
ad a. Abr. 2095 (Freher. ad 2096), Tit. 1 : Titus Musonium Rufum phi- 
losophum de exilio revocat. Cf. Dio LXVI 13: ndvrag avTixcc rovg 
iftkooot^ovg o Ovfonuaiavog, nkrjv tov Movomviov, tx rrjg '^Pio/utjg t'isßakfp 
(a. 71). An inscription (Eph. Arch. 3833, 3) : IfQsvg \4n6kkoivog Jijkiov 
did (ßiov) MovGuiviog '^Povifog. That he wrote in Greek appears from 
Gell. IX 2, 8. XVI 1, 1 sq. and the collection of his sayings concerning 
moral questions {dno^vri^oviv fxaia Movgcoj^iov) by Lucius and (Valerius) 
Pollio, from which Stobaeus gives ample quotations in his Florilegium. 
Cf. E. Rohde, on Lucian's Jovxiog, p. 26 sq. note. The citation in 
Gellius V 1 may possibly be a translation, but the play between re- 
mittere and amittere animum (ib. XVIII 2, 1) seems to point to original 
Latin composition. C. Musonii Rufi . . reliquiae et apophthegmata cum 
annot. ed J. Venhuizen-Peerlkamp, Harlem 1822. H. Ritter and L. Preller, 
hist, philos. graeco-rom. p. 438 sqq. J. J. Bäbler, New Swiss Mus. IV 
(Bern 1864) p. 23—37. 0. Bernhardt, on G. Mus. Rufus, Sorau 1866. 
4. E. Baltzer, Musonius, Nordhausen 1871. 50 pp. 

4. Epictetus of Hierapolis, known by his pupil Arrianus' 'Eyxfi'Qtdiot/ 
'Emxr^Tov. Fr. Spangenberg, on Epictetus' doctrine, Hanau 1849. 4. 
Winnefeld, the Philosophy of Ep., a contribution to the history of the 
eclectic philosophy of the Imperial Roman period, in Fichte's Journal 
of Phil. XLIX p. 1—32. 193—226. G. Grosch, the moral teaching of 
E., Wernigerode 1867. 4. and many other treatises. 

5. Quintil. X 1, 124: Plautus in stoicis rerum cognitioni utilis. See 
above 261, 9. On Celsus see above 275, 3; on Fabianus above 261, 10 
sq.; on Seneca above 284, 4 and 5; on the Epicurean Aufidius Bassus 
above 272, 2. 

6. Sen. de tranq. an. (dial. IX) 14, 4: Kanus lulius, vir inprimis 
magnus, cuius admirationi ne hoc ^uidem obstat quod nostro saeculo 
natus est, cum Caio (Caligula) diu altercatus, was by him sentenced 
to death. (9.) prosequebatur ilium philosophus suus (to the place of 
execution). . . promisitque (I. K.) si quid explorasset circumiturum 
amicos (after his death) et indicaturum quis esset animarum status. 



72 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

7. P. (Fannius?) Thrasea Paetiis from Patavium, son-in-law to 
Caecina Paetus, the husband of the younger Arria and father of Fannia 
who was married to Helvidius Priscus (n. 12), consularis, sentenced to 
death by Nero a. 66. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. VI 2 p. 1898 sq. A. 
S. Hoitsema, de P. Thr. P., Groningen 1852. G. Joachim, P. Valerii 
Paeti Thr. vita, Lahr 1858. Dio LXII 26: o Sqao^ag xal o 2oQccvög 
(n. 8), xcd ytvovg xcd nkovrov irjg rt avjunaayjg ((Qfjtjg ig ret nqiaia at/rj- 
xovj&g, . . miid-uvov . . oji rotovroi rjoap. Tac. A. 16, 21 : ad postre- 
mum Nero virtutem ipsam excindere concupivit interfecto Thrasea 
Paeto et Barea Sorano. He belonged to the secta quae Tuberones et 
Favoniop . . genuit (ib. 22), When sentenced to die, he was maxime 
intentus Demetrio, cynicae institutionis doctori (Sen. de benef. VII 8, 
2: virum exactae . . sapientiae flrmaeque . . constantiae, eloquentiae 
vero eius quae res fortissimas deceat etc., exiled under Vespasian, Dio 
LXVI 13). cum quo . . de natura aniraae et dissociatione spiritus cor- 
porisque inquirebat etc. (Tac. A. XVI 34). Thrasea's ideal was always 
Cato minor, whose life he had also written in a work resembling a 
panegyric, and which was used by Plutarch as his chief source in his 
biography, see Plut. Cat. min. 37 cf. 25 and H. Peter, on the sources 
of Plutarch p. 65 sq. 68. 

8. Servilius Barea Soranus, cos. suff. 52 under Claudius, accused 
at the same time as Thrasea (n. 7) and driven to commit suicide. Dio 
LXII 26: rov Imqhvov novnkiog Eyvaitog Kfkt-Q (of Berytos) ffikoao'iog 
xuTf^jjfvdouaqxvQrjafv. Tac. A. XVI 32: cliens hie (P. Egnatius) Sorani 
et tunc emptus ad opprimendum amicum auctoritatem stoicae sectae 
praeferebat, habitu et ore ad exprimendam imaginem honesti exercitus, 
ceterum animo perfidiosus, subdolus etc. Juv. Ill 116 sqq. with the 
Schol. on I 33 (8oranum Barcam Celor philosophus magister ipsius apud 
Neronem scelere delationis occidit et ipse postea sub Vespasiano ob 
hoc ipsum Musonio Rufo accusante damnatus est) and VI 552. 

9. Rubellius Plautus . , placita maiorum colebat, habitu severo, 
casta et secreta domo, Tac. A. XIV 22 (where Nero writes to him a. 
50: per Asiam avitos agros, in quibus tuta et inturbida inventute fru- 
eretur). ib. 57: Plautum . . veterum Romanorum imitamenta praeferre, 
assumpta etiam Stoicorum arrogantia sectaque, quae turbidos et nego- 
tiorum adpetentes faciat. fle was murdered by Nero a. 62, ib. 58 sq. 
Fr. Wolffgramm, Rub. PI. and his character in Tac. and Juvenal, 
Prenzlau 1871. 

10. H. Schiller, on the Stoic opposition under Nero; II — 3. 
Wertheim 1867 sq. Carlsruhe 1869. 

11. Vita Persii: usus est apud Cornutum duorum convictu doctissi- 
morum et sanctissimorum virorum, acriter tunc philosophantium, Claudii 
Agaturrini (Reinesius: Agathemeri) medici Lacedaemonii et Petroni 
Aristocratis Magnetis, . . cum aequales essent, Cornuti minoris et ipsi. 

12. Tac. Hist. IV 5 : Helvidius Priscus Carecinae municipio, 
Cluvio patre, qui ordinem primi pili duxisset, (adopted by some Hel- 



Philosophers : Thrasea and llelvidms f^riscns. 73 

vidius) ingenium inlustre altioribus studiis (cf. Gell. XIII 10, 1 above 
260, 1) iuvenis admodum dedit, non, ut plerique, ut nomine magnifico 
segne otium velaret, sed quo firmior adversus fortuita remp. capesseret. 
doctores sapientiae secutus est qui sola bona quae honesta, mala tantum 
quae turpia, potentiam, nobilitatem ceteraque extra aniriium neque bonis 
neque malis adnumerant (i. e. Stoicism), quaestorius adhuc a Paeto 
Thrasea (n. 7) gener delectus etc. 6: erant quibus adpetentior famae 
videretur; . . ruina soccri in exilium pulsus ut Galbae principatu (a. 
69) rediit Marcellum Eprium (above 292, 3) delatorem Thraseae accu- 
sare adgreditur. . . primo minax certamcn et egregiis utriusque ora- 
tionibus testatum etc. A subsequent attack upon Marcellus v^^as like- 
wise in vain, though not, as Tac. dial. 5 lets his speaker represent it 
in accordance with his character, in consequence of the superior elo- 
quence of Marcellus; cf. Hist. IV 43 sq. He was praetor a. 70. When 
he continued his opposition even under Vespasian, partly without suf- 
ficient reason and merely for demonstration's sake, the Emperor lost 
at last patience, Helvidius was exiled and soon afterwards killed partly 
by mistake. Suet. Vesp. 15. Dio LXVI 12 [IlQioxog 'Kkovidtog . . ToTg 
artaixoig doy/jaaty tyTQcafflg y.al njy 7ov &Q«.oiov nc.QQrjGiav ov avv 
xaiQio fAijjiovfJifvog etc.). 

295. In the department of grammar the most eminent 
person of this time is M. Valerius Prob us of Berytus, who 
undertook the critical revision of the texts of the classical 
writers in the manner of the Alexandrine eritics. He chiefly 
devoted his studies to Lucretius, Virgil, Horace, and the poems 
of Persius. He also explained the peculiarities of archaic 
Latin partly in oral lectures, partly in treatises most of which 
he edited himself in epistolary form. Ot his work de 
notis a valuable abridgment, containing the legal abbreviations, 
has come down to us. Other parts of his works were used 
by later grammarians, e. g. Flavins Caper. He is different 
from a certain Probus who lived at the commencement of the 
fourth century and by whom we possess a grammatical manual 
(Ars vaticana). 

1. Sueton. gramm, 24 (P. being the last grammarian in Suetonius^ 
account, directly after Remmius Palaeraon, so that he appears to be 
next to Suetonius' age): M. Valerius Probus Berytius diu centuriatum 
petiit, donee taedio ad studia se contulit. legerat in provincia quosdam 
veteres libellos (Latiu) apud grammatistam. . . hps cum dibgentius 
repeteret atque alios deinceps cognoscere cuperet . . in proposito 
mansit multaque exemplaria contracta emendare ac distinguere et ad- 
notare curavit, soli huic nee ulli praeterea grammaticae parti deditus. 
hie non tam discipulos quam sectatores aliquot habuit; numquam enim 



74 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

ita docnit ut magistri personam sustineret. unum et alterum vel, cum 
plurimos, tres aut quatuor postmeridianis horis admittere solebat cu- 
bansque inter longos ac volgares sermones legere quaedam, idque perraro. 
(Cf. n. 2) nimis pauca et exigua de quibusdam minutis quaestianculis 
edidit (independently of his editions), reliquit autem non mediocrem 
silvam observationum sermonis antiqni. These 'collectanea' would thus 
appear not to have been edited by himself, but from his papers after 
his death. 

2. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2072 = Neron. 2 (Amand. 2073): Probus 
Berytius eruditissimus grammaticorum Romae agnoscitur. From Martial 
(ill 2, 12 to his book: nee Probum timeto) he seems to have been 
living as late as Domitian. This agrees also with the fact of Gellius 
having heard in his youth some of Probus' pupils (n. 3), who might be 
born c. a. 70. Favorinus also belonged to them (Gell. Ill 1, 6). Gell. 
IX 9, 12: Valerii Probi, . . docti hominis et in legendis pensitandisque 
veteribus scriptis bene callidi. I 15, 18 (grammaticum inlustrem). IV 
7, 1 (V. P. grammaticus inter suam aetatem praestanti scientia fuit). 
Auson. epigr. praef. ad Syagr. 18 — 20: nomen grammatici merui, non 
tam grande quidem quo gloria nostra subiret Aemilium aut Scaurum 
Berytiumve Probum. Id. profess. 15, 12 (Scaurum Probumque). 20, 7 
(grammatice ad Scaurum atque Probum). Macrob. 22, 9 sq. (Valerius 
Probus, vir pcrfectissimus, notat etc. quod tantum virum fugisse miror). 
Cassiod. de gramm. p. 2321 P. (Palaemon, Phocas, Probus et Censorinus). 
Analecta gramm. Vindob. p. 514 (ut est Probus et Caesar). Gräfenhan, 
Hist, of class. Philol. IV p. 286—293. W. Brambach, on Latin spelling 
p. 31 — 37. J. Steup, de Probis grammaticis, Jena 1871. 206 pp. Against 
his assumption of two different Probus, an elder, (in Suet.) and a 
younger (in Martial and Gellius) shortly succeeding each other see W. 
Teuffel, Studies and Char. p. 442-445, cf. Rh. Mus. XXVII p. 62 sqq. 
and 192. 

3. Specimens of Val. Probus' lectures on sermo antiquus in Gell, who 
obtained them from his familiäres (e. g. Annianus VI 7, 1 sqq.) ; see 1 15, 18 
III 1, 5 sq. (on Sallust). VI 7, 3—5 (Plautus and Terence). 9, 12 (Va 
lerius Antias). XIII 21, 1—8, and ib. 9: his tum verbis Probus . 
hominem dimisit, ut mos eius fuit erga indociles, prope inclementer 
Written explanations are indicated ib. VI 9, 11 (on the perfects occe 
curri Probus adnotavit et haec verba apposuit). XV 30, 5 (ego cum 
Probi multos admodum commentatiouum libros adquisierim neque 
scriptum in his inveni etc.). IV 7, 1 sqq. (Valerius Probus — pro- 
nounced Hannibalem, Ilasdrubalem — teste epistula eius scripta ad Mar- 
cellum, in qua Plautum et Ennium . . eo modo pronuntiassc affirmat 
etc.). Commentationes of this kind (probably edited from his papers) 
are perhaps those on fluctuating deponents (below n. 7), de inaequa- 
litate consuetudinis (n. 7), on verba communia (Gellius XV 13 with 
Kretzschmer de font. Gell. p. 86), and other grammatical treatises, 
see n. 7. 



The grammarian Valerius Probus. 75 

4. Suetonius in the Anced. Paris, (first edited by Th. Bergk, Ztsch. 
f. A. W. 1845, p. 85 sqq., reprinted in Osann's Anecd. Rom. p. 327 sqq., 
Sueton. ed. Reifit". p. 137—141, and A. Nauck, Lex. Vindob. p. 278 sqq.): 
his (21 critical notes) sous in adnotationibus Ennii, Lucilii et histori- 
corum usi sunt Vargunteius, Ennius Aeliusque et poetremo Probus, 
qui illas in Vergilio et Horatio et Lucretio apposuit ut Homero Arist- 
archus (p. 138 R.)- Cf. Steup p. 48—60. 88 sqq. This employment of 
critical notes in his editions of poets probably induced Probus to devote 
some attention to 'notae' in general. Gell. XVII 9, 5: est adeo Probi 
grammatici commentarius satis curiose factus de occulta literarum 
significatione in epistularum (J. Caesaris (above 182, 8) scriptura. The 
abbreviations employed in iure civile (i. e. in legibus et plebiscitis, in 
legis actionibus, in edictis perpetuis ; cf. above 46, 3) are contained in 
the treatise (preserved in several mss.): Valerii Probi iuris notarum 
(liber), probably once part of a treatise of V. Pr. de not is antiquis or 
de litteris singularibus (which begins : est etiam circa perscribendas 
vel paucioribus Uteris notandas voces studium necessarium), but is muti- 
lated at the end and has altogether come down to us in an abbreviated form. 
There is nothing in this treatise which points to a later time than that 
of Probus, barring some interpolations found in the bad mss,, not in 
the Amb. and Chigianus. The best edition by Th. Mommsen in Keil's 
gramm. lat. IV p. 271 — 276. and after this in Huschke's iurisprud, antei. 
p. 64—70 — 68—77 ed. II. Cf. Mommsen, on M. Val. Pr. de notis 
antiquis, in the Trans, of the Saxon Society of Literature 1853, p. 91 
— 134, and in his edition p. 267—270. Huschke 1. 1. p. 61—64=^63—68. 
Steup p. 135 sq. The arrangement of the portion belonging to Probus 
follows the subject and is systematical, but in the later list of 
notae (the Lugdunenses, ex cod. Reginae, Magnonianae, Lindenbrogianae, 
Vaticanae, Papianae and Einsidlenses, published together by Mommsen 
in Keil IV p. 277—230) the arrangement is alphabetical. The latter 
belong to the 15th century and form the list of 'siglae' used by the 
earliest collectors of inscriptions. (Th. Mommsen 1. 1. p. 129 sqq.) 
Only the Einsidl. contain a part of the ancient lists of Probus, not 
known from other sources, see Huschke iurispr.^ pp. 68. 74 — 77. See 
also W. Schmitz, Studies on Latin stenography. I: The Madrid Notes 
(21 pp.) and de Romanorum tachygraphia (12 pp.) in the Pansteno- 
graphicon 1869. 

5. Oral explanations by Probus of passages of Virgil and his 
diction see in Gell. IX 9, 12 sqq. XIII 21, 1 — 8. The first passage 
(cf. Serv. Aen. IV 418. IX 814. XI 554) proves that Probus kept free 
from blind admiration. In forming the text of his edition, he em- 
ployed the earliest sources; see Gell. XIII 21, 4: in primo Georg., 
quem ego, inquit (Probus), librum manu ipsius (Vergilii) correctum 
legi. This edition is often quoted by Servius; see 0. Jahn's Pers. p. 
CXL-CL. Ribbeck Proleg. Vergil, p. 136-149. Cf. Steup p. 85—94. 
99—125. E. g. Servius Ge. I 277: Probus orchus (Steup p. 84: orcus) 
legit, Cornutus vetat (Steup. putat) aspirationem addendam (horcus) 



76 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

His criticism was expressed chiefly in the critical notes of the Alexan- 
drines (Ribbeck p. 149 — 163, cf. A. Riese in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 93, p. 
868 — 874). The accuracy of Probus' labours on Virgil (see above 220, 
1 a) may l)e guessed at from the commentary on the Bucolics and 
Georgics attributed to him, and which may actually be traced back to 
him. but is overlaid with an abundance of foreign matter. It was first 
edited (from a lost cod. Bobiensis) by J. B. Eignatius, Venet. 1507 and 
repeatedly afterwards (cf. Keil p. V — XI), the best edition by H. Keil, 
M. Valerii Probi in Verg. Bu. et Ge. commentarius etc., Halle 1848 (p. 
\ — 68). Wollenberg, de Probo carminum Vergil, editore, Berlin 1857. 
4. A. Riese, de commentario Vergiliano qui M. Valeri Probi dicitur 
(Bonn 1862) p. 15 — 32 and against him Ribbeck, in Pleckeisen's Jahrb. 
ö7, p. 351 355 and Proleg. Verg. p. 163 — 165. Steup p. 112 sqq. 

6. Besides his editions of Lucretius and Horace (n. 4), Probus 
seems also to have published an edition of Terence with notes, see 0. 
Jahn, Persius p. CXL, and cf. Steup p. 94 sq. 97 — 99. For his notes 
on Persius see below 297, 1. G. Valla wrongly attributed the ocholia 
edited by him on Juvenal (in which e. g. Trajan is mentioned on I 35) 
to this Probus; see 0. Jahn, Persius p. CLIV — CLVII. For Scholia on 
Persius by a so-called Probus lb. p. CLVII sq. Steup p. 127 sq. Com- 
mentaries on Plautus and Sallust? Steup p. 130 — 133. 

7. The mentions made of Probus (saec. I) in Charisius, Diomed, 
Servius and Priscian are no doubt derived from a third source, per- 
h;»ps from Flavius Caper (Steup p. 190 — 200). They relate mostly to 
the treatise de iuaequalitate consuetudinis (Charis. II p. 212, 7 K. ::^ 
lulius Romanus), parts of which are the citations in Priscian V 45 (p. 
171. 4 sq. H: et apud Caprum et apud Probum de dubiis generibus) 
and X 52 (p. 541, 19: Probus de dubiu perfecto tractans ostendit Nae- 
vium protulisse etc.). Cf. ib. X 46 p. 535: quod Probus usu Pomponii 
(al)ove 135, 4 sq.) comprobat. Other quotations evidently relate to the 
younger Probus (saec. IV), see Steup p. 187—189. Cf. n. 8. And as 
his Ars was often joined with Diomed in one and the same ms., 
Probus is frequently mistaken for him (Steup p. 177 — 183. Rh. Mus. 
XXVI p. 317 sq.) and also for Sacerdos (Steup, de Prob. p. 184— 187). 

8. Under the name of Probus we possess a short work entitled 
Catholica, treating of noun and verb (De catholicis Probi in Keil's 
gramm. lat. IV p. 3—43). This being identical with the second book 
of Sacerdos (whom see), the question arises who is the real author, 
Probus or Sacerdos? Spengel, Lersch, and Steup are in favour of the 
latter; and indeed 'sacerdos' is very frequently used in this work as 
an instance of a noun (Steup p. 163 sq.). The first book of Sacerdos 
was in school-use and mss. partly superseded by the Ars of Probus 
(=: Ars vaticana), and the name of Probus transferred to the whole 
work (ib. p. 168 sq.). Cf. Pompeius in Kcil V p. 165, 17 sqq.: scripsit 
ad hunc locum (on the genera of nomina) Probus unum librum. iste 



The arammarimi Valerius Probtfs: 77 

(Donatus) institutoriam artem scripsit, non scripsit pcrfpctis, ?ef] ad 
eos qui volunt se perfectos esse. Keil V p. XVII- XXIV. 

b) A very lengthy, but also very trivial treatise on the whole of 
grammar, first published a. 1833 by A. Mai (auct. class. V p. 153 sqq.) 
from a codex vaticanus and hence called Ars vatic an a or gramma- 
ticus vaticanus, then a. 1837 by Endlicher (from Paris. 7519. saec. XV) 
under the title of Probi . . ars minor (Analecta Vindob. I p. 227 sqq.), 
the best edition by Keil (IV p. 47—192, cf. p. XVIII) as Instituta artium; 
cf. Steup, Rh. Mus. XXVI p. 314—317. It belongs to the commencement 
of saec. IV and is not by the same author as the Catholiea (H. Wetitzel, 
de Probo p. 9 sqq. Steup p. 142—147). We possess also an Appendix 
to it (in Endlicheres Anal. p. 437- 451, Keil IV p. 193—204), which de- 
viates in some points from the Ars Probi, but in which that work is 
evidently made use of. Especially the third part (de orthographia) is 
valuable, the fourth treats de differentiis. Valerii Probi de nomine ex- 
cerpta (in Endlicher's Anal. p. 213—225. Keil IV p. 207- 216) are a 
compilation from various grammatical works and seem to bear the 
name of Probus from the circumstance of having been added to the 
Ars Probi in some ms. (Steup p. 175 — 177). But in the work on final 
syllables (de ultimis syllabis liber ad Caelestinum), ap. Keil IV p. 219 
— 264, the addition of the name of Probus rests only on the conjecture 
of the first editor of it (Mediol. 1504), Parrhasius. Cf. W. Freund in 
Jahn's Jahrb. V. 1832. p. 90 sqq. Steup p. 138 sq. 

9. The assumption of the existence of two grammarians of 
the name of Probus, that of Berytus in the first century and the 
author of an Ars in the fourth century is chiefly defended by 
F. Osann (Contributions to the Hist, of Latin and Greek Lit. II 
p. 166 sqq.), L. Lersch (Ztsch. f. A. W. 1843, nr. 79 sq.), 0. Jahn 
(Persius p. CXXXVI), H. Wentzel (de Probo artifice latino, Oppeln 
1867, p. 7—16), and recently by J. Steup (cf. note 2). Quite iso- 
lated is now H. Keil who (gramm. lat. I p. LII — LIV. IV p. XVI 
— XXXI. Symb. phil. Bonn. p. 93-100; Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 95 p. 
638 — 643) refers all quotations from Probus to the Berytian, at least 
as regards their chief substance, assuming that his posthumous writings 
were subsequently put into the shape of a manual, in two parts, one 
of which (under the usual title of Instituta artium) treated of letters, 
syllables, and the eight parts of speech, the second of nouns and verbs 
(the commencement inKeiiIVp.3: quoniam instituta artium sufficientcr 
tractavimus, nunc de catholicis nominum et verborum rationibus docea- 
mus). But as it is of itself very doubtful, whether from observationes 
sermonis antiqui (see n. 1) a systematical grammar might have been 
constructed, this view has, moreover, been entirely upset by showing 
the relation of the Catholiea to Sacerdos; see n. 8 (a). 

10. Under Nero Pliny the Elder wrote his eight books dubii ser- 
monis, see Plin. Epist. Ill 5, 5 (below 307, 2 and 4). 



78 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

296. The epic panegyric on the Consul Piso was probably 
written in the reign of Claudius by an anonymous young poet, 
who was well-versed in the literature of the Augustan period, 
skilled in employing all the means of rhetoric, and in im- 
parting to his verses an elegant and harmonious flow. 

1. Tac. A. XV 48: is (C. Piso, f 65 = 818 V. C.) Calpurnio genere 
ortus . . claro. apud volgum rumore erat. . . namque facundiam tu 
endis civibus excercebat, largitionem adversum amicos et ignotis quo 
que, comi sermoue et congressu. aderant etiam . . corpus procerum 
decora facies. sed procul gravitas morum aut voluptatum parsimonia 
This description suits the Piso of the panegyric poem perfectly well 
though it cannot have furnished the theme of it. So also the Sohol 
of Valla on Juv. V 109: Piso Calphurnius, ut Probus inquit, antiqua 
familia, scenico habitu tragoedias actitavit, in latrunculorum lusu tam 
perfectus . . ut ad eum ludentem concurreretur. ob haec insinuatus 
C. Caesari repente . . relegatus est, quia consuetudinem pristinae 
uxoris, abductae sibi ab ipso, deinde remissae, repetere noluisse (the 
traditional reading is repetita esse) existimabatur. mox sub Claudio 
restitutus et post consulatum (it is uncertain in what yea.r; it cannot 
have been 810) materna hereditate ditatus magnificentissime vixit, me- 
ritos sublevare inopes ex utroque ordine solitus, de plebe vero certos 
quotannis ad equestrem censum dignitatemque provehere. In agreement 
with this, the panegyric poem praises Calpurnius Piso as an eloquent 
solicitor before the Centumvirs and in Criminal suits, as a speaker in 
the Senate (e. g. tu, reticente senatu, quom tua bis senos numeraret 
purpura fasces, Caesareum grato cecinisti pectore numen, 69 sqq.), 
liberal, a boon companion, who was accustomed to fill up his leisure- 
time with writing verse (151 sqq.), music and the draught-board (la- 
trunculorum lusus). From the fact that, in the lengthy justification 
(or excuse) of Piso's musical playing (157 sqq.) Nero's example is not 
quoted we should infer that it did not yet exist. Nothing calculated 
to lead us beyond Claudius occurs in the poem. 

2. The author assures us honestly, though perhaps not quite cre- 
dibly, that he was induced to sing Piso not by (207 sqq.) divitis auri 
imperiosa fames, but by laudis amor. His youth appears from v. 248 
sq.: quamvis nunc iuvenile decus mihi pingere malas coeperit et non- 
dum vicesima venerit aestas. He is acquainted with and mentions the 
Augustan poets, Virgil, Horace, L. Varius, Melissus (277 sq.), and Ovid ; 
there are reminiscences of Horace (130 sq.) and Ovid (203). In accord- 
ance with them he says desset, v. 6. Somewhat uncommon is the 
hasta of the decern viri who preside to the Centum viri (41 sq.). The 
prosodiacal and metrical treatment is the same as with the most accu- 
rate poets; the caesura is always correct and varied (he combines the 
TQid^nf^- and €(fjd't}ju. with tqit. r^o/- 14 times in 261 hexameters), eli- 
sion scarce (atque illos 24, quare age 259 = 81) and only in the first foot. 



The panegyric poem on Pisa. 79 

3. The author's name not having been handed down, all attempts 
at discovering it have been in vain. Even the conjecture which seems 
to be most probable, that the bucolic poet Calpurnius (below 301) 
wrote the poem (M. Haupt, de carm. bucol. p. 26 sq.) is not supported 
by any convincing arguments. Comp. C. F. Weber (1859) p. 14 sq. 
That the poem is not mentioned or quoted by any later writer (unless, 
indeed, it was read by Probus; see n. 1) may be explained from the 
merely personal character of the subject. 

4. The oldest "known ms. is the Parisian Notre-Dame 188 of the 
first half of saec. XIII (employed by Scaliger), which agrees with Junius' 
Atrebatensis in all important points (A. in Weber); see E. Wölfflin, 
Philol. XVII p. 340 sqq. These facts suffice to disprove the assumption 
that the poem was written in the 16th century. 

5. Editio princeps by Sichard (Basil. 1527), as app. to Ovidii opera 
from a ms. probably belonging to the abbey of Lorsch (near Mannheim). 
It is also found in many editions of Lucan, e. g. by Corte (Lips. 1726). 
Separate editions by Hadr. Junius, Animadversorum libri VI (Basle 1556) 
p. 249 sqq. In Wernsdorf's poetae latt. min. IV p. 236—282, cf. ib. p. 
36—48. 72—74; in W^ E. Weber's corpus poett. lat. p. 1411 — 1413. J. 
Held (incerti auctoris etc., Breslau 1831. 4.), C. Beck (Statu ad Pis. 
poemation, Ansbach 1835), C. F. Weber (incerti auctoris carmen pane- 
gyricum in Pis. cum prolegomenis et adnotatione critica, Marburg 1859. 
44 pp. 4.). 

6. On the writer and his poem see C. F. Weber's prolegomena 
and J. Mähly in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 85, p. 286—289. Contributions to 
the criticism of the text by M. Haupt (de carm. buc. 1854, p. 37 and 
Hermes HI p. 211 sqq.), C. F. Weber (annotationes ad etc. Marburg 
1860. 12 pp. 4.), J. Mähly (1. 1. p. 289-294). 

297. Among the poets of the time of Nero, the youthful 
and unripe, but noble-minded A. Persius Flaccus (A.D. 
34 — 62) from Volaterrae, wrote both other compositions which 
have been lost, and six satires, most of which are versified 
lectures on Stoic tenets, in the manner of the Stoics and 
with extensive employment of Horatian expressions and phrases. 
The exaggeration and bombast characteristic of the manner 
of this period are in these Satires carried to obscurity. 

1. On the life of Persius see the vita Aulis Persii Flacci, de com- 
mentario Probi Valeri sublata, in 0. Jahn's edition (1843) p. 233 — 238 
and in Reifferscheid's Suetonius p. 72 — 75, with the explanations of 
Jahn ib. p. CL — CLII, Reifferscheid p. 394 — 398. Steup de Probis p. 
125 — 130. Jahn maintains, but Reifierscheid denies that commentarium 
meant a set of notes on the Satires ; Steup has a mediating view ac- 
cording to which it was taken from a biographic preface to a com- 
mentary, just as in the case of Virgil. 



80 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. * 

2. Vita: Aules Persius Flaccus natus est prid. non. decembr. Fabio 
Persico, L. Vitellio coss. (4 Dec. 787 = 34). decessit VIII kal. decembr. 
Rubrio Mario, Asinio Gallo coss. (24 Nov. 815=: 62). natus in Etruria 
Volaterris eques rom. . . decessit autem vitio stomachi anno aetatis 
XXVIII. (sepultus est) ad VIII miliarium via Appia in praediis suis. 
Hieronym. a. Abr. 2050 = Tiber. 21: Persius Flaccus satiricus poeta 
Volaterris nascitur; and ad a. 2078 (Freher. ad a. 2079) =: Neron. 8: 
Persius moritur anno aetatis XXIX. — Vita: pater eum Flaccus pupillum 
reliquit moriens annorum fere sex. His mother was Fulvia Sisennia. 
. . studuit Flaccus usque ad annum XII aetatis suae Volaterris, inde 
Romae apud grammaticum Remmium Palaemonem (above 277, 3) et 
apud rhetorem Verginium Flavum (above 292, 9). cum esset annorum 
XVI amioitia coepit uti Annaei Cornuti (above 292, 2), ita ut nusquam 
ab eo discederet; inductus (ab eo) aliquatenus in philosophiam est. . . 
coluit ut patrem Servilium Nonianum (above 286, 2). . . idem decem 
fere annis summe dilectus a Paeto Thrasea (above 294, 7) est, . . 
cognatam eius Arriam uxorem habente. . . sero cognovit et Senecara, 
sed non ut caperetur eius ingenio. . . fuit morum lenissimorura, vere- 
cundiae virginalis, formae pulcrae, pietatis erga matrem et sororem et 
amitam exemplo sufficientis. 

3. Vita: et raro et tarde scripsit. hunc ipsum librum (the six 
Satires to which the vita was intended as an introduction) imperfectum 
reliquit, versus aliqui dempti sunt ultimo libro, ut quasi finitus esset, 
leviter retractavit Cornutus et Caesio Basso (below 299, 1) petenti ut 
ipsi cederet tradidit edendum. scripserat in pueritia Flaccus etiam 
praetextam Vescio (Vescia according to M. Hertz, who understands this 
of the sudden attack of Vescia, Livy IX 25), et 'odomoQixdHv librum 
unum, et paucos in socrum Thraseae, in Arriam matrem, versus, quae 
se ante virum (Caecina Paetus) occiderat. omnia ea auctor fuit Cor- 
nutus matri eius ut aboleret. editum librum continuo mirari homines 
et diripere coeperunt. Cf. Quintil. X 1, 94 (multum et verae gloriae 
quamvis uno libello Persius meruit). Martial. IV 29, 7 (above 238, 3). 

4. Vita: lecto Lucilii libro X vehementer satiras componere 
instituit, . . sibi primo, mox omnibus detracturus, cum tanta recentium 
poetarum et oratorum insectatione ut etiam Neronem . . culpaverit (see 
above 281,8). This 'insectatio' takes place in the first Satire and in the 
prologue prefixed to it in 14 choliaml)ics. This is really the only satire 
in Persius' collection and treats of the taste of the poets and public 
of his age. The others are declamations on dogmas of the Stoic system, 
full of dramatic scenes which frequently approach burlesque and recall 
Sophron ; see Laurent. Lyd. de magistr. I 41 (above 24, 2). They are 
all dressed up with Horatian reminiscences. Just as Persius' characters, 
except those which are mere shadows or the representatives of Stoic 
categories, are derived from Horace or Lucilius, he has also borrowed 
numerous thoughts, comparisons, and expressions from Horace, though 
genei^ally distorting them by his additions and exaggerations. Cf. Ca- 
saubonus, Persiana Horatii imitatio, e. g. in Diibner's edition of Per- 



1 



JW.sins. 81 

sius, p. 344 — 367. Owing to the affected boldness of his metaphors, 
tropes and epithets, the strangeness of his combinations, the manner 
of enveloping all in mystery, and partly also on account of the want 
of practice on the author's part, his style is encumbered with almost 
intolerable obscurity. Cf. W. Teuffel, Studies and Char. p. 400—409. 

5. As Persius was in the Middle Ages greatly admired on account 
of his moral strictness, and as, moreover, his Satires do not take up 
much space, we possess them in numberless m s s. A list of them is 
given in 0. Jahn's edition (1843) p. CLXXIII— CCXIV . The earliest and 
best are two at Montpellier saec. IX (C) and X (A), the latter with the 
subscriptio : Flavius lulius Tryfonianus Sabinus v. c. . . temptavi emen- 
dare sine antigrapho meum et adnotavi Barcellonae coss. . . Arcadio 
et Honorio Q. (a. 402), see 0. Jahn 1. 1. p. CLXXIV-CLXXXI. CXCII 
sq. and in the Trans, of the Saxon Society 1851, p. 332 sq. The same 
recurs in a Vatican ms. (B). But even these mss., just like all the 
other mss. of Persius, abound in errors, owing to the fact that the 
scribes did not understand what they copied. But this also prevented 
any attempt at interpolation. A. Kissel, Persii codicum mss. Leidensium 
collatio, una cum animadvers. in eius satiram I, Zalt-Bömel 1848. 100 pp. 
On a Vienna ms. saec. X with glosses and Scholia see A. Göbel, Philol. 
XIV. p. 170 sqq. 279 sqq., cf. XV p. 128—135, and in the Conitz pro- 
gram 1859. 4. M. Zillober, on an unknown ms. of Persius, Progr. of 
the Stephan- Gymnasium at Augsburg 1862. 4. 

6. The Scholia on the Satires of Persius (the best reprint in 0. 
Jahn's edition 1843, p. 245—350) bear the title: (Annei) Cornuti com- 
mentum, leaving it uncertain whether they were actually written by 
some Cornutus or that this name was merely prefixed to lend these 
notes the authority of the poet's master and instructor. They are a 
compilation from old glosses and brief Scholia, forming a commentary 
mostly trivial and sometimes even absurd. It may perhaps belong to 
the Carlovingian period (0. Jahn p. CXIII sqq.) an assumption more 
probable than that of C. F. Hermann (lect. Pers. I, Marb. 1842, and 
Anal, de aetate et usu schol. Pers. Getting. 1846. 4.), that it was written 
in the time of Isidore (a. 636). It is doubtful whether anything in this 
commentary should be traced back to Probus (cf. note 1). The glossae 
Pithoeanae are a selection from this commentary (Jahn p. CLXIV — 
CLXVI). 

7. Editio princeps c. 1470 fol. at Rome generally with Juvenal; 
the principal later editions are by B. Fontius (Venet. 1480 fob), J. Bri- 
tanniens (originally Brix. 1481 fob), N. Frischlin (Basle 1582. 4.), P. 
Pithoeus (Paris 1585), E. Vinetus and Th. Marcilius (Paris 1601. 4.), 
Is. Casaubonus (first ed. Paris. 1605.4.; the last edition with many ad- 
ditions by Fr. Dübner, Lips. 1833), König (Getting. 1803), Fr. Passow 
(P. I Leipzig 1809), Achaintre (Paris 1812), E. W. Weber (Lips. 1826), 
Fr. Plum (Copenhagen 1827), J. C. Orelli (Eclogae poett. latt., Zürich 
1833), F. Hauthal (part I Leipzig 1837) and especially 0. Jahn (cum 

6 



82 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

s(3holiis antiquis ed., Lips. 1843; the text Lips. 1851, and, with Juvenal 
and Sulpicia, recogn. Berol. 1868). See also C. F. Heinrich's lectures 
on Pers., edited by 0. Jahn, Leipzig 1844. A text (with Juvenal) 
by C. Fr. Hermann, Lips. (Teubner) 1854. Edited by A. Pretor, 
London 1869. 

8. On Persius see e. g. Nisard, etudes sur les poetes latins de la 
decadence (Paris 1834) 1 p. 237 — 311. 0. Jahn's Prolegomena, and in 
Ersch and (Truber's Encycl. Ill 18. p. 33—38. W. Teuffel's introduction 
to his translation. C. Martha, un poete stoicien. Revue des deux mondes, 
September 1863, p. 291 sqq. Breuker, A. Persius and his time. Mors 

1866. 21 pp. 4. 

Fr. Knickenberg, de ratione stoica in Pers. satt, apparente, Münster 

1867. 122 pp. 

W. Pierson, on the metaphors of Persius, lihein. Mus. XII p. 88 
— 98. B. Erdmann, observationes aliquot grammaticae in Pers. satiras, 
Wittenberg 1866. 4. J. Schlüter, Quaestiones Persianae, Münster 1857. 

9. On Sat. I see A. Kissel (n. 5), F. Hand (Jena 1850 4.), H. Leh- 
mann (Ztschr. f. d. Alt. Wiss. 1852, Nr. 25 sq.). On Sat. II H. Lehmann, 
Philologas VI p. 431—445; on IV Häckermann in Jahn's Archiv XVIIl 
p. 390—410; on V H. Lehmann (Greifswald 1855. 34 pp. 4.) and Han- 
drick (Torgau 1846. 4.: a German translation by the same Torgau 
1853. 4.). 

298. Of the same inind as Persius and a friend of his 
was Seneca's nephew M. Annaeus Luc anus, who in pro- 
portion to his short life (a. 39—65) was a fertile writer in 
various departments both in prose and in verse. We possess 
his Pharsalia in ten books, an unfinished epic poem on the 
Civil War between Pompey and Caesar, of historical accuracy, 
though evidently in favour of Pompey, whose cause the writer 
identifies with that of Rome's liberty and greatness. The 
treatment is very rhetorical, full of descriptions, speeches and 
general sentences; the style is artificial and pathetic; the 
whole production unripe, but indicative of talent and a 
generous heart. 

1. We possess two biographies of Lucan, the one (in Keifterscheid's 
Suetonius p. 50-52) with a gap at the beginning and unfavourable to 
the poet, in close agreement with Hieronymus' abridgment, and hence 
probably by Suetonius; the other (in Reiiferscheid's Suetonius p. 76 — 
79) complete, long-winded, admiring and defending Lucan, probably 
by the expositor Lucani, the grammarian Vacca, probably of the sixth 
century, see C. F. Weber, vitae M. Annaei Lucani collectae, Part. I 
(Marburg 1856. 4.). To this we may add the statements of Tacitus and 



II 



Fersius and Lucan. 83 

Statins' genethliacon Lucani (Silv. II 7). Lucani vita per annos digesta 
by C. F. Weber 1. 1. Part. II and III, Marb. 1857 sq. 4.; and De suprema 
Lucani voce, Marb. 1857, 4. 

2. Vacca: M. Annaeus Lucanus patrem habuit M. Annaeum Melam 
. . Cordubensem, equitem rom. . . notum Romae et propter Senecam 
fratrem . . et propter studium vitae quietioris. . . matrem habuit et 
regionis eiusdem et urbis Aciliam (above 292, 13). . . natus est III non. 
novembr. C. Caesare Germanico II L. Apronio Caesiano coss. (3 Nov. 
792 = 39 A. D.). . . octavum mensem agens Romam translatus est. 
. . a praeceptoribiis tunc eminentissimis est eruditus (cf. vita Persii: 
cognovit per Cornutum etiam Annaeum Lucanum, aequaevum auditorem 
Cornuti. Lucanus mirabatur scripta Flacci etc.). declamavit et graece 
et latine cum magna admiratione audientium. 

o. Suetonius' vita: prima ingenii experimenta in Neronis laudibus 
dedit quinquennali certamine. . . revocatus Athenis a Nerone cohor- 
tique amicorum additus atque etiam quaestura horioratus (sacerdotium 
etiam accepit auguratus, Vacca) non tamen permansit in gratia (the 
fault of which the writer lays upon the poet and the offence taken by 
him at the depreciation of his talent, while Vacca blames Nero's jea- 
lousy of Lucan' poetical succees, see n. 4) . . sed et famoso carmine 
cum ipsum (Neronem) tum potentissimos amicorum gravissime proscidit. 
ad extremum paene signifer Pisonianae coniurationis extitit. . . verum 
detecta coniuratione nequaquam parem animi constantiam praestitit (cf. 
Tac. A. XV 56. 70). . . impetrato autem mortis arbitrio libero . . brachia 
ad secandas venas praebuit medico (cf. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2079 = 
Ner. 9 — cod. Freher. as late as at a. 2Q80 — : M. Annaeus Lucanus 
Cordubensis poeta in Pisoniana coniuratione deprehensus brachium ad 
secandas venas medico praebuit. Vacca: sua sponte coactus vita exce- 
dere venas sibi praecidit periitque pridie kal. mai. Attico Vestino et 
Nerva Siliano coss. = 30 April 818 = 65 A. D.). poemata eius etiam 
praelegi memini, confici vero ac proponi venalia non tantum operose 
et diligenter sed inepte quoque. 

4. Vacca: et certamine pentaeterico acto in Pompei theatre lau- 
dibus recitatis in Neronem fuerat coronatus et ex tempore Orphea 
scriptum (in hexameters) in experimentum adversum complures ediderat 
poetas et tres libros (of the Pharsalia) quales videmus. quare inimicum 
sibi fecerat imperatorem. quo . . interdictum est ei poetica (cf. Tac. 
A. XV 49: famam carminum eius premebat Nero prohibueratque osten- 
tare, vanus adsimulatione ; Dio LXII 29), interdictum etiam causarum 
actionibus. . . extant eius conplures et alii (libri), ut Iliacon (Stat. 
Silv. II 7, 54—56; R. Unger quaestio de Lucani Heliacis, Friedland 1858. 
4.), Saturnalia (from this perhaps Martial. X 64, 6 ?), Catachthonion (cf. 
Stat. Silv. II 7, 57), Silvarum X, tragoedia Medea imperfecta, salticae 
fabulae XIV (see above 8, 1 extr.), Epigrammata (? the codd.: appa- 
mata and et ippamata); prosa oratione in Octavium Sagittam (Tac. A. 
XIII 44. Hist. IV 44) et pro eo (a mere exercise of the pen), de incendio 



84 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

urbis, Epistolarum ex Campania, non fastidiendi quidem omnes, tales 
tarnen ut belli civilis (Phars.) videantur accessio. Also adlocutio ad 
Pollam (his wife Argentaria Polla) according to Stat. Silv. II 7, 62 sq. 
R. linger, de Lucani carminum reliquiis, Friedland 1860. 4. 

5. Quintil. XI, 90: Lucanus ardens et concitatus et sententiis cla- 
rissimus et, ut dicam quod sentio, magis oratoribus quam poetis imi- 
tandus. An old criticism on Lucan (which was perhaps spread by 
Suetonius) is less just. Serv. Aen. I 382: Lucanus ideo in numero poe- 
tarum esse non meruit quia videtur historiam composuisse, non poema. 
This agrees almost verball}'- with Isidor. Orig. VIII 7, 10. Schol. Phars. 
I 1 : ideo Lucanus dicitur a plerisque non esse in numero poetarum 
quia omnino historiam sequitur, quod poeticae arti non convenit. So 
also Jornaud. get. 5. Petron. apparently alludes to him Sat. 118: belli 
civilis ingens opus quisquis attigerit, nisi plenus litteris, sub onere la- 
betur. non enim res gestae versibus comprehendendae sunt, quod longe 
melius historici faciunt, sed etc. Cf. Martial. XIV 194: Lucanus. Sunt 
quidam qui me dicant non esse poetam, sed qui me vendit bibliopola 
putat. It is true that the subject was too large for such a poem as 
the Pharsalia. But the principal mistakes are the rhetorical treatment, 
and the abundance of descriptive passages, in which the limits of mo- 
deration and good taste are frequently overstepped. See, e. g., the 
fearful scenes depicted at the close of b. Ill and VI 530, also VII 839 
sqq. Sentimental rhetoric appears IV 168 sqq. An almost Ovidian 
description of Cornelia's longing for her husband Pompey V 805 sqq. 
Useless exhibition of geographical and mythological learning III 169 sqq. 
IV 593 sqq. 677 sqq. VI 330 sqq. X 193 sqq. 

6. The subject is carried down to the siege sustained by Caesar 
in Alexandria, but the authentic title of the work (IX 983: Pharsalia 
nostra vivet etc. shows that it was the writer's intention to continue 
his work to the battle of Pharsalus. The first three books were pu- 
blished by Lucan himself (see n. 4), when he was still on good terms 
with Nero; whence I 33 — 66 his praise with the customary suggestion 
of a later apotheosis (very different is VII 456 sqq.). A difference of 
political views (A. Preime p. 12 sqq.) between the first books and the 
continuation cannot, however, be maintained. In these we find his pre- 
ference for Pompey (II 453 sqq. 519 sqq. 732 sqq.) and Cato and Brutus 
(II 234 sqq.) as well as his aversion to Caesar (11 439 sqq. 382 sqq.). 
Not diff"erent opinions are enounced by the poet in his later books, 
but rather the same with increased candour, or even bitterness and 
hostility. Pompey's cause is by him identified with right and liberty 
(e. g. VI 139. 259. Vn 579 sqq.), while Caesar's is constantly designated 
as scelus (e. g. VII 751, cf. also IV 188. V 242. 261 sqq. 390 sqq. VI 
147 sqq. 298 sqq. VII 40. 168 sqq. 243. 558 sqq. 751. 777 sqq. VIH 782. 
834). Caesar's victory is represented as the cause not only of the 
downfall of liberty (VII 433 sqq. 639 sqq. 696 sq. IX 204 sqq. 252 sq.), 
but also of the decay of Roman power and majesty (VII 427 sqq.). 
Even Caesar's noble actions are turned into the reverse (VII 798 sqq. 



d 



Lucan. 85 

IX 1034 sqq.), and his assassination is justified and praised (¥11593 sqq. 
cf. VIII 609. X 338 sqq. 523 sqq.). Negatively speaking, Caesar is the 
hero of the poem, and for this reason he is ironically promised immor- 
tality (IX 981 sqq.). Just as he is all that is bad, Pompey is all that 
is good (cf. especially VIII 841 sqq., also V 1 sqq. VI 799 sqq. VII 28 
sqq.), so that even the betrayal of his own country admits of praise 
(VIII 232 sqq.). Only Cato surpasses him in the poet's eyes (IX 597 
sqq., cf. ib. 187 sqq. 254 sqq. 553 sqq.). The Stoic convictions of Lucan 
appear in many passages, e. g. VII 814 sqq. IX 302 sqq. 572 sqq. X 
265 sqq. 413 sq. Expressions resembling Epicurean tenets (e. g. VIT 
446 sqq. 455 sq.) are the results of his despair of a just Providence 
(in 449). Directly against Nero is IX 983 sqq. Other candid expressions 
IV 807 sqq. 823. V 385. VI 229. VII 210. 433 sqq. 456 sqq. Vlll 672. 
IX 252 sq. 600 sqq. X 24 sqq. 

7. That the tenth book is not complete appears even from its 
small size, as it has at least 200 lines less than the other books. But 
even books IV— IX were not published by Lucan himself, but after his 
death by some friend or relation (Genthe p. 75—82). It is, however, 
possible that these books were recited in public by the author himself- 
Vacca pronounces them 'mendosi' and applies to them Ovid's expression 
'emendaturus si licuisset eram', and this may perhaps be said of details, 
but in the whole composition Lucan would scarcely have changed much. 
Fronto p. 157 N. : unum . . poetae prooemium commemorabo, poetae 
eiusdem temporis eiusdemque nominis (as Seneca): fuit aeque Annaeus. 
is initio carminis sui (the Phars.) septem primis versibus nihil aliud 
quam bella plus quam civilia interpretatus est. The erroneous expla- 
nation of these words seems to have caused the report given by the 
Schol. Lucan. I 1 (p. 8 sq. Us.): hos VII versus primos dicitur Seneca 
ex suo addidisse . . ne videretur liber ex abrupto inchcare. Against 
F. Osann (de Sen. scriptis deperditis spec. III. Giessen 1848. 4.) see 
Genthe p. 77 — 81. C. F. Weber, de duplici Pharsaliae Lucaneae exordio? 
Marburg 1860. 26 pp. 4. 

8. Lyd. de magistr. Ill 46: cag 6 IIok^iAMv tv nhfimri ^^rjyrjaf-wv 
Tfjc; xcaci Aovxavov rov Pcj/umov i/uifvkiojy avyyQcci^yjg ccnfi^^rcno. On 
Vacca see n. 1. Some remnants of these commentaries remain in the 
Sch'olia on Lucan, of which we possess a twofold recension, one 
entitled Commenta and which exists in a complete shape only in the 
Berne ms. 370 (C) saec. X, the other styled Adnotationes, the most 
complete and important mss. of which are the Wallersteinensis, two 
Vossiani saec. X at Leyden, and a Gemblacensis at Brussels saec. X- 
The latter have been published by Oudendorp and C. F. Weber, though 
inaccurately; and both together are being edited by H. Usener, of 
which publication Pars prior has appeared containing the commenta 
Bernensia, Lips. Teubner 1869. To this we may add H. Genthe, scholia 
Vetera in Luc. e codice Montepessulano, Berlin 1868. 29 pp. 4. 

9. The epic itself is entitled De hello civili in the mss. The 
earliest ms. of it is formed by the palimpsest leaves at Vienna, Naples 



86 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

and Rome, at the latest of saec. IV. D. Detlefsen, Philologus XIII p. 
313—357. XV p. 526—538 XXVI p. 173—184. W. Steinhart, de Lucani 
schedis rescriptis Vindobonensibus, Salzwedel 1860. 4. and in Fleckeisen's 
Jahrb. 83, p. 553 — 367. Among the other mss., Voss. II (B in Steinhart, 
U in Usener), Montepess., Colbert, and Cassellanus bear the subscription: 
Paulus Constantinopolitanus emendavi manu mea solus, whom Usener 
(Rhein. Mus. XXIII p. 497 — 505) identifies with the Papulus Const. 
Theyderich of a Paris miscellaneous ms. 7530 of a. 674. The mss. of 
this recension differ from the numerous other mss. in omitting a con- 
siderable number of lines in the books not published by Lucan himself, 
which may perhaps' have come from the papers of the poet, but are 
more probably later interpolations. Also in the mss. of this recension 
the lines in question are added from mss. of the other class, though 
in unequal measure. W. Steinhart, de Lucani codice Montepessulano, 
in the Symbola philol. Bonn. p. 287 — 300: see his Diss, de emendatione 
Lucani, Bonn. 1854. C. E. C. Schneider, trium codd. Vratisl. Luc. lec- 
tiones variae, Bresl. 1823. 4. Irnm. Bekker, on a ms. of Lucan at Berlin, 
Monthly Reports of the Academy at Berlin, 1853, p. 166 — 69. On three 
mss. saec. XI and XU see J. Klein, Rhein. Mus. XXIV p. 121—126. 

10. Ed. princeps Rom. 1469 fol. Among the later editions we 
should chiefly mention those by Th. Pulmann (Antverp. 1564. 1576), H. 
Grotius (ex emend. H. Gr. cum eiusdem notis, Antverp. 1614. Lugd. 
1626; cf. Usener, Lucani pugnae Pharsaliae narratio ex H. Gr. rec. ed. 
cum comm. critico, Greifswald 1863. 4. Rhein. Mus. XIX p. 148—150), 
G. Corte (Lips. 1726. cf. H. Genthe in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 89, p. 547 
—550), Fr. Oudendorp (Lugd. Bat. 1728. 4.), P. Burmann (Lugd. 1740. 
4.), C. Fr. Weber (cum notis varr. etc. Lips. 1821—1831, 3 vols., the 
last of which contains the Scholia and editionem morte Cortii inter- 
ruptam absolvit. Lips. 1828 sq. 2 vols.). Also editions by Lemaire 
(Paris 1830, 2 vols.) and C. H. Weise (rec. schol. interpr., Quedlinb. and 
Leipzig 1835). R. Bentley's notes on the first three books in the 
edition Strawberryhill 1760. 4. (Luc. c. notis H. Grotii et R. Bentlei) 
and Glasgow 1816; also in C. F. Weber's edition. 

11. J. Merkel, Lucan's Phars. 1. I in Latin and German. AschaflFen- 
burg 1849. 4. 

12. Meusel and Gottfr. Bürger, de Lucano, Halle 1767 sq. 4. 2 partes. 
Supplements to Sulzer V, 1. p. 16 sqq. VII p. 334 sqq. Leloup, de 
poesi epica et Phars. Luc, Treves 1827.4. A. Preime, de Lucani Phar- 
salia, Marburg 1859, and especially Herm. Genthe, de Lucani vita et 
scriptis, Berlin 1859. 85 pp. 

F. Kortiim, Historical Investigations (Leipzig and Heidelberg 1863) 
p. 209—252. A. Schaubach, Lucan's Phars. and its relation to history, 
Meiningen 1869. 4. Th. Creizenach, the Aeneid . . and the Pharsalia 
in the Middle Ages, Frankfort-on the-Maine 1864. 4. 



Caesium /icu<,sifi^. S7 

299. One of the friends of Persius wjis the lyrical j^oet 
Caesius Bassus who seems also to have written a didactic 
poem de metris. It is probable that in the third century this 
work was turned into a prose-manual of metres, considerable 
fragments of which are extant. Some other compositions 
wrongly bear his name. Other writers of verse in the time 
of Nero are Vagellius. Curtius Montanus, and Serranus. 

1. Vita Persii (see 297, 1) p. 234 J.: amicos liabuit a prima ado- 
lescentia Caesium Bassum poetam et Calpurnium Staturam, qui vivo 
eo iuvenis decessit (and was not a poet himself). He edited the Satires 
of Persius; see above 297, 3. Schol. Pers. 6, 1 (p. 340 J.): hanc satiram 
scribit Persius ad Caesium Bassum poetam lyricum, quern fama est in 
praediis suis positum ardcnte Vesuvio . . et late ignibus abundante cum 
villa sua ustum esse (A. D. 79). Cf. Plin. Ep. VI 16, 8 (according to 
0. Jahn's emendation): accipit codicillos . . Caesi Bassi imminente 
periculo exterriti. Quintil. X 1, 96: lyricorum Horatius fere solus legi 
dignus. . . si quern adicere velis is erit Caesius Bassus, quern nupor 
vidimus. Pers. 6, 1—6: admovit iam bruma foco te, Basse, 8abino? 
iamne lyra et tetrico vivunt tibi pectine chordae, mire opifex numeris 
veterum primordia vocum atque marem strepitum fidis intendisse latinae, 
mox iuvenes agitare iocos et police honesto egregius lusissc senes? 
Priscian. X 36. p. 527 H. : Bassus in II lyricorum: Calliope prince])S 
sapienti psallerat ore. The identity with the writer on metres is ren- 
dered very probable by the quotation Bassius (instead of Bassus) adNero- 
nem de iambico sic dicit, in Rufin. p. 2707 P.=379 Gaisf. From this me- 
trical work is no doubt derived Diomed III p. 513 K.: huius (i. e. mo- 
lossicum metrum) exemplum dat Caesius Bassus tale: Romani victores 
Germanis devictis. Cf. Ter. Maur. 2358: quae (exempla) locasse Caesium 
libro notavi quem dedit metris super. 2369: auctore tanto credo me 
tutum fore. Victorin. ap. Keil VI p. 209, lO sq.: Caesius Bassus, vir 
doctus atque eruditus, in libro de metris 'iambicus trimetrus' . . ait. 
The latter characteristic applies to the treatise de metris which is 
mutilated at the beginning and attributed to Atilius Fortunatianus 
owing to an error arising from the final subscription of a work following 
this in the ms. (see Keil, gramm. VI p. 255—272), which treatise can 
therefore be by Caesius Bassus, especially as it contains many valuable 
notices drawn from old writers (multa quae ex antiquissima et prae- 
stantissima doctrina sunt petita, Keil p. 252). From Persius (numeris 
etc.) we might indeed infer that Caesius' work was originally in verse, 
like that of Terentianus Maurus; for which reason Westphal assumes 
a later prose version. The derivation {naQuymyi^) also assumed by 
Varro of the various metres from one metrum principale (the herons 
and trimeter iambicus) by means of adiectio, detractio, permutatio etc. 
was perhaps contained in it. The examples were derived from the 
contemporary poets Pomponius Secundus (above 279, 7), Seneca (and 



88 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch, 

Petronius Aroiter?) R. Westphal, on Greek metres P p. 169—174. See 
ibid. p. 119 sq. Keil, gramm. latt. VI p. 250—252. 

2. In the collection of the Latin writers on metre a fragment (p. 
2663 sqq. P. — 302 sqq. Gaisf. z= Keil IV p. 305 sq.) bears the title 
of Ars Caesii Bassi de metris. It contains a poor explanation of five 
metres of Horace, derived from Caesius Bassus (n. 1). It is followed 
(p. 307—312 Keil VI) by two chapters, entitled Breviatio pedum and 
De compositionibus, perhaps from Julius Romanus. R. Westphal, on 
Greek metres P p. 118 sq. 132 sq. 204 sq. Keil, gramm. lat. VI p. 253 
and 254. 

3. In general see also Leutsch, Pliilologus XI p. 739—744. J. Caesar 
in Pauly's Enc. I 2. p. 2295, Nr. 10. 

4. Sen. nat. quaest. VI 2, 9: egregie Vagellius meus in illo in- 
clito carmine . . inqnit. Hence Ritschl in Reifferscheid's Suet, reliqq. 
p. 528—531 has applied to this Vagellius the statement of Donatus 
(ib. p. 35): Scipionis fabulas edidisse Terentium Vagellius in Actione 
ait (follow three Senarii). A declamator mulino corde Vagellius occurs 
Juv. 16, 23 cf. 13, 119. 

5. Tac. A. XVI 28 (a. 66 = 819): qui . . Curtium Montanum de- 
testanda carmina factitantem eludere impune sinerent. 29: Montanum 
probae iuventae neque famosi carminis, quia protulerit ingenium, ex- 
torrem agi. Specimens of his candour in the Senate (a. 70) Tac. Hist. 
IV 40. 42. 

6. Quintil. XI, 89 in treating of epic poets: Serranum (G. Sarpe; 
the mss. read farrenum, varrenum etc.) consuramari mors immatura 
non passa est: puerilia tamen eius opera et maximam indolem osten- 
dunt et admirabilem praecipue in aetate ilia recti generis voluntatem. 
But Juv. 7, 79 — 81 presupposes a man of longer life: contentus fama 
iaceat Lucanus in hortis marmoreis, at Serrano tenuique Saleio gloria 
quantalibet quid erit, si gloria tantumst? According to these words 
Serranus should rather be placed in a later period. 

7. On Gaetulicus see above 286, 1; on Atticus Labeo below 303, 5. 

8. In this period lived the two epigrammatists Lucillius and Leoni- 
das (of Alexandria) who occupy much space in the Greek Anthology. 

300. It cannot be doubted that in Nero's time arose that 
character-novel which has come down to us under the name 
of Petronius Arbiter. Originally a large work of at least 
20 books with accounts of various adventures supposed to 
have taken place during a journey, it now consists of a heap 
of fragments, the largest of which is the cena Trimalchionis, 
being the description of a feast given by a rich and un- 
educated upstart. Though full of dirt, this novel is not only 



I 



Writers on metre, yetronius. ' 89 

highly important in illustrating the history of the manners and 
language, especially plebeian, but is also a work of art in its 
way, full of humour, knowledge of human nature, splendid 
wit and merry humour. In its form it is a satira menippea, 
in which the metrical pieces interspersed contain parodies of 
certain fashions of taste. This applies especially to the large 
epic poems of Troiae halosis and Bellum civile. The spirit 
of this work bears great affinity to C. Petronius, a courtier 
who was compelled to die by Nero a. 66, but the identity of 
the writer and the courtier is by no means certain. 

1. The original title of the work appears to have been Satirae, 
which is partly preserved in the mss. (satirarum liber etc.), partly 
chang'ed to satiricon or Petronii Arbitri satiric! liber or similar titles; 
the most complete title is given by the cod. Trag. : Petronii Arbitri 
Satyri fragmenta ex libro XV et XVI ; see Bücheler's edition p. VI sq. 
and p. 2. The name of Afranius which is found in mss. by the side 
of Petr. Arb., denotes his resemblance to that poet of togatae in pue- 
rorum foedis amoribus (above 131, 1). Being employed for excerpts in 
anthologies, the work itself was all the sooner lost, which it appears 
to have been as early as the 7th century. In the 9th century we find 
that the carmen de hello civili was both known and used. In the lOth 
and 11th century the earliest ms. we have was written, cod. Bernensis 
(B); saec. XII John of Salisbury, saec. XIII Vincentius of Beauvais read 
Petronius in his present shape. Bücheler's ed. p. X sq. The pretended 
discoveries of new parts of Petronius since the end of the 17th century 
have always turned out to be forgeries; especially the parts published 
by Fr. Nodot a. 1693 at Paris (Bücheier p. XLII), and Lallemand's pre- 
tended discovery at St. Gall (Paris 1800). 

2. The extant mss. have on the whole the same gaps and cor- 
ruptions and must, therefore, be derived from one and the same ori- 
ginal ms., which contained only excerpts from the complete work of 
Petronius and besides them various small Latin poems and glosses 
collected by anonymous hands from Gellius, Isidore and ecclesiastical 
writers, and which came to be attributed to Petronius owing to their 
connexion with the excerpts from Petronius. Cf. C. Beck, Petronius 
Arbiter de antiquis dictionibus, Cambridge (America) 1860. 26 pp. 4. 
and on it A. Reifferscheid, Rhein. Mus. XVI p. 1 — 12. Similar miscel- 
laneous mss. among the codd. of Petronius are the Leidensis (L) of 
Jos. Scahger, Bernensis (B) and Traguriensis (saec. XV) from Trau in 
Dalmatia found c. 1620, now in the library at Paris (A). The latter con- 
tains also the cena Trimalchionis (H), first published from it Patav. 
1664 and (by P. Petitus) Paris 1664. On the mss. of Petronius in ge- 
neral see Bücheler's edition p. XII— XXXVI, cf. p. XLIV sqq. C. Beck, 
the manuscripts of the sat. of P. A. described and collated, Cambridge 



90 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

(Mass. Ü. S.) 1863. 218 pp. 4.; on the Leyden and Berne mss. of P. 
and their mutual relation, Philol. XX p. 293—301, and against him 
Bücheier ibid. p. 726—730. 

3. In the extant parts the freedman Eucolpius is introduced as 
speaker, describing the adventures he experienced on a journey together 
wnth another freedman, Ascyltos, and their puer, called Giton. Adven- 
tures at Marseilles are indicated by Sidon. Apol. c. XXIII 155 sq., 
but the part we possess takes place in the South of Italy, most of it 
in a 'colonia' of Campania, perhaps Naples or (L. Friedländer in the 
Königsb. ind. lect. 1860 sq. p. 61 sq.) Puteoli, ch. 116 sqq. at Croton. 
The time of the events is laid under Tiberius (Bücheier p. VII), which 
agrees also with the mention made of (Mam. Aemilius) Scaurus (above 
271, 2) c. 77; there are also interspersed allusions to persons of the 
time of Caligula and Nero (Bücheier p. VIII) The characters are ca- 
pitally delineated, chiefly in their own words, but with a slight trace 
of irony. The diction of each character is always in strict conformity 
with their habits ; Eucolpius himself using the speech of educated per- 
sons in the best age of Latin literature (C. Beck, the age etc. p. 135 
— 152), maintaining of course the liberty of the conversational style and 
adding a number of constructions peculiar to the first century of the 
Christian era (an uncritical collection in Beck 1. 1. p. 152 — 157). Most 
of the occasional speakers use a plebeian diction, full of proverbial 
expressions, slang, exaggeration , solecisms and archaisms and also 
Grecisms (owing to the semi-Greek character of the place) : see G. 
Studer, Rhein. Mus. II (1843) p 75-85. C. Beck, the age etc. p. 106 
— 184. Cf. n. 9. The versified passages are mostly attributed to the 
vain and tasteless poet Eumolpus; especially c. 89 the Troiae halosis 
in 65 senarii and c. 119 — 124 the bellum civile in 295 hexameters. But 
in other places also the diction easily passes into poetical form, 
e. g. c. 5, 83, 108, 127 sq.. 131, 133 sq., 135 sq. 139 hexameters c. H' 
18, 80, 82, 109, 126,132, 137 in distichs; c. 5 choliambics; hendecasyl- 
labics c. 15, 79, 93, 109, fr. 20; logaoedi 132; lonici 23; iambs fr. 19,21. 
This feature turns the novel into a satira Menippea (above 24, 3). 

4. As regards the different opinions on the age of this work we 
should mention Niebuhr's view (Trans, of the Academy at Berlin 1828. 
II. p. 250 sqq. = Minor Philological Writings p. 337 sqq.) that it be- 
longed to the third century and the reign of Alexander Severus, a view 
caused by an inscription (Orelli 1175) erroneously assigned to that time 
and the persons of which were wrongly identified with those of Pe- 
tronius; see W. TeufiFel, Studies and Char. p. 391—393. Bücheier p. IV 
sq. not. On the other hand, C. Beck^ the age of Petronius Arbiter, 
Cambridge (Mass.) 1856. 158 pp. 4, (esp. p. 100—104) places the work 
under Augustus or Tiberius, between A. D. 6 and 34; against him see 
Bücheier, Rh. Mus. XI p. 608 sq. In our days we may look upon that 
view as firmly established, according to which the work was written 
under Nero; see especially G. Studer, P.hein. Mus. II p. 50—92. 202 sq. 
F. Ritter ibid. p. 561- 569; W. Teuffel ibid. IV p. 514 sq. Neque ho- 



Petronwü!. 91 

mines, res, mores, studia, cultus denique omnia humanus civilisque 
qualis describitur, neque genus sermonis arsque metrorum in aliud 
atque Neronianum tempus conveniunt certum igitur et Senecae Pe- 
tronium et Lucano fuisse aequalem (Bücheier, ed. p. V). Even in Nero's 
time the simple and natural style of this novel formed an exception, 
but at any later time it would have been an impossibility. For allu- 
sions to Seneca see E. Gottschlich, de parodiis Senecae apud Petronium, 
in the Miscell. philolog. for Fr. Haase's jubilee (Breslau 1863) p. 26—29. 
It is evident that the Troiae halosis alludes to a similar poem by Nero 
on the same subject (above 281, 8), and that the bellum civile is a 
parody of Lucan's poem whose manner is exaggerated, though he is 
not mentioned, as he was still living; see J. G. Mossier, de Petr. poe- 
mate de bello civili (Breslau 1842) and quaestionum Petron. spec, quo 
poema de bello civili cum Pharsalia Lucani comparatur, Hirschberg 
1857; spec. II., Hirschberg 1865. 4. 1870. 4. 

5. Tac. A. XVI 17 : paucos intra dies eodem agmine Annaeus Mela, 
. . C. Petronius cecidere (a. 66 =±: 819 v. c.)- 18: de C. Petronio 
pauca supra repetenda sunt, nam illi dies per somnum, nox officiis et 
oblectamentis vitae transigebatur ; utque alios industria, ita hunc ignavia 
ad famam protulerat habebaturque non ganeo et profligator, . . sed 
erudito luxu. ac dicta factaque eius quanto solutiora et quandam sui 
iieglegentiam praeferentia tanto gratius in spem simplicitatis accipie- 
bantur. proconsul tamen Bithyniae et mox consul vigentem se ac 
parem negotiis ostendit. dein revolutus ad vitia seu vitiorum imitatione 
inter paucos famiiiarium Neroni adsumptus est, elegantiae arbiter, dum 
nihil amoenum et molle affluentia putat nisi quod ei Petronius adpro- 
bavisset. When sentenced to die, he audiebat referentes nihil de im- 
mortalitate animae et sapientium placitis, sed levia carmina et faciles 
versus. That the work of Petronius, mentioned ib. 19 sq., and in which 
he flagitia principis sub nominibus exoletorum feminarumque et novi- 
tatem cuiusque stupri perscripsit atque obsignata misit Neroni, has no 
connexion with the extant satirae, has been proved by Fr. Ritter 
(Rh. Mus. II p. 569—572) and is not refuted by C. Peter (Hist, of Rome 
III 1 p. 360 note). The character of C. Petronius does indeed suit the 
character of the satire, but the passage of Tacitus not only not 
indicates any literary activity, but even excludes it; see W. Teuffel, 
Studies and Char. p. 394 sq. It is true that a serious character, like 
Tacitus, might perhaps neglect a work which he was right in consi- 
dering as dirty literature; but had it appeared under the name of the 
consul he characterized he still ought to have mentioned it as the 
most forcible indication of his character, and at all events he could 
not merely have stated: illi dies per somnum transigebatur. Even in 
case it was a work of his earlier years or published after his death, 
*his pecuhar silence and such a characteristic were incompatible. We 
should, therefore, either assume that the satirae were published ano- 
nymously and perhaps appeared at a different place (in Massilia? Ap. 
Sid XXm 115), the work being subsequently attributed to the Petronius 



92 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

mentioned by Tacitus owing to a combination caused by the affinity 
of time and spirit, and in which the designation of Petronius as ele- 
gentiarum arbiter may have caused the surname of Arbiter, or in case 
the author called himself Petronius Arbiter, we must assume that he is 
diiferent from the one mentioned by Tacitus. The identity of the two 
is not, however, doubted by Borghesi, Oeuvres III p. 561 sq. 

6. The earliest appearance of the name is in Terent. Maur. v. 
2489 sqq. (Arbiter disertus) and 2852 sqq. (Petronius). Sidon. Apoll. 
carm. IX 268 mentions Petr. in a list of poets, XXIU 155 Arbiter 
among the famous writers eloquii latini. The judgment of Lyd. de 
mag. I 41 (above 24, 2), is destitute of authority. Macrob. comm. in 
somn. Sc, I 2, 8: fabulae . . auditum mulcent, velut comoediae . . vel 
argumenta fictis casibus amatorum referta (novels), quibus vel multum 
se Arbiter exercuit vel Apuleium nonnumquam lusisse miramur. Quo- 
tations of Petronius in Diomed (Arbiter), Servius, Priscian, Fulgentius 
(Petr. Arb.), Sergius and others, collected in Bücheler's ed. p. 206 sqq. 
The name of Petronius is not attested in the case of the poems nr. 
31—40, 50—52 in Bücheier; A. Riese in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 99, p. 281. 

7. On the editions of the satirae see Bücheier p. XXXVII 
sqq. Among those published before the discovery of the cena Trim, 
(n. 2) we may mention those by J. Dousa (Lugd. 1585 and elsewhere), 
Goldast (Helenop. 1610. Frankf. 1611), Gonsalez de Salas (Francof. 1629. 
4.); among the later editions especially those by P. Burmann (Utrecht 
1709. 4. Amsterdam 1743. 4.; J. J. Reiske, libellus animadvers. ad alt. 
ed. Burmann., Lips. 4 parts), also C.G.Anton (Lips. 1781). Texts Lips. 
1721, Bipont. 1790. The first critical edition ex recens. Fr. Bücheleri, 
Berol. 1862; the text (with the Priapeia) ib. 1862, and (with Varro's 
satires and Seneca's apocol.) 1871. 

8. Contributions to the criticism of the text by J. C. Orelli (lec- 
tiones Petron., Zurich 1836. 4.), G. Studer (observat. critt. in Petr. cen. 
Trim., Bern 1839. 4.), W. Wehle (observat. critt. in Petr., Bonn 1861), 
0. Keller (Rhein. Mus. XVI p. 532-551), C. Beck (above n. 2). 

9. On Petronius and his work see also W. TeufTel in Pauly's 
Enc. V p. 1402—1406. Fr. Bücheier, New Swiss Mus. Ill (Bern 1863) 
p. 17 — 31. E. Ludwig, de Petr. sermone plebeio. Lips. 1870. 39 pp. 

301. About the commencement of Nero's reign, Calpur- 
niiis wrote seven eclogues with strict technical elaboration 
and in imitation of the manner and subjects of Theocritus 
and Virgil, in pretty good taste, but with much servility. To 
the same time belong two other extensive fragments of bucolic 
poems in an Einsiedeln ms. Two centuries afterwards Cal- 
purnius himself was imitated and exaggerated by Nemesianus, 
whose garrulous four eclogues differ from Calpurnius both in 



I 



Petronivs. Calpumius and Neniedanus. 9^ 

prosody and metre, but were long mixed up with those of 
Calpurnius, owing to their outward and casual connexion. 

1. In the ms. of Thaddaeus Ugoletus of uncertain age, from 
which the edition of Angelas Ugoletus (Parma c. 1490) was made, the 
property of the two poets is carefully distinguished (in the edition: 
Titi Calphurnii Siculi bucolicum carmen . . incipit; Aurelii Nemesiani 
poetae Carthaginiensis ecioga prima incipit; according to Nie. Augelius : 
finis bucolicorum Calphurnii. Aurelii Nemesiani p. earth, ecioga prima 
etc., see M. Haupt, p. 11 sq.) and even the cod. Neapol. has at the end 
of eel. 11 the subscription: Aureliani Nemesiani Carthag. buc. explicit 
(Haupt p. 13). The signal difference of technical treatment has been 
pointed out by M. Haupt, de carminibus bucolicis Calpurnii et Neme- 
siani, Berlin 1854. 4., p. 1 — 5. In the poems of Calpurnius a final o 
is used short only in agreement with the strictest poets, in those of 
Nemesianus we find mulcendo, laudando, arabo' and other shortenings; 
in the first, synaloephe is extremely scarce (in 758 lines we find, be- 
sides three doubtful instances of synaloephe of q u e in subsequent 
feet, only eight certain instances and these always in the first foot, six 
examples of e, and one each of a and urn. Five of these instances 
occur in eel. 3 which is perhaps the earliest of all, one each in eel. 1, 
2, 5, none at all in eel. 4, 6, 7; but in the 319 hexameters of Neme- 
sianus we have 39 instances of synaloephe, three of which (8,21. 9,14. 
32) concern a long vowel and only about half of them the first foot. 
To terminate a line with montivagus Pan (eel. 10, 17), or to take 
futuri (perhaps venturi) as a molossus (eel. 10, 23), is never found in 
Calpurnius. The caesura consists in Calpurnius in more than 70 in- 
stances in the combination of xcaa tqitov rQO)((äov, TQtS^rj/uijUfQtjg and 
ii^&rifufxsQ^g, in Nemesianus it is almost limited to the nfyS^tjfxijufQijg, 
that other combination occurring only 6 times. But the technical 
treatment of the last four eclogues agrees with that of Nemesianus' 
Cynegetica (Haupt p. 9 sq.). The identity of the author of all the 
eleven eclogues is also excluded by the numerous repetitions of com- 
plete lines and the variation of thoughts and phrases which occur in the 
last four as compared with the first seven ; especially eel. 9 (Nemes. 2) 
is almost entirely a compilation from eel. 2, 3 and 7 ; but also in eel. 
8 (Nem. 1) eel. 1, 4 and 6 are much used, and 10 (Nem. 3), 2 is iden- 
tical with (Calp.) 5, 2. Statins is never imitated in eel. 1 — 7, but in 
8 — 11, and also in Nemesianus' Cyneg. (Haupt p. 10 sq.). A certain 
fondness of a parenthetic use of memini, fateor appears only in the 
first seven, but not in the last four pieces. 

2. The time in which the first seven eclogues were written ap- 
pears with certainty from the numerous allusions contained in them» 
especially in eel. 1, 4 and 7 (Haupt p. 16—26). The prince (deus) is 
styled iuvenis (1, 44. 4, 85. 137. 7, 7) of youthful beauty (7, 84), ma- 
ternis causas qui lusit in ulnis (1, 44 see above 281, 7) who exhibits 
splendid games, composed with which vilia sunt quaecunque prioribus 



94 The First, Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

annis vidimus et sordet quidquid spectavimus olim (7, 44 sq.), with 
whose accession begins an era of peace, liberty and dementia (1, 42 
— 88. 4 passim). All this agrees with Nero's reign and its prosperous 
commencement, just as the comet which appears in autumn (1, 77 sqq.) 
suits the comet which made its appearance shortly before the death of 
Claudius (a. 807). The diction and metre of these seven eclogues 
would also suit this period, or at least nothing would force us beyond 
it. The writer complains of his poverty (4, 156 sqq.) and endeavours 
through Meliboeus (according to Sarpe, quaest. phil. Rostock 1819. 4. 
= Seneca, according to Haupt p. 26 sq. = Calpurnius Piso) to bring 
his panegyric poems under the notice of the prince. It cannot be de- 
cided whether 'Siculus' denotes his native country or he is called so 
merely on account of writing in the style of Theocritus. 

3. Even in the portion belonging to Calpurnius thoughts and 
subjects are imitated from Theocritus and Virgil, in the sentimental 
and rhetorical style of the first century and with an exaggeration of 
the colours of the original (e. g. 2, 15). Nemesianus in his turn ex- 
aggerates the ideas and phrases of Calpurnius, especially the erotic 
traits, and the rhetorical execution is very lengthy and tiresome. On 
the whole, the last four poems attest much less poetical talent than 
the first four. 

4. The best ms. of the eleven poems is the Neapolitan of the be- 
ginning of saec. XV; the Paris ms. 8049 saec. XIII (=: Heinsii cod. ap. 
Burmann?) contains only eel. I, 2, 3, and 4, 1—12, A copy of the cod. 
of Th. Ugoletus (see n. 1) is in the Riccardian library. None of the 
mss. which attribute all the eleven eclogues to Calpurnius goes beyond 
saec. XV. 

5. Editio princeps Rom. 1471 fol. (with Silius It.). Then often 
together with Gratius' (above 148, 1) and Nemesianus' Cynegetica. In 
Wernsdorf's poetae lat. min. II p. 73—214. Recognovit, annotation e et 
glossario instruxit Chr. D. Beck, Lips. 1803. In W. E. Weber's Corp. 
poetar. lat. p. 662—671. Recens. et annott. critt. instr. C. E. Glaeser, 
Gotting. 1842. 

6. Contributions to the criticism of Calpurnius by M. Haupt (see 
n. 1) p. 27—32, on Nemesianus' eel. ib. p. 32—35, on his Cyneg. ib. 
p. 35 — 37; on Calp. and Nemes. see also J. Mähly, on Soph. 0. C. 
(Basle 1868) p. 101—118. 

7. The Einsiedeln poems were first published (from a ms. saec. 
X) by H. Hagen, Philol. XXVIH p. 338-341, and by A. Riese, Anthol. 
lat. 725 sq. (II p. 180—183). Contributions to their criticism and esti- 
mation by R. Peiper (praef. in Sen. tragg. suppl., Breslau 1870. 4. p. 
27—32), Bücheier, Rhein. Mus. XXVI p. 235-240, Ribbeck ibid. p. 406 
—410, cf. p. 491—493, H. Hagen in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 103, p. 239— 152. 
The first consists of 49, the second of 39 hexameters; the first is a 
poetical contest between Ladas and Thamyras (iudice Mida), the second 



Calpiifnius and Nemedarms. The poem on Etna. 95 

a dialogue between Glyceranus and Mystes. The second surpasses the 
first in talent, truth of sentiment, wit and poetical depth, though this 
should not be used to infer difference of authorship, as H. Hagen does. 
The author of the first poem is in a more favourable position than 
Calpurnius; cf. v. 18: et me . . Cynthius . . laudatam chelyn, iussit 
variar'e canendo. The beginning of the second (quid tacitus, Mystes?) 
agrees curiously with that of Calpurn. eel. 4, ßücheler p. 239 sq. thinking 
Calpurnius the imitator. Nero is belauded in the usual manner, nr. 
725 praising Nero's public appearance as citharoedus, and nr. 726 the 
return of the golden age under Nero. A long vowel is elided only 
once 725, 45 (ergo ut), and only puto (725, 11) is shortened. Besides 
the Tifpd-tjjLti^uQfijg, only the combination of tqit. rQo/. with f^f ,V^. occurs 
(n. 1) five times in nr. 725 (v. 6, 8, 26 sq. 40), six times in nr. 726 
(v. 7, 10, 24, 31, 36, 39). 



302. To the time of Nero we should probably attribute 
the didactic poem entitled Aetna, containing 645 correct hexa- 
meters, most of them in rather a dry style and with 
zealous opposition to current opinions. The author of it is 
probably Seneca's friend, Lucilius Junior, a man of literary 
culture. 

1. That the work was written before the great eruption of Vesu- 
vius a. 69, appears from the complete absence of any mention of it 
(e. g. 429 sqq., cf. 605 sqq.). It begins with a lengthy impugnatiou of 
the mythical opinions caused by the poets in reference to the causes 
of volcanic activity (fallacia vatum 29 sqq.; stolidi mendacia vulgi 366 ; 
fabula mendax 511), and general opposition to anthropopathic suppo- 
sitions (32 sq. 370). The poem often alludes to Epicurean (32 sq.) and 
Stoic tenets (173 sq. 537 sqq.). Debita carminibus libertas ista, sed 
omnis in vero mihi cura, 91 sq. Didactic expressions are frequently met 
with, see 116 sq. 143 sq. 158 sqq. 175. 188 sqq. 219 sqq. 306 sq. 329 sq. 
348. 387 sq. 391 sq. 399 sq. 415 sq. 425 sqq. 448 sq. 510 sq. 529. 536 sq. 
The same words and structures occur repeatedly. The real didactic 
parts are characterized by a great want of variety and life ; very con- 
spicuous in them is the lava (lapis molaris). On the other hand, the 
diction improves and becomes more sympathetic when the beauty and 
human dignity of the study of nature are contrasted with small pursuits 
(224—281) and distant branches of activity (568—598). In the same 
way, the description of an eruption of Etna (608 sqq.) is very vivid. 
Did the author use Seneca's nat. quaest. (e. g. 119 sqq. 282 sqq.)? Cf. 
Jacob p. XVIII sq. The allusions to Lucretius are more evident; but 
on the whole the diction follows the style established especially by 
Virgil. The metrical peculiarities attest the fluctuation and uncertainty 
peculiar to the fifty years subsequent to the death of Augustus. Though 
in the main agreeing with Ovid, the metre retains, chiefly in the treat- 



96 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

ment of caesura, some harshnesses ot Virgil's, just as we find it in 
Manilius and Statius (L. Müller). 

2. Sen. nat. quaest. IV praef. 9 to Lucilius: ita est, mi lunior. 
He was born perhaps ten years later than Seneca (ib. Ill 1, 1 : apud 
te, iuvenis carissime, invenio : followed by a hexameter. Epist. 26, 7: 
iuvenior es), at Pompeji or Naples (Sen. Epist. 49, 1, 55, 1. 70, 1), in 
modest circumstances (nat. quaest. IV praef. 15: eluctatus natalium 
angustias; cf. Epist. 19, 5. 44), out of which he worked his way by 
assiduous exertion: Sen. Epist. 44, 2: eques rom. es et ad hunc ordinem 
tua te perduxit industria. Cf. ib. 19, 3: in medium te protulit ingenii 
vigor, scriptorum elegantia, clarae et nobiles amicitiae. iam notitia te 
invasit. Nat. quaest. IV praef. 15 — 17 Seneca lets him say: non mihi 
in amicitia Gaetulici (above 286, 1) vel Caius fidem eripuit, non . . 
Messala et Narcissus. . . videbam apud Caium tormenta, . . non tarnen 
ferro incubui etc. He held various official appointments in Germany, 
lUyria and Africa (Sen. Ep. 31, 9), and was finally for some time Im- 
perial intendant (procurator) in Sicily (nat. quaest. IV praef. 1. Epist. 
19, 5. 31, 9. 43, 3 and often). 

3. The interest Lucilius Junior took in literature. Sen. nat. q. 
IV praef. 1. Epist. 45, 1. ib. 2, 2: vide ne ista lectio auctorum mul- 
torum et omnis generis voluminum liabeat aliquid vagum et instabile. 
Seneca exercised a favourable intiuence upon him (Epist. 34, 2: adsero 
te mihi, meum opus es. ego cum vidissem indolem tuam inieci manum 
etc.). Lucilius' correspondence with Seneca is often mentioned by the 
latter, e. g. 'Epist. 59, 4: audi quid me in epistula tua delectaverit : 
habes verba in potestate. non efi'ert te oratio nee longius quam desti- 
nasti trahit. (5.) . . pressa sunt omnia et rei aptata. loqueris quantum 
vis et plus significas quam loqueris. . . (6.) invenio tamen translationes 
verborum, . . invenio imagines etc. His literary occupations. In Seneca 
nat. quaest. IV. praef. 14, Lucilius says: liberalius me studiis tradidi 
quamquam paupertas alia suaderet et ingenium eo duceret ubi praesens 
studii pretium est, ad gratuita carmina me deflexi et ad salutare Studium 
philosophiae me contuli. To the latter department seems to have be- 
longed the work mentioned by Sen. Epist. 46: librum tuum, quern 
mihi promiseras, accepi. . . qui quam disertus fuerit ex hoc intellegas 
licet: levis mihi visus est, cum esset nee mei uec tui corporis, sed qui 
primo adspectu aut T. Livii aut Epicuri posset videri. Cf. ib. 23, 9: 
Epicuri tui. Lucilius was, however, just as much or little of a real 
Epicurean as Seneca was of a Stoic; cf. ib. 107, 1 (Epicurus noster). 
Nat. quaest. IV 2, 2: quare non cum poeta meo (Lucil.) iocor et illi 
Ovidiura suum impingo? He had chiefly written poetry on Sicilian 
subjects; ib. Ill 26, 6 (hoc, the legend of Arethusa, et a te traditum 
est ut in poemate, LuciH carissime),) cf. the hexameter ib. 1, 1. He 
dressed up philosophical ideas in epic metre, Sen. Epist. 24, 19 — 21. 
Sentences as senarii ib. 8, 10. Ibid. 79, 1: exspccto epistulas luas qui- 
bus indices mihi circumitus Siciliae totius quid tibi novi ostenderit. 
ib. 5 : Aetnam describas in tuo carmine et hunc solemnem omnibus 



I 



The poem on Etna. 97 

poetis locum attingas. quern quo minus Ovidius tractaret nihil ohstitit 
quod iam Yergilius (occasionally) impleverat. ne Severum quidem Cor- 
nelium uterque deterruit. 7: aut ego te non novi aut Aetna tibi salivain 
movet. iam cupis grande aliquid et par prioribus scribere. 

4. As, therefore, both the period (n. 2) and the philosophical 
(Epicurean) and literary (Ovid, Seneca) tendencies of Lucilius and his 
intention of choosing Etna as the subject of a poem (n. 3) agree with 
this work, it is very probable that he wrote it, and we want only the 
confirmation of the mss. The poem has come down to us in the ap- 
pendix of the poems of Virgil and as one of his works; see above 
225, 1 n. 1 sq. To attribute this poem to Cornelius Severus (above 
247, 5) was an inference drawn from Sen. Epist. 79, 5 (see n. 3 fin.) 
which is quite devoid of further support. 

5. The poem on Etna has come down to us with several gaps. 
The best ms. is the lost Florentine ms. {ß in Munro's edition), which 
contained, however, only v. 138 — 286 (see Munro p. 30—32); the most 
complete ms. and which is far superior to all the others is the Cam- 
bridge ms. («) collated by Munro (see p. 29 sq.). With this agrees 
most of all the fragmentum Stabulense (from the abbey of Stavelot) ; 
see Bormans, collation des 167 premiers vers de I'Aetne de L. J. avec 
un fragment mscr. du Xln^e siecle, Brussels 1854. 124 pp. (Bulletin p. 
258—379); cf. F. W. Schneidewin, Götti. Gel. Anz. 1855. The interpo- 
lated class, saec. XIY sq., is represented by Munro's y (British Museum, 
Arundel 133), cf (Jacob's Helmstad.), t (Jacob's ms. 3 =: Vratisl.), C 
(in the British Mus.) 

6. The poem was originally published with Virgil's works, e. g. 
Aid. 1517. 1534, by Scaliger, Lyons 1572 or 1573, Leyden 1595; see 
Munro p. 26 sq. ; separately by Th. Gorallus {=. John Leclerc), Amster- 
dam 1703. 1715; in Wernsdorf's poetae lat. min. IV p. (79) 87-214 (216) ; 
•cf. p. 3—25. In W. E. Weber's corpus poet. lat. p. 1405—1410. With 

a German translation by Schmid (Brunswick 1769) and J. H. F. Meineke 
(Quedlinburg 1818). Rec. notasque los. Scaligeri, Fr. Lindenbruchii et 
suas adiecit (also a metrical translation) Fr. Jacob, Lips. 1826. XXIV 
and 270 pp. Revised, emended and explained by H. A. J. Munro, Cam- 
bridge 1867. 84 pp. 

7. Critical contributions by M. Haupt (Quaest. CatulL 1841, p. 54 
—68, in the Berlin list of lectures 1854. 20 pp. 4. and 1859. 11 pp. 4. 
also in Hermes HI p. 338 — 341, and J. Mähly, contributions to the 
criticism of the poem on Etna, Basle 1862. 32 pp. 4., E. Bahrens 
(lectiones latt., Bonn 1870. p. 36—40). 

303. In the first century and under the Julian Dynasty 
was composed a metrical version on the subject-matter of the 
Iliad for school-purposes. Though at first a mere translation, 
the work assumes gradually the character of an abridg- 



Ö8 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

ment. The author does not show any original talent, but 
makes much use of the Aeneid and the Metamorphoses ; he is, 
however, correct and accurate in all technical peculiarities. 

1. Of the 1075 (1070) hexameters contained in this work, 537 cor- 
respond to the first five books of the Iliad. The catalogue of the ships 
is rendered with much accuracy and the numerous and frequently dif- 
ficult names arc brought in without a single mistake. The books XIX 
to XXII are treated very superficially. In a few instances the author 
has permitted himself some extensions, chiefly by adding comparisons 
or descriptions. He may, perhaps, have availed himself of a prose- 
abridgment of the Iliad. He made extensive use of Ovid and Virgil, 
and is often put to straits by metrical necessities. His horizon does 
not extend beyond the Augustan poets, though a few weak traces seem 
to point to Lucretius. The metre is treated with a strictness almost 
pedantic. That the work was composed under the Julian Dynasty, at 
the very latest under Nero, appears from v. 904 — 907 W. ■=: 899 — 902 
M.: quem (Aeneas) nisi servasset magnarum rector aquarum, ut pro- 
fugus latus Troiam repararet in arvis augustumque genus caeli submit- 
teret astris, non clarae gentis nobis mansisset origo. Cf. 235 (sacer 
Aeneas). 483 (Veneris pulcerrima proles). C. Lachmann, Monthly 
Trans, of the Academy at Berlin, January 1841 (before the death of 
Tiberius); see his note on Iwein p. 527 and on Lucr, III 11. L.Müller 
on the abridgment etc. p. 15, and Philol. XV p. 479-482. 502. 

2. The epitome was much used in the Middle Ages and generally 
styled Homerus. But as early as the llth century (the first time in 
the abbot Benzo, before 1106, see Phil. XV p. 475) the name of Pin- 
darus (Thebanus) occurs for this author; this must be due to some mis- 
take ; as L. Müller, Rh. Mus. XXIV p. 492 sq., supposes, to some mis- 
conception of Horace 0. IV 9, 5 sqq. On subsequent employment by 
Albert of Stade, Guido de Columna and the Trojumanna saga see H. 
Dünger, on the Legend of the Trojan war, Dresden 1869, p. 28. 63sq. ,78. 

3. As regards the numerous mss., only few (e. g. the Florentine 
ms.) go beyond saec. XI; the best (i. e. least interpolated) are one of 
Burmann (v. 1—644), an Erfurd ms. (Ritschl, Rh. Mus. I p. 137—140) 
and the second Leyden ms. After the llth century, when this abridg- 
ment was frequently read in schools, it underwent many interpolations 
and changes. L. Müller, on the abr. etc. p. 11 — 14, and on the second 
Leyden ms. of Homer, lat., in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 85, p. 729 — 732. On 
a Brussels ms. see Reiffenberg Annuaire III p. 189 sqq. 

4. Editions of the epitome. The first dated ed.. Farm. 1492; 
but one s. 1. et a. seems to be earlier. Of the later editions we mention 
especially Wernsdori's in his poetae latini minores IV p. 617 — 752, cf. 
ib p. 546—567. 598-604. 608-616. Incerti auctoris, vulgo Pindari Theb. 
epitome Iliadis homericae e rec. et cum notis Th. van Kooten ; edidit 
. . II. Weytingh, Lugd. Bat. et Amstelod. 1809. L. Müller, on the 



I 



Pindarus Thebanus. 99 

abridgment of the Iliad by the so-called Pindarus Theb. (Berlin 1857) 
p. 16—46, and supplements Philologus XV p. 483-509. 

5. Th. Bergk, Philologus XIV p. 184, conjectures that the author 
was Attius who is mentioned by Persiu8 I 50 (Ilias Atti ebria veratri) 
as the author of a prose Iliad, a person frequently called Attius Labeo 
owing to a combination with ib. 4 (ne mihi . . Labeonem praetulerint). 
Against this see L. Müller, Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 83, p. 652 sq. M. Haupt, 
Berlin ind. lect. 1859 sq. p. 4. Schol. Pers. I 4 (p. 248 J.): quia Labeo 
transtulit Iliada et Odysseam, verbum ex verbo, ridicule satis, quod 
verba potius quam sensum secutus sit. eius est ille versus : crudum 
manduces Priamum Priamique pisinnos. Not identical with him and 
therefore scarcely to be considered as the source of that Scholion is 
the version (ib. not. 5) : Labeo poeta latinus fuit, ut Fulgentius in libro 
etymologiarum ait, qui carmen et opus homericum convertit in latinum 
et placuit non magis auditoribus quam lectoribus; eius versus est 
crudum etc. It is not very credible that this line should have been 
made up by Fulgentius, as 0. Jahn supposes, Trans, of the« Saxon 
Society 1856, p. 301 sq., cf. his edition of Persius p. LXXII sq. Both 
names appear combined as early as the Schol. Pers. I 50 (p. 259 J.) : 
Attius Labeo poeta indoctus fuit illorum temporum, qui Iliada Homeri 
versibus foedissime composuit. 

304. We may also consider as productions of the first 
century (with a few exceptions) the poems contained in the 
codex Vossianus 86, both on account of their range of subjects 
and for their technical elegance. 

1. The poems of the cod. Voss. saec. IX (in.) have been chiefly edited 
by Riese, Anthol. lat. nr. 392—480 (I p. 257 — 295; cf. ib. p. XXXVIII 
— XLI. II p. LXIV). The first (nr. 392—395) belong to a later period, 
perhaps the time of Trajan, and some even to that ofAusoniup. But no 
doubt all those are of the first century which turn on subjects of the close 
of the Republican period. Most of them bear the colouring of opposi- 
tional tendencies, e. g. the praise of Cato of Utica, Pompey and his 
sons, the caution against Court-life , the praise of simplicity and retire- 
ment. But monarchical tendencies appear in the poems in praise of 
Caesar, especially his expedition to Britain, and on the death of the 
brothers Maevii in the Civil War between Antony and Octavianus (nr. 
462 sq.; in Wernsdorf EI p. 199—205, cf. p. 134—136), probably from 
the time of Claudius. The poem on the death of the two Cascae is 
destitute of distinct colouring (nr. 457). The rhetorical character of 
all these poems is strongly pronounced, especially in tha Chria on 
spes (nr. 415; in Wernsdorf III p. 226—234; cf. p. 141 sq.) and in the 
two elegies on Maevii fratres. Part of these poems are put to the 
name of Petronius ; see above 300, 6. 

2. For the elegies on Maecenas see above 225, 6. 



100 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 



2. The time of the Flavian Dynasty, A. D. 69—96. 

305. After the Julian and Claudian Dynasty had termi- 
nated with Nero and hereditary monarchy had become extinct 
and when the wars for the succession had shaken the Empire 
for more than a year in all its parts and exhausted the last 
remnants of Roman vigour, Vespasian (a. 69 — 79), the 
most distinguished of the competitors, ascended the throne. 
Aristocratic encroachment and luxury now gave way to sober 
economy. The Empire could now regain its strength after 
the excitement and exhaustion of the recent events. The suc- 
cession of Titus was entirely undisputed; in his short reign 
(a. 79 — 81) he endeavoured to combine kindness and good 
government. But in its third member already the dynasty 
degenerated, as the wickedness of Domitian, Titus' brother, 
vied with the worst princes of the Claudian family. Literature 
which had been benefited under Vespasian by the blessings 
of peace, suffered under Domitian no less by his vanity than 
by his cruelty. 

1. See the accounts of this dynasty by Tillemont, E. v. Wieters- 
heim (History of the Migration of tribes I, c. VIII), Merivale, C. Peter 
(ffist. of Rome III 2. Halle 1869. p. 1—140). E. Beule, Titus et sa 
dynastie, Paris 1870. 

2. C. E. Peter, de fontibus historiae imperatorum Flaviorum, 
Halle 1866. 

3. Tac. Hist. H 101 : scriptores temporum qui potiente rerum Flavia 
domo monimenta belli huiusce (of a. 69) composuerunt . . corruptas in 
adulationem causas tradidere. Mommsen understands these words 
especially of Cluvius Rufus (below 309, 2), Nissen more justly of the 
History of Pliny (below 307, 5). 

306. Though chiefly a practical man and governed by the 
endeavour to replenish the treasury which had been exhausted 
by the mad dissipation of the preceding thirty or forty years. 
Vespasian still possessed and manifested literary culture, 
nay even wrote Memoirs. He and his son Titus patronised 
Pliny the Elder, Valerius Flaccus, Saleius Bassus, Curi- 
atius Maternus, Silius Italiens, Turnus. The most eminent 
rhetorician of this time was Julius Gabinianus. and even Quin- 



I 



Vespasian and Titus. 101 

tilian's professional career belongs for the greater part to this 
period. Historical composition is chiefly represented by the 
Jewish writer Josephus, who however wrote in Greek and fre- 
quently adulterated truth intentionally. 

1. T. Flavius Vespasianus was born 17 Nov. 762 (9 A. D.), Cos. 
804 = 51, Procos. of Judaea a. 67 sqq. where especially since July 69 
Mucianus (below 309, 1) won the throne for him. After the death of 
Vitellius (Dec. 22, 69) he was undisputed ruler. He died June 23, 79 
= 832; see W. Teuffel in Pauly's Encycl. VI 2 p. 2478-2487. 

2. Richter, on the relation of the Emperor Vespasian to literature, 
Plauen 1866. 4. Tac. Hist. H 80: concurrentes (Antiochenses) . . adlo- 
quitur (Vesp.), satis decorus etiam graeca facundia. From a speech 
made by Vesp. in the Senate is Orelli Inscr. 720. Joseph, vit. 65 (p. 
340, 18 sq. Bk.): tV To7g Ovfanccotayov jov avToxQUTOQog vnofxvrj^aGtv 
ovTio yfyQctnrai. (p. 343, 9:) toXg KcdcccQog vTio^uvrj^uuoi'V tvavrictv nf- 
nofrjocu njj^ yqm^rjv. Cf. c. Apion. I 10: lolg itav avToxQicioQioy (Vesp. 
and Titus?) vnofxvrifAaaiv. Suet. Vesp. 18: primus e hsco latinis grae- 
cisque rhetoribus annua centena constituit. praestantis poetas (such 
as Saleius Bassus, below 313, 2) nee non artifices . . magna mercede 
donavit. That he treated the philosophers differently and drove them 
as well as the astrologers from Rome, was a measure due to the advice 
of Mucianus, because the philosophers ofthat age were quite immode- 
rate and necessarily appeared as a dangerous element of political 
discontent and disorder. Dio LXVI 13 (a. 71): to? ov xccl cckkoi nokkoi 
ix TMP (TTcor/CcHy xakovuspiop k6y(op nQoa)(d^ivrfg, ^ufd- tav xcd JtjurjTQiog 
o xvpixog, Gv/vd x(d ovx tmirjdfia ToXg naqovGi (^tj^aoGUi, tm Trjg q.iko- 
Gocfjiag TiQOG^rjuccTi xaTa/Qio/ufpoi, (fiskiyoPTO . . 4'nfiGfp o Movxiarog 
TOP OvfGTiciGtapop nccprag Tovg Toiovtovg ix Tfjg 7iok((og ixßaknp. . . xal 
JiciPTccg avTixci Tovg (^vkoGO(^ovg o OvfGnaGiapog, nkrjp jov Movgiopiov 
(above 294, 3), ix Tijg Pojutjg mßakfp, top ok di] /JijutjTQtop xal top 

OGTikiop xal tg ptjGovg xaTsxk€tafp. xal 6 fxsp OGT/'ktog, (c xal . . 
nokkiö nkfio) xaTCi Trjg jLiopa^/fag xaTfdQa^ufp, oficog na^a/Qij/bia jufTfGTt]. 
Tiö df Jtj^tjTQiio f.it]d' iog vnsCxopTL ixfkfvGfp 6 OvfcnaGutPog kf/t^ijpat 
oTi Gv Tifp napTa noK^ig ipa Gf anoXTftPO), tyoj Of xvpa vkaxTovPTa ov 
(fjopfvct). See above 294, 12. 

3. Titus Vespasianus, born Dec. 30, 40 or 41 (793 or 794), con- 
quered Jerusalem Sept. 8, 70, was allowed a share in the reign by his 
father 71, Emperor 79, died Sept. 13, 81 = 834. Heimbrod, Titi . . 
vita, in Jahn's Archiv VHI (1842). p. 383—399. W. Teuflfel in Pauly's 
Enc. VI 2. p. 2487—2493. The elder Pliny's preface to his h. n. is 
addressed to Titus, where we read e. g. 11 : te quidem in excelsissimo 
generis humani fastigio positum, summa eloquentia, summa eruditione 
praeditum etc. Cf. ib. 5: fulgurat in nullo umquam verius dicta vis 
eloquentiae, tribunicia postestas facundiae. quanto tu ore patris laudes 
tonas, quanto fratris amas (famas Detl.)! quanto in poetica es! Ibid- 



102 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

II 25, 89 : ocissimo significatu haec fuit (stclla crinita, a comet) de qua 
quinto consulatu suo (a. 76 = 829) Titus imperator Caesar praeclaro 
carmine perscripsit. 

307. Pliny the Elder. C. Plinius Secundus of Upper Italy 
(A. D. 23 — 79), succeeded by extreme diligence and the most 
grudging use of time in combining an extensive official occu- 
pation as officer and inspector of finances in various parts 
of the Empire with the most comprehensive and and many- 
sided studies and fertile literary activity in the departments 
of tactics, history, grammar, rhetoric, and natural science. 
Though his literary exertion partook in most branches more of 
the nature of a compilation, voluntarily resigning all claim 
to symmetry or even beauty of form, it still deserves admi- 
ration for its extent, and the death of Pliny (on the occasion 
of an eruption of Vesuvius) proves that it Avas the result of 
the most genuine thirst for knowledge. 

1. Suet. ed. Reiffsch. p. 92 sq.: PHnius Secundus Novocomensis 
(praef. 1 he calls Catullus his conterraneus) equestribus militiis industrie 
functus (chiefly in Germany, where he seems also- to have had his 
castrense contubernium with Titus, see n. h. praef. 3) procurationes 
quoque (in Gallia Narbonensis, Hispania Tarraconensis, under Vespasian 
as procurator Caesaris) splendidissimas et continuas summa integritate 
administravit et tamen liberalibus studiis tantam operam dedit ut non 
temere quis plura in otio scripserit. itaque bella omnia quae umquam 
cum Germanis gesta sunt XX voluminibus comprehendit, item naturalis 
historiae XXXVII libros absolvit. periit clade Campaniae : cum enim 
Misenensi classi praeesset et flagrante Vesuvio ad explorandas propius 
causas liburnica pertendisset . . vi pulveris ac favillae oppressus est, 
vel, ut quidam existimant, a servo suo occisus, quem aestu deficiens ut 
necem sibi maturaret oraverit. The latter catastrophe (IX kal. sept.) 
is described by the younger Pliny in a letter addressed to Tacitus, Ep. 
VI 16 (petis ut tibi avunculi mei exitum scribam, quo verius tradere 
posteris possis etc.) cf. VI 20 (ais te adductum litteris quas exigenti 
tibi de morte avunculi mei scripsi cupere cognoscere quos ego Miseni 
relictus . . casus pertulerim etc.). x 

2. Plin. Epist. Ill 5. 1 sqq. (to Baebius Macer): pergratum est mihi 
quod tam diligenter libros avunculi mei lectitas ut habere omnes velis 
quaerasque qui sint omnes. (2.) fungar indicis partibus atque etiam quo 
sint ordine scripti notum tibi faciara. . . (3.) 'De iaculatione equestri 
unus' (cf. n. hist. VIII 162: nos diximus in libro de iaculatione equestri 
condito). hunc cum praefectus alae militaret (in Germany) pari ingenio 
curaque composuit. 'De vita Pomponi Secundi duo,' a quo (above 279, 7) 
singulariter amatus hoc memoriae amici quasi debitum munus exsolvit. 



i 



riini/ the Elder. 103 

(4.) 'Bellorum Germaniae XX', quibus omnia quae cum Germanis gessimus 
bella collegit (cf. n. 1 and 5, Tac. A. I 69 : tradit C. Plinius, germani- 
rorum bellorum scriptor). inchoavit cum in Germania militaret, somnio 
monitus. . . (5.) 'Studiosi IIP, in VI volumina propter amplitudinem 
divisi, quibus oratorem ab incunabulis instituit et perficit (cf. n. 3). 
'Dubii sermonis VHP (cf. n. 4). scripsit sub Nerone novissimis annis, 
cum omne studiorum genus paulo liberius et erectius periculosum 
servitus fecisset. (6.) 'A fine Aufidii Bassi XXXP (cf. note 5). 'Naturae 
historiarum XXXVIP, opus diffusum, eruditum nee minus varium quam 
ipsa natura. (7.) miraris quod tot volumina multaque in his tam scru- 
pulosa homo occupatus absolvent? magis mitaberis si scieris ilium 
aliquamdiu causas actitasse, decessisse anno sexto et quinquagesimo, 
medium tempus distentum impeditumque qua officiis maximis qua ami- 
citia principum egisse. (8.) sed erat acre ingenium, incredibile studium 
summa vigilantia. . . (9.) ante lucem ibat ad Vespasianam imperatorem 
(nam ille quoque noctibus utebatur), inde ad delegatum sibi officium, 
reversus domum quod relicum temporis studiis reddebat. (10.) post 
cibum saepe . . liber legebatur, adnotabat excerpebatque. nihil enim 
legit quod non excerperet. . . (11.) . , super banc (cenam) liber lege- 
batur, adnotabatur, et quidem cursim. . . (13.) tanta erat parsimonia 
temporis. . . (14.) . . dum destringitur tergiturque (in the bath) audiebat 
aliquid aut dictabat. (15.) in itinere . . liuic uni vacabat: ad latus no- 
tarius cum libro et pugillaribus, cuius manus hieme manicis munie- 
bantur. . . (16.) . . perire omne tempus arbitrabatur quod studiis non 
impenderetur. (17.) hac intentione tot ista volumina peregit electorum- 
que commentarios CLX mihi reliquit, opisthographos quidem et minu- 
tissime scriptos. . . referebat ipse potuisse se, cum procuraret in 
Hispania, vendere hos commentarios Largio Licino CCCC milibus num- 
mum, et tunc aliquanto paueiores erant. 

3. Gellius IX 16, 1 sqq. : Plinius Secundus existimatus est esse 
aetatis suae doctissimus. is libros reliquit quos Studiosorum inscripsit, 
non mediusfidius usquequaque aspernandos. in his libris multa varie 
ad oblectandas eruditorum hominum aures ponit. refert etiam plerasque 
sententias quas in declamandis controversiis lepide arguteque dictas 
putat. It appears, therefore, to have been a treatise on rhetoric with 
examples. Quintil. Ill 1, 21 : scripsit de eadem materia (rhetoric) . . 
accuratius . . aetatis nostrae Verginius, Plinius, Tutilius. XI 3, 143: 
qui de gestu scripserunt. . . quo magis miror Plinii Secundi, docti 
hominis et in hoc utique libro paene etiam nimium curiosi, persuasionem 
etc. ib. 148: quo magis miror banc quoque succurrisse Plinio curam 
etc. It would thus be due to his general celebrity as writer, if he should 
be meant ib. Ill 4, 2: nunc maximo temporum nostrorum auctore i)rope 
impulsum (est). 

4. Plin. n. h. praef. 28: ego plane meis Jadici posse multa con- 
fiteor, nee his solis sed et omnibus quos edidi, ut obiter caveam istos 
Homeromastigas . ., quoniam audio et stoicos et dialecticos, Epicureos 
quoque (nam de grammaticis semper expectavi) parturire adversus 



104 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

libellos quos de grammatica edidi. His work treated of the dubious 
formations in declension, conjugation, and word-formation, but besides 
phonology and flexion embraced also etymology and the parts of speech, 
and was used and quoted by the grammarians down to the Middle Ages, 
Especially Charisius quotes it frequently, in the parts derived from 
Julius Romanus; Priscian VI 44 (p. 233, 13 IL: Plinius Secundus in I 
artium) and 78 (p. 262, 18 H. : Plinius Secundus in I artis grammaticae) 
reproduces the title inaccurately. Lersch, Linguistic Philosophy of the 
Ancients, I p. 150 sqq. Alfr. Schottmüller, de C. Plini Secundi libris 
grammaticis particula prima, Bonn Diss., 1858. 44 pp. D. Detlefsen, on 
the flexions of Pliny the Elder, Symb. phil. Bonn. p. 697-714. W. 
Brambach, on Latin Orthography, p. 37 sq. 

5. Plin. Epist. V 8, 5: avunculus mens idemque per adoptionem 
pater historias, et quidem religiosissime, scripsit. The praise of con- 
scientious investigation of the sources and balancing of discrepant 
accounts is fully justified; in many cases the author's judgment remained 
even quite undecided. Ct. Nissen, Rhein. Mus. XXVI p. 533 sq. The 
work extended to 31 books; see n. 2. Plin. n. h. praef. 20: vos quidem 
omnes, patrem (Vespasian), te (Titus) fratremque, diximus opere iusto 
temporum nostrorum historiam orsi a fine Aufidii Bassi (above 272, 2). 
ubi sit ea quaeres? iam pridem per acta sancitum et alioqui statutum 
erat heredi mandare, ne quid ambitioni dedisse vita iudicaretur. (Cf. 
below 336, 12) proinde occupantibus locum faveo, ego vero et posteris, 
quos scio nobiscum decertaturos, sicut ipsi fecimus cum prioribus. II 
199: anno Neronis principis supremo, sicut in rebus eius exposuimus. 
ib. 232: Neronis principis supremis, sicut in rebus retulimus. The work 
was employed (and surpassed) by Tacitus; see Hist. HI 28: Hormine 
id (the sack of Cremona) ingenium, ut Messala (below 309, 3) tradit, 
an potior auctor sit C. Plinius, qui Antonium (Primum) incusat, baud 
facile discreverim. Cf. A. XIII 20 (Plinius et Cluvius . . referunt). XV 
53 (quod C. PHnius memorat), both in the time of Nero. See H. Nissen, 
Rh. Mus. XXVI p. 497—548, especially p. 524 sqq. 532-544. Suetonius 
no doubt used (though he never names) the work of Pliny in his bio- 
graphies of Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian, 
though it does not appear to have been his chief authority. The 
criticism in Calig. 8 (cf. above 287, 1) relates to the Bella Germanica. 
Plutarch (in Galba and Otho) may be supposed to reproduce Pliny 
very faithfully. See below 332, 4. 

308. We possess of the works of Pliny only his naturalis 
historia in 37 books, a work presented a. 77 to Titus, but 
incessantly enriched and enlarged by the author until his 
death. It is a kind of encyclopedia of natural science, though 
chiefly so far as regards its employment in the life and 
art of man, and hence it also contains geography, medicine 
and history of art. The materials are compiled from a 



Pliny the Elder. 105 

great number of works, frequently very hastily and without 
sufficient knowledge and criticism, hence unequal in value. 
The style also is uneven: sometimes only bent upon the sub- 
ject-matter and thus satisfied with the first expression that 
offers, sometimes mannered and rhetorical. On the whole, 
the work is an inexhaustible store-house of information and a 
monument of the serious, studious and patriotic mind of the 
author. It long exercised great intiuence both in its 
original shape and in various abridgments. 

1. Plin. n. h. praef. 1 : libros naturalis historiae, novicium Camenis 
Quiritium tuorum opus, natos apud me proxima fetura, liceutiore epistula 
narrare coiistitui tibi, iucundissime Imperator. . . (3.) censorius tu' 
sexiesque consul (a. 77 = 830). (12.) levioris operae hos tibi dedicavi 
libellos. nam nee ingenii sunt capaces . . neque admittunt excessus 
aut orationes sermonesve aut casus mirabiles vel eventus varios, iucunda 
dictu aut leprentibus blanda. (13.) sterilis materia, rerum natura h. e. 
vita, narratur, et haec sordidissima sui parte, ut plurimarum rerum aut 
rusticis vocabulis aut externis, immo barbaris. . . (14.) praeterea iter 
est non trita auctoribus via nee qua peregrinari animus expetat. nemo 
apud nos qui idem temptaverit, nemo apud Graecos qui unus omnia 
ea tractaverit. . . iam omnia attingenda quae Graeci rr}g tyxv^koncudiCag 
vocant. . . (16 ) equidem ita sentio peculiarem in studiis causam eorum 
esse qui difficultatibus victis utilitatem iuvandi praetulerunt gratiae 
placendi, idque iam et in aliis operibus ipse feci. . . (17.) viginti milia 
rerum dignarum cura . . lectione voluminum circiter duum milium . . 
ex exquisitis auctoribus centum inclusimus XXXVI voluminibus, adiectis 
rebus plurimis quas aut ignoraverant priores aut postea invenerat vita. 
(18.) nee dubitamus multa esse quae et nos praeterierint, homines enim 
sumus et occuiDati officiis, subsicivisque temporibus ista curamus, i. e. 
nocturnis. . . (21.) in his voluminibus auctorum nomina praetexui. . . 
(32.) quid singulis contineretur libris huic epistulae subiunxi. . . His 
nephew, in editing the work after the death of the author, united the 
list of sources formerly prefixed to each book (cf. XVIII § 23) with 
the table of contents as book I, and thus raised the number of books 
to 39. That the author himself published only the first decade, ürlichs 
(Vindic. I p. 19 and Chrestom. Plin. p. XIV note) concluded from the 
repetition of restant immensae subtilitatis animalia X extr. and XI in., 
and also from the subscription of XI and XII in the Riccard. : editus 
post mortem. We find altogether in this work many traces of want 
of perfection, citations not filled up, marginal notes without definite re- 
ference, etc. See Th. Bergk, exercitationes Plin., Marburg 1847. 1851. 
4. D. Noltenius, quaestiones Plinianae, Bonn 1866, with v. Jan in 
Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 1866, p. 698 sqq. 

2. Contents and arrangement of the work. I: Table of contents 
and list of sources. 11: Mathematical and physical description of the 



106 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

world. III — VI: Geography. VII: Anthropology and physiology of man. 
VIII— XI : Zoology (VIII Mammalia; IX fishes; X birds; XI insects and 
beetles; comparative anatomy and physiology). XII — VII: Botany (XII 
and XIII exotic trees and shrubs; XIV and XV fruit-trees; XVI wild 
trees ; general botany ; XVII cultivation of trees ; XVIII and XIX corn, 
vegetables, theory of agriculture and horticulture ; XX — XXVII medicinal 
botany). XXVHI— XXXII: Medicinal zoology. XXXni— XXXVII : Mi- 
neralogy especially as applied to life and art (b. XXXIV sq. history of 
art). The execution is very arbitrary in details, probably owing to the 
influence of the work chiefly excerpted. Thus XXVII all plants not 
treated previously are additionally given in an alphabetical list. On 
XXXI sq. see Noltenius p. 25 sq. 

•3. Pliny intends to state his sources almost completely: est enim 
'benignum . . et plenum ingenui pudoris fateri per quos profeceris, non 
ut plerique ex his quos attigi fecerunt (praef. 21). He even seems to 
have among his 146 Roman and 327 foreign writers several known to 
himself only from compilations or citations. If therefore he does not 
ipention Dioscorides and yet agrees with him, we should explain this 
from the agreement of the mutual sources of the two writers. The 
order of enumeration in the list of sources generally coincides with 
the order in which the writers in question are made use of in the 
book, though subsequent additions and changes have caused some de- 
viations; H. Brunn, de auctorum indicibus Plinianis disjDutatio isagogica, 
Bonn 1856. 60 pp. See D. Detlefsen, Philologus XXVIII p. 701—716. 
The name of Varro appears most frequently, among the externi we 
chiefly meet with the names of Aristotle, Theophrastus and other peri- 
patetic philosophers. Pliny is fond of following Roman authorities, e. 
g. on bees Hyginus, on medicine Pompeius Lenaeus, on botany Sextius 
Niger. He does not appear to have formed a just estimation of his 
sources, and above all he credits the collectors of curious information 
just as much as the most weighty investigators. E. Meyer, Hist, of 
Botany II p. 127—133. G. Montigny, quaest. in Plin. n. h. de animali- 
bus libros, Bonn 1844. 74 pp. Detlefsen, Vitruvius as a source of Pliny, 
Phil. XXXI p. 385—434. On slips in the history of art see L. Ross, 
Archaeological Essays II (Leipzig 1861) p. 352 — 377. Cf. 0. Jahn, on 
the art-criticisms of Pliny, in the Trans, of the Saxon Society of Lite- 
rature, 1850, p. 105—142. A. Brieger, de fontibus librorum Plinii XXXIII 
— XXXVI quatenus ad rem plasticam pertinent, Greifswald 1857. 78 pp. 
8. G. Wustmann, on Pliny's history of art, Rh. Mus. XXH p. 1—24. J. 
C. Elster, prolegomena ad excerpta plin. ex libr. XXXV, Helmstedt 
1838. H. E. Dirksen, the sources of the h. n. ofPHny, especially those 
on Roman law. Posthumous Writings I p. 133 — 148. 

4. Pliny's general views on the universe appear chiefly from b. 
II. Hence he was openly opposed to popular belief, without however 
altogether adhering to a definite philosophical system. In his religious 
and philosophical views he mostly inclined to Stoicism. He complains 
of the dereliction of nature and the depravation of manners as fre- 



Pliny the Elder. 107 

quently as Columella and Seneca. Urlichs, Chrestom. Plin. p. XV sq. 
0. Vorhauser, on the religious and moral views of Pliny the Elder, 
Inspruck 1860. 32 pp. 4. L. Rummler, C. Plini Sec. philosophumena, 
Stettin 1862. 66 pp. Friese, the Cosmology of Pliny, I (with 2 plates), 
Breslau 1862. 44 pp. 4. 

5. On the diction of Pliny see Wannowski, Pliniana, Posen 1847. 
4. On the poetical elements of it see E. Opitz, Quaestiones plinianae, 
Naumburg 1861. 32 pp. 4. 

6. 'The style of Pliny is very difterent in the different parts of 
his work. His praefatio abounds in strange exj^ressions, far-fetched 
phrases, and brilliant thoughts. Many of the introductions to the single 
books are poetical, but penetrated with seriousness ; there is in them 
an energetic pathos, the thoughts being forcibly expressed in few words. 
These parts are treated with great care, being instances of gravitas. 
But in the descriptive parts which form the body of the great work 
itself, Pliny generally heaps one excerpt upon the other; in many de- 
partments, especially those of botany, medicine, mineralogy, he has 
not completely mastered his hard subject-matter, and as a rule contents 
himself with dry nomenclature and description. As he feels the want 
of scientific classification he endeavours to enliven his subject by rhe- 
torical helps, especially by studying variety and novelty in his phrases 
and sentences.' D. Detlefsen, Philol. XXVIII p. 317 sq. L. Grasberger, 
de uso pliniano, Würzburg 1860. 128 pp. (especially de brevitate dicendi, 
and de dictionis varietate). Wannowski (see n. 5) p. 27 — 36. E. Opitz, 
p. 2—16. 

7. The work was much read from the very beginning (cf. Sym- 
mach. epist. I 24) and abridged at an early time. As early as under 
Adrian, a Chorographia was compiled from it and enlarged with additions 
from Pomponius Mela and other works of this kind. This Chorogra- 
phia pliniana was known to and employed by Apuleius. Ammianus 
Marcellinus too did not employ Pliny at first hand, but rather used 
this abridgment. It forms also the basis of the works of Solinus and 
Martianus Capella. Th. Mommsen, Solini collectanea etc. (Berlin 1864) 
p. XXI sqq. Medical and diaetetic excerpts from Pliny, but with 
additions from other sources, form b. I — IV of the so-called Plinius 
Valerianus. 

8. We possess nearly 200 mss. of Pliny, most of them however 
of saec. XIV and XV and without value concerning the constitution 
of the text. Those which are of importance may be divided into 
earlier mss. which are incomplete, and later ones which are complete. 
The first class are free from the transpositions, repetitions, and gaps 
of the later mss., but they are fragmentary: the Bamberg ms. (saec. X.) 
which is relatively speaking complete, contains only six books (32—37). 
Other representatives of this earlier class are the Nonantulanus or 
Sessorianus (saec. V), Mone's leaves (saec. VI), the Paris ms. 10318 
(saec. VII or VIII), Leidensis Voss. (saec. IX), Paris 4860 (saec. X), 



108 The First Centui*}' of the Imperial Epoch. 

and the ms. from which the most important mss. of the later class 
were corrected and supplemented. The mss. of the later class are 
all derived from an archetype (now lost) m which II 187 — IV 67 had 
changed places with IV 67 — V 34. From this, two classes of mss. 
were derived: the first adopting this transposition without any change, 
the second attempting to rectify it, though in an unsatisfactory manner. 
To the first division belong Leidensis Lipsii = Vesontinus = Chifiletianus 
Dalecampii =: F (saec. XI; copies of it the Toletanus, Parisinus 6797, 
Vaticanus 1953, Laurentianus, saec. XIII sq. in Sillig T, d, x, L), Vati- 
canus 3861 = D saec. XI, Paris. 6796 =. G (Sillig: c), Riccardianus --=: 
R (c. a. 1100), and probably some old excerpts, e. g. the Lucensis = 
H (saec. VIII), Monacensis-Frisingensis (saec. VIII or IX), Bernensis 347 
and 265 (saec. X). The second division is chiefly represented by Paris. 
6795 =^ E (Sillig a) saec. X or XI, which was copied in a number of 
mss. (e. g. Paris. 6798 and the Luxemburgensis of M. A. Namur and 
M. Michel, Luxemb. 1865. 4), also Vindobon. (a, in Sillig w) saec. Xm, 
and Leopoldo-Laurentianus (of a. 1433). See the detailed discussions 
by D. Detlefsen, Philologus XXVID p. 284-309, cf. Rhein. Mus. XV 
p. 265—288. 366—390. XVIII p. 227—240. 327 sq. A. Eels, de codicum 
antiquorum in quibus Plini n. h. ad nostra tempora propagata est fatis, 
fide atque auctoritate, Getting. 1861. 114 pp. 4. L. v. Jan, de auctoritate 
codicum plin., 1858. 4. and in the Reports of the meetings of the 
historical and phil. Section of the Munich Academy 1862, p. 1862, 
p. 221—260. L. Urlichs, Rhein. Mus. XVIII. p. 527-536, Eos 1865, 
p. 353 sqq. and Vindiciae plinianae II. C. Mayhoft', lucubrationum 
plinianarum capita III. Neustrelitz 1865. 136 pp. 8. 

9. Contributions to the criticism of the text. Th. Bergk, exercitationes 
plinianae, I. (Marburg 1847. 4.). 11. (ib. 1851. 4.). L. v. Jan, Münchner 
Gel. Anz. 1852, Xr. 70-73, and elsewhere. C. L. Urlichs, Vindiciae 
plinianae I. (Greifswald 1853. 192 pp.). II. (Erlangen 1866); de numeris 
et nominibus propriis in Plini n. h., Würzburg 1857. 4. ; Rhein. Mus. 
XIV p. 599-612 and others (n. 8.) C. Mayhoff (see n. 8). Detlefsen, 
Philologus XXXI p. 336-342. 

10. Of the numerous complete editions only the following are still 
deserving of notice. Ed. princeps Ven. 1469 fol. Cum castigationibus 
Hermol. Barbari.^Rom. 1492 fol. Rec. I. Dalecampius, Lyons 1587 fol. Cum 
notis I. Fr. Gronovii, Lugd. Bat. 1669- 3 vols, (the notae . . emendatius 
editae, Gotha 1855 z= Sillig vol. VI). Illustr. 1. Harduin, Paris 1685, 

5 vols. 4. 1723 sqq., 3 vols. fol. (Lips. 1778— 1788, 10 vols. 8.) Rocogn. 
cum var. lect. lul. SilHg, Lips. 1831—1836, 5 vols., and especially 
recens. et cum comm. criticis instruxit, Gotha 1853 — 1855 5 vols, 
with Suppl. VI; Indices, composuit 0. Schneider, := vol. VII and VIII, 
1857 sq.). An edition of the text by L. v. Jan, Lips. Teubner 1854 — 1865, 

6 vols. (vol. 6 indices). D. Detlefsen recensuit, Berol. 1866 sqq. 

11. Chrestomathia Pliniana by J. M. Gesner (Lips. 1722. 1776), F. 
A. Beck (Hadamar 1828). L. Urlichs (with explanatory notes, Berlin 



I 



Pliny the Elder. Mnciamus. 109 

1857). Excerpta ex Plin. I. XXXV comm. crit, et exegei. instr. etc. 
J. C. Elster, Helmstedt 1851—1853, 3 parts, 74 pp. 4. 

12. Recent literature on Pliny reviewed by L. v. Jan, Philologus III, 
XII, XXI, by D. Detlefsen in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 77, p. 481—493. 
653-672, and Philologus XXVIII 2. 

309. Pliny already used the uncritical description of a 
journey to the East by Vespasian's partisan Licinius Muci- 
anus, who exerted himself also in collecting historical docu- 
ments. Two excellent men of this time, the orator and con- 
sular M. Cluvius Ruf us, whose work embraced the time 
of Nero and the events of a. 69 and seems to have aimed at 
historical truth, and Vipstanus Messala, an orator of the 
same tendency as Quintilian, but altogether a man of varied 
culture and who frequently gave oöence by his independence 
of thought, made events they had witnessed the subjects of 
their historical works. The history, too, of Fabius Rusticus, 
a younger friend of Seneca's, seems to belong to this period. 

1. M. Licinius Crassus Mucianus, vir secundis adversisque iuxta 
famosus. insignes amicitias iuvenis ambitiöse coluerat, mox atteritis 
opibus, . . suspecta etiam Claudii iracundia, in secretum Asiae sepositus 
(as praeses Syriae). . . luxuria, industria, . . nimiae voluptates, cum 
vacaret; quotiens expedierat, magnae virtutes. palam laudares, secreta 
male audiebant; Tac. hist. I 10 cf. II 5. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. IV 
p. 1079 sq, Nr. 37. He took part in Corbulo's first expedition to 
Armenia (Pliny mentions him ten times 55 and 60), and governed 
Syria (P)in. n. h. XH 9. XIII 88) and (a. 67) Syria, n. h. Ill 6. XIX 12. 
XXVIII 5) ter consul (before 67, a. 70, 72; f before 77; Borghesi 
Oeuvres IV p. 345—353). L. Braun p. 12—18. Tac. dial. 37: haec 
Vetera (speeches from the Republican period), quae et in antiquariorum 
bybliothecis adhuc manent et cum maxime a Muciano contrahuntur ac 
iam undecim (at present), ut opinor, actorum (see above 213, 2) libris 
et tribus epistolarum composita et edita sunt. Different from this 
compilation and written at an earlier time was the one from which 
Pliny (and perhaps also Josephus, see Nissen Rh. Mus. XXVI p. 
541 — 543) derived statements on the East, chiefly concerning natural 
history and geography, with frequent appeals to his being an eye- 
witness cf. Plin. n. h. VII 36 (Licinius Mucianus prodidit visum a se 
Argis etc. . . eiusdem sortis et Zmyrnae puerum a se visum). 159 
(Tmolus). XIX 12 and XXXIV 36 (Rhodus; whence Brieger de fontibus 
p. 60 refers also the other statements of Pliny on Rhodus to Muc). 
In his list of sources Pliny quotes the work repeatedly, ex Licinio 
Muciano on book 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; ex Muciano on book 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 
12, 13, 16, 19, 31, 33, 35, 36. He is also quoted in b. 14, 21, 28, 32, 



110 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

34. The passages are collected by L. Brunn p. 18—45. As man 
superstitio*is (Plin. n. h. XVIII 5), Muc. appears to have been credulous 
as writer, and to him Pliny owes many incredible and fantastical state- 
ments. H. Peter, hist. lat. p. CCCL sq. L. Brunn, de C. Lie. Muc, 
Lips. 1870. Diss. 

2. Tac. hist. IV 43: a laude Cluvii Rufi orsus, qui perinde (like 
Eprius Marcellus, above 292, 3) dives et eloquentia clarus nuUi umquam 
sub Nerone periculum facessisset. Cf. ib. 18: Hispaniae praeerat (a. 69) 
Cluvius Rulus, vir facundus et pacis artibus, bellis inexpertus. ib. 76. 
n 58. 65. Ill 65. IV 39. Consul (I. R. N. 2224) already under Caligula, 
as he is called consularis at his assasination a. 41 ; see Joseph, antiq. 
XIX 1, 13: Ovaripiog jig tmp ovyxkrjTixcou . . rJQfro Kkovovtoy naQfCo- 
fAfvov (KVTia, zed Tovtov vnarticoy etc. Suet. Ner. 21 (per Cluvium con- 
sularem) and (from him ?) Dio LXIII 14 (Kkovovio) '^Povif'M, ccv&qI vna- 
jfvxori, xQV'^^f^^vog). His identity with the historian appears from Plut. 
0th. 3: Klovßiog df '^Pov^^og sig ^IßrjQiKP (which he governed) tftjal 
xo^uKT,9fjyc(t dinkiofxciTCi in which Otho styled himself Nero; cf. Suet. 
0th. 7. In Plut. quaest. rom. 107 he is quoted as an authority for the 
derivation of histrio. Cluvius would seem to have written his historical 
work in his later years (after a. 70), when he had retired from politics. 
Tac. A. XIII 20 (above 307, 5). XIV 2 (tradit Cluvius etc.), Cluvius 
being in either case opposed to Fabius Rusticus who protected Seneca. 
Plin. Epist. IX 19, 5 (Verginius Rufus related): ita secum aliquando 
Cluvium locutum: scis, Vergini quae historiae fides debetur; proinde si 
quid in historiis meis legis aliter ac velis (on himself), rogo ignoscas. 
H. Peter (on Plutarch's sources p. 40—44) and Th. Mommsen (Hermes 
IV p. 318 — 325) consider his historical work the principal source of 
Plutarch in his Galba and Otho, and of Tac. Hist. I and II (also of 
Sueton. in Galba, Otho and Vitell., though he never mentions him : 
comp. Suet. Galb. 17 with Plut. Galb. 19). But see 0. Clason, Plut 
and Tacitus (Berlin 1870) p. 12—14, Tac. and Suet. p. 76 sqq., and 
especially H. Nissen, Rh. Mus. XXVI p. 507 sq. 530—532. See also 
above 305, 3. 307, 5. 

3. Tac. hist. Ill 9: legioni tribunus Vipstanus Messala praeerat, 
Claris maioribus (cf. dial. 27, where the orator Valerius Messala — above 
218, 8 sqq. — is numbered among his maiores), egregius ipse et qui solus 
ad id bellum (of a. 69) artes bonas attulisset. ib. Ill 25: rem nominaque 
auctore Vipstano Messala tradam. 28 (above 307, 5). IV ^2: magnam 
eo die (a. 70) pietatis eloquentiaeque famam Vipstanus Messala adeptus 
est, nondum senatoria aetate (i. e. beginning of twenty) ausus pro 
fratre Aquilio Regulo (see below 321, 3) deprecari. He was a friend 
of Tacitus' youth, but seems to have died early, as he is never men- 
tioned in Pliny's letters. His historical work seems to have treated of 
the events of his time only so far as he was personally concerned in 
them in the character of Memoirs or a historical and political pam- 
phlet. H. Nissen, Rh. Mus. XXVI p. 529, cf. ibid. p. 536 sq. Tacitus 
has commemorated him in his dialogus, see ib. 15. non desinis, Messala, 



I 



Cliivins Huf us, Vipstanus Messala, and others. Ill 

Vetera tantum et antiqua mirari, nostrorum autem temporum studia 
irridere et contemnere? nam hunc tuum sermonera saepe excepi, cum 
oblitus et tuae et fratris tui eloquentiae neminem hoc tempore oratorem 
esse contenderes prae antiquis. ib. 32 Tacitus makes him blame the 
'diserti' of his time because they ignorent leges nee teneant senatus- 
consulta, ius civitatis ultro derideant, sapientiae vero studium et prae- 
cepta prudentium penitus reformident, with the addition : quodsi forte 
haece audierint, certum habeo dicturos me, dum iuris et philosophiae 
scientiam tamquam oratori necessariam laudo, ineptiis meis plausisse- 
He also says ib.: ego lam meum munus explevi et, quod mihi in con- 
suetudine est satis multos offendi. F. A. Eckstein, prolegomena ad 
dialog, de orat. p. 14 — 19. 

4. On the history of Julius Secundus see 310, 4; on that of 
Curtius Rufus above 287. 

5. The seven books lov lovdaixov nok^fxov of Josephus were still 
written under Vespasian, about A. D. 75; see H. Paret's introduction 
to his translation (Stuttgart, Metzler 1855) p. 18 sq. 

6. Tac. Agr. 10: formam Britanniae Livius veterum, Fabius 
Rusticus recentium eloquentissimi auctores, . . adsimulavere. Ann. XIII 
20: Fabius Rusticus auctor est etc. . . sane Fabius inclinat ad laudes 
Senecae, cuius amicitia floruit. XIV 2 (F. R. memorat), XV 61 (tradit 
E. R.). He is made heir with Tacitus and Pliny in the will of Dasumius, 
whence we learn that he was still alive a. 108 or 109. To him addressed 
is perhaps Plin. Ep. IX 29 (Rustico), and we should perhaps refer to him 
Quintit. X 1, 104: superest adhuc et ornat aetatis nostrae gloriam vir 
saeculorum memoria dignus, qui olim nominabitur, nunc intellegitur. 
See A. Haakh in Pauly's Encycl. VII 2 p. 2921 sq. nr. 76. Mommsen, 
Hermes III p. 51, n. 4. 

7. Minuc. Fel. Oct. 33, 4: si Romanis magis gaudes, ut transeamus 
veteres, Antonii Juliani de Judaeis require: iam nequitia sua 
banc eos (the Jews) meruisse fortunam. Probably the M^Qxog lAt/iioj/iog 
^lovkuivog, o rijg ^lovdcciccg innQonog (Joseph b. iud. VI 4, 3), who parti- 
cipated in the siege of Jerusalem by Titus and as a member of the 
council of war voted for the destruction of the City (Jos. 1. 1.) J. Bernays, 
Sulpic. Sev. p. 56, conjectures that Tacitus' account in tlie Hist, is 
derived from his work. 



310. Like these historians, we find in the time of Ves- 
pasian the poet Curiatius Maternus as orator; others 
devoted themselves chiefly to rhetoric and oratorical instruction, 
e. g. the rhetorician Sex. Julius Gabinianus in Gaul. A native 
of Gaul was also M. Aper who pleaded and declaimed at 
Rome, and also held appointments there. Julius Secundus, 



112 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

who died very early, was a friend of Quintiliaii, but in elo- 
quence, though not so much as Aper, shared the general 
tendency of his age to elegance and artifice of form. 

1. On Curatius Maternus see 313, 1. Salvias Liberalis (see 336, 3) 
was also known as early as under Vespasian. 

2. In the list of rhetoricians treated of by Suetonius (p. 99 Rffsch.) 
we find immediately before Quintilian Sex. Julius Gabinianus. 
From Suetonius is derived Hieronym. on Euseb. ehron. a. Abr. 
2092 = 01. 213, 4=:Vesp. 8: Gabinianus celeberrimi nominis rhetor in 
Gallia docuit. Cf. on Isaj. VIII praef. (T. IV p. 329 Vail.): qui flumen 
eloquentiae et concinnas declamationes desiderant legant Tullium, 
Quintilianum, Gallionem, Gabinianum. Tac. dial. 26 extr. : quotus 
quisque scholasticorum non hac sua persuasione fruitur ut se ante 
Ciceronem numeret, sed plane i^ost Gabinianum? 

3. In Tacitus' dialogus M. Aper (c. 5 — 10. 16—23) defends the 
modern style of eloquence, though rather in a sophistical manner and 
more with glittering words than solid arguments. lb. 2: M. Aper et 
Julius Secundus, celeberrima turn (under Vespasian) ingenia fori nostri, 
quos ego in iudiciis . . studiose audiebam, . . quamvis maligne plerique 
qpinarentur nee Secundo promptum esse sermonem et Aprum ingenio 
potius et vi naturae quam institutione et litteris famam eloquentiae 
consecutum. nam et Secundo purus et pressus et in quantum satis erat 
profluens sermo non defuit et Aper omni eruditione imbuius contem- 
nebat potius litteras quam nesciebat. 11: cum dixisset Aper acrius, ut 
solebat, et intento ore. 7 : equidem (Aper) non eum diem laetiorem 
egi quo mihi latus clavus oblatus est vel quo homo novus et in civitate 
minime favorabili natus quaesturam aut tribunatum aut praeturam accepi 
quam eos quibus mihi datur to conduct the law-suit successfully. 
10: ne quid de Gallis nostris (cf. Aper) loquar, and 17: ipse ego in 
Britannia vidi senem. 

4. Quintil. X 3, 12: memini narrasse mihi lulium Secundum 
ilium, aequalem meum atque a me, ut notum est, familiariter amatum, 
mirae facundiae virum, infinitae tamen curae. ib. 1, 120: lulio Secundo 
si longior contigisset aetas clarissimum profecto nomen oratoris apud 
posteros foret. adiecisset enim atque adiciebat ceteris virtulibus suis quod 
desiderari potest, id est autem ut esset multo magis pugnans et saepiuj 
ad curam rerum ab elocutione respiceret. (121) ceterum interceptus 
quoque magnum sibi vindicat locum, ea est facundia etc. Cf. XII 10, 
11: elegantiam Secundi. Cf. n. 3. In his dialogus Tacitus (c. 4 sq.) 
invests him with the power of umpire between the representatives of 
opposite directions, the Republican and the Imperial eloquence. Ib. 14: 
probari video in te, Secunde, quod luli Asiatici (Africani Nipperdey, 
see above 292, 4) vitam componendo spem hominibus fecisti plurium 
eiusmodi librorum. Plut. 0th. 9: tovto jufp dirjyfiTo (used to relate) 
2&y.ovv&og o QtjTOiQ, tnl tmv hniorokoiv y&voufvog tov "Oxhoivog. hfQOtr 
d t]y lixovfn/ etc. 



Historians and Jurists under VespoMan. I I'd 

5. Quintil. IV, 1, 19: fuerunt etiam quidam rerum siiarum iudices, 
nam et in libris Observationum a Septimio editis affuisse Ciceronem 
tali causae invenio et ego etc. This would lead us to think Sept. a 
writer in rhetoric. He is possibly identical with Septimius Severus, 
the condiscipulus of Victorius Marcellus (Stat. Silv. IV praef.), to whom 
Statins addresses Silv. IV 5 (v. 3: fortem atque facundum Severum). 
See below 321, 8. 

6. On Pliny's treatise on rhetoric see above 307, 3; on Verginius 
and Tutilius above 275, 1. 

311. The most influential jurists of the age of Vespasian 
were the Sabinian Caelius Sabinus and the Proculeian Pegasus. 
Urseius Ferox and Juventius Celsus the Elder as well as a 
certain Plautius, whose work was much commented on at a 
later time, seem to belong to this period. 

1. Pompon. Dig. I 2, 2, 53: Cassio (above 293, 3) (C. Arulenus) 
Caelius Sabinus successit, qui plurimum temporibus Vespasiani potuit 
(he was, however, cons. suflF. already 69 = 822, Tac. Hist. I 77); Proculo 
(above 293, 1) Pegasus (n. 2) qui temporibus Vespasiani praefectus urbi 
fuit; Caelio Sabino Prisons lavolenus; Pegaso Celsus (the father). 
Gell. IV 2, 3 : Caelius Sabinus in libro quern de edicto aedilium curu- 
lium composuit. From this Gell. VI 4, 1 (Caelius Sabinus iuris peritus) 
~ 3. Dig. XXI 1 (de aedil. ed.) 14 (pr. n. 3. 10.) 17 § 1. 6. 8. 12 sqq.) 
20. 65 (2). From other works of the same author Gai. Inst. Ill 70 
and 141. Dig. XXXV 1 (de cond. et demonstr.), 72, 7. 

2. Juv. 4, 77 sqq.: properabat Pegasus (cf. n. 1) attonitae positus 
mode vilicus urbi, . . interpres legum sanctissimus, omnia quam quam 
temporibus diris (of Domitian) tractanda putabat inermi iustitia. On 
this the Schol. (p. 223 J.) says: filius trierarchi, ex cuius liburnae 
parasemo nomen accepit. iuris studio gloriam memoriae meruit, ut 
liber vulgo, non homo, diceretur. hie functus omni honore, cum pro- 
vinciis plurimis praefuisset, urbis curam administravit. hinc est Pega- 
sianum SCtum. Inst. II 23, 5: postea Vespasiani Aug. temporibus, Pe- 
gaso et Pusione consulibus, senatus censuit etc. Cf. Gai. I 31 : SCto 
quod Pegaso et Pusione consulibus factum est. Ill 64 (idque maxime 
Pegaso placuit; quae sententia aperte falsa est). In the Digest his name 
occurs repeatedly, but fragments are not quoted. 

3. Ulpian in the Collat. eleg. mos. XII 7, 9: libro X Urseius refert 
Sabinum (n. 1) respondisse. Proculus (above 293, 1) had also been 
quoted in his writings (Dig. IX 2, 27, 1. XXXIX 3, 11, 2). On the 
other hand, Salvius lulianus wrote libri IV Ad Urseium Ferocem. It 
does not agree with the period we should hence assume for Urseius 
that Cassius (above 293, 3) existimasse Urseium refert (Dig. XLIV 5, 1, 
10, cf. VII 4, 10, 5: Cassius apud Urseium scribit), for which reason 

8 



114 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Bertrand and Viertel would reverse the reading by substituting Urseius 
apud Cassium. Cf. K. Viertel, de vitis ictorum p. 16 — 20. 

4. Celsus Dig. XXXI 20: et Proculo placebat et a patre sic accepi; 
and 29 pr. : pater meus referebat, cum esset in consilio Duceni Veri 
consulis itum in sententiam suam. Cf. ib. XII 4, 3, 7 : refert (Celsus) 
patrem suum existimasse etc. XVII 1, 39: et Aristoni et Celso patri 
placuit etc. 

5. The time of Plautius is fixed by his quoting Cassius and Pro- 
culus (Dig. XXXIV 2, 8: Plautius: . . Cassius ait. XXXV 1, 43 pr.: 
Plautius: . . Proculus, Cassius . . aiunt), and by his being commented 
on by Neratius Priscus, Javolenus, Pomponius and Paulus, all of whom 
composed libri ex Plautio or ad Plautium. 

312. The only poet of the time of Vespasian that has 
come down to us is Valerius Flaccus, of whom we 
possess ten books of Argonautica, a free imitation of Apol- 
lonius of Rhodes, the traces of Alexandrine learning being 
effaced and effective scenes dwelt on to greater length, besides 
which the characters are delineated with much care and the 
psychological motives fully developed. The diction is rhe- 
torical and full. The phraseology of this author is for the 
most part derived from Virgil, but owing to bold figures and 
combinations of words and an artificial compression of 
diction it has lost both lucidity and symmetry. It is, however, 
highly probable that the work, such as we have it, is a torso. 

1. The name is given in the subscription of the Vatican ms. 3277 
(saec. IX) to b. II: G. Valerius Flaccus Balbus Setinus, i. e. with two 
cognomina and the addition of his native town (Setia). He died before 
A. D. 90; cf. Quintil. X 1, 90: multum nuper in Valerio Flacco amjsi- 
mus. It does not appear from these words that he died young. His 
introduction was written under Vespasian, probably not long after the 
capt^^re of Jerusalem by Titus (a. 70); see Argon. I 7 sqq. tuque o, 
pelagi cui maior aperti fama, Caledonius postquam tua carbasa vexit 
oceanus (cf. Tac. Agr. 13), phrygios prius indignatus lulos, eripe me 
populis . . sancte pater, vcterumque fave veneranda canenti facta virum. 
versam proles tua pandet Iduraen (namque potest), Solymo nigrantem 
pulvere fratrem etc. From I 5 sq. we may infer that the poet held 
the position of XV vir sacr. fac: Phoebe, mone, si Cymaeae mihi 
conscia vatis stat casta cortina domo, si laurea digna fronte viret. 
Martial's friend Flaccus, from Patavium (Mart. I 61, 3 sq. 76, 1 sq.) 
who is likewise described as poet, though not of Argonautica (ib. 76^ 
3 sqq. pierios differ cantus citharamque sororum. . . quid petis a Phoebo? 
. . quid possunt hederae Bacchi dare ? . . quid tibi cum Cirrha, quid 
cum Permesside nuda ? Cf. ib. IV 49, 3 sqq.) and as living in poverty 



I 



I 



Valerius Flacccs. 115 

{ib. 1 76, 4 sqq. VIII 56) is no doubt a diflferent person and lived 
somewhat later than the author of the extant poem (Thilo prolegg. 
p. V-VII). 

2. See the comparison of Val. Fl. with Apollonius in Weichert's 
work on the life and poem of Apollonius (Meissen 1821) p. 270 sqq., 
and G. Thilo, Prolegg. p. VIII— XIII. The Roman poet surpasses the 
Greek in his uniform design and the bolder characters of Jason and 
Aeetes, but he has also stretched the subject-matter (which is of itself not 
very favourable to poetry (too much by rhetorical treatment. Did he avail 
himself of Diodorus? G. Thilo p. VIII note 2. The usual machinery 
of gods is fully made use of (especially Juno and Minerva appearing 
very often) and psychological description is applied even to the Gods. 
Pedantic learning is very much kept back bv the prevalence of pathetic 
and sentimental rhetoric, but still there is a considerable residue of it 
left. Anachronisms (such as Lagus and Arsinoe) are noticed by Thilo 
p. XXVIII. He alludes to his predecessors, e. g. I 17 sq. to Germanic. 
Arat. 40 sq. With regard to poetical diction and the technical elabo- 
ration of metre Valerius holds the same position to Virgil as Persius 
to Horace; in both the artificial element is increased and the style 
often degenerates into bombast and obscurity (cf. Thilo p. XIII — XXV); 
the technical part showing the accuracy peculiar to the silver age. A 
strict censure on the poeticel value of Val. Fl. is found in the supple- 
ments to Sulzer VIII p. 305 sqq. 

3. The close of b. VIII being rather abrupt and essential parts of 
the legend, such as the death of Absyrtus and the homeward journey 
of the Argonauts not being treated in the extant poem, we may safely 
conclude that more was intended to come ; what remains, might 
have furnished enough for two to four books. It is, however, doubtful, 
whether this last part had actually been executed by the poet and was 
subsequently lost, as N. Heinsius supposed, or the poet was by death 
or other circumstances prevented from carrying it further, which is 
the view taken by G. Thilo and C. Schenkl. The latter view is not 
supported by the length of time spent by Val. over his work (n. 1). 
It would be supported by other traces of the want of final perfection, 
if they were more trustworthy than those mentioned by Thilo p. XXVI 
— XXXIX, as the assumption that 'Valerius, si carmen emendare potu- 
isset, ad usum ceterorum poetarum et scriptorum magis se accommo- 
daturus fuerit' (p. XXXIII) is not only not proved, but even improbable. 
A certain validity attaches only to a number of discrepancies which 
are not removed (ib. p. XXVII sq.), and also to the fact that blemishes 
are most frequent in b. VIII (Schenkl p. III). On the other hand, some 
parallel lines (e. g. V 565 sq. VII 201 sq.) may be easily explained from 
the state of the original ms. But artistic blemishes scarcely prove 
want of completion in a poet of the first rank, not to speak of Valerius 
Flaccus. 

4. This poet and his work are not mentioned by any other ancient 



116 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

writer but Quintilian (n. 1), not even by grammarians. But we find imi- 
tations of him in Statius (Theb, and Ach.) and Silius, subsequently also in 
Claudian and C. Marius Victorinus. The poem has been preserved in 
the Vatican ms. 3277 (V in Thilo and Schenkl) saec. IX, from which 
all other mss. appear to have been copied, even the St. Gall ms. 
(P) discovered by Poggio a. 1417 and which contains only the first 
three books and the first half of b. IV. It has been lost after that 
time, but we possess four copies of it made saec. XV, three of which 
are at Rome in the Vatican library, and one at Oxford. The Vatican 
ms. 3277 is disfigured by many gaps and bad readings, corrections of 
which are frequently attempted in the Italian copies of it (e. g. in the 
one employed by Carrio and in the Monacensis lat. 802, saec. XV), 
sometimes successfully, but generally in a very arbitrary manner. G. 
Thilo prolegg. p. XL— LXXXVI. 

5. Ed. princeps Bonon. 1474 fol. Cum comm. ed. J. B. Pius, 
Bonon. 1519 fol. Ed. L. Carrio, Antverp. 1565 sq. Ad fidem codd. emend. 
N. Heinsius, Amstelod. 1680. Cur. P. Burmann., Utrecht 1702. Leyden 
1724. 4. Ed. Th. Ch. Harles, Altenb. 1781, 2 Tomi. Cum comm. perp. 
ed. J. A. Wagner, Gotting. 1805. The text with traduction etc. par 
Dureau de la Malle, Paris 1811, 3 vols. Cum comm. ed. N. E. Lemaire, 
Paris 1824, 2 vols. Book VIII cum notis criticis etc. ed. A. Weichert, 
Meisen 1817. Recensuit Georg. Thilo, Halle 1863. CII and 256 pp. Ed. 
C. Schenkl, Berol. 1871. 

6. Contributions to the criticism of the text by C. Förtsch (Emen- 
dationes Valerianae, part. I Naumburg 1855. 4. II 1864. 4.), F. Eyssen- 
hardt (Rhein. Mus. XVII p. 378—392), Koch (ibid. XVHI p. 163 sq.). 
Ph. Wagner (Philologus XX p. 617—647), G. Thilo (Prolegg., especially 
c. 3), G. Meyncke (Quaestiones Val.. Bonn 1865, and Rhein. Mus. XXII 
p. 362—376), M. Haupt (Hermes III p. 212—215). R. Löhbach (Observ. 
critt. in . . Arg., Andernach 1869. 4.), P. Braun (Obs. critt. et exeg., 
Marburg 1869), Br. Hirschwälder (Curae crit. in . . Arg. P. I, Breslau 
1870. 35 p.), C. Schenkl (Studies on the Arg. of. Val. Fl., in the Trans, 
of the Academy of Vienna, 1872). 

313. Curiatius Maternus, whom Tacitus has comme- 
morated in a highly honourable manner, a man of refined 
oratorical training, wrote tragedies under Nero (e. g. Medea) 
and praetextae under Vespasian (Domitius, Cato) and also a 
tragedy on the subject of Thyestes. Saleius Bassus, a poet 
lauded by his friends, and noticed also by Vespasian, seem 
s to have written chiefly epic poems, perhapslike Valerius 
Flaccus on mythical subjects. During his father's reign, 
Domitian seems also to have attempted epic poetry. 

1. Tac. dial. 11 assigns these words to Curiatius Maternus: 
sicut in causis agendis efficere aliquid et eniti fortasse possum, ita re- 
citatione tragoediarum et ingredi famam auspicatus sum, cum quidem 



i 



Curiatius Mateiiius. Salews Bassins. 117 

imperante Nerone {so L. Müller; see Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 97, p. 417—420, 
the mss. in Nerone) improbam et studiorum quoque sacra profanantem 
Vatinii (? Gronovius, the mss. vaticinii) potentiam fregi (perhaps by 
la^Jiing him in the character of Thersites, as L. Müller supposes), et 
hodie si quid nobis notitiae ac nominis est magis arbitror carminum 
quam orationum gloria partum, ac iam (A. D. 75) me deiungere a 
forensi labore constitui. Cf. ib. 5: natus ad eloquentiam virilem et 
oratoriam . . omittit studium. ib. 2: postero die quam Curiatius Ma- 
ternus Catonem recitaverat, cum offendisse potentium animos diceretur 
tanquam in eo tragoediae (see above 14, 2) argumento sui oblitus tantum 
Catonem cogitasset, aeque de re per urbem frequens sermo haberetur 
etc. 3: si qua omisit Cato, sequent! recitatione Thyestes dicet; banc 
enim tragoediam disposui iam (Maternus speaks) et intra me ipse for- 
mavi. Then Aper observes: adeo te tragoediae istae non satiant quo 
minus omissis orationum et causarum studiis omne tempus modo circa 
Medeam, ecce nunc circa Thyesten consumas: . . etiam si non novum 
tibi ipse negotium importasses, Domitium (perhaps the pugnax Domitius 
in Lucan VII 601, i. e. Caesar's enemy, L. Domitius Ahenobarbus, Cons. 
700; see A. Haakh in Pauly's Encycl. II p. 1210—1215) et Catonem, id 
est nostras quoque historias et romana nomina, Graeculorum fabulis 
aggregare. The chronological order would, therefore, be: the tragedy 
against Vatinius, then Medea, Domitius, Cato, Thyestes. It is probable 
that we should of him understand Dio LXVII 12: Mc'hsqpop ao(fiGTijy, 
on xciTCi TvQccj/t/(oy diii ti daxdiv (as might be the case in his recitation 
of Thyestes), dn^xifivfv (Domitian, A. D. 91). Different from him is 
Maternus, iuris et aequarum cultor sanctissimus legum in Martial X 37. 

2. Tac. dial. 5: quis nescit neminem mihi (i. e. lulius Secundus, 
above 310, 4) coniunctiorem esse et usu amicitiae et assiduitate con- 
tubernii quam Sal ei um Bassum, cum optimum virum tum absolu- 
tissimum poetam (the exaggeration of a friend)? Aper ib.: Saleius 
Bassus . . carminum gloriam fovet, cum causas agere non possit; and 
9 : Saleium nostrum, egregium poetam. . . versus . . Basso domi na- 
ßcuntur, pulchri quidem et iucundi. . . laudavimus nuper . . Yespasiani 
liberalitatem, quod quingenta sestertia Basso donasset. Quintil. X 1, 
90 (among the epic poets) : vehemens et poeticum ingenium Salei Bassi 
fuit, nee ipsum senectus maturavit (or senectute maturuit). Juv. Vli 
80 sq.: Serrano tenuique (poor? cf. Stat. Silv. V 3, 158 tenuis . . Co- 
rinnae) Saleio gloria quantalibet quid erit, si gloria tantum est (without 
material results)? The Bassus mentioned by Martial III 47. 58, 1. Y 
23. VIII 10. VII 96, 1, is a different person, to conclude from his per- 
sonal circumstances, though he also composed poetry and tragedies; see 
V53: Colchida quid scribis, quid scribis, amice, Thyesten? quo tibi vel 
Nioben, Basse, vel Andromachen? J. Held, de Saleio Basso poeta, 
Breslau 1834. 4. 

3. Statins' father had in early youth successfully competeu in the 
poetical contests at Naples (Stat. Silv. V 3, 112 sqq. 134 sqq.), then 



118 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

been professor of eloquence (gemina facundia lingua, ib. 90) and poetry- 
first at Naples (ib. 146—175), then at Rome ib. 176 — 194), had composed 
a poem on the conflagration of the Capitol a. 69 (ib. 199 sqq.: vix 
requies flammae . . excisis cum tu solatia templis . . concipis ore^pio 
captivaque fulmina defies, mirantur Latii proceres ultorque deoruni 
Caesar) and was just going to flere pio cantu (ib. 205) the eruption of 
Vesuvius (a. 79), when he died (ib. 206 sqq.; at the very earliest a. 80, 
see below 316, 3), 65 years old (ib. 253 sq.), from which he appears to 
be born a. 15 = 768 at the earHest. 

4. On Domitian's epic attempts see below 314, 2. 



b) Domitian. 

ol4. The superticial interest formerly displayed by 
Domitian in literature, disappeared immediately on his accession 
to the throne. The Capitoline and Alb an contests did indeed 
embrace also poetry, but they admitted only of panegyrics on 
the vain despot. His arm lay heavily on all intellectual life. 
It was however felt most by history. As regards eloquence, 
only that of the delatores flourished. Without endangering 
personal existence or honour, the only course possible in 
the reign of Domitian was the one taken by such men as 
Juvenal, Tacitus, and Pliny — to be silent. Among the 
authors some flattered the crowned monster from weakness 
and some from egotism; the first motive influenced Silius 
Italiens, Statins, and Quintilian,while calculating servility 
decided Josephus and Martial. Even writers on technical 
subjects, like Sex. Julius Frontinus and the Jurists, scarcely 
succeeded in avoiding the menacing cliff's. All the greater 
was the number of dilettanti who endeavoured to prove their 
utter insignificance and harmlessness by writing verses. 

1. Flavins Domitian us, born Oct, 24, 51 (804), Emperor after 
Sept. 13, 81 (884), assassinated Sept. 18, 96 (849). The contemporary 
writers, inscriptions and coins allow us to draw of the 15 years of his 
reign as lively an image as of few other parts of Roman history, though 
it is true that not much has as yet been carried out in this direction. 
A. Imhof, J. Fl. Dom., drawn from the sources, Halle 1S57. 144 pp. 
E. V. Wietersheim, Hist, of the Migration of Tribes I (Leipzig 1859) Ch.VHI. 
C. Peter, Hist, of Rome HI 2 (Halle 1869) p. 112—140. 

2. Suet. Dom. 2: simulavit poeticae studium, tam insuetum antea 
sibi quam postea spretum et abiectum (see n. 3), recitavitque etiam 
publice. Tac. Hist. IV 86: Domitianus . . studium litterarum et amorem 



i 



Domitian. 119 

carminum simulans. They appear chietly to have consisted in attempts 
at epic poetry. Quintil. X 1, 91 : hos nominavimus (as epic poets), quia 
Germanicum Aug. ab institutis studiis deflexit cura terrarum parumque 
diis visum est esse eum maximum poetarum. quid tamen his ipsis eius 
operibus in quae donato imperio iuvenis secesserat sublimius, doctius, 
omnibus denique numeris praestantius ? quis enim caneret bella melius 
quam qui sic gerit? It may possibly have been the bellum iudaicum 
he undertook to describe or pretended to do so; see Val. Fl. I 7 sqq. 
(above 312, 1). See also below 315, 3. He did not write the Aratea: 
see above 270, 7. Suet. Dom. 18: quamvis libello quern de cura capil- 
lorum ad amicum edidit haec etiam, simul ilium seque consolans, in- 
seruerit etc. 

3. Suet. Dom. 20: liberalia studia imperii initio neglexit, quam- 
quam bybliothecas incendio absumptas impensissime reparare curasset, 
exemplaribus undique petitis missisque Alexandriam qui describerent 
emendarentque. numquam tamen aut historiae carminibusve noscendis 
operam ullam aut stilo vel necessario dedit. praeter commentarios et 
acta Tiberi Caesaris nihil lectitabat; epistolas orationesque et edicta 
alieno formabat ingenio. From this we should form our jugdment in 
respect to Quintil. IV prooem. 3 : principem ut in omnibus ita in elo- 
quentia quoque eminentissimum. 

4. Suet. Dom. 4: instituit (a. 86) et quinquennale certamen Capito- 
lino lovi triplex, musicum, equestre, gymnicum. . . certabant et prosa 
oratione graece latineque. . . celebrabat et in Albano quotannis Quin- 
quatria Minervae . . et scenicos ludos superque oratorum ac poetarum 
certamina. Plin. paneg. 24 : quis iam locus miserae adulationis manebat 
ignarus, cum laudes imperatorum ludis etiam et commissionibus cele- 
brarentur? According to the inscription in Orelli 2603 (Pauly's Enc. 
VI 2. p. 2364, Nr. 142) L. Valerius L. f. Pudens cum esset annorum 
XIII Romae certamine sacro lovis Capitolini lustro sexto claritate in- 
genii coronatus est inter poetas latinos omnibus sententiis iudicum. Cf. 
also the inscription from Acerra, Hermes I p. 151 — 155. But Statins 
Silv. Ill 5, 31 sqq. V 3, 231 sqq.) and the young Annius Florus (whom 
see), perhaps also Q. Sulpicius Maximus, a boy of twelve years, tertio 
certaminis lustro (A. D. 86, cf. C. L. Visconti, il sepolcro del fanciullo 
Q. S. M., delineato etc., Rome 1871. fol.) were unsuccessful. The Alban 
olive-wreath was, however, several times gained by Statius (Silv. Ill 5, 
28 sqq.). Cf. Friedländer, Sketches of Roman manners and morals III 
p. 32S— 326. 

5. Tac. Agr. 2 : legimus, cum Aruleno Rustico (below 324, 2) Paetus 
Thrasea, Herennio Senecioni Priscus Helvidius laudati essent, capitale 
fuisse neque in ipsos modo auctores sed in libros quoque eorum sae- 
vitum, delegato triumviris ministerio ut monumenta clarissimorum inge- 
niorum in comitio ac foro urerentur. . . expulsis insuper sapientiae 
professoribus atque omni bona arte in exsilium acta. . . sicut vetus 
aetas vidit quid ultimum in libertate esset, ita nos quid in Servitute, 



120 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

adempto per inquisitiones etiam loquendi audiendique commercio. 
Especially in the last years of Domitian (cum profiteretur odium bo- 
norum, Plin. paneg. 95) virtus was suspecta, inertia in pretio (Plin. 
ep. VIII 14, 7). Helvidius e. g. metu temporum nomen ingens paresque 
virtutes secessu tegebat (ib. IX 13, 2). 

6. Suet. Dom. 10: occidit Hermogenem Tarsensem propter quasdam 
in historia figuras, librariis etiam qui eam descripserant cruci fixis. . • 
interemit . . Mettium Pompusianum quod . . depictum orbem terrae 
in membrana contionesque regum ac ducum ex T. Livio circumferret 

. . lunium Rusticum quod Paeti Thraseae et Helvidi Prisci laudes edi- 
disset appellassetque eos sanctissimos viros, cuius criminis occasione 
philosophos omnis urbe Italiaque summovit. Among the latter were 
Artemidorus (Plin. Ep. Ill, 11), Lucceius Telesinus, Demetrius, Dio 
Chrysostomus, Epictetus. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2105 = 9 Dom. = A. 
D. 89: Domitianus mathematicos et philosophos romanos (Var. romana) 
urbe pepulit. ad 2111 = 15 Dom. = A. D. 95 (more correctly a. 93; 
Mommsen, Hermes III p. 84 sq. n. 4): Domitianus rursum philosophos 
et mathematicos Roma per edictum extrudit. 

7. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2109 = 13 Dom. =z A. D. 93: Flavins 
losephus vicesimum librum Antiquitatum h. temp, scribit. 

8. On the dilettanti-versifiers of this reign see below 319. See L. 
Friedländer, recensio poetarum Static, Martiali, Plinio iun. contempo- 
raneorum, Königsberg 1870. 4. Sketches of Roman manners and morals 
III p. 351 sqq. 

315. Under Domitian wrote C. Silius Italiens (A. D. 25 
— 101) — a man who after an oratorical career that had 
led him up to the dignity of consul (a. 68), had entirely 
devoted himself to quiet leisure and literary pursuits. In his 
seventeen books of Punica he derived his subject from Livy, 
and in his style and diction imitated Homer and Virgil, in 
applying mythological motives even to this historical subject 
matter. His performance is lengthy and declamatory, abounding 
in episodes, as the author endeavours to embody all the 
traditional embellishments of epic poetry in his work as 
completely as possible. The technical treatment of his verse 
is so strict as to be monotonous, 

1. Plin. Epist. Ill 7 (A. D. 101): modo nuntiatus est Silius Ita- 
liens in Neapolitano suo inedia finivisse vitam. (2.) causa mortis valetudo. 
erat illi natus insanabilis clavus (a corn, cf. the medical Diss, de morte 
Silii It. by Laur. Heister, Helmstedt 1734. 4.), cuius taedio ad mortem 
irrevocabili constantia decucurrit, usque ad extremum diem beatus et 
felix, nisi quod minorem ex liberis duobus amisit, sed maiorem melio- 



Domitian. Silws Italiens. 121 

remque florentem atque etiam consularem (Martial. VIII 66) reliquit. 

(3.) laeserat famam suam siil) Neroiie : credebatur sponte accusasse. 

sed in Vitelli amicitia (cf. Tac. Hist. Ill 65) sapienter se et comiter 

gesserat, ex proconsulatu Asiae gloriani reportaverat, maculam veteris 

industriae laudabili otio abluerat. (4.) fuit inter principes civitatis sine 

potentia, sine invidia: salutabatur, colebatur, multumque in lectulo iacens 

cubiculo semper non ex fortuna frequenti doctissimis sermonibus dies 

transigebat, cum a scribendo vacaret. (5.) scribebat carmina maiore 

cura quam ingenio, nonnumquam indicia hominum recitationibus expe- 

riebatur. (6.) novissime ita suadentibus annis ab urbe secessit seque 

in Campania tenuit, ac ne adventu quidem novi principis (i. e. Trajan, 

a. 99) inde commotus est. (7.) . . erat (^ikoxcckog usque ad emacitatis 

reprehensionem. plures isdem in locis villas possidebat (among them 

one which had formerly belonged to Cicero, perhaps his Cumanum; 

see Martial. XI 48: Silius haec magni celebrat monimenta Maronis, 

iugera facundi qui Ciceronis habet, heredem dominumque sui tumulive 

larisve non alium mallet nee Maro nee Cicero) adamatisque novis priores 

neglegebat. multum ubique librorum, multum statuarum, multum ima- 

ginum, quas non habebat modo verum etiam venerabatur, Vergilii ante 

omnes, cuius natalem religiosius quam suum celebrabat, Neapoli maxime, 

ubi monimentum (=: tumulus, see Martial. I. 1. and XI 49; above 226, 

12) eius adire ut templum solebat. (9.) in hac tranquillitate annum 

LXXVum excessit, delicato magis corpore quam intirmo ; utque novis- 

simus a Nerone factus est consul (a. 68 ^=. 821 V. C. cf. Martial. VII 

63, 9 sq.) ita postremus ex omnibus quos Nero consules fecerat decessit. 
(10.) illud etiam notabile : ultimus ex Neronianis consularibus obiit quo 
consule Nero periit (i. e. Silio Italico). His former acti\^ty as orator 
is mentioned by Martial. VII 63, 5 sqq. sacra cothurnati non attigit 
ante Maronis implevit magni quam Ciceronis opus, hunc miratur adhuc 
centum gravis hasta virorum, hunc loquitur grato plurimus ore cliens. 
After his consulship (11 sq.). emeritos Musis et Phoebo tradidit annos 
proque suo celebrat nunc Helicona foro. His early interest in Virgil 
is indicated by Cornutus' (above 294, 2) dedication of his work de 
Vergilio. The complete name of Ti. Catius Sil. It. in Gruter p. 300,1. 

2. That Martial praises the wealthy poet and his work in a high 
strain is a matter of course; see n. 1 and IV 14, 1 sqq.: Sili, Castalidum 
decus sororum, qui periuria barbari furoris ingenti premis ore perfidosque 
astus Hannibalis levesque Poenos magnis cederc cogis Africanis. VI 

64, 10: perpetui . . Sili. VII 63 sq.: perpetui nunquam moritura Volu- 
mina Sili qui legis et latia carmina digna toga etc. From the fact 
that he never designates him as countryman, it appears sufficiently 
that Silius was not a native of Italica. Quintilian's silence concerning 
Silius, even in his list of Roman epic poets X 1, 85 — 90, may be ex- 
plained by the fact that Silius was still alive when Quintilian composed 
his work, and that he had not yet published his poem. Statins (Silv. 
IV 7, 14 sqq.) alludes to Sil. I 233. 

3. The Emperors of the Flavian dynasty are praised by Sil. Ill 



122 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

594—629, where he says ot Domitian v. 607 sqq.: at tu transcendes^ 
Germanice, facta tuorum (of father and brother!), iam puer auricomo 
praeformidate Batavo (of. Martial II 2, 4 above 270, 7 fin.), nee te ter- 
ruerint Tarpei culminis ignes : . . servabere . . ; nam te longa manent 
nostri consortia mundi. Then he adds bombastic praises of Domitian's 
failures in the East and North and finally (618 sqq.) says: quin et 
Romuleos superabit voce nepotes quis erit eloquio partum decus; hinc 
sua Musae sacra ferent, meliorque lyra (than Orpheus) . . Phoebo mi- 
randa loquetur. More in conformity with truth he says at the close of 
XIV: at ni cura viri qui nunc dedit otia mundo effrenum arceret po- 
pulandi cuncta furorem nudassent avidae terrasque fretumque rapinae. 
But XVi 533 sq. he does not suppress the sigh : quid iam non regibus 
ausum? aut quod iam regnis restat scelus? Praise ot Virgil VIII 593 
sq.: Mantua Musarum domus atque ad sidera cantu evecta aonio et 
smyrnaeis aemula plectris. He occasionally celebrates his friends n 
the characters of his poem, e. g. in Pedianus (XII 212 — 222) he no 
doubt intends to gratify a son of Asconius Ped. (above 290). 

4. Silius who lacks talent for poetical invention almost pedanti- 
cally imitates the Homeric poems and Virgil. He has of course his 
'OvfiQog (III 163 sqq.) and Kcaakoyog (III 222 sqq.), his Hector's (i. e. 
Hannibal's) parting (HI 62 sqq.), his description of the shield (II 395 
sqq.), his dd^ka XVI 277 sqq.), his fJia/^ na^anoid/utog (IV 667 sqq.), 
his Proteus (415 sqq.) and his vfxvia (XIII 395 sqq.), also his description 
of the gates (IH 32 sqq.) like the one in the Georgics. Like Hercules, 
Scipio (XV 20 sqq.) stands at the cross-road of Virtus and Voluptas; 
like Turnus, Hannibal at Zama fights a phantom. Juno has the same 
part as in the Aeneid and frequently interferes in favour of Hannibal 
(I 548 sqq. II 526 sqq. HI 163 sqq. IV 417 sqq.); on the other side 
Venus and Vulcan bestir themselves (IV 667 sqq.). The delineation of 
characters is rather poor. The frequent descriptions of battles belong 
to the rhetorical appurtenances. In national colouring and also in local 
details Silius vies with the Aeneid. The poet takes very decidedly part 
against Hannibal (e. g. II 696 sqq.). After b. XII the treatment is very 
unequal, and in b. XVII it is evident that the poet hastens to the end; 
not a word on Scipio's passage to Africa and Hannibal's landing there. 
The work closes with Scipio's triumph after the battle of Zama, after 
a prospective view has been disclosed of Hannibal's final fate and the 
destruction of Carthage (v. 371 sqq.). See in general the supplements 
to Sulzer VII p. 374 sqq. W. Cosack, quaestiones Silianae (especially 
p. 16—56 de fide historica Silii, chiefly concerning his relation to Livy), 
Halle 1844. L. Cholevius, epitheta ornantia quibus utitur Virgilius cum 
iis comparata quibus posteriores epici latini, maxime quidem Silius 
carmina sua distinxerunt, I. Königsberg 1865. 

5. The work was still used by Vibius Sequester, but was for- 
gotten in the middle ages, and even Petrarch does not seem to have 
known it when he wrote his Africa; see 0. Occioni (n. 7) p. 116 — 143. 
In 1417 Poggio or rather Bartholomaeus Politianus (de monte Puliciano) 



i 



Siliu.'i Italiens . 123 

found at St. Gall also a ms. (cf. 312, 4) of Silius, which was indeed 
subsequently again lost, but is to all purposes preserved in the copies 
made of it in Italy in the 15th century. In the same manner the ms. 
found at Cologne by Carrio and which he assigned to the time of 
Charlemagne (it extended, however, only as far as XVI 555, and would 
also seem to have been used by Fr. Modius) has again been lost. Cf. 

A. Drakenborch's pref. to his edition and in Ruperti p. XLV sqq. G. 
Thilo, Quaestiones Silianae, Halle 1858. 4. and in the Symbola phil. 
Bonn. p. 399—401. 

6. Two ed. principes Rome 1471 fol. simultaneously. Bold inter- 
polations (by Ambrosius Nicander Toletanus) in the luntina 1515. L. 
Carrio, Emendationum etc. libri (Antv. 1576. Paris 1583), with Fr. Modii 
novantiq. lectt. (Frankf. 1584), both in Gruter's Lampas III 2. p. 90sqq. 
and V p. 1 sqq. Ed. D. Heinsius (with his Crepundia Siliana), Lugd. 

B. 1600. Ed. Claud. Dansqueius (Paris 1618), Cellarius (Lips. 1695) and 
especially cum animadv. N. Heinsii etc. ed. A. Drakenborch, Utrecht 
1717. 4. Ed. J. B. Lefebvre de Villebrune (with a French translation), 
Paris 1781. 3 vols. Comm. perp. illustr. J. C. Th. Ernesti, Lips. 1791. 
2 voLs. Perpet. annot. ill. G. A. Ruperti, Getting. 1795—98, 2 vols. 
Texts by Lünemann (Gotting. 1824) and in W. E. Weber's corpus poett. 
latt. p. 799-897. 

7. Quaestiones Silianae by Wilh. Cosack (see n. 4) and G. Thilo 
(see n. 5). Emendationes Silianae by G. Thilo in the Symbola philol. 
Bonn. p. 367—410. 

8. Cajo Silio Italico e il suo poema; studi di Oner. Occioni, Pa- 
dova 1869 (p. 149 sqq. an Italian translation of books III and XI). 

316. Under Domitian lived and wrote also P. Papinius 
Statins of Naples (c. A. D. 45 — 96). Highly educated and 
endowed with poetical talent, warm feeling, and very ver^tile 
in formal polish, Statins still displeases more than he attracts, 
by the want of truth perceptible in his poems, in which he 
does not express merely real thoughts and feelings, but also 
feigned, made and even ordered ideas, and which he frequently 
overlays and weighs down by rhetorical and mythological 
phrases. His earliest and largest work, the The b aid in 
twelve books, is a very unenjoyable production (he seems to 
have derived his subject-matter from Antimachus, and follows 
Virgil in epic technicalities). He never completed his A chill eis, 
of which even the second book is not finished. Very at- 
tractive are his Silvae, five books of poems written on 
various occasions mostly in epic metre, very few in melic 
metres; valuable sketches of the period, some of which 



124 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

are documents of respectable, though at the same time weak 
feelings. 

1. In defining the chronological facts concerning Statins it is ne- 
cessary once for all to leave aside the unfounded opinions of Dodwell in 
his Annales Statiani (Oxon. 1698, together with Annales Velleiani and 
Quintilianei). See Grosse Observ. p. 4—10. When his father (above 

313, 3) died (c. a. 80 := 833), Statius had already obtained victories in 
poetical contests (Sil. V 3, 225 sqq.) in his native town of Naples (Silv. 
Ill 5, 78 sq.) and had recited parts of his Thebaid at Rome (ib. 215 sqq. 
cf. 233 sqq. and Juvenal VII 82 sqq.). On the other hand he says of 
himself Silv. V 2, 158 sq. (c. a. 95 or 96): nos fortior aetas iam fugit, 
cf. IV 4 69 sq. (a. 95) : nos facta aliena canendo vergimur in senium. 
V 4 he mentions his prolonged sleeplessness, and III 5, 37 sqq. a heavy 
illness he had passed through. The fifth book of the Silvae, the third 
piece of which dates from an earlier time (n. 80), while the fourth is 
merely a brief complaint from a sick-bed and the fifth is unfinished, 
seems not to have received this shape until after the author's death. 
Nothing would entitle us to infer that Statius survived Domitian. The 
time of his birth can only be inferred from his father's age (see 313, 
3; cf. C. F. Weber, Panegyr. in Pison. p. 12 sq.) and the performances 
of the son during the father's life-time; we shall not, therefore, be 
justified in descending below the year 800 V. C. That his retreat to 
Campania was caused by his failure in the Capitoline games (above 

314, 4), is probable, though not supported by any definite proof. 

2. Statins' wife was a Roman widow of the name of Claudia (Silv. 
Ill 5) who brought a daughter with her, but did not bear children in 
her second wedlock (Silv. V 5, 79 sq.). She does not seem to have 
been without money, though Statins' possessions (if any) at Naples 
came from his father, and the estate at Alba (Silv. Ill 1, 61 sq., cf. 
iugera nostra ib. V 3, 37) had been given him, perhaps by Domitian 
(Silv. m 1. 1.). The very fact that Statius never (Silv. IV 9 being merely 
a joke) appears as such a beggar in his intercourse with his patrons as 
Martial, is in favour of his relative independence in material respects. 
Juv. VII 86 sq.: (Statius) cum fregit subsellia versu esurit, intactam 
Paridi nisi vendit Agaven (see above 8, 1 fin.) proves only that Statius 
did not derive any material advantages from reciting his Thebaid. The 
cheapness of Statins' Muse in regard to orders (e. g. from the Eunuch 
and imperial favorite Earinus, Silv. Ill 4) was probably rather due to 
political pressure than pecuniary wants. As his patrons he mentions 
Metius Celer (rex mens, Silv. Ill 2, 92 sq.) and Plotius Grypus (IV 9, 
48 sqq.) ; with others his intercourse is on an equal footing, e. g. with 
Claudius Etruscus (dilectus sodalis, Silv. I 5, 9; meus, ib. Ill praef.; 
perhaps a relative of his wife's), Pollius FeHx (meus, ib. IV praef.) and 
his son-in-law Julius Menecrates (ib. IV 8). Vettius Crispinus, a boy of 
16 years, whose father is dead, receives from the poet (ib. V 2) exhor- 
tations which a father misfht sfive. See L. Friedländer, Sketches of 



1 



Statine, 125 

Roman manners and morals III (Berlin 1871) p. 342. 404 — 411. But in 
respect of Domitian and anything connected with his person (Silv. IV 
praef. : latus omne divinae domus semper demereri pro mea mediocritate 
conitor; nam qui bona fide dios colit amat et sacerdotes) his adulation 
is unbearable. Not content with extolling the happiness of Earinus in 
being admitted to the Emperor's presence (III 4, 60 sqq.), he says of 
the day on which Domitian invited him to dinner: haec aevi mihi prima 
dies, haec limina vitae (IV 2, 13), and represents his wretched successes 
against foreign enemies as something very grand (e. g. IV 3, 153 sqq.), 
praises his dementia (III 3, 167 sqq.) and maintains that, if possible, 
the Emperor would do away with death (V 1 165 sqq.), makes sidera, 
undae terraeque pray for his preservation (III 4, 101 sqq.), praises his 
beauty (III 4, 44 sqq., cf. IV 2, 41 sqq.) and compares him when re- 
clining at table with a resting Hercules (IV 2, 46 sqq.). I 1 94 sqq 
he makes Domitian's father and brother descend from heaven by night 
to kiss Domitian's equestrian statue. But of dead Caligula (III 3, 70 
sqq.) and ferus Nero (V 2, 33) he ventures to speak openly. 

3. The composition of the Thebais (cf. Silv. Ill 5, 36 and Juv. 
7, 83) took him very long (Silv. Ill 5, 35. IV 7, 26), even twelve years 
(Theb. XII 811). Silv. Ill 2, 142 sq. it is mentioned as not finished, 
but its completion is spoken of ib. IV 4, 88—92 (iam sidonios emensa 
labores Thebais optato collegit carbasa portu etc.), cf. ib. 7, 7. 25 sqq. 
As Statins' father had already seen the first commencement of the 
work (Silv. V 3, 233 sq.), the composition of the whole w^ork seems to 
have occupied the years 80 — 92. It turns on the contests of Polynices 
and Eteocles. After the action has in the first ten books scarcely made 
any progress, owing to the long-winded speeches, preparations and 
descriptions it is summarily finished in the last two books, which 
contain not only the fight of the two brothers, Creon's accession and 
prohibition to bury Polynices, but also Antigone's petition addressed to 
Theseus, his interference and the death of Creon. The legend is treated 
very freely in details, Greek and Roman peculiarities (e. g. the abstract 
figures of Virtus, Furores etc.) being mixed up together. The arran- 
gement and motives are merely superficial. Epic comparisons are 
interspersed in great abundance. Descriptions of battles are succeeded 
by sentimental episodes. The mythological learning appears also in 
the paraphrasing of mythical names in the manner of Lycophron. The 
diction is frequently bombastic and not rarely obscured by artificial 
brevity. Welcker, Minor Writings I p. 396—401. V^^e recognise the 
traces of the Augustan patterns nearly everywhere, but also an endea- 
vour to surpass them in artificial and pathetic colouring. At the end, 
however, Statius addresses his work in the following terms (XII 816 sq.): 
vive, precor, nee tu divinam Aeneida tempta, sed longe sequere et 
vestigia semper adora. He speaks more confidently Achil. I 10 sqq. 
and Silv. II 3, 63. V 3, 213 sq. 

4. The design of the Achilleid was conceived on a very great 
scale and was to embrace also the legends antecedent and posterior to 



126 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

the Iliad. Ach. I 1 sqq.: magnanimum Aeaciden, . .Diva, refer, quam - 
quam acta viri multum inclita cantu maeonio, sed plura vacant, nos 
ire per omnem sic amor est heroa velis Scyroque latentem dulichia 
proferre tuba, nee in Hectore tracto sistere, sed tota iuvenem deducere 
Troia. The first book relates in 674 lines, how Thetis hid her son in 
female disguise in the house of Lycomedes, but Calchas discovers his 
sojourn by dint of prophecy, after the supposed girl has already seduced 
one of the daughters of the unsuspicious host, Deidamia. The 453 lines 
extant of the second book describe how Odysseus discovers Achilles 
and takes him to Troy. The style is less ranting and artificial, but 
just as diffuse as in the Thebaid. It was used by Joseph Iscanus 
(Dünger p. 25 sq.) and especially by Konrad of Würzburg (c. 1280); 
see H. Dünger, the Legend of the Trojan war, p. 46 — 48. 52. 54 sq. 

5. Both Theb. I 17 sqq. and Ach. I 19: (te longo necdum fidente 
paratu molimur, magnusque tibi praeludat Achilles), Statins promises 
Domitian a special epic in celebration of his deeds, cf. Silv. IV 4, 93 
sqq. : nunc . . Troia quidem magnusque mihi temptatur Achilles, sed 
vocat arcitenens alio pater armaque monstrat ausonii maiora ducis. 
trahit impetus illo iam pridem retrahitque timor. A beginning of this 
would -seem to have been found among the papers of Statins and to 
have been published; hence the four hexameters in the Scholia of Ge. 
Valla on Juv. IV 94. 0. Jahn, Rh. Mus. IX p. 627. 

6. As title (Gell, praef. 6.) Silvae according to Quintilian X3, 17 
denotes rapidly executed works, improvisations; cf. Silv. I praef.: hos 
libellos, qui mihi subito calore et quadam festinandi voluptate fluxerunt; 
. . nullum ex illis biduo longius tractum, quaedam et singulis diebus 
effusa. II praef.: epicedio prosecutus sum adeo festinanter ut etc. Ill 
praet. : (libellos) subito natos. According to IV praef. Statins was 
blamed by some quod hoc stili genus (opuscula, leves libelli. II praef. 
ioci, IV praef.) edidisset. The 32 pieces were first written separately 
and when a number of them were ready joined to a book and de- 
dicated to an individual with a prose-address; book I to Stella, II to. 
Atedius Melior, III to Pollius Felix, IV to Victorius Marcellus; the 
preface to book V relates only to the first piece, but was doubtless 
intended to be continued, if the poet had been spared to complete the 
book; see n. 1. Except V 3 all pieces seem to belong to the last six 
years of the poet's life, as the first book can be proved to be not 
anterior to a. 90 and the order of the books is chronological; see L. 
Friedländer, de temporibus Martialis librorum et Silvarum Statu (Kö- 
nigsberg 1862. 4.) p. 14—16. Cf. Ill praef.: securus itaque tertius hie 
silvarum nostrarum liber ad te mittitur. habuerat quidem et secundus 
testem, sed hie habet auctorem. IV praef.: plura in quarto silvarum 
quam in prioribus. Silv. Ill 5 a journey to Naples is contemplated, 
IV praef. is written from Naples. IV 1 celebrates Domitian's 17th con- 
sulate (a. 95). Other subjects are the deaths of friends (also of pueri 
delicati), in which epicedia he is often lachrymose, departures of friends 
(properaptica), their possessions (villae, halnea, works of art, even a 



Statins. 127 

psittacus), marriages, births and birthdays (Lucani II 7), Saturnalia etc. 
As made to order are designated I 1 and 2. II 7. Ill 4. Phalaecian 
metre is used in I 6. II 7. IV 3. 9., Alcaics in IV 5, and Sapphics in IV 7. 

7. Abundance of words, studied elegance, bold formations and in- 
novations in the use of words Statius shares with his whole period; 
peculiar to him (at least in the Silvae) is the rapidity of working, from 
which some carelessnesses (e. g. repetitions, Hand öilv. p. 269 sqq.) 
may be explained. Cf. Apollon. Sid. carm. 9, 223—226. Supplements 
to Sulzer's Theory VIII p. 344 sqq. Hand on Silv. p. X sqq, J. Dan- 
glard, Stace et ses Silves, Clermont-Ferrand 1864. On his diction see 
Suringar, Observationes in Stat, silv., Ling 1810. E. Grosse, Observat. 
p. 11 — 37. 45—50. E. Nauke, Observat. criticae et gram, in Stat. p. 16 
— 35. On the metrical peculiarities of Statius see Grosse, Observat. p. 
37 — 44. 0. Müller, Quaest. Statianae, Berlin 1861. 4. On his relation 
to Silius see Kitschl, Bonn Ind. lect. 1857 sq. p. IV. 

8. Statius obtained in a later period imitators, especially in Si- 
donius Apollinaris, and was admired even in the Middle Ages (cf. 
Dante Purgat. XXI) and diligently read. Hence we possess numerous 
mss. of his Thebaid, at least 70, the most important of which appears 
to be the Paris ms. 8051 (Puteaneus) saec. X. The Silvae exist in a 
smaller number of mss., all of which are derived from a ms. brought 
by Poggio from France to Italy and the various readings of which 
Politian noted in the margin of the ed. princ, after which time it has 
been lost again; but the Breslau ms. is a slavishly faithful copy of it 
(Imhof de condicione p. 4. 39 sqq.). The Budensis at Vienna (ib. p. 4. 
35 sq.) approaches it very closely. F. Hand, Silv. p. XX sqq. C. F. 
Weber, de codice Statu Cassellano (saec. XI), Marburg 1853. 54 pp. 4. 
Dübner and G. Queck in their prefaces. A. Imhof, de Silvarum Statia- 
narum condicione critica, Halle 1859. 44 pp. 4. E. Grosse, on a Treves 
ms. of Statius, Königsberg 1866. 19 pp. 4. F. Deycks on a ms. at 
Münster, Münster 1865. 4. W. Schmitz, on a fragment of a ms. at 
Düsseldorf, Rhein. Mus. XXI p. 438-443. 

9. Editions. Ed. princeps 1472. Parmae 1473. Bomae 1475. 
Venet. (Aid.) 1502. Rec. J. Bernartius, Antverp. 1595. Ed. Fr. Tilio- 
broga (Lindenbrog), Paris 1600. 4. Cura Em. Crucei, Paris 1618. 4. Ex 
reo. J. Fr. Gronovii, Amsterd. 1653. Ex rec. et cum animadv. C.Barthii, 
Cygn. 1664 sq. 4 vols. 4. (with Ind.). Ed. Amar et Lemaire, Paris 1825. 
4 vols. W. E. Weber in his Corpus poett. latt. p. 898—1029. Cum 
notis ed. Fr. Dübner, Paris 1835 sq. 2 vols. Rec. G. Queck, Lips. 
Teubner 1854. 2 vols, (see Imhof, de condic. p. 43 sq.) Thebais et 
Achilleis cum scholiis rec. 0. Müller, 3 vols (I. Leipzig 1870.) 

10. Critical contributions by M. Haupt (Monthly Reports of the 
Berlin Academy 1861 p. 1074 sqq.), 0. Müller (Quaestiones Statianae, 
Berlin 1861. 34 pp. 4. Rhein. Mus. XVHI. p. 189—200), E. Nauke (Ob- 
servationes criticae et gramm. in Statium, Breslau 1863, p. 1—16), A. 
Imhof (Emendationes Statianae, Halle 1867. 4.). 



128 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

lani Gruteri suspiciones in St. Theb. I cum animadv. F. Handii, 
Jena 1851. 4. 

11. Editions of the Silvae by Jer. Markland (rec. et. emend., 
London 1728. 4. reprinted by Sillig, Dresden 1827. 4. Cf. Imhof, de 
condic. p. 12—35) and Ferd. Hand (Lips. 1817; only Silv. I 1-3). 

J. Fr. Gronovii in St. Silvas diatribe, Hag. Cora. 1637; cum annotatt. 
ed. F. Hand, Lips, 1811. 2 vols. Silv. IV 6 cum comment. F. Handii, 
•Jena 1849. 33 pp. 4. Silv. I 4 e codd. et schedis Handii, in Jahn's 
Archiv XVIII p. 121 sqq. C. H. Volckmar, specimen novae Silv. St. 
editionis, Hfeld 1860. 4. (Silv. I 1). Silv. Ill 5 emend, et adn. A. Imhof, 
Halle 1863. 28 pp. 4. Ecloga ultima (Silv. V 5) emendatiorem ed. R. 
Unger; accedunt de Statu locis controv. coniectanea, Neustrelitz 1868. 
308 pp. E. Grosse, Observatorum in St. Silvis specimen, Berlin 1861. 

12. Scholia on the Thebaid, the value of w^hich consists chiefly 
in the mythological materials accumulated from Hyginus, Servius and 
others, are preserved under the name of Lutatius (or Lactantius) Pla- 
cidus, probably the author of the Argumenta Metamorphoseon Ovidii 
(above 244, 2). They are found in the old editions of Statins, also in 
those of Lindenbrog, Barth, and others. Cf. Dübner's pref. p. VIII sqq. 
Herrn. Schottky, de pretio Lactantiani comm. in St. Th. et (p. 25 — 39) 
de nomine, philosophia (mystical and pagan) et aetate (5.th, .cw.twry) 
commentatoris, Breslau 1846. E. Wöltflin, Philologus XXIV p. 156—158. 
R. Unger, Electa e Lact, in St. Th. comm., Friedland 1863. 4. M. 
Schmidt, on a Schohon on Statius, Philologus XXIII p. 541—547. 

13. On the Achilleis we have insignificant Scholia in Lindenbrog 
and in Mai, Spicileg. rom. IX appendix. Dommerich, ad Stat. Ach. ex 
membranis anecdota, Wolfenbüttel 1758. 4. 

317. In Domitian's reign we have also the greater part 
of the literary career of M. Valerius Marti alis (c. A. D. 
42 — 102) from Bilbilis in Spain; we possess by him 15 books 
of Epigrams, which turn on the social life of the Eome of 
those days with all its dirt and servility. Martial appears in them 
nearly equal to Ovid in the ease and elegance of poetical form, 
and even superior to him in want of character and morals. 
Martial shares his contemporary Juvenal's preference for ugly 
things, but does not like him rise above them; and his rival's 
(Statins') crouching to the rulers is still surpassed by him. 
He is a great talent, but repulsive on account of the utter 
absence of feeling for moral and aesthetic worth, or the dig- 
nity of man. Besides the elegiac metre, Martial in his Epi- 
grams frequently uses hendecasyllabics and choliambics. 

1. The death-year of M. Valerius Martialis (on the supposed cog- 
nomen of Coquus see Schneidewin's edition of 1842, p. 21 sq.) was at 



Statins. Mcurtialis. 129 

the latest 102, perhaps alread}- A. D. 101; in his poems there is no 
trace pointiog beyond this year; see Th. Mommsen, Hermes III p. 120 
— 126. But the letter of Pliny which announces his death (see n. 7) 
seems to be of the year 102; Stobbe, Philologus XXVII p. 640. His 
birth-year may be inferred, though not with certainty, from X 24: 
natales mihi Martiae kalendae, . . quinquagesima liba septimamque 
vestris addimus hanc focis acerram. Though this poem may perhaps 
belong to the second edition of the tenth book, a. 98 (or the beginning of 
99), it is still not quite certain and the mode of calculation not quite 
clear. After 34 years spent at Rome (X 103, 7 sqq. 104, 9 sqq. cf. XH 
31, 7. 34 1), i. e. perhaps 64—98, he returned home, probably because 
under Nerva and Trajan a new spirit had begun to reign at Rome not 
congenial to Martial and from which he could not expect much. Even 
before, his manner of living at Rome was wretched enough as he de- 
spised real work, though neither his literary earnings nor his begging 
addresses to rich and powerful patrons procured him enough to live 
on; cf. HI 38 and in many other places. As a present we may, however, 
consider the small villa which he possessed subsequently to a. 83 (see 
n 38, and cf. I 55) near Nomentum in the Sabine country, with a small 
house in the metropolis. Both from Titus (IH 95, 5. IX 97, 5 sq.) and 
Domitian he received for his poems the ius trium liberorum (II 92, cf. 
IV 27, 3 sq.), and the dignity of tribunus (IH 95, 9). Equestrian rank 
(III 95, 10. VI 3, 2. 17, 2. IX 49, 4. XII 26, 2) he may have possessed 
by birth. His parents were Valerius Fronto and Flaccilla (V 34, 1). In 
his native country he received from the domina Marcella (XII 31), pro- 
bably out of admiration for his literary performances (cf. XII 21), the 
present of an estate. — A. Brandt, de Martialis poetae vita, Berlin 
1853. 38 pp. 

2. Many are the patrons addressed by Martial; among 
them chiefly the nearest friends of the Emperors, e. g. Parthenius 
(below 319, 2), Crispinus (e. g. VII 99), and Earinus (above 316, 2). 
The literary characters of the age are also sufficiently represented in 
these poems; but Tacitus appears never, nor does Statins, just as vice 
versa Martial is never mentioned by Statins. This circumstance is all 
the more to be observed, as the two poets were contemporaries and moved 
simultaneously in the same circles, nay even treated the same subjects. 
E. g. Stat. Silv. I 2. 5 = Mart. VI 21, 42; Silv. H 1. 7 r= Mart. VI 28 
sq. Vn 21-23; Silv. HI 3 sq. = Mart. VH 40. IX 11-13. 16. 36; Silv. 
rV 6 =; Mart. IX 43 sq. This silence is no doubtless due to the com- 
petition and rivalry of these two poets. Martial may, therefore, be 
supposed to allude in his frequent remarks on the poets of long- 
winded epic poems (e. g. in twelve books like the Thebaid, Mart. IX 
50, 3, cf. also IX 19. X21. XIV 1, 11) especially to Statins. Friedländer, 
Sketches of Roman manners and morals III p. 348 sq. 369 — 404. 

3. If history does not admire Domitian as the embodiment of all 
human and princely virtues. Martial for one does not bear the blame. 
He on the contrary praises all the actions of Domitian in peace and 

9 



130 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

in war as proofs of the highest wisdom and valour, and when the Emperor 
is in the field, can scarcely find expressions sufficient to contain Rome's 
desire for the return of this mild prince and 'father of the fatherland', 
under whom Rome is stated to be freer than ever (V 19, 6). Especially 
the eighth book abounds in adulation. Spect. 33 he even exclaims : 
Flavia gens, quantum tibi tertius abstulit heres! paene fuit tanti non 
habuisse duos. Nay IX 3 he expresses the frivolous idea that the gods 
properly owe such great thanks to Domitian that he might sell them 
off. He is all the more at a loss under Nerva when blanditiae no longer 
hold good and rustica Veritas reigns (X 72). The truth on Domitian 
is stated XII 6, 11 sq., cf. 15, 9 sq. His former expressions to the 
contrary were not due to self-deception, as appears from this epigram. 

4. The Epigrams are preceded by a book not counted in and 
which contains 33 epigrams; it is called liber spectaculorum from its 
contents, but bears, in the mss., only the title of epigrammaton liber. 
J. Kehrein in Jahn's Archiv IV p. 541 — 553. F. Schmieder, Martial, 
de spect. liber, Brieg 1837. 4. Of the 14 books of Epigrams XHI bears 
the special title of Xenia, XIV of Apophoreta, and these two alone 
received from Martial himself headings to the single epigrams. Both 
are intended as presents on the festival of Saturnalia, and contain 
mostly epigrams in the original sense of the word, i. e. inscriptions on 
some subject, while the other epigrams correspond to the later sense 
of the word, being occasional and witty compositions. Each book 
generally has at its beginning a dedication with preface, some (b. I, 
II, VIII, XII) in prose, like the prefaces of Statins. Each book contains 
on an average 100 epigrams, arranged so as to make them more in- 
teresting by variation, also in point of metre. But the books them- 
selves are (except XIII and XIV) arranged in chronological order, as 
the poet always collected his previously published epigrams whenever 
he had a sufficient number of them, and their publication as book seems 
to have taken place in yearly intervals (X 70, 1. cf. IX 84, 9). Only 
the last three books (X, XI, XH) were published after Domitian's death ; 
the first may also contain some poems written under Vespasian and 
Titus, to whom (Caesares) Martial had already presented poems (1 101, 
2). The liber spectaculorum belongs to Domitian's first years, like 
b. I and II (a. 82 until 87 at the latest); b. IH (which does not con- 
tain any allusion to the Emperor or other chronological traces) is dated 
from Forum Cornelii and written after b. II and before b. IV (perhaps 
still a. 87); IV is from a. 88 and 89 ; V from a. 90 ; VI from the close 
of 90 and the first part of 91 ; VII and VIII from a. 92 and 93 ; IX, X 
(in their first edition) and XI from 94—96. The two books XHI and 
XIV were written between a. 88 and 93. Book XI was mostly written under 
Domitian, but published under Nerva, in December 96. The next was 
a purified excerpt from X and XI presented to the Emperor (XH 5), 
perhaps middle of 97. Then the extant castrated edition of X, imme- 
diately before the poet's return to Bilbilis (98) ; finally b. XII from Spain, 
after contumacissima trienni desidia (XII praef.), as we should not 



t 



Martial. 131 

hesitate in understanding triennium as the space of 272 years and 
placing the book (with Mommsen) into the beginning of a. lOl, though 
Stobbe assumes a twofold version, a shorter one for Terentius Priscus 
(and of 101) and an enlarged edition for Rome (beg. of 102). See the 
details in L. Friedländer, de temporibus librorum Martialis Domitiano 
imperante editorum, Königsberg 1862. 4., and de temporibus libr. Mart. 
X et XI, ib. 1865. 4., Sketches of Roman morals and manners III p. 
372—390. H. F. Stobbe, Philol. XXVI p. 44—80 and (against Mommsen, 
see n. 1) ibid. XXVII p. 630—641; Friedländer 1. 1. p. 656—658. 0. 
Hirschfeld, Gott. Gel. Anz. 1869, p. 1506—1510. An epigram of Martial 
not found in his collection is given Anth. lat. 276 R. 

5. The subjects of these epigrams are derived from real life 
(VIII 3, 20 cf. X 4, 10), though mostly in its obscene side to suit the 
taste of the multitude. Epigrammata illis scribuntur qui solent spectare 
Florales (I praef.) Chaste or bashful persons are requested not to 
read them (ib. and III 69. XI 16). The eleventh book is the most 
impudent, in excuse of which the Saturnalia are alleged (c. 2. 6. 15, II sq.). 
But the books dedicated to the Emperor (V and VIII) are praised for 
their (relative) decency; IV also contains only seven pieces of this 
kind, perhaps for a similar reason (IV 1). But even then these epi- 
grams did not please all readers. Martial repeatedly protests that his 
life should not be judged by his epigrams (14, 8: lasciva est nobis 
pagina, vita proba est; cf. VII 55, 6. XI 15, 3), and his revision of b. X 
was probably calculated to remove the worst obscenities, and perhaps 
this purifying process might also have been extended to b. XI, if 
Martial had not left Rome (Stobbe, Philol. XXVI p. 72—74). But 
Martial could point to numerous predecessors in this kind, especially 
Catullus, and in some passages even Horace. 

6. Living characters are introduced with their real names, in case 
Martial either praises them or speaks of them with indifference. Cf. I 
praef. : spero me secutum in libellis meis tale temperamentum ut de 
illis queri non possit quisquis de se bene senserit, cum salva infimarum 
quoque personarum reverentia ludant; quae adeo antiquis auctoribus 
defuit ut nominibus non tantum veris abusi sint sed et magnis. VH 12, 3: 
mea nee iuste quos odit pagina laesit. It is in vain that he frequently 
endeavours to represent as humanitas or good nature or even principle 
(parcere personis, dicere de vitiis, see X 33, 10) what is merely the reverse 
of his servility. He generally chooses his name according to his metre 
and even protests against any personal allusions (II 23. IH 11. EX 95b, 
cf. I 96, 14). Some names he uses in a typical sense, e. g. Fidentius 
of a plagiary, Selius of a parasite, Ligurinus of a recitator, Postumus 
of patrons, and Caecilianus, Gargilianus, Candidus, Classicus, Ponticus, 
Zoilus, Flaccus, Tucca etc. for anything. But with regard to dead 
characters, Martial (like Statins, 316, 2 fin.) is candid, e. g. chiefly 
concerning Nero I 20, 4. FV 63. VII 21, 3. 44 sq. 34, 4: quid Nerone 
peius?); he praises Arria (1 13) and Thrasea (I 8, 1. PV 54, 7) undis- 



132 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

guisedly; they appear to him as types in the same way as Cato 
or Porcia. 

7. Plinius Epist. Ill 21, 1: audio Valerium Martialem decessisse 
et moleste fero. erat homo ingeniosus, acutus, acer, et qui plurimum 
in scribendo et salis haberet et fellis (cf. Mart. VII 25, 3) nee candoris 
minus. (2.) prosecutus eram viatico secedentem: dederam hoc amicitiae, 
dederam etiam versiculis quos de me composuit (Mart. X 19). His 
juvenile poems (I 113. cf. XII 94) have perished without leaving any 
trace, and the renown he had won in his time and of which he speaks 
so ostentatiously, is based upon his epigrams. On account of these 
he places himself on a par with Domitius Marsus and Catullus. That 
he could not attain anything higher, he explains from his poverty. 
Cf. I 107. Vn 99, 5 sqq. VHI 56. X 78, 14 sqq. XI 3. 24. But his narrow 
circle of ideas as weU as his want of earnest and industry induce 
us to doubt whether he would have done anything great in better 
circumstances. Spartian. Hel. Ver. 5, 8 : idem Apicii Caelii relata, 
idem Ovidii libros amorum in lecto semper habuisse, idem Martialem, 
epigrammaticum poetam, Vergilium suum dixisse. 

8. The mss. of Martial are enumerated by Schneidewin Prolegg. 
p. LXn— C with p. 678—684; and classified ib. p. C— CXXVII. Most 
of them are interpolated by Italians (deteriores). Among the earlier 
mss., only T (Thuaneus) and H (Haupt's Vindobonensis), both saec. X 
and derived from the same source, contain the liber spect. (ib. p. 
CXXVn — CXXXII), which is also added in some of the mss. of the 
second class (C b). To the earlier class (C a) belong also the Puteaneus 
(X) saec. X, Edinburgensis (E) saec. X (cf. Schneidewin's text p. V. sqq.), 
three Vossiani, R (saec. IX), A (saec. XI) and B (saec. XII), a Vaticanus 
(V) saec. X or XI. To another class belong the Florentinus (F) and 
Palatinus (P) saec. XV, with the subscription : ego Torquatus Gennadius 
emendavi. 

9. On the editions see Schneidewin's Prolegg. p. XI — LXH. Ed. 
princeps s. 1. et a. (Rome c. 1470). 4. Ferrara 1471. 4. Rome 1473. 
Cura G. Merulae, Yen. 1475. Cum comm. D. Calderini, Ven. 1474 fol. 
Rec. I. Gruter, Francof. 1602. Ramirez de Prado, Paris 1607. 4. Cum 
comm. M. Raderi, Ingolst. 1607. 1611; Mogunt. 1627 fol. Cum notis 
varr. ed. P. Scriverius, Lugd. Bat. 1611. 1621. Cum animadv. J. Fr. 
Gronovii ed. C. Schrevelius, Amsterd. 1661. 1670. Bipont. 1784. Ed. 
N. E. Lemaire, Paris 1825. 3 vols. In W. E. Weber's Corp. poett. latt. 
p. 1030—1136. Edid. F. Guil. Schneidewin, Grimma 1842. CXXXH 
and 739 pp.; ex rec. sua denuo recognita. Lips. Teubner. 1853. 

10. Rooy, Coniecturae criticae in Mart., Utrecht 1764. Osk. Gut- 
mann, Observationum in M. Val. Mart, particulae quinque (chiefly on 
Martial's use of the dative p. 1—30; de metris M. p. 46—52, Breslau 
1866. L. Friedländer, de nonnullis locis corruptis in M. epigr., Königs- 
berg 1867. 4. A. Scotland, Philologus XXIX p. 184—187. van Eldik 
in the Verslagen en Med. der Akad. v. W. 1868, XI. M. Haupt, Hermes 
V p. 30—32. 



Martial. Stella and Turnus. 133 

11. On Martial see G. E. Lessing's Works I. p. 190 sqq. Mart, as 
man and poet, Berl. 1843. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. IV. (1845) 
p. 1600—1606. 

318. Among the other numerous poets who lived in the 
reign of Domitian, we may chiefly notice Arruntius Stella 
(Cons. c. 101), the friend of Statins and Martial and author 
of erotic elegies on his subsequent wife Violantilla; the satirist 
Turnus and his brother, the tragic poet Scaevus or Scaevius 
Memor; Verginius Rufus and Vestricius Spurinna, both of whom 
made an honourable political career and then wrote erotic 
verses; lastly Calenus' wife Sulpicia, who also wrote erotic 
poems. The names of Turnus and Spurinna, and probably also 
that of Sulpicia, are connected with modern forgeries. 

1. An inscription in Orelli 784: L. Arruntio Stella, L. Julio Marino 
coss. XIV. Kal. Nov. As Trajan is not yet called Dacicus in it, this 
inscription would not appear to have been composed anterior to a. 
103, and the consular year in question is no doubt 101 (Th. Mommsen, 
Hermes III p. 124—126; cf. Stobbe, Philologus XXVI p. 76 sq. XXVII 
p. 632 sqq.) The identity of the Stella frequently mentioned by 
Martial and Statins is rendered nearly certain by the fact that he 
was iuvenis patriciis maioribus ortus (Stat. Silv. I 2, 71), held the 
place of a XVvir libr. sibyll. (ib. 177. Martial IX 42), gave festival 
games in honour of the Northern (or Sarmatic) triumph of Domitian 
(Mart. Vni 78, 3 sqq.; probably as praetor cf. Mart. X 41), aspired to 
the consular dignity (Mart. IX 42, 6 sq., cf. Stat. Silv. I 2, 174 sqq.) 
and also obtained it (consul mens. Mart. XII 3, 10 sqq.). He was born 
at Naples (Stat. Silv. I 2, 260 sq.; from Patavium he was according 
to Mart. I 61, 3 sq.), and thus as well as by their common poetical 
studies on friendly terms with Statins (Silv. I 2, 256—262), who com- 
posed the Epithalamium Silv. I 2 in honour of Stella's marriage with 
Violantilla, whom he called Asteris (Stat. Silv. I 2, 197 sqq.), while 
Martial in allusion to her real name generally calls her lanthis: see 
VII 14 sq. 50, 1 XII 3, 12 cf. VI 21, 1. Stella had also dwelt on the 
death of a favourite pigeon of his love (Mart. I 7. VII 14). Martial 
calls him disertus (V 59, 2), facundus (XII 3, 11), mens (V 11, 2. 12, 7. 
VI 47, 1. IX 55. XII 3, 10). Cf. also Martial IX 89. Apollin. Sid. carm. 
IX 264. Dolling, on the poet Stella of Patavium, Plauen 1840. 4. 

2. Valla's Schol. on Juv. I 20: Turnus hie libertini generis ad 
honores ambitione provectus est, potens in aula Vespasianorum Titi et 
Domitiani. Martial. XI 10: contulit ad saturas ingentia pectora Turnus; 
cf. VII 97, 7 sq.: nam me diligit ille proxiraumque Turni nobilibus 
legit libellis. Rutii. Namat. I 603 sq.: huius vulnificis satura ludente 
Camenis nee Turnus potior nee luvenalis erit. Sidon. Ap. carm. IX 266 
Lyd. magistr. I 41 (above 24, 2). Schol. luv. 71: unde ait Turnus in 



134 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

• 
satura (succeeded by two corrupt hexameters on the poisoner Locusta 
under Nero). The 30 lines (Indignatio in poetas Neronianorum tempo- 
rum) edited by J. L. G. Balzac under the name of Turnus, as he stated 
from an old ms., were in his own life-time admitted into the collection 
of his poems, under the title of Ficta pro antiquis, and somewhat 
enlarged (III p. 194 in the edition of 1650). See L. Quicherat in the 
Revue de ITnstruction publique 1869, p. 341—345 cf. ib. p. 371 sq. 397. 

3. Valla's Schol. on Juv. I 20: Lucilium dicit . . vel, ut Probus 
exponit, Turnum (n. 2) dicit Scaevi Memoris tragici poetae fratrem. 
Martial. XI 9 on a portrait of him : clarus fronde lovis (i. e. a prize in the 
Capitoline games), romani fama cothurni spirat, Apellea redditus arte 
Memor. ib. 10: contulit etc. (n. 2) cur non ad Memoris carmina? 
frater erat. Hence probably Sidon. Ap. IX 263 (non Turnus, Memor). 
Six anapaests by Scaevus in tragoedia (Hecuba or Troades) are quoted 
by Serg. in Keil's gram. lat. IV p. 537, 14. The title of Hercules for 
a tragedy by Memos or Memmius rests on the testimony of Fulgentius 
(expos, s. ant. s. v. suppetias, p. 563, 23). M. Hertz, de Scaevo Memore 
poeta tragico commentariolum, Breslau 1869. 8 pp. 4. 

4. L. Verginius Rufus of Milan, Cos. a. 63 (under Nero), 69 
(through Otho) and 97 (with Nerva), who died in his last consulship 
83 years old (Plin. Ep. II 1), a fatherly friend to Pliny the younger 
who mentions him Ep. V 3, 5 among the authors of erotic poems, and 
VI 10, 4. IX 19 1 quotes the epigram which he had composed for him- 
self. Cf. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. VI 2. p. 2666 sq. Nr. 26. 

5. Pliny Epist. IH 1 (a. 101) decribes old Spurinna's disposition 
of his days, e. g. (7.) se cubiculo ac stilo reddit. scribit enim, et 
quidem utraque lingua, lyrica doctissima. mira illis dulcedo, mira 
suavitas, mira hilaritas , cuius gratiam cumulat sanctitas scribentis. 
(10). illi post septimum et septuagesimum annum (which shows that 
he was born A. D. 24) aurium, oculorum vigor integer. Cf. ib. IV 27, 
5 sq. (gravissimus senex). II 7, 1 sq.: heri a senatu Vestricio Spurinna 
principe auctore triumphalis statua decreta est, for his successes against 
the Bructeri; so also to his son Cottius, quem amisit absens (ib. 7, 3). 
In the wars of a. 69 he had sided with Otho; Tac. Hist. II 11. 18. 23. 
36. Plut. 0th. 5—7. He was consul under Domitian, the second time 
probably a 100; see Th. Mommsen, Hermes III p. 39 sq. A letter 
addressed to him and his wife Cottia Plin. Ep. Ill 10; to him alone 
V 17. Under the heading Incipit Vesprucius Spurinna de contemtu 
seculi ad Martium, Caspar Barth pretended to have found four poems 
by him in Horatian metres and with artificial gaps; these he subse- 
quently edited in his Venatici et bucol. lat. (Hannover 1613) after 
Gratius, and in his Adversaria XIV 5. Just as in his other fictions 
(cf. Bursian, ex Hygini geneal. exc, Zurich 1868, p. VII sq.), Barth 
found here also credulous believers, last of all in C. A. M. Axt, in his 
Compilation entitled V. Sp. lyricae reliquiae, . . recogn., in germanicum 
convertit et cum annotationibus (p. 29— 144!) . . edidit, Frankfort 1840. 



I 



Scaevius Memor. Spurinna. Sulpicia. 135 

Against him see Otto and L. Lersch in Ztsch. f. A. W. 1842, p. 845 sqq. 
873 sqq. These poems are indeed solely remarkable for the triviality 
of their contents and metrical errors; Earth's statements on his ms. 
are, moreover, so vague as to become suspected even in a writer of 
better faith. Cf. also G. S. Bayer, de Vestr. Sp. lyrico et illius frag- 
mentis, in the commentationes of the Petersburg Acad., a. 1750, 
p. 311 sqq. Wernsdorf, poetae latini minores III p. 325 — 336. 351 — 368. 
IV p. 839—853 Riese, Anthol. lat. II p. 336 sqq. 

6. Martial. X 35, Isqq. : omnes Sulpiciam legant etc. haec castos 
docet et pios amores etc. cuius carmina qui bene aestimarit nullam 
dixerit esse sanctiorem, nullam dixerit esse nequiorem. lb. 38, 1 sqq.: 
molles tibi quindecim, Calene, quos cum Sulpicia tua iugales indulsit 
deus et peregit annos! Auson. Id. XIII (cento nupt.) e. g. prurire opus- 
culum Sulpiciae, frontem caperare. Fulgent, myth. I p. 598: Sulpiciae 
procacitas. Sidon. Apoll, carm. IX 262 sq. quod Sulpiciae iocus Thaliae 
scripsit blandiloquum suo Caleno. Two senarii of this remain in 
Valla's Probus-Scholion to Juv. VI 537. Very different is the tone of 
70 hexameters published as Sulpiciae s atiraVenetiis perBernardinum 
Venetum a. 1498 (repeated Strasburg 1509) with the Latin poems of 
Italian scholars and by Th. Ugoletus in his Ausonius (Parma 1499, 
Ven. 1501), a poem subsequently often appended to editions of Ausonius, 
Petronius and the Satirists (cf. 0. Jahn p. 10 sq.), last of all with Persius 
and Juvenal by 0. Jahn (Berlin 1868) p. 145 — 147. Wernsdorf, poetae 
lat. min. III. p. 83—95; cf. p. LX — LXV. Separate editions by C. G. 
Schwarz and J. Gurlitt (Hamburg 1819. 4. 2 parts), and Ch. L. Schläger 
(rec, explic, 1846). A French translation by C. Monnard (Paris and 
Frankf. 1820), a Swedish translation by C. A. F. Möller (Malmö 1859). 
This poem is a dialogue between the poetess and the Muse. The first 
desires in heroic metre Fabellam detexere pacis, not in Phalaeceans 
'nee tcimetro iambo', nor in Hipponacteans. Cetera quin etiam quon- 
dam quae milia lusi. . . constanter omitto. After this introduction the 
question is raised what might be Jove's intentions concerning Rome. 
Quid reputemus enim: duo sunt quibus extulit ingens Roma caput, virtus 
belli et sapientia pacis. But virtus was long since gone and sapientia 
was driven away from Rome by him qui res romanas imp erat inter, 
non trabe (ovx dno doxov) sed tergo (!) prolapsus et ingluvie albus. 
But even Cato the Elder had observed that misfortune was Rome's 
good fortune; Romulidarum igitur longa et gravis exitium pax. Hoc 
tabella modo pausam facit. optima posthac Musa velim moneas whither 
she was now to go with her Calenus. In her answer the Muse imparts 
to her the comforting assurance that the tyrant would speedily be 
killed and concludes vive, vale. manet hunc pulchrum sua fama 
dolorem etc. J. C. G. Boot,commentatio de Sulpiciae que fertur satira, 
Amsterdam 1868. 4. 22 pp. (Trans, of the Dutch Academy) justly 
considers these lines as the production of the 15th century. We learn 
nothing from them except what we knew also from other books; only 
Domitian's obesitas ventris has been turned into a double-throat, and 



136 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

his red complexion into paleness. Such boldness of portraiture and these 
prophecies were no doubt easier to our author than to Sulpicia Caleni. 
The general tone and the expressions throughout betray a half-scholar, 
who was not over-clever in writing verse. Hence the numerous super- 
fluous words and awkward phrases (e. g. the somnus obesus of wasps!), 
and perhaps also the infinitives defendier arma, me dignarier infit. 
Much less scholarly is the great predilection for synaloephe and the 
use of et in the principal caesura (Sicaniae et, consilio et etc.) and 
even the measure of nee trimetro iambo. But L. Müller thinks it 
certain that the poem existed in a very old ms. of Bobbio (cf. A. W. 
Zumpt's Rutil. Nam. p. IV not. 2: heroicum Sulpitii carmen LXX), 
and attributes the grammatical and metrical errors to the great cor- 
ruption of the text. 

319. Besides these, Martial mentions a number of other 
persons of all ranks who composed verse in their leisure-time 
and recited them in public recitations, an institution which 
had almost become an epidemic, or who even published them 
as books. Some attempted various departments, while others 
devoted themselves to one kind exclusively. 

1. Many had retired from public life, e. g. Atedius Melior (Stat. 
Silv. II 3, 64 sqq.), Marius from Atina (Martial. X 92, 1 sqq.), Pollius 
Felix of Puteoli (Silv. II, 2, 112—141. Ill praef.). The least dangerous 
way of employing one's leisure was the composition of verse, as Pollius 
did (Silv. Ill 1, 67; cf. facundus ib. 65 and III praef.). Literary exertion 
might therefore appear as a form of idleness (Martial II 7). To what 
extent the recitations had been carried, appears e. g. from Juvenal I 
1—14. Martial III 44 sq. 50. X 70, 10—12. The attendance at them 
was for many a way of earning their livelihood (Mart. II 14, 2 sqq. 11 27). 

2. Poets in various or unknown branches were in this time Bassus 
(according to Martial V 53 — if indeed name or person be not 
altogether fictitious — a writer of epic poems and tragedies) ; Canius 
Rufus of Gades (Mart. I 61, 9. Ill 20. 64, 6); Cn. Octavius Titinius 
Capito (see below 327, 2); Carus (who obtained a prize at the Capitoline 
contest. Mart. IX 23 sq.); Faustinus (Mart. I 25), Flaccus of Patavium 
(above 312, 1); Manlius Vopiscus (vir eruditissimus et qui praecipue 
vindicat a situ literas iam paene fugientes, Stat. Silv. I. prooem. cf. 
ib. I 3, 1 facundi Vopisci, and v. 99 — 104; Novius Vindex critic and 
poet (Stat. Silv. IV 6, 22—31. 97 sqq. cf. Martial. IX 43 sq.); Domitian's 
chamberlain Parthenius, assassinated a. 97 (vates, Mart. IX 49, 3 cf. V 
6. 2, XII 11, 2 sqq. XI 1, 6); Rufus (poet and orator according to the 
epitaph XII 52); Sabina (Atestinae nondum vulgata Sabinae carmina. 
Mart. X 93, 3 sq.); Septimius Severus (below 321, 9); Sosibianus 
(? Mart. IV 33); L. Stertinius Avitus, Cos. 92 (sublimi pectore vates, 
Mart. IX 1, 1, cf. praef.); L. Valerius Pudens (above 314, 4); Varro 
(a tragic, elegiac and lyrical writer Mart. V 30). 



1 



Versifiers. Quintilian. 137 

3. Epic subjects, like the Theseid of Codrus (Juv. I 2) were 
treated by Statius and Julius Cerealis (Martial. XI 52, 1. 17 sq.: tuos 
nobis relegas licet usque Gigantas, rura vel aeterno proxima Vergilio), 
and perhaps (unless the name be a fiction) by Paulinus (Mart. II 14, 
3 sq. tuusque laudat Achilleos . . pedes). 

4. Besides Stella, elegiac poets were Voconius Victor, a writer of 
elegies onThestylus in the manner of the Alexandrines (doctos . . libellos), 
Martial. VII 29 cf. VIII 63, (vates) ; Nerva (below 325, 1); Unicus, 
a relation of Martial, and who wrote poems in the manner of Catullus 
and Ovid (Mart. XII 44). Others are mentioned by Mart. II 14, 5 sq. 
Vn 46, 5. Besides Martial, epigrams were written by Brutianus 
(Mart. IV 23, 4 sqq.) and others (Mart. VIII 18); graeca epigrammata 
and iambi were written by Arrius Antoninus (Plin. Ep. IV 3, 3 cf. 
IV 18, 27, 5 sq.: gravissimus senex. V 15), Cos. I. a. 69, the grandfather 
of Antoninus Pius on the mother's side. 

5. Tragedies (Telephus, Orestes etc. Juv. I 5 sq.) were written by 
Scaevius (above 318, 3), Bassus (above 313, 2), Canius Rufus and Varro 
(note 2); perhaps also by Tucca and Ligurinus (Mart. Ill 45), Paccius 
(Alcithoe, Juv. VII 12), Faustus (Thebais, Tereus, Juv. VII 12) and 
Rubrenus Lappa (Atreus, Juv. VII 72). See also below 335,4. Of Satyr- 
dramas we should perhaps understand Mart. X 99: si romana forent 
haec Socratis ora, fuissent lulius in Satyris qualia Rufus habet. New 
togatae are indicated by Juv. I 3. Palliatae were written, perhaps in 
this time, by M. Pomponius Bassulus (below 327, 8). For Mimographers 
see 280, 1. Suet. Domit. 10: occidit et Helvidium filium, quasi scenico 
exodio sub persona Paridis et Oenonis divortium suum cum uxore 
taxasset. On the Agave of Statius see above 8, 1 fin. Famous actors 
of mimi in this time were Latinus (W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. IV 801) 
and his secundarum Panniculus (Mart. II 72, 4. Ill 86, 3. V 61, 11). 
also Tettius Caballus (Mart. I 41, 17 sqq.) and Thymele. 

6. Obscene literature. Mart. XII 43, 1 sqq. facundos mihi de 
libidinosis legisti nimium, Sabelle, versus etc. (11.) tanti non erat esse 
te disertum. 



320. A prominent place among the prose-writers of this 
period is due to M. Fabius Qu in tili anus (c. A. D. 35 — 95) 
a native of Calagurris in Spain, but who was educated at 
Rome and long remained an honoured public professor of 
eloquence at Rome, last of all entrusted by Domitian with 
the education of his (grand-)nephevvs and made Consul by him. 
He did not publish anything before the later years of his 
life, when he composed first a work on the causes of the 
decay of eloquence, and then a large work, the extant twelve 
books on the complete training of an orator (Institutio oratoria), 



138 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

including the necessary grammatical training. The subject is 
treated in a manner mediating between the popular rhetorical 
writings of Cicero and technical works on rhetoric. The 
writer aims at the simplification of technicalities and shows 
more taste and mild judgment than strictness and scientific 
accuracy. Of great value to us is book 10, which contains 
a list of the literature useful for rhetorical studies. Though 
Quintilian shares to some extent the faults and defects of his 
time, he is still fully alive to them and attempts to correct 
them in his style by reverting to the manner of a better 
period. He is never tired of praising and recommending 
Cicero. A number of mediocre scholastic declamations which 
have come down to us bear Quintihan's name unjustly. 

1. Hieronym. a. Abr. 2084 = Ner. 14 =: 68 A. D.: M. Fabius 
Quintilianus Romam a Galba perducitur. Abr. 2104 = Dom. 8 = 88 
A. D.: Quintilianus ex Hispania Calagurritanus primus Romae publicam 
scholam et salarium e fisco accepit et claruit. Auson. prof. Burd. 1, 7: 
asserat usque licet Fabium Calagurris alumnum. He certainly spent 
his youth at Rome, where his father was a rhetorician (IX 3, 73: 
pater mens contra eum qui etc. Sen. contr. X praef. 2: quomodo . . 
Quintilianus senex declamaverit, and ib. 33, 19 : circa hunc sensum est 
et ille a Quintiliano dictus). Cf. Quintil. XI, 24: nobis pueris insignes 
pro Voluseno Catulo . . orationes ferebantur. These were still made 
under Tiberius (f 37), see above 271, 5 and 9, though they were 
esteemed and circulated even later. VI 1, 14: nobis adolescentibus 
accusator Cossutiani Capitonis (57 A. D.) etc. XI, 86: quae ex 
Afro Domitio (f 59) iuvenis excepi. According to these facts Quintihan's 
birth should not be placed later than A. D. 35. See also X 3, 12 : 
lulium Secundum (above 301, 4), aequalem meum atque a me . . 
familiariter amatum. Quintilian's rhetorical training was influenced by 
the men enumerated above 292, aud by Nonianus (above 286, 2), also 
by Palaemon (above 277, 3). 

2. His exertions as a pleader in law-courts. Quint. VII 2, 24: id 
est in causa Naevii Arpiniani solum quaesitum. . . cuius actionem, et 
quidem solam in hoc tempus, emiseram, quod ipsum me fecisse ductum 
iuvenili cupiditate gloriae fateor. nam ceterae quae sub nomine meo 
feruntur neglegentia excipientium in quaestum notariorum corruptae 
minimam partem mei habent. IV 1, 19: ego pro regina Berenice 
(under Vespasian) apud ipsam causam dixi. IX 2, 73: equidem et in 
personas incidi tales et in rem quoque quae etc. ream tuebar quae 
subiecisse dicebatur mariti testamentum etc. (74.) ita ergo fuit nobis 
agendum ut iudices illud intellegerent factum etc., et contigit utrumque. 
quod non inseruissem . . nisi probare voluissem in foro quoque esse 
his figuris locum. IV 2, 86: me certe . . fecisse hoc in foro . . scio. 



I 



Quintilian. 139 

VII 2, 5: fuerunt tales nostris etiam temporibus controversiae, atque 
aliquae in meum quoque patrocinium inciderunt. 

3. His scholastic speaking. XI 2, 39: sic contingit ut etiam quae 
ex tempore videbantur effusa ad verbum repetita reddantur. quod 
meae quoque memoriae mediocritatem sequebatur, si quando inter- 
ventus aliquorum qui hunc honorem mererentur iterare declamationis 
partem coegisset. nee est mendacio locus salvis qui interfuerunt. 
Juv. VI 280: die aliquem, . . Quintiliane, colorem. Auson. prof. Burd. 1, 
156: seu libeat fictas ludorum evolvere lites ancipitem palmam Quinti- 
lianus habet. This may probably relate to the supposed declamations 
of Q. (note 11). So also in Trebell. Poll. trig. tyr. 4, 2 (II p. 93 P.): 
Quintiliano, quem declamatorem romani generis acutissimum vel unius 
capitis lectio prima statim fronte demonstrat. 

4. Q. as professor of eloquence. Cf. n. 1. Martial. II 90, 1 sq.: 
Quintiliane, vagae moderator summe iuventae, gloria, romanae, Quinti- 
liane, togae. Plin. Epist. II 14, 10: ita certe ex Quintiliao, praeceptore 
meo, audisse memini. VI 6, 3: prope cotidie ad audiendos quos tunc 
ego frequentabam Quintilianum , Niceten, Sacerdotem ventitabat. 
Quintil. Ill 6, 68: frequenter quidem, sicut omnes qui me secuti sunt 
meminisse possunt, testatus et in ipsis etiam illis sermonibus (on 
rhetoric n. 6) me nolente vulgatis hoc tamen complexus etc. On the 
character of his activity as a teacher X 1, 125 sq. (where he warns 
to beware of Seneca's style). I prooem. 1 : post impetratam studiis 
meis quietem, quae per viginti annos erudiendis iuvenibus impenderam. 
II 12, 12: quando et praecipiendi munus iam pridem deprecati sumus 
et in foro quoque dicendi. He subsequently became tutor of the 
princes. IV prooem. 2: cum mihi Domitianus Aug. sororis suae 
nepotum (cf. Suet. Dom. 15: Flavium dementem patruelem suum, . . 
cuius filios etiam tum parvulos successores palam destinaverat et abolito 
priore nomine alteram Vespasianum appellari iusserat, alteram Domi- 
tianum) delegaverit curam. Auson. gratiar. act. p. 290 Bip. : Quintilianus 
consularia per dementem ornamenta sortitus (cf. Juv. VII 197: fortuna 
volet fies de rhetore consul). Q. appears also to have become rich 
by teaching; see Juv. VII 186 sqq. . . . unde tot Quintilianus 
habet saltus? a fact mentioned as an exception. The Quintilianus to 
whom Plin. Epist. VI 32 (quamvis et ipse sis contincntissimus et filiam 
tuam ita institueris etc. te porro animo beatissimum, modicum facul- 
tatibus scio) sent an addition to the dowry of his daughters, must be 
a different person, as ib. 11 14, 10 (c. a. 97—100) and VI 6, 3 (A. 106 sq.) 
presuppose the orator as dead and the letter itself does not contain 
any reference to thanks. Nor did any of his children survive the 
rhetorician, see VI prooem. 4: ut incusem deos superstes omnium 
meorum. erepta prius mihi matre eorundem, quae nondum expleto 
aetatis XIX» anno duos enixa filios . . decessit. 6: mihi fiiius minor 
quintum egressus annum prior alteram ex duobus eripuit lumen. 9: una 
post haec Quintiliani mei spe ac voluptate nitebar. . . iam decimum 
aetatis ingressus annum (he also died). — H. Dodwell, annales Quin- 



140 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

tilianei, Oxon. 1698 (also in Burmann's ed., p. 1117 sqq.) E. Hummel, 
Quintiliani vita, Gotting. 1843. 4. L. Driesen, de Q. vita, Cleve 1845. 
4. C. Pilz, Quintilian, the life of a professor in the Imperial period, 
Leipzig 1863. 

5. Juv. IV 75 mentions Q. as the pattern of a serious, steady man 
and the greatest contrast to a comedian. The extant work proves 
him to have been a mild, humane (cf. I 3, 13 sqq. II 4, 10 sqq.) 
character, an enemy to pedantry (X 1, 26 cf. 56 sq. 80) and inclined 
to acknowledge others' merits (X 1, 40 sq.), honourable (cf. XII 7, 3) 
and kind (VI 2, 36), with a deep sense of domestic happiness and 
unhappiness; see VI prooem. The homage he renders to Domitian IV. 
prooem. 3—5 (see above 314, 3) and XI, 91 sq. (see above 314, 2) is 
indeed opposed to truth (e. g. X 1, 92: nunc ceterarum fulgore vir- 
tutum laus ista — as poet — praestringitur) and even too strong 
(IV prooem. 5: mihi . . poterit ignosci si . . nunc omnes in auxilium 
deos ipsumque in primis quo neque praesentius aliud nee studiis magis 
propitium numen est invocem ut . . tantum ingenii adspiret etc.), but 
may perhaps be excused by his gratitude for the confidence the 
Emperor had shown him (see n. 4) and the general style of the 
period. He praises Cato of Utica XII 7, 4; see also above 272, 1. 

6. His earlier works. I. 0. II 4, 42: an ab ipso (Demetrio Phal.) 
id genus exercitationis sit inventum, ut alio quo que libro sum confessus, 
parum comperi. V 12, 23 : haec et in alio nobis tractata sunt opere etc- 
VIII 3, 58: de hac parte [xaxoCrjkoy) et in alio nobis opere plenius 
dictum est etc. More accurately he expresses himself ib. VI prooem. 3: 
ita forte accidit ut eum quoque librum quem de causis corruptae elo- 
quentiae emisi iam scribere aggressus (lost my younger son). When 
the elder boy died at the age of 10 years (n. 4), the younger may have 
been perhaps nine years old, whence that work would appear to have 
been published perhaps four years before I. 0. VI praef. VIII 6, 76: 
eundem locum plenius in eo libro quo causas corruptae eloquentiae 
reddebamus tractavimus. Differently from the previously published 
dialogus of Tacitus, Q. had treated rather of the stylistic than of the 
political aspect of the question. Opposed to Q.'s wishes was the publication 
of speeches which had been taken down while he was reciting them (n. 2) 
and of lectures (sermones, n. 4). I. 0. L prooem. 7: duo iam sub nomine 
meo libri ferebantur artis rhetoricae neque editi a me neque in hoc 
comparati. namque alterum sermone per biduum habito pueri quibus 
id praestabatur exceperant, alterum pluribus sane diebus quantum 
notando consequi potuerant interceptum boni iuvenes, sed nimium 
amantes mei temerario editionis honore vulgaverant. 

7. On his extant work Q. says in his preface, which he addresses 
to his publisher Trypho : efflagitavisti . . ut libros quos ad Marcellum 
meum De institutione oratoria scripseram iam emittere inciperem. 
nam ipse eos nondum opinabar satis maturuisse, quibus componendis 
. . paulo plus quam biennium tot alioqui negotiis districtus (as a tutor 
of princes, n 4) impendi, the greater part of which time was taken 



Quintilian. 141 

up by collecting the materials. He says that he would have liked to 
revise his work at his leisure, though he was unwilling to keep it back 
much longer. He addresses himself (cf. I prooem. 6. IV pr. 1 VI 1 pr. 1 
XH 11, 31) to Victorius Marcellus (cum amicissimus nobis turn eximio 
literarum amore flagrans, I pr. 6; see below 321, 8), whose son Gallus 
(Stat. Silv. IV 4, 20) showed talent (Quint. I pr. 6). In writing the 
book the author had also in his mind his own elder son (VI pr. 1). 
In general, his work was not intended for pueri (VIII 6, 13), but for 
boni and studiosi iuvenes (III 6, 64. VI pr. 1. XII 11, 31. cf. V. 10, 96. 
VII 3, 30. XI 1, 5, 55). It was composed c. 90 sqq., and the first three 
books were already completed, when Quintilian was entrusted with 
the education of the sons of Flavins Clemens, who had been executed 
by Domitian about the beginning of 96. We possess it entire; III 8, 42 : 
duodecimo, qui summus futurus est, libro. 

8. Plan and execution. I. prooem. 5 : ego . . non aliter quam si 
mihi tradatur educandus orator studia eius formare ab infantia incipiam. 
21 : liber primus ea quae sunt ante officium rhetoris (i. e. the work of 
a grammaticus) continebit. secundo prima apud rhetorem elementa et 
quae de ipsa rhetorices substantia quaeruntur tractabimus. (22.) quinque 
deinceps (III — VII) inventioni, nam huic et dispositio subiungitur, 
quattuor (VIII — XI elocutioni, in cuius partem memoria ac pronuntiatio 
veniunt, dabuntur. unus (XH) accedet in quo nobis orator ipse infor- 
mandus est, ut qui mores eius, quae in suscipiendis, discendis, agendis 
causis ratio, quod eloquentiae genus, quis agendi debeat esse finis, 
quae post finem studia, . . disseramus. (25.) nos quidquid utile ad 
instituendum oratorem putabamus in hos XII libros contulimus, breviter 
omnia demonstraturi. He opposes the aifectata sublimitas of the 
ordinary manuals on rhetoric (I prooem. 24. IH 11, 21. cf. II 15, 37) 
and their unpractical pedantry (V 13, 59. 14, 27 — 32). His own theory 
is based on personal experience (VI 2, 25) and the practice of the 
principal speakers (V 13, 60). He is eclectic, III 1, 5: hie liber . . 
pleraque non inventa per me, sed ab aliis tradita continebit. ib. 22: 
neque me cuiusquam sectae velut quadam superstitione imbutus addixi. 
4, 11 : nobis et tutissimum est auctores plurimos sequi et ita videtur 
ratio dictare. II 8, 6 : libera vel contra receptas persuasiones rationem 
sequenti sententia est. VI 2, 25: quodsi tradita mihi sequi praecepta 
sufficeret, satisfeceram huic parti; . . sed eruere in animo est quae 
latent, . . quae quidem non aliquo tradente, sed experimento meo ac 
natura ipsa duce accepi. Eloquence has an ethic basis; I prooem. 
9 sqq. II 2, 15, 1. 32 sqq. 16, 11. 20, 4. 8. XII 1, 1; hence also XII 
7, 7: non convenit oratori iniusta tueri scientem; cf. V 7, 32. Some- 
what more loosely he expresses himself H 17, 27 sq. 36. cf. VI 
2, 5. 24. He opposes the prevailing taste of the period (above p. 5) and 
falls back upon nature (II 5, 11, sq. cf. X 7, 15: pectus est quod disertos 
facit et vis mentis) and the veteres (II 5, 22 sqq. V 12, 20. VIII prooem. 
24 sqq. 5, 34. X 1, 43 sq.), especially Cicero, who is always spoken of 
with the highest respect. (V 11, 11. 17. 13, 52. VHI 3, 64. 66. IX 1, 
25. X 1, 105—112. 2, 25. 7, 31. XI 1, 67 sqq. 73 sq. 85. 89. 93. 3. 184. 



142 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

XII pr. 4. 1, 19 sqq. 10, 12 sqq. 36. 45 sq. and defended even in his 
weaknesses (cf. XI 1, 17—21. 23 sqq. XH 1, 16 sq. VHI 3, 51); he is 
made the basis of Q.'s work and only reluctantly does he differ from 
him (e. g. IV 2, 64. V 11, 2. VII 8, 8. IX 4, 2. 16. 55 sq. XI 3, 123). 
VI 3, 3 he speaks of his amor immodicus praecipui in eloquentia viri, 
and exclaims X 1, 112: hunc spectemus, hoc propositum nobis sit 
exemplum, ille se profecisse sciat cui Cioero valde placebit. His 
theoretic explanations are throughout supported with instances from 
the orators of the classical period. These Quintilian knows exceedingly 
well, while he ignores the prose-writers anterior to Cicero, as super- 
fluous for a good Latin style. In general, Quintilian's studies are 
manysided, though the character he gives to some writers in his tenth 
book and which are not always quite proper, make us doubt his actual 
acquaintance with them. H. Babucke, de Q. doctrina et studiis capita 
duo (de philosophia Qi, p. 6 — 32; de ratione inter Q. et Graccos inter, 
cedente, p. 33 — 46), Königsberg 1866. His diction is not rarely rhe- 
torically coloured; cf. Ill 1, 3: admiscere temptavimus aliquid nitoris, 
. . ut hoc ipso alliceremus magis iuventutem. He has numerous 
similes and comparisons derived from nature and husbandry (1, 2, 14. 
H 6, 7. 10, 6. 16, 13 sq. XH 10, 76. cf. H 19, 2. VIII 5, 26. X 3, 2. 7, 
28. XII 1, 7. 10, 19), but also many taken from other parts of human 
activity (IV 5, 5. 14. 22. V 10, 21. IV 4, 113. 129. X 3, 6. 7, 23. XII 2, 
11. 8, 10. 9, 2 sq.). In his style he aims at classicality, though he 
is not free from the influence of his time. E. Bonnell, de grammatica 
Quintil., in Spalding's ed. VI p. XXI sqq. and his Lexicon Quintili- 
aneum. R. Törnebladh, de elocutione Qi, Upsala 1858; de usu parti- 
cularum apud Q., Holm 1861. 60 pp. Voigtland, de brevitate Q., 
Schleusingen 1846. 4. 

9. Among the manuscripts of the Inst. or. the most important 
is the Ambrosian saec. XI (A in Halm), written by several hands and 
much more negligently in the later books (IX 4, 135 — XII 11, 22 are 
quite wanting in it) than in the first four. The gaps are filled up and 
the errors corrected by a number of mss., which contain a very good 
text but have also lost nearly ^^ of the text owing to the repeated loss 
of leaves, a class chiefly represented by the Bernensis (B.) saec. X, 
from which Ambros. II (saec. X) and Bambergensis saec. X (Bg.) are 
derived. In the latter a later hand (G. in Halm) has supplied the 
parts originally missing from a complete ms., (cf. Halm Rh. Mus. XXIH 
p. 218 — 222). Hence are derived the Florentine ms. saec. XI and 
Turicensis saec. XH. Besides A, the complete, but partly interpolated, 
partly corrupt class consist of mss. of the 15th century, e. g. Lass- 
bergensis (L) at Freiburg, Monacensis (M) nr. 23473 and Obrecht's 
Argentoratensis (S). In many cases Julius Victor's compilation is 
useful. C. Halm, on the rhetorician Julius Victor as a source of 
emendation in the text of Quintilian, in the Trans, of the Munich 
Academy 1863, 389—419; on the authorities of the text of Quintilian, 
ib. 1866. p. 493-524; Rh. Mus. XXH p. 38 sq., and in his edition p. 



I 



Qifintilian. 143 

V— IX. A. Reifferscheid, on Poggio's ms. of Quintilian, Rh. Mus. 
XXin p. 143 — 146. Enderlein, comm. de Bamberg, cod. Quint., 
Schweinfurt 1S52. 4. J. Ständer, Quaest. Quint, p. 5 — 13 (de Ambr. 

1 et Bamberg codd.). 

10. Editions. Ed. princeps Rom. 1470 fol. Venet. 1471 fol. 
Aldina Ven. 1514. 1521. 4. luntina Flor. 1515. 4. E codd. emend. 
E. Gibson, Oxon. 1693. 4. London 1714. 1716. 4. Ed. Ulr. Obrecht, 
Strasburg 1698. 4. 2 vols. Recogn. et em. P. Burmann, Lugd. Bat. 
1720. 4. 2 vols. Recogn. et emend. CI. Capperonnier, Paris 1725 fol. 
Coll. codd. et perp. comm. illustr. J. M. Gesner, Gotting. 1738. 4. Ad 
codd. fidem rec. et annot. expl. G. L. Spalding, Lips. 1798 — 1816, 
4 vols, to which vol. V by C. G. Zumpt, 1829 and VI (Lexicon Q. et 
indices) by E. Bonnell, 1834. In us. schol. cur. G. A. B. Wolfi", Lips. 
1816—1821, 2 vols. Notas critt. adiecit A. G. Gernhard, Lips. 1830, 

2 vols. Rec. C. G. Zumpt, Lips. 1831. Ad codd. Lassb., Turic, Ambr. 
fidem rec. et illustr. fl. Meyer, Lips. 1833, Vol. I. Ad fidem codd. rec. 
E. Bonnell, Lips. Teubner 1854, 2 vols. The principal edition rec. 
C. Halm, Lips. Teubner 1868 sq. 

Editions of book X by C. H. Frotscher (Lips. 1826), C. G. Herzog 
(Leipzig 1829. 1830. 1833), Augusti {— Schneidewin, Helmstedt 1831), 
G. A. Herbst (Lips. 1834), E. Bonnell (Leipzig 1851. Berlin 1855. 1863). 

E. Albert! (Leipzig, Engelmann 1858), G. T. A. Krüger (Leipzig, Teubner 
1861), C. Halm (Lips., Teubner 1869). 

On criticism and explanation. Raph. Regii ducenta problemata, 
Venet. 1482. 4. Quaestiones Quintilianeae by F. Müller (Halle 1840), 

F. Bahlmann (Berlin 1859. 4.), F. Meister (Liegnitz 1860. 4. Breslau 
1865. 4. Cf. Halm, Rhein. Mus. XXII p. 39 — 61), R. Törnebladh 
(Colmar 1860), J. Ständer (Bonn 1865). Dörry, de locis al. Q. emend., 
Torgau 1860. 4. F. Ritschl, Grammatical points in Quintilian, Rhein. 
Mus. XXII p. 599—614. J. Ständer p. 14—29 (de Q. grammatico). 

On book X adnotatt. critt. by F. Osann, 6 particulae, Giessen 1841. 
1842. 1845. 1850. 1857. 1858. 4. J. Jeep, de locis al., Wolfenbüttel 
1863. 4. L. Merklin, on the parallel composition of Q. X, Rhein. Mus. 
XIX p. 1—32. 

11. Quintilian who frequently mentions his previous works in his 
I. 0. (see n. 6) and appears to have died soon after the publication of 
it, never mentions any published declamationes. It is, however, 
possible that such were published after his death from copies made 
at the time (cf. n. 2 and 6). He is mentioned as the author of con- 
cinnae delamationes by Jerome (in Esaiam VIII praef.), and Ausonius 
(above n. 3) and Trebell. Poll. XXX tyr. 4, 2: fuit autem (Postumus 
iunior) . . ita in declamationibus disertus ut eius controversiae Quinti- 
liano dicantur insertae, from which passage they appear to have been 
augmented with later productions. Concerning the 19 larger and even 
more the 145 smaller declamationes (the rests of a collection containing 
388 pieces) attributed to Quintilian, nothing is in favour of the author- 



144 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch 

ship of the famous rhetorician, which is on the contrary contradicted 
by their utter insignificance. They are perhaps by one of his pupils. 
In the mss. they are attributed to a certain M. Florus. The first com- 
plete edition Treviso 1482 fol. Ascens. 1580 and oftener. Ex bibl. 
Pithoei, Paris 1580. Heidelberg 1594. Notis illustr. Oxon. 1675. 1692. 
In the editions of the I. 0. by Obrecht, Burmann and others. 

12. Lactant. inst. div. I 21: optime Quintilianus in Fanatico : istud, 
inquit, si deus cogit iratus est. V 7: quod ipsum Quintilianus egregie 
ac breviter ostendit in Capite obvoluto. VI 23: quod optime Quin- 
tilianus expressit: homo, inquit, neque etc. This would seem to be a 
Christian writer. 

321. In the time of Quintilian we meet with Tutihus as 
a writer on rhetoric, and Princeps as a rhetorician. Among 
the orators M. Aquilius Kegulus, a contemptible timeserver, 
w^ho composed also literary works, Baebius Massa, Mettius 
Cams, and Palfurius Sura, made themselves feared as de la- 
to res. As pleaders we may mention Tacitus, Pliny and 
Herennius Senecio, and especially Victoiius Marcellus, Septimius 
Severus from Africa, Flavins Ursus, Vettius Crispinus, Satrius 
Rufus, Licinius Sura and others. 

1. Quintil. Ill 1, 21 : scripsit de eadem materia (rhetoric) . . aetatis 
nostrae Verginius, Plinius (above 307, 3) Tutilius. Martial. V 56, 5: 
famae Tutilium suae relinquas. See also Plin. Epist. VI 32, 1. 

2. Suet, gramm. 4: me quidem adolescentulo repeto quendam 
Principem nomine alternis diebus declamare, alternis disputare, non- 
nullis vero mane disserere, post meridiem remoto pulpito declamare 
solitum. lulius Tiro (cf. Plin. Ep, VI 31, 7) who is mentioned in the 
list of rhetoricians treated of by Suetonius after Quintilian, is changed 
by Reiiferscheid (Suet. p. 99. 418 sqq.) into M. Tullius Tiro, whom 
a scribe might easily have put in as the author of the notae tironianae 
(above 178, 4). 

3. Plin. Epist. I 5,1: vidistine quemquam M. Regulo timidiorem, 
humiliorem post Domitiani mortem? sub quo non minora flagitia com- 
miserat quam sub Nerone (admodum iuvenis, Tac. Hist IV 42), sed 
tectiora. (2.) Rustici Aruleni periculum foverat, exultaverat morte, adeo 
ut librum recitaret publicaretque in quo Rusticum insectatur atque 
etiam Stoicorum simiam appellat; adicit Vitelliana cicatrice stigmosum. 
agnoscis eloquentiam Reguli. (3.) lacerat Herennium Senecionem . . 
intemperanter. . . (4.) praeterea reminiscebatur quam capitaliter ipsum 
me apud centumviros lacessisset. (5.) aderam Arrionillae, . . Regulus 
contra etc. (14.) scripsit (Mettius Modestus) in epistula quadam quae 
apud Domitianum recitata est: Regulus omnium bipedum nequissimus. 

. (15.) est (Regulus) locuples, factiosus, curatur a multis, timetur a 



I 



Recndus and others. 145 

pluribus. II, 11, 22: est Regulo tam mobile Ingenium ut plurimum 
audeat, plurimum timeat. IV 2, 1 : Regulus filium amisit. (3.) amissum 
luget insane. 7, 2: nuper adhibito ingenti auditorio librum de vita 
eius recitavit; . . eundem in exemplaria mille transcriptum per totam 
Italiam provinciasque dimisit. (6.) hunc luctuosum Reguli librum etc. 
(7.) est tam ineptus ut risum magis possit exprimere quam gemitum ; 
credas non de puero scriptum, sed a puero. . . (4.) inbecillum latus 
(of Regulus), OS confusum. haesitans lingua, tardissima inventio, me- 
moria nulla; nihil denique praeter Ingenium insanum ; et tamen eo im- 
pudentia ipsoque illo furore pervenit ut orator habeatur. As such 
servile Martial praises this influential and rich man, I 111 (cf. 12 and 
82). II 74, sq. (quanta reduci Regulus solet turba, ad alta tonsum 
templa cum reum misit). IV 16, 6. V 28, 6 (licet vincas . . oratione 
Regulos). 63, 4 (ipse tuo cedet Regulus ingenio): VI 38. 64, 11. He 
is perhaps meant (but not mentioned by name, as he was still alive) 
by Juv. I 33—36. He died c. a. 105 ; cf. Plin. Ep. VI 2, 1 : soleo non- 
numquam in iudiciis quaerere M. Regulum. . . (2.) habebat studiis 
honorem, timebat, pallebat, scribebat, quamvis non posset ediscere. 
illud ipsum quod . . semper haruspices consulebat de actionis eventu 
a nimia superstitione, sed tamen et a magno studiorum honore veniebat. 
(3.) iam ilia perquam iucunda una dicentibus, quod libera tempora pe- 
tebat, quod audituros corrogabat. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. I 2. p. 
1391, Nr. 43. 

4. On Baebius Massa, who was overthrown under Domitian, see 
Plin. Ep. VII 33, 4 sqq.; on Mettius Carus see W. Teujffel in Pauly's 
Enc. IV p. 1905, Nr. 6. Schol. Juv. I 35: Massa morio fuisse dicitur 
et Carus nanus. . . hi omnes Neronis fuerunt liberti, sed et nequissimi 
delatores. . . Massa et Carus Heliodoro deferente occisi sunt. 

5. Juv. IV 53 — 55 : si quid Palfurio, si credimus Armillato, quid- 
quid conspicuum pulchrumque est aequore toto res fisci est, ubicumque 
natat. On which Valla's Schol. says: Palfurius Sura, ut inquit 
Probus, consularis viri filius sub Nerone luctatus est cum virgine lace- 
daemonia in agone; postea a Vespasiano summotus e senatu transiit ad 
stoicam sectam, in qua cum eloquentia (et artis poeticae gloria, is added 
by the other Scholia) praecelleret, Domitiano familiaritate coniunctus 
delationem acerbissime exercuit, sed interfecto Domitiano accusatus est 
a Senatu et damnatus. The other Scholia say: cum fuissent inter de- 
latores potentes apud Domitianum hi, Armillatus, Demosthenes et Latinus 
archimimus (above 319, 5), sicut Marius Maximus scribit. Cf. also Suet 
Dom. 13: capitolino certamine cunctos ingenti consensu precantis ut 
Palfurium Suram restitueret, pulsum olim senatu ac tunc de oratoribus 
coronatum etc. 

6. On Tacitus and Pliny as speakers see below 328, 5 and 335, 2. 

7. Herennius Senecio, from Hispania Baetica (Plin. Ep. VII 33, 5), 
defedned Lieinianus (ib. IV 11, 12 sq.) and accused (with Pliny) Baebius 

10 



146 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Massa (Plin. Ep. VII 33, 4 sqq.) Concerning his work on Helvidius 
Priscus and his execution by Domitian see below 324, 2. 

8. Quintilian's work (above 320, 7) is dedicated to Victor ius 
Marcellus, and also Stat. Silv. IV (prooem. Marcelle carissime), 4 (of 
a. 95) is addressed to him where he is exhorted to recover from his 
work: certe iam latiae non miscent iurgia leges, . . nee iam tibi turba 
reorum vestibulo. . . cessat centeni moderatrix, iudicis hasta, qua tibi 
• . iam nunc celeberrima fama eminet et iuvenes facundia praeterit 
annos (v. 39—45). nee tibi sola potentis eloquii virtus, sunt membra 
accommoda bellis (v. 64 sq.). Hence, si latii ducis (i. e. Domitian) sic 
numina pergant, quern tibi posthabito studium est coluisse Tonante, 
quique tuos alio subtexit munere fasces et spatia antiquae mandat re- 
novare Latinae (i. e. curator viae latinae), forsitan ausonias ibis frenare 
cohortes (v. 56 — 61) etc. magna pater dignosque etiam nunc belliger 
actus poscit avus praestatque domi novisse triumphos (v. 72 sq.). 

9. Stat. Silv. IV prooem. (to Victorius Marcellus) of a. 95 : proxi- 
mum est lyricum carmen (Silv. IV5)adSeptimium Severum, iu- 
venem . . inter ornatissimos secundi ordinis, tuum quidem etiam condis- 
cipulum, sed mihi . . artissime carum. So also Martial V 80 meus Se- 
verus and VE 38, 1 noster S. A native of Africa, he had come to Italy even 
as puer (Stat. Silv. IV 5, 29 — 48), and seems to have been the grand- 
father of the later Emperor who was born in Africa a. 146. Est et 
frementi vox hilaris foro, venale sed non eloquium tibi, ensisque vagina 
quiescit, stringere ni iubeant amici. sed rura cordi saepius et quies 
(Stat. 1. 1. 49—53). hie plura pones vocibus et modis passu solutis, 
sed . . interim . . barbiton ingeminas (ib. 57—60 cf. Martial. XI 57). 
See above 310, 5. 

10. Statius Silv. II 6: consolatio ad Flavium Ursum de amissione 
pueri delicati, in which v. 95: ubi (tua) nota reis facundia raptis? II, 
prooem.: ad Ursum nostrum, iuvenem candidissimum et sine iactura 
desidiae doctissimum. He is probably the son of the Ursus mentioned 
by Dio LXVII 3 and 4 (a. 74): OuQOoy rrjg ^lovkiag (djtjaccjufytjg vncaoy 

11. Addressed to Crispinus, the son of Vettius Bolanus, is the 
propempticon Stat. Silv. V 2 (of a. 95 — 96), according to which he had 
become a 3alian priest in very tender years (v. 129 — 131), and had 
'nuper' pleaded for an innocent friend, quamquam non ante forum 
legesque severas passus, sed tacita studiorum occultus in umbra (v. 99 
— 110). A Clodius Crispinus was Consul, a. 113. 

12. Stat. Silv. IV pr.: Plotio Grypo. (see 316, 2) maioris gradus 
iuveni. To him he addresses ib. 9, where v. 14—19: tua dicta, . , 
quae trino iuvenis foro tonabas aut centum prope indices, priusquam 
te Germanicus (Domitian) arbitrum . . annonae dedit omniumque late 
praefecit stationibus viarum. 

13. According to Plin. Ep. I 5, 11 Aquilius Regulus (n. 3) had, 
under Domitian in centumviraU iudicio, cum responderet . . Satrio Rufo, 



Victoiius Marcellcs and other orators. 147 

said ironiciilly: Satrius Rufus, cui non est cum Cicerone aemulatio (like 
Pliny) et qui contentus est eloquentia saeculi nostri. Cf. ib. IX 13, 17. 

14. L. Licinius C. f. Sura, Cos. II a. 102 and III a. 107, the 
patron of Martial (VI 64, 12 sq.: has nugas . . quas . . laudat . . Sura) 
cf, VII 47, 1 sq.: doctorum Licini celeberrime Sura virorum, cuius 
prisca graves lingua reduxit avos. Addressed to him is a question con- 
cerning a phenomenon, by Plin. Ep. IV 30 (I : quaestionem altissima 
ista eruditione dignissimam. II: scrutare tu causas, potes enim). Die 
LXVIII 15 (a. 107): rw JSovqu tw Aixivioi xal rca^i^v (^r}fxo6Cav x(d av- 
d^ucyTa idü)X€ (Trajan) jfXsvTrjüavTt. Victor Caes. 13, 8. Epit. 13, 6. 
Julian. Caess. p. 22 (ed. 1736). Orelli-Henzen 150. 5448. Borghesi 0pp. 
V p. 33 sqq. C. I. lat. II 4282. 4508. 

15. L. (Mart. IV 55, 1) Valerius Licinianus of Bilbilis (ib. and 1 
61, 11) a solicitor (ib. I 49, 35. IV 55, I sq., where he is even com- 
pared to Cicero). Under Domitian he was exiled, but Nerva allowed 
him to live in Sicily (Plin. Ep. IV 11, 11 sqq.) where he then became 
a professor of eloquence. Plin. Ep. IV 11, 1 (a. 104): audistine Vale- 
rium Licinianum in Sicilia prohteri; . . praetorius hie modo inter elo- 
quentissimos causarum actores habebatur, nunc eo decidit ut exul de 
senatore, rhetor de oratore fieret. (2.) itaque ipse in praefatione (of a 
declamatio or some treatise ?) dixit etc. (3.) . . latine, inquit, decla- 
maturus sum. See ib. 14. 

16. Maternus from Spain, iuris et aequarum cultor sanctissime 
legum, veridico latium qui regis ore frenum, addressed by Mart. X 37 
cf. II 74, 4 sq. 

17. The epithets facimdus or disertus are also given to Pollius 
Felix (see 306, 1), Erucius Clarus (Plin. Ep. 119,4), Marcus (Valerius? 
Mart. X 73), Sextus (Mart. V 5, 1), Restitutus (Mart. X 87, 2 sqq.), 
Caecilius Secundus (Mart. VII 84 cf. V 80), Atticus (Mart. VII 32), 
Aelianus (Mart. XII 24, 3). Votienus who held a high charge in Gaul 
(Mart. VIII 72) was no doubt a son of the orator (above 271, 1). 

322. A highly respectable position was in this time held 
by Sex. Julius Frontinus (c. 40 — 103), an excellent engineer 
and man of business, at the same time a man of character 
and of modesty. He also left records of his varied experience 
and studies. We possess excerpts from a work on gromatics. 
A theoretic work on tactics has perished, but has been used 
by Vegetius. We possess, however, though disfigured by 
foreign additions, a popular work on tactics, the books 
Strategematon, the fourth of which pretends to be an addition 
(Strategematica) , but does not agree with the plan and 
character of the rest and looks rather suspicious. We also 
have by Frontinus a work in two books de aquis urbis Romae, 



138 The .First Uentury of the Imperial Epoch. 

Wjiich is important ' on account of a number of liistorical 
information and docümötitg, and is written in terse and concise, 
though' refiftiedi diction.K ii ^ , > 

RHUiL ,|^ifei..,;7'a^,,flist,.„pir.p?,^.,j[^.^ 8^3 = 70): lulius Frontinus praetor 
urbanus, r Ä^i ,thu^ ^ppe^ps |i;o,,]?SL>^9,,(?eenborn a. 41, at the latest. Frontin. 
Strat. IX 3,,ll4;|aPiSpi(J^s Iipperato^is C^esarisDomitiani AugustiGermanici 
(a title giy^n by, way of £^nticipatioa) ep bello quod Civilis in Gallia moverat 
(a/823) Xi^igQ,i^^T|fi . .^ciyitas,^^^ad phsecjuiiim redacta LXX milia armatorum 
tUadidit mihi. Ta(j,i Agr^..!)? :., ^yi^tinuit ?Tiolem^]ui,lius Frontinus (in Britain, 
asi.|aucceßspr;|of iP,etiiJ,up ,p,^f,e,^(iSj,jp^'obably- 70—78 — 829—881, after 
his consulship), vir magnus, quantum, ,^iceb.at, v.E^lidamque et pugnacem 
Silurum gentem armis subegit etc. Cf. E. Hübner, Rhein. Mus. XII p. 
5Ö— 56. His pa;rtibit)atiön in th^ wai^ with the Ghatti may be inferred 
from ' Strätegl 11, '8." '3^ 1-0; II 8v 23.' MV 7.''^He lived a studious Mfe 
iliY'e'tii'ement''oi!'''th^'bliore' of Campania,' Mart. X 56. Cos. I under 
Dötriitian' (befol*fe his' dej)a!tturie' fdi^ Britain), 11 (bis Frontino consule, 
Märt. X 4^,' 20? cSfl.'I^hildloguBiXMXpi. 187) under Nerva (Plin. panegyr 
61), probabl^ ' ä: ' 97 '-j HI ä: ' 1 00 ;conj ointly i with Traj an. Curato r aquarura 
a?^t' (aq.' l.*l'02'^xtr.).'"H^ söem'^ ' tO'ihave died'C. a. 103, as Pliay (a. 
103 or 104)' öiicbeeded him ilA thfe digiiity of augur (Plin. Ep. IV 8, 3. 
Cf:' ad' TÄ" 13)." "According to Pliny (Ep. IX 19, 1) Frontinus vetuit 
omnino monumentum sibi fieri, with the characteristic addition : im- 
pensa. monumenti . s,vi,pQry^ic^a , ,^st«; , mei^oi"?,^ npS.tri durabit si vita me- 
röinv<is.i(ibl/&),! |....,..-,|,|,,; .„fii.r.-i! -n,. ^roo-t jrrf> uMnirA o;ibn9v .r. ^:-.( 

2. The gromatic work was written under Domitian (p. 54,11 s'qq.': 
pit^iditantissinnus postea Domitianus ad hofi: beneficium procurrit gt uno 
e'äietö tofius ' ItaWae lmiettimMHberstvti)t,^ in reference; itp the subsecivae), 
aiid likewise that ioiu: istratagemsi, perhaps/ befoife, the beginning of the* 
wä^r \ilith thei Dacians^ /as .he m/fentionis- ouljr the G*$rmaiis (see n. 1). He 
aiSiv^ays'i^dberes td the loffibial fiötioa,! as if /th^i Emperor haddone what 
was in ( ■'resllity the I worki lof > hia gienerals, ju$t . as he subsequently does ) 
with regard to Nerva. Real flattery towards Domitian does not occur 
(iahtiis Jätöi V.'iil,) S(is ^ajfl i(rfito)!jpo,^\%p)^);,-an,4 Eiiiiy, m^(r theiiefore 
ju8Myi;8?i(y, E}p.)i\f,,.:^^;.^:;,^uO(S;;Qif(ls (i)i^nc, (ujtii^^^j^f^^ifian) ^c^yitas nkostra 
sp^^^tati^^^ji^Oj^ , l^^f?^i^|it,|. Q(^rellium et Frontinum. Cf. , jb. ,IV ,^> .^}, I^io 
Frontino, principi viro, .Trie work pn the aqueducts was written by 

FÄiWus' t^ By,^'k'Liti^m'<'h^4^'hik^^bye^i=^ ^ 

aqiiytelft'.'''6f.'''ri. ^^''^fti'lniftöäk^^^r'ör)™ 

tiirl^BriH'ü^ ' tn^^Dkim^iMf^ni I i'diduiösx poawt^r&umt iuätitia» divi- Kenvae ; poptilp 
refiititiiitv i tiöstraJ »seduijiari i ad (C/sp^^mi i ^egulam, ^xß^^giy-j 1 Ol ^^i^ip^ü . tiobi^ j 
cif/^wm^untfhus.i;iyfl8»,ftde?i,^os|[r,^,^^ ^[^Pl^Vi^^t^ aj,prit>j(jij^:da.ta prq,J.iCj-; 

terit. The Expositio et ratio 'omnium formarum ad Celsum (Works qf 
the 'koä^' GroMat/^' ft p*.''^l-11^10fef 'wKi^öH^is W hi^A^^^ik^^mi^M^ ' 
to^i^fontmus.^iJ^l'o'riy^^Jfatli^ifty Bäiliüi, Jät^eoi'diftg töl ithl'Aröfe-Hä«^,:' 

se^''liM'(ii\^^.W9J^3^iiM"' ''J> ^>l(K)d ov/l iii >ii()// ;.; >>i}\n]i\i)i'i v,' ■)/.■([ 



1 



Frontinus. 'I4l9 

3. From the gromatic work, which embraced at least two books, 
we possess only explanatory excerpts (best edited in the works of the 
Roman engineers by Lachmann, 1 p. 9—58), which treat de agrorum 
qualitate, de controversiis (in general), dc limitibus, de controversiis 
aquarum. On the critical condition of this work see Lachmann 1. 1. II 
p. 101— 13L 

4. A theoretic work on tactics anterior to the Strat. is alluded to 
at the beg. of the Strat. : cum ad instruendam rei militaris scientiam 
unus ex numero studiosorum eius accesserim, eique destinato, quantum 
nostra cura valuit, satisfecisse visus sim, deberi adhuc institutae arbitror 
operae ut sollertia ducum facta . . expeditis amplectar commentariis. 
To this we should probably refer Veget. I 8 (p. 12 L. : quae Cato 
ille censorius de disciplina militari scripsit, quae Cornelius Celsus quae 
Frontinus perstringenda duxerunt) and 11 3 (p. 36 L. : Cato ille maior 
. . se reip. credidit profuturum si disciplinam militarem conferret in 
litteras. . . idem fecerunt alii complures, sed praecipue Frontinus, divo 
Traiano ab eius modi comprobatus industria). His interest embraced 
also the military art of the Greeks; see Aelian. Tact, praef. (Greek 
Writers on War II p. 236 sq.) : iml ds int tov x9(ov naiQog gov Niqovag 
7ittQ<c 4>^ovjtvM jio tTita^/uio vnccTixio hv 4>oQjui(cig ^fx^Qug jtycig (ft^r^iipa, 
doiiuy anfvfyy.au^via nfol tj?V tj/ lolg noks/uoig IfxnfiqCav, . . fVQov ovx 
hküuova onovdijv I'/outk ftg tj/V tkcqcc tolg^Ekkrjai jf^^naQrjfjiivrjv uccd-rjaty 
(than for the Roman). Of him we should also understand Aelian. de ordin. 
inst. 1 : nf^t irjg xa^' OutjQoy luxjtx^g ivfrv/o/ufy avyyQccifjfvci 2jQaro- 
xkfi Tf x(u 'P^oyriopi, jm xa& ^[xüg vncaixio avd^f. if there indeed 
4>Qovitvia be meant or should be written, and if we should not rather 
think of (Ti. Catius Caesius?) Fronto (Cons. 96), whom Martial I 55 
calls darum militiae togaeque decus; cf. Borghesi, Oeuvres III p. 382. 

5. The subject of the Strateg. consists in the sollertia ducum facta, 
quae a Graecis una GTQcatjytjuctTixiop appellatione comprehensa sunt 
(praef.). . . in tres libros ea diduximus. in primo erunt exempla quae 
competant proelio nondum commisso, in secundo quae ad proelium et 
confectam pacationem pertineant; tertius inferendae solvendaeque obsi- 
dionis habebit strategemata. . . cum etiam hoc opus, sicut cetera (cf. 
n. 3 and 4), usus potius aliorum quam meae commendationis causa ad- 
gressus sim etc. The examples are well chosen and chiefly, though 
not exclusively, selected from Roman history. The books themselves 
are arranged according to the subject-matter, in the chapters according 
to the characters, but in all other details without any definite plan. As 
Frontinus (in his praef.) willingly resigns all claim to completeness 
and thinks that the examples given by other writers might be easily 
inserted into his work, this invitation to add interpolations appears to 
have been accepted and largely carried out at an early time. The 
foreign interpolations may be known by their interrupting the personal with 
a real arrangement (idem fecit, similiter, quoque, e. g. I 3, 7. II 9, 
3—5) and by being added according to some outward similarity (II 9, 3 
and 5 caput; IV 3, 14 abstaining from plundering) and by the use of 



150 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

dicitur, traditur and similar words (e. g. 15, 13. II 12, 4. Ill 4, 4. 12, 3) 
or by some other difference of style (e. g. I 7, 7). These interpolations 
are partly derived from Frontinus himself (e. g. I 5, 13. II 12, 4), and 
have sometimes caused the omission of the exemplum in its proper 
place (e. g. II 9, 3. 5. in III 11 and IV 5, 14 in II 11). Such instances 
are especially frequent in the fourth book, which pretends to increase 
the strategemata of the first three books with Strategematica, i. e. deeds 
and sayings of a strategic bearing, and begins in a boasting vein quite 
foreign to Frontinus: multa lectione conquisitis strategematibus et non 
exiguo scrupulo digestis, ut promissum trium librorum implerem, was 
about to be augmented with what could not be placed in the rubrics 
and was not even properly strategemata; here also the arrangement 
was to be according to the subject-matter i. e. de disciplina, do efiectu 
disciplinae, de continentia, de iustitia, . . de varus consiliis. This dis- 
tribution according to moral notions does not bear much resemblance 
to the manner of Frontinus, but agrees all the more with that of 
Valerius Maximus, from whom a great number of the exempla of this 
book are borrowed; many others are repetitions from the first three 
books, sometimes very free, and sometimes more accurate, which would 
be void of reason in the case of Frontinus himself. The interpolator 
has also enlarged the preface to the first book by a significant allusion 
to this fourth book, beginning with the words: si qui erunt quibus 
Volumina haec cordi sint meminerint etc. This book and the other 
interpolations are found already in the earliest extant ms., the Gotha- 
nus saec. IX, and it appears to have originated not later than in the 
fourth or fifth century, i. e. the time of Julius Paris, Exuperantius, 
Vibius Sequester etc. C. Wachsmuth, Rh. Mus. XV p. 574—583. Our 
present text is still based on the apparatus collected by Oudendorp. 
Editions of the Strateg.: Rom. 1387. 4. With Vegetius and others 
Colon. 1580. Cum notis Stewechii ed. Fr. Modius, Lugd. B. 1607. 4. 
In Scriverii scriptores rei militaris, Lugd. B. 1644. Emend, illustr. Sam. 
Tennulius, Lugd. B. 1675. The principal edition by F. Oudendorp, 
Lugd. B. 1731. 1779. Ed. N. Schwebel, Lips. 1772. On a confusion of 
chapters in b. II see Fr. Haase, Rhein. Mus. Ill (1845) p. 312-319. G. 
Masson, notices et extraits des Manuscripts . . au British Museum, I 
les strat. de Fr., Revue archeol. 1869. I. p. 447—451. 1870. I. p. 19 
— 21. E. Gedicke, on a transposition of leaves in Fr., Hermes VI p. 
156—164. cf. R. Schöne, ibid. p. 248—251. A. Eussner, on Fr. Str.. in 
the Journal of Bavarian Colleges VII (1871). 

6. In only one ms. of Monte Cassino (saec. XI? cf. Bücheier p. 
VII— XIII. Sauppe Gott. Gel. A. 1859, p. 993), from which all the other 
mss. were merely copied, we possess the treatise de aquis urbis Romae 
(Heinrich and Biicheler; Cassin. : de aquaeductu u. R.; Sauppe: de 
cura aquarum u. R. or de officio aqq.), composed a. 97 and published 
after the death of Nerva (divus Nerva, 87. 118) under Trajan (93 extr.: 
novum auctorem Imperatorem Caesarem Nervam Traianum Augustum 
praescribente titulo), perhaps A. D. 98. Just as in the Strat., a preface 



Frontimf s. 151 

contains an account of the purpose and plan of the work. Cum . . 
me seu naturalis soUicitudo seu fides sedula non ad diligentiam modo 
verum ad amorem quoque commissae rei instigent, sitque nunc mihi 
al) Norva Augusto . , aquarum iniunctum officium, . . primum ac po- 
tissimum existimo, sicut in ceteris negotiis institueram, nosse quod 
suscepi. (2.) . . quai^ropter ea quae ad universam rem pertinentia con- 
trahere potui more iam per multa mihi officia servato in ordinem et 
velut in corpus diducta in hunc commentarium contuli. . . in aliis 
autem libris, quos post experimenta et usum composui (cf. n. 3 — 5), 
succedentium res acta est ; huius commentarii fortassis pertinebit et ad 
successorum utilitas, sed cum inter initia administrationis meae scriptus 
sit imprimis ad meam institutionem regulamque proficiet. Then follows 
the arrangement. Frontinus exclaims c. 16 with patriotic pride: tot 
aquarum tam multis necessariis molibus pyramidas videlicet otiosas 
comi^ares aut inertia, sed fama celebrata opera Graecorum? The second 
book begins with c. 64. Editio princeps between 1484 and 1492- 
Juntina by locundus, 1513. Often published together with Vitruvius ; 
separate editions chiefly Ijy J. Polenus, Patav. 1722. 4. His notae are 
also given in the edition of G. C. Adler, Altona 1792. Rec, iilustr. ei 
germanice redd, (with the notes of Heinrich and Schultz) A. Dederich, 
Wesel 1841. XXXV and 318 pp. Rec. Fr. Bücheier, Lips. (Teubner) 
1858. XIV and 54 pp. Cf. H. Sauppe, Götti. G. A. 1859, p. 990-997. 

7. A complete edition of Frontinus by R. Keuchen (Amstelod 1661). 
Te;scts in the Bipont edition 1788 and by Dederich (Lips. 1855. Bibl. 
Teubner). 

8. Frontini vita in the edition of Polenus. A. Dederich, fragments 
on the life of Sex. Julius Frontinus, Ztschr. f. Alt. Wiss. 1839, Xr. 105 
—107. 134-136, p. 834-855. 1077—1094. 

323. To the time of Domitian belongs also the juridical 
writer Aiifidius Chius, while luventius Celsus and Neratius 
Priscus did not attain any prominent influence until the time 
of Trajan and his successor. As a grammarian we may 
especially mention Aemilius Asp er, the ingenious and erudite 
commentator of Terence, Sallust and Virgil; also Claranus 
and Martiars friend Apollinaris. 

1. Martial. V 61, 10: acrior (procurator) hoc Chius non erit Aufi- 
dius. Fragm. Vat. 77 : contra quam Atilicinum respondisse Aufidius 
Chius refert. 

2. On Neratius i'riscus and luventius Celsus (the Son) see below 
337, 1 and 2. 

3. Among the famous grammarians Ausonius praef. ad Syagr. 20 
(Aemilius, see above 295, 1) and Epist. XVIII 26 (quem Claranus, quem 
Scaurus et Asper, quem sibi conferret Varro) mentions Aemilius 



152 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Asp er; cf. Augustin. de util. cred. 17 (Asper, Cornutus, Donatus). He 
iwas later than Cornutus (above 294, 2), as he opposed and contested 
his opinions (Schol. Veron. on Aen. Ill 691); and as he had not been 
ncluded by Sueton. in his account de grammat., he may also have been 
later than Probus of Berytus (above 295) and still living when Suetonius 
composed his work. This is not disproved by the fact that the com- 
mentary attributed to Probus repeatedly mentions Asper (p. 15, 24 K. : 
Aemilius Asper cum hunc locum adnotaret. p. 19, 9: non, ut Asper 
putat); see above 295, 5; nor is it contradicted by Schol. Veron. ad 
Aen. IX 373 (p. 101, 6 K.) and Serv. Aen. X 539 placing Asper before 
Probus, as nothing there lets us infer chronological arrangement. 
An inaccurate note in Vat. 1492 (saec. XV): Asper grammaticus civis 
rom. tempore Antonini philosophi fuit. Asper's Commentary on Terence 
is quoted by Donatus on Phorm. I 2, 24. Ad. Ill 2, 25. IV 2, 20; cf. 
Rufin. de metr. Ter. p. 2705 P. ; Aspri in Vergilium et Sallustium com- 
mentaries Hieron. apol. c. Rufin. 1 16 (IV 1. p. 367 Bened.). The com- 
mentary on Sallust is frequently mentioned by Charisius; see especially 
n p. 216, 28 K. : Asper commentario Sallustii historiarum I. See above 
203, 7. His commentary on Virgil is best known to us; see Ribbeck 
prolegg. p. 128—136. From the numerous fragments of it we may 
infer that A. was conservative in his criticism of the text, and paid 
equal attention to the explanation of the subject-matter and of the 
language, always showing good judgment and taste. Aper treated also 
systematically of the deviations of Virgil from ordinary usage both in 
accidence and syntax. The fragments of these Quaestiones Vergilianae 
or grammatica Vergiliana see in Keil, Probi comm. (Halle 1848) p. 
109—115. Cf. p. XV— XVII and H. Hagen, Philologus XXV p. 353—357. 
Hence perhaps also sic (pexui vel pectui) Asper de verbo ap. Priscian. 
(partit. II p. 489, 36 H. cf. Inst. X p. 536, 6. 499,18 sqq. H.), unless 
this is meant of a general grammar (Ars). In general see Suringar, 
hist. crit. schol. lat. p. 95—97. 124—142. 255—258. Bergk, Ztschr. f. 
Alt. Wiss. 1845, p. 118 sq. 125 sq. 129 (who considers him an adherent 
of Aristarchus). Gräfenhan, Hist, of class. Philol. IV p. 55—78. 285.sq. 

4. Martial. IV 86: si vis auribus atticis probari, exhortor moneoque 
te, libelle, ut docto placeas Apollinari, a refined aesthetic critic. Cf. 
VII 26 (meum . . facetae aures). 89, 2 (noster). X 30 XI 15, 12. Per- 
haps the Domitius Apollinaris to whom Plin. Epist. (II 9 and V 6) are 
addressed; cf. ib. IX 13, 13 (cos. design, for a. 97). C. I. gr. 4236. 

5. Martial. X 31, 1 sq.: quae vix intellegat ipse Modestus (above 
277, 1) et vix Claranus. See above n. 3. Porphyrio on Hor. Sat. II 3, 
83 Anticyra oppidum et insula hoc nomine , ut Claranus testatur. This 
should most probably be understood of the grammarian Claranus, and 
certainly renders it credible that he wrote a commentary on Horace, 
though there are no other traces of a work of this kind. He is perhaps 
also meant in Serv. Aen. XI 316 (quod etiam Clanarius ait). 

6. Martial. X 70, 2: doctus Potitus. De Gadibns improbus magister 



k 



Gra/mmarians and Historians under Domitian. 153 

7. In this period we should perhaps place Largius Licinus, the author 
of a work entitled Ciceromastix (above 271, 3 fin.), which seems to 
betray a period when Cicero's name had already become the shiboleth 
of a certain party. He probably wrote after Asinius Gallus and cer- 
tainly much before Gellius; see 271, 3. See above 307, 2 fin. A cer- 
tain Larcius Licinus is mentioned by Pliny Ep. II 14, 9. Ill 5, 17 and 
elsewhere. 



324. Historical works were in the reign of Domitian 
composed by Junius Maximus, in a harmless manner, while 
Arulenus Rusticus and Herennius Senecio (the first an adherent 
of the Stoic system) wrote in opposition to the government — 
which cost them their life. A certain Fronto is also mentioned 
as a Stoic, as well as Decianus of Emerita, though he knew 
how to combine caution with his philosophy. Pollius Felix 
was an Epicurean. The works on gastronomy by Priscus and 
Calvus seem also to belong to this time. 

1. Statius Silv. IV prooem. : Maximum lunium et dignitatis et elo- 
quentiae nomine a nobis diligi satis eram testatus epistula quam ad 
ilium de editione Thebaidos meae publicavi; sed nunc quoque cum 
reverti maturius e Delmatia rogo (in Silv. IV 7). Cf. Silv. IV 7, 45 sqq. 
and 53 sqq.: tuas artes, . . omne quis mundi senium remensus orsa 
Sallusti brevis et Timavi reddis alumnum. The work would thus appear 
to have been a universal History, resembling neither Sallust nor Livy 
in regard of the subject-matter. 

2. lunius Rusticus Arulenus, trib. pleb. a 66 (Tac. A. XVI 26), 
praetor a. 69 (Tac. hist. Ill 80), according to Suet. Dom. 10 killed by D. 
(a. 90) quod Paeti Thraseae et Helvidi Prisci laudes edidisset (a laudatory 
biography) appellassetque eos sanctissimos viros. More accurately Tac 
Agr. 2 (above 314, 5). Dio LXVII 13 : toV 'Povonxoy toV UqovXtivov 
ciTiiXTfiyfy ojt ti^iloaoi^fi, (cf. above 321, 3) xtd ort loy SQccaiav Uqov 
bivo^al^fj X(cl Eqivviov ^fvfriioytc ort, rf ovdf/utay ciQ)(t]i/ iy noXkiä ßi(0 
fi€Tcc rafXKicii/ r^TtjXft xul ort rov ÜQiaxov xov ßCoy cvvtyqaipiv. Plin. 
Ep. VII 19, 5: cum Senecio reus esset (by Mettius Carus) quod de vita 
Helvidi libros composuisset; and ib. 6: illos ipsos libros . . abolitos 
senatus consulto. 

3. Martial. XIV, 106, 2: stoicus hoc (urceo) gelidam Fronto petebat 
aquam. On Palfurius Sura see above 321, 5. For other philosophers 
see 314, 6. 

4. Martial. I 8: Thraseae et Catonis dogmata sic sequeris salvus 
ut esse velis, pectore nee nudo strictos incurris in enses, . . Deciane. 
Cf. ib. 39 (cecropiae madidus latiaeque Minervae artibus etc.). 61, 10. 
II praef. 



154 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

5. Chaeremon stoicus ap. Martial. XI 56, 1. Heliodorus stoicus in 
the Probus-Scholion on Juv. I 35. 

6. Stat. Silv. II 2, 112 sq.: hie ubi siderias exercet Pollius (above 
319, 1) artes, sen volvit monitus quos dat Gargettius auctor etc. 

7. Flavins Archippus, philosophus, in Domitian's eyes bonus vir 
et professioni suae etiam moribus respondens, but sententia Veli Paulli 
proconsulis . . crimine falsi damnatus in metallum; see Plin. ad Trai. 
58-60. 

8. Martial. IX 77: quod optimum git disputat convivium facunda 
Prisci pagina. XIV 196: Calvus de aquae frigidae usu. 

9. Martial. XII 95: Musaei pathicissimos libellos (in Greek?) qui 
certant Sybariticis libellis, . . lege etc. See above 319, 6. 

3. The time of Nerva and Trajan, 
A. D. 96—117. 

325. What had grown up under the benevolent rule of 
Vespasian, but had timidly concealed itself under Domitian's des- 
potism, ventured to show itself in broad daylight under the 
mild sceptre of Nerva and Trajan. In that time we find, 
therefore, a large number of writers on all departments of 
literature. Recitations were still kept up, though already 
on the decline, owing to the insignificance of most of the 
productions, the satiety of the hearers, and the greater space 
now accorded to practical eloquence by the increase of general 
freedom. The recollection of the time they had gone through, 
filled most writers with bitterness and anger, a remark applicable 
not only to such men as Juvenal and Tacitus, but even to 
tame Pliny. Nerva himself took a certain interest in poeti'y 
and literature, but his reign was too short to allow him to 
manifest it much. Trajan's (c. 54—117) whole mind was less 
devoted to ideal speculations, and he promoted their develop- 
ment only indirectly. The old complaints of the sterility of 
literary studies, and of the pursuits of art, return therefore in 
his reign with uniüipaired vivacity. 

1. M. Cocceius Nerva, son and grandson to jurists (above 276, 2. 
293, 2), Cos. I with Vespasian a. 71 = 824, II with Domitian a. 90 = 
843, Emperor from 18th Sept. 96 (849) until 27th January 98 (851); cf. 
A. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. V p. 592 sq. Nerva, nostri temporis TibuUus, 
is Martial's expression VIII 70 cf. IX 26. Plin. Ep. V 3, 5; above 281, 7. 
An edict by him on his accession to the throne forms a document inserted 
by Pliny ad Trai. 58. 



« 



Nerv a and Trajan. 155 

2. M. Ulpius Traianus from Italica, born 18th Sept. 53 ^ 806 
(Dierauer p. \) sq. n.), Cos. 91 = 844, adopted by Nerva end of Octol)er 
97, Cos. II 98, Emperor from 27th Jan. 98 until 7 or 8th Aug. 117, 
when he died (in Cilicia). W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. VI 2. p. 2702 
—2711. C. Völker, de imp. . . Traiani vita, I Elberfeld 1859. 4. J. 
Dierauer, Contributions towards a critical history of Trajan, in M. Bü- 
dinger's Investigations on points of the Imperial History I (1868) p. 1 
—186. C. Peter, Hist, of Rome III 2 p. 144—168. Dio LXVIII 7: 
naidff'ccg ccxQißovg, oarj t^ koyoig, ov /usrio/f. to yf /usy hqyov «VT^g 
xcit i^nforuTo xcd tnoi&i. Victor Epit. 13, 7 sq.: magis simpliciora in- 
genia aut eruditissimos, quamvis ipse parcae esset scientiae moderateque 
eloquens, diligebat. Julian. Caes. p. 22 sq.: y,ain(-^ dvi/a^ufuog Uyfiv 
— V7i6 Q{Cx9-v/uiag innQsnfiv yuQ ficoi^fi jd nokkd T(f ^ovqcc (Licinius 
Sura) y(id(f(iy vnfQ ccvtov — (^d^eyyofAfvog fxüklov rj khyoyv infd&ixuvfv 
avToTg etc Plin. paneg. 47: quern honorem dicendi magistris, quam 
dignationem sapientiae doctoribus habes ! ut sub te spiritum et sangui- 
nem et patriara receperunt studia! quae priorum temporum immanitas 
exiliis puniebat etc. . . at tu easdem artes in complexu, oculis, auribus 
habes. praestas enim quaecumque praecipiunt etc. Cf. n. 3. It is there- 
fore probable that we should understand of Trajan (Friedländer thinks 
of Adrian) Juv. 7, 1 sqq. et spes et ratio studiorum in Caesare tantum; 
solus enim tristes hac tempestate Camenas respexit etc. See W. Teuffel's 
translation p. 233 sq. Trajan favoured especially the rhetorician Dio 
Chrysostomus (Or. XLIV 2, 3 Emp.). Comp. J. Burckhardt, New Swiss 
Museum IV (1864) p. 97 — 122. He founded libraries, especially the 
Ulpia (Dio LXVIII 16). Memoirs by Trajan are indicated by Priscian 
VI 13 p. 205, 6 sq. H. : Traianus in I Dacicorum: inde Berzobim . . 
processimus. On a speech of Trajan in the Senate on 1 Jan. 100 see 
Plin. paneg. 67. But Fronto ad Ver. II 1. p. 123 N.: Nerva (Trai.) 
facta sua in senatu verbis rogaticiis commoudavit. See above the quo- 
tation from Julian. Trajan's replies to Pliny's inquiries (see below 385, 
6 and 9) are brief and concise, but always i^ertinently expressed. A 
decree of Trajan in Plin. Ep. V 13, 8. A letter in Henzen's Mon. fr. 
arval. (1868). 

3. Plin. Ep. V 14, 6: tandem homines non ad pericula, ut prius, 
verum ad honores virtute perveniunt. Under Domitian (especially in 
his later j^ears , cum profiteretur odiilm bonorum, Plin. paneg. 95) su- 
specta virtus, inertia in pretio (ib. VIII 14, 7). Helvidius e. g. metu 
temporum nomen ingens paresque virtutes secessu tegebat (ib. IX 13, 
2). Priorum temporum servitus . . reducta libertas, ib. VIII 14, 2 sq, 
cf. IX 13, 4 (reddita libertas). Liberius ideoque etiam libentius scribitur, 
ib. Ill 18, 6. Studia, quae prope extincta refoventur, ib. Ill 18, 5. Cf. 
n. 2 and ib. VIII 12, 1 : litterarum senescentium reductor (Capito). V 
17, 6: faveo saeculo, ne sit sterile et effetum. But I 10, 1: si quando 
urbs nostra liberalibus studiis floruit, nunc maxime floret. Cf. n. 5. 

4. Plin. E. I 13, 1 : magnum proventum poetarum annus hie (97) 
attulit. toto mense aprili nuUus fere dies quo non recitaret aliquis. 



156 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch, 

iuvat me quod vigent studia, . . tametsi ad audiendum pigre coitur, which 
is then further developed. Cf. ib. Ill 18, 4: numquam aut valde 
vacat Romae aut coramodum est audire recitantem, VI 17. Juv. 1, 1 
sqq. 7, 40 sqq. Tac. dial. 9. Pliny himself treats these readings with 
much importance (ib. VII 17, 13. VIII 21, 4 sqq.) and extended them 
also to speeches which had already been held (ib. VII 17). 

5. Orators and speakers were numerous, see below 336, 1 — 5. But 
comp, also Plin. Ep. II 14, 2 sqq. : pauci (sunt) cum quibus luvet dicere. 
ceteri audaces atque etiam magna ex parte adulescentuli obscuri etc. 
(4.) sequuntur auditores actoribus similes, conducti et redempti etc. 
VI 2, 5 sqq.: et qui dicunt egisse malunt quam agere et qui audiunt 
finire quam iudicare. Tac. dial. 19: apud indices qui . . saepe ultro 
admonent (oratorem) atque alio transgredientem revocant et festinare 
se testantur. 

6. On the outward position of scholars and writers at Rome see 
Juvenal's seventh satire (cf. below 326, 4 fin.). 

7. J. G. Hullemann, oratio de literarum, praesertim latinarum, 
apud Romanos studiis Nei*va Traiano imperatore, Lugd. Bat. 1858. 46 
pp. H. Thiersch, on the position of polity and philosophy towards 
religion under Trajan, Adrian and the two Antonines, Marburg 1853. 

8. Important inscriptions in the time of Trajan (cf. Orelli-Henzen 
782—804. 5440—5451). a) The will of Dasumius of a. 108 or 109, 
edited by Ambrosch (Annali dell' inst. arch. 1831. Tav. d'agg. B. C. 
and p. 387 — 406) and CI. Cardinali (Diplomi imperiali p. 217 sqq.), last 
of all extracts in G. Bruns, fontes "^ p. 147 — 151, cf. Rudorff in the 
Journal for historical Jurisprudence XII p. 301 — 392. 

b) The documents concerning the foundation of charities (tabulae 
^limentariae) from Veleia (671 lines) and (of the Ligures Baebiani) 
from Beneventum (234 lines). On the first see F. A. "Wolf, on a charity 
founded by Trajan, Berlin 1808. P. de Lama, Tavola alimentaria Ve- 
lejate, Parma 1819. It is printed also in Zell's Manual of Roman epi-, 
graphic science, I nr. 1777, p. 390 sqq. E. Desjardins, de tabb. aliment. 
(Paris 1854); Veleia (Paris 1858) and in the Bull, dell' inst. arch. 1856, 
p. 1—20. On the second (e. g. in the Inscr. R. N. 1354, ap. Orelli- 
Henzen 6664) see especially W. Henzen, Tab. al. Baebianorum, Rome 
1845 (from the Annali delP inst. arch. XVI p. 1—111). In general see 
Pauly's End. I 1 p. 774-776. VI 2 p. 1556—1559. 

326. Among the poets of the age of Trajan the most 
prominent is D. Junius Juvenalis of Aquinum (about a. 
47 — 130), who had originally devoted himself to the study 
of rhetoric and to military service, but subsequently began to 
pubHsh satires. We possess sixteen of them, divided into five 
books. The latest and last satires are senile. Those which 



J 



Trajan . ./? wena I. 157 

are really characteristic describe the vices of Roman Society 
in an eloquent manner and frequently with horrible vividness. 
The dark background, the always pathetic, elevated and 
concise style and the adoption of a systematic design produce 
a certain monotony. The names are partly typical or fictitious, 
partly derived from the past, especially from the time of Nero 
and Domitian. Much remains unintelligible, in spite of the 
existing Scholia. 

1. Our knowledge of Juvenal's life is mostly derived from the 
inscription put by him probably under Domitian in the temple of Ceres 
Helvina at Aquinum (Mommsen I. R. N. 4312 ^=. Orelli-Henzen 5599, 
cf. C. L. Grotefend, Philol. XII p. 489 sq. n. 5) : (Cere)ri sacrum (D. 
Iu)nius luvenalis, trib(unus) coh(ortis I) Delmatarum, Il(vir) quinq(uen- 
nalis), flamen Divi Vespasiani, vovit dedicav(itq)ue sua pec(unia). Of 
the various vitae (printed in 0. Jahn's edition of 1851, p. 386—390) 
the earliest (I in Jahn) is the one attributed to Probus by Valla, begin- 
ning: lunius luvenalis, libertini locupletis incertum filius an alumnus, 
ad mediam fere aetatem declamavit, animi magis causa quam quod 
scholae se aut foro praepararet. Sat. 15, 27 (nuper consule lunco) 
shows that Juv. survived the consulship of (Aerailius) luncus (a. 127=880) 
for some time. On his death we read in Vita I: octogenarius urbe 
summotus est, . . verum intra brevissimum tempus angore ac taedio 
periit; II: revertitur luvenalis Romam, qui tandem ad Nervae et Traiani 
principatum supervivens senio et taedio vitae confectus . . spiritum 
cum tussi expuit; III: tristitia et angore periit anno aetatis suae altero 
et octuagesimo; IV: decessit longo senio confectus exul Antonino Pio 
imperatore. He cannot have died before the reign of Adrian, as he 
was not mentioned among the viri illustres of Suetonius. See also n. 2. 

2. It is certain that Juvenal was exiled, but the time and place of 
his exile are doubtful. The most authoritative passage is Sidon. Apoll, 
carm. IX 267 sqq. non qui tempore Caesaris secundi aeterno incoluit 
Tomos reatu, nee qui consimili deinde casu ad vulgi tenueni strepentis 
auram irati fuit histrionis exul. The vitae connect it with Sat. 7, 90 
(quod non dant proceres dabit histrio etc.) though in the text these 
words contain no offence and scarcely any blame of the histrio and 
must have been construed by the way in which they were employed. 
It is, therefore, most probable that under Trajan or perhaps Adrian 
these words were shouted to a histrio by the people in the theatre, 
and that he in return wreaked his anger upon the innocent author, as 
he could not well punish the people. W. Teuftel, Studies and 
Characteristics p. 410 — 412. At all events, the exile cannot (with 
Malala and Suidas) be placed under Domitian, because Martial (VII 24. 
91. XII 18) attests Juvenal's presence at Rome in his latter years. His 
exile took place in the form of a military relegation, perhaps to 
Britain (vita cod. Bonon.: Traianus . . fecit eum praefectum militum 



158 The First Centur}^ of the Imperial Epoch. 

contra Scotos qui bellum Romanis moverant, ibi ut luvenalis interfice- 
retur), where the cohors, which Juvenal had formerly commanded 
(see nr. 1), stood in the years 104, 106, 124. That he was exiled to 
Egypt is an inference made in most of the vitae from Sat. XV 45, a 
place which proves only that Juvenal had staid there some time 
or other. 

3. J. V. Francke, examen criticum luv. vitae (Altona 1820), and 
De vita luv. quaestio altera (Dorpat 1827 fol.) C. A. Bauer, Crit. Obser- 
vations on some information concerning the life of Juv., Regensburg 
1833. G. Pinzger, in Jahn's Jahrb. XIV (1835) p. 261 sqq. W. Teuffel, 
ibid. XLIIl (1845) p. 103—116; TransL of Juv. p. 148—153. B. Borghesi, 
intorno all' eta di Giovenale, Rom 1847 = Oeuvres V. p. 49—76. 
C. Synnerberg, de temporibus vitae carminumque luv. rite constituendis, 
Helsingfors 1866. 92 pp. 

4. The division into books is the same as is generally followed 
by Priscian in his quotations; see M. Hertz's edition II p. 537 sq. 
The poems themselves seem to be arranged in chronological 
succession. None of them was composed before the time of Trajan. 
The authenticity of the two last has been attacked (though with un- 
satisfactory arguments) by Heinrich and C. Kempf (Observationes in 
luv., Berlin 1843, aud De luv. sat. XV luvenali abiudicanda, Berlin 
1843. 4.); see W. Teuffel and W. Hertzberg in their translations p. 153 sq. 
341 sq. Against the insane criticism of 0. Ribbeck, originally in his 
edition of the text (Lips. 1859) and in the Symb. philol. Bonnp. 1— 30, 
then also in his work 'The genuine and the spurious Juvenal' (Berlin 
1865) see W. Teuffel 1. 1. 154. 209. 246. 252. 259., and the Vindiciae 
iuvenalianae of B. Lupus (Bonn 1864) and 0. Meinertz (Königsberg 1866), 
also 0. Jahn's edition of 1868, p. 9 sq. Vita VI (one of the shortest 
and best) : in exilio ampliavit satiras et pleraque mutavit. There are 
indeed several traces of a twofold revision by the poet himself: see 
W. Teuffel, Studies and Characteristics p. 424—434. In the same way 
L. Friedländer, Sketches of Roman manners and Morals III p. 4i2 sq., 
supposes that Sat. VII was for the most part composed under Trajan, 
but the introduction (v. 1—21 or 35) prefixed at a later time, when 
the poet rewrote this satire after the accession of Adrian, whose 
interest for poetry was known. 

5. Juv. 1, 22 sqq.: cum tener uxorem ducat spado etc. . . difficile 
est satiram non scribere (30). (79 sq.) si natura negat, facit indignatio 
versum, qualemcumque potest, quales ego vel Cluvienus. 150 sqq. 
dicas hie forsitan: unde . . ilia priorum scribendi quodcumque animo 
flagrante liberet simplicitas, cuius non audeo dicere nomen ? . . (170 sq.) 
experiar quid concedatur in illos quorum Flaminia tegitur cinis atque 
Latina. This shows that the poet did not intend to satirize living 
characters, and of such he mentions only Marius Priscus, Isaeus, 
Archigenes and Gallicus, all (except the first) in a polite manner, i. e. 
Juvenal follows the method also observed by Martial (above 317, 6) 



Juvenal. 159 

and Pliny (below 335, 6). The other names, at least so far as they 
denote real persons, belong to the past, frequently even a very distant 
past, e. g. in the case of Cicero or even Lucilius. They are shadows 
against whom the poet fights, but such as may be considered the types of 
living characters of his time. The rhetorical pathos of Juvenal only 
rarely (as in the case of II 59 sqq. IV 37 sqq. VIII 212 sqq.) permits 
us to find a more definite chronological date. See Fr. Strauch, de 
personis luvenalianis, Goth. 1869. 63 pp. This pathos is fond of the 
darkest colours and easily lends the Satirist the appearance of being a 
pessimist or nihilist. In general, Juvenal retained in his Satires the 
habits of his rhetorical training (I 15 sqq.). Hence he fixes definite 
themes for each piece and carries them through in a sober and straight- 
forward manner, now with monotonous transitions, now intentionally 
without any connecting links. Hence also his stilty tone and artificial 
conciseness, by the side of rhetorical exaggeration in phrase and 
diction. His metre is intentionally made sonorous and powerful. 
W. Teuffel, Studies and Characteristics p. 414—424. H. Wilcke, quid 
elocutio luv. a Persiana differat, Stendal 1869. 18 pp. 4. 

6. With regard to preceding writers Juvenal is chiefly acquainted with 
Horace (e, g. 5, 107 =: Hor. Ep. I 1, 40) and Virgil (c. g. 2, 100 = Aen. 
XH 94; 3, 198 = Aen. II 311; 5, 138 sqq. = Ae. IV 328, XII 475, 
6, 133 sq. = Ge. IH 282); but most frequent are his allusions to his 
friend Martial (e. g. 6, 184 = M. X 68; 6, 196 sqq. =z M. VI 23; 
6, 492 sqq. == M. II 66). 

7. We possess two classes of Scholia on the Satires of Juvenal. 
The first goes in its greater part back to the end of the fourth century 
and in spite of great corruptions contains not a few traces of real 
scholarship. They are preserved in the codex Pithoeanus (now at 
Montpellier, nr. 125) saec. IX and the Sangallensis (D 476) saec. XI, 
and were first edited by P. Pithoeus (a. 1585), then by A. W. Cramer 
(a. 1823), emended by L. Schopen in Heinrich's edition (1839) I p. 
156—324 (annotationes criticae on them p. 325—440), the best reprint 
in 0. Jahn's edition of 1851, p. 171—385. The Scholia which George 
Valla published Venet. 1486 as the Scholia of Probus and which extend 
hardly as far as the eighth satire, were derived from a ms. belonging 
to the same class, though more complete. The second class bears 
(like the Scholia on Persius, above 297, 6) the name of Cornutus 
(Cornuti expositio super toto libro luvenalis), is found in more recent 
mss. (especially Laurent. 52, 4 saec. XV), probably belongs to the 
Carlovingian period, and is both verbose and empty; see 0. Jahn's ed. 
of Persius p. CXVI— CXXXI. Specimens of them were published by 
Schopen, Inedited Scholia on Juv. Ill, Bonn 1847. 4; K. F. Hermann 
(Schediasma de scholiorum ad luv. genere deteriore. Getting. 1849. 4). 
and Gigch (Apparatus criticus ad luv., Lugd. Bat. 1849; Tria capita ad 
luv. eiusque scholiastas spectantia ib. 1850). 



160 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

8. In the same manner the manuscripts of the Satires are 
divided into two classes. Of the earlier class only the Budensis or 
Pithoeanus (P. ap. Jahn) saec. IX (see n. 7) is extant, and even this 
ms. has been completely revised and corrected by a later hand in 
accordance with mss. of the second class. The similar ms. of Ge. 
Valla has entirely disappeared, and in the St. Gall ms. (a. 7) the text 
of Juvenal has been lost. A Vienna ms. saec. X extends only until 
5, 96: see on this A. Göbel in the Reports of the Meetings of the 
Vienna Academy XXIX (1859) p. 73 sqq. On the Montpellier ms. see 
also F. Riihl, Philologus XXX p. 676 sq. Much more numerous are the mss. 
of the second interpolated and badly corrupted class. Two of these 
(Mediceus and Leidensis) saec. XI bear the subscription: Legi ego 
Niceus Romae apud Servium magistrum ct emendavi The grammarians 
who quote passages from Juvenal generally follow the readings of this 
second class. C. Fr. Hermann, de codicibus luvenalis recte existimandis 
(Getting. 1847. 4.) and Vindiciae luvenalianae (ib. 1854. 4.) 0. Jahn in 
his edition of 1868, p. 5 — 9. Abortive attempts to prove the class of 
Nicaeus to be superior were made by A. Häckermann, on the Pithoean 
ms. of Juv. I. Greifswald 1856. 4.; on the explanation of Hermann 
and the criticism of Juv., Greifsw. 1857; the Pith. Codex of Juv., 
Philologus XII p. 658-695. XVI 412— 449. XVH 481— 491 ; commen- 
tatio in luv. satiras, Greifs wald 1867. 4. 

9. The editions of Juvenal are enumerated in Ruperti's ed. I p. 
CLXIV-CCLHI. We will mention: Ed. princeps, Venet. 1475. 4. 1470 
and Rome c, 1470 (fol.) Cum comment. D. Calderini (Venet. 1475. 4. 
1495, fol.), G. Vallae (Venet. 1486. fol.), Cald., Vallae, Mancinelli 
(Venet. 1492. fol.), with Merulae (Venet. 1498. fol.). Aid. (1501. 8.). 
Cum comm. Britannici (Brix. 1501. fol. and often). Cum notis Pul- 
manni et Hadr. Junii (Antv. 1565. 8.). Fr. Pithoei (Lutet. 1585. 8.); 
Schol. Britann., Pith., Curion. Pulmann. (Lutet. 1602. 4.). Cura N. 
Rigaltii (Lutet. 1613. 4. 1616. 12.). Ed. Grangaeus (Paris 1614. 4.). 
Cum scholl, et comm. ed. H. C. Henninius (with Persius, Ultraiect. 1685. 
4. Lugd. Bat. 1695. 4.). Cum perp. comm. ed. G. A. Ruperti (2 vols,, 
Lips. 1801; an abridgment of it, Gotting. 1803. 1819). Ed. N. L. 
Achaintre (Paris 1810. 2 vols.), N. E. Lemaire (Paris 1823. 2 vols.). 
Rec. et ann. E. W. Weber (Weimar 1825. 8.). In J. C. Orelli Eclogae 
poett. lat. (Sat. 4. 8. 10. 15.), W. E. Weber's Corpus poett. latt. p. 1138 
—1173. Ex emend, et c. comm. C. F. Heinrichii : ace. scholia Vetera 
Bonn 1839. 2 vols.). Cum scholiis veteribus recensuit et emendavit 
0. Jahn, Berol. 1851. 

Texts by A. Häckermann (Lips. 1851), C. F. Hermann (Lips. Teubner 
1854), 0. Ribbeck (see n. 4), 0. Jahn, (Berol. 1868.). 

Juv. satt, delectus, cum notis ed. C. Schmidt. Bielefeld 1835. Satt, 
tres (3, 4, 5) ed. C. L. Roth, Nürnberg 1841. 

10. On Juvenal see Manso in the Supplements to Sulzer VI. p. 294 
— 342. Nisard, etudes . . sur les poetes latins de la decadence (Paris 



I 



JiivenaJ and contemporary Poets, 161 

1834) I. p. 241 sqq. II. p. 101—174. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. IV. 
(1845) p. 535 — 539. Völker, Juvenal; his life and character, Elberfeld 
1851. C. F. Hermann in his Edition (1854) p. Ill— XVIII. Munding, 
on the religious and moral bearing of the Satires of Juvenal, Rottweil 
1865. 4. A. Widal, Juvenal et ses Satires; etudes litteraires et morales, 
Paris 1869. G. Boissier, I. et son temps, Revue des deux mondes, 
June 1870, p. 141-174. 

11. Critical and exegetical contributions by J. R. Heinecke 
(Animadversiones, Halle 1804), G. Pinzger (de versibus spuriis et male 
suspectis, Breslau 1827. 4.), J. N. Madvig (de locis aliquot Juv. inter- 
pretandis, Opusc. acad. I. p. 29—63. II. p. 167—205), Corn. Müller 
(de locis aliquot etc. Hamburg 1830. 4.), C. F. Hermann (spicileg. 
annotationum ad sat. HI 4. Marburg 1839. 4. De sat. VII temporibus, 
Gotting 1843. 4.), C. Kempf (Observationes in luv. aliquot locos inter- 
pretandos, Berol. 1843), G. G. Matthias (Observat. in sat. 1. Marburg 
1844. 4), N. Mohr (spicileg. annotatt. ad. I. sat. 1 et 2, Dorpat 1845), 
A. L. Dollen (Contributions towards the criticism and explanation of J., 
Kiew 1846), Bogen (de locis al. luv. explicandis etc. Bonn 1849), A. 
Häckermann (in Jahn's Archiv XVI, XVII and the Berlin Journal for 
Gymn. 1866), A. Schmidt (de locis aliquot etc. Halle 1851), J. T. H. 
Wolters (comm. lit. in sat. I., Walddüren 1853), A. Göbel (luvenaliana, 
Conitz and Berlin 1859. 4.), Borghesi (annotazioni, Oeuvres V. p. 509 
— 536). Others are mentioned in notes 4. 5. 8. 

G. Lehmann, antiquitates Rom. domesticae in luv. satt, illustratae, 
I. Halle 1867. 



327. The general skill which the age of Trajan possessed 
in various forms of poetry is evidenced by the great number 
of men who (as we know chiefly from the pages of Pliny 
the younger) composed and published verse. Such were 
Octavius Rufus, the influential Titinius Capito, Passennus 
Paulus who imitated Propertius and Horace, Caninius who 
attempted epic poetry, Sentius Augurinus in melic metres, 
Vergilius Romanus, who wrote mimiambi and comedies, and 
others. We possess extensive specimens of the poems of the 
African rhetorician P. Annius Florus. 

1. Plin. Ep. I 7 (Octavio Rufo). 5: tu me tuis (versibus) agere non 
pateris, quorum tanta cupiditate ardeo ut etc. II 10 (Octavio), 1 : hominem 
te . . crudelem qui tam insignes libros tam diu teneas! . . (3.) enotuerunt 
quidam tui versus etc. Perhaps the same Rufus as ib. IX 38 : legi 
librum (by him) omnibus numeris absolutum. 

2. Cn. Octavius Titinius Capito, . . proc(urator) (of Domitian) ab 
epistulis et a patrimonio, iterum ab epistulis divi Nervae ... ab 

11 



162 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

epistul(is) tertio inip(eratoris) Nervae Caesar (is) Traiani Aug(usti) Gcr- 
(manici), Orelh 801. Clarissimi cuiusque vitam egregiis carminibus 
(epigrams) exornat, Plin. Ep. I 17, 3, of. VIII 12, 4 sq.: scribit exitus 
inlustrium virorum . . quasi funebribus laudationibus. V 8, 1 : suades 
ut historiam scribam. 

3. Caninius (Rufus) bellum dacicum scribere parat, in the heroic 
style of the Greeks, Plin. Ep. VIII 4, 1. 3 sqq. of. IX 33, 1. 11. I 3 
(Caninio Rufo) , 1 (quid agit Comum, tuae meaeque deliciae?) 
and 3 sqq. Eight hexametrical lines from a Bellum parthieum Traiani 
imp. in Riese's Anthol. lat. 392 (I p. 257 sq.) 

4. Plin. Ep. VI 15, 1: Passennus Paulus, splendidus eq. rom. 
et in primis eruditus, scribit elegos. gentilicium hoc illi : est enim 
municeps Properti atque etiam inter maiores sues Propertium numerat. 
IX 22: magna me sollicitudine affecit Passenni Pauli valetudo. . . si 
elegos eius in manus sumpseris leges opus tersum, molle, iucundum 
et plane in Properti domo scriptum, nuper ad lyrica deflexit, in quibus 
ita Horatium ut in illis ilium alterum effingit. . . magna varietas, 
magna mobilitas. amat . . , dolet . . , laudat . . , ludit etc. 

5. Plin. Ep. V 17, 1 sq.: nuntio tibi fuisse me hodie in auditorio 
Calpurni Pisonis (Cons. 111?), recitabat xccTccGTfQia/acöy eruditam sane 
. . materiam. scripta elegis erat fluentibus et teneris et enodibus, 
sublimibus etiam etc. 

6. Plin. Ep. IV 27: audivi recitantem Sentium (Borghesi: Serium) 
Augurinum cum . . admiratione. poematia appellat. multa tenuiter, 
multa sublimiter, multa venuste, multa . . cum bile. He subjoins a 
specimen in hendecasyllabics in the manner of Catullus, Calvus and 
Pliny (below 335, 4). Cf. ib. IX 8: omnia scripta tua pulcherrima, 
maxime tamen ilia de nobis. 

7. Plin. Ep. VI 21, 2: nuper audivi Vergilium Romanum paucis 
legentem comoediam ad exemplar veteris comoediae scriptam. (4.) scripsit 
mimiambos, . . scripsit comoedias Menandrum aliosque aetatis eiusdem 
aemulatus. . . nunc primum se in vetere comoedia . . ostendit. non 
illi vis, . . non amaritudo, non lepos defuit. ornavit virtutes, insectatus 
est vitia, fictis nominibus decenter, veris usus est apte. circa me . . 
benignitate nimia modum excessit etc. 

8. M. P m p n i u s M. f. B a s s u 1 u s in an inscription of Aeclanum 
ap. Mommsen I. R. N. 1137 = Henzen 5605 = Bücheier, Greifswald 
List of Lectures 1870, p. 12: ne more pecoris otio transfungerer, 
Menandri paucas vorti scitas fabulas, et ipsus etiam sedulo finxi novas, 
id quale quälest chartis mandatum diu. The correctness of the lines 
and the personal circumstances of the author render it probable to 
assign these lines to the second half of the first century (Mommsen 
Hermes III p. 465—467) or to the time of Trajan (Bücheier). On the text 
see Bergk in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 1870, p. 826, n. 3. 



Vergilius Romanus and others. Tacitus. 163 

9. As poets are mentioned in general terms Silius Proculus 
(Plin. Ep. Ill 15), Cluvienus (Juv. 1, 80); and merely as writers Julius 
Avitus (quantum legit, quantum scripsit! Plin. Ep. V 21, 5), Geminus 
(ib. IX 11, 1), Atrius or Satrius (ib. IX 35), Nonius Maximus (ib. IV 
20 cf. V 5). 

10. On Annius Florus see below 336, 7. 



328. Among the prose- writers of the time of Trajan 
the first place is occupied by Cornelius Tacitus (c. A. D. 
54 — 119), Cons. a. 97. His best years, like those of Juvenal, 
belonged to the reign of Domitian, when fear and indignation, 
repressed without any possibility of discharge, embittered all 
thought and feeling. His sympathies belonged to the aristo- 
cratic republic, but his intellect convinced him of the necessity 
of monarchic institutions. He also possessed the aversion to 
boisterous conduct and precipitate action peculiar to aristocrats 
and doctrinaires, and shared the prevalent sentiment of 
resignation, which he also endeavoured to justify theoretically. 
As historian, Tacitus endeavoured in the first place to ascer- 
tain the facts. He followed the best sources, though frequently 
without naming them, and sifted them with strict criticism. 
He candidly states the results of his conscientious investi- 
gations, while his own views are generally merely implied 
in the careful wording of his sentences. He treats his subject 
in a pragmatical manner, zealously inquiring into the causes 
of actions, which he traces partly in the circumstances, partly 
in the characters. The first he sometimes declares to be 
necessary and decreed by Fate, sometimes accidental. He 
is fond of tracing the psychological connexion of facts, and in 
the delineation of characters and psychological analysis 
Tacitus displays unequalled mastery. The key-note of his 
work is, like his subject-matter, serious, melancholy and even 
bitter. This historian avoids all that might impair his dignified 
bearing, rhetorical display as well as passionate outpourings; 
but he knows how to increase his dignity by artistic accuracy 
and calculation and by a very peculiar diction. Though he 
wavered some time between the models of the classical period, he 
finally decided in favour of the poetically coloured and pointed 
style of his contemporaries, but in so doing the epigrammatic 
novelty and audacity of his diction even enhanced the peculiarities 



164 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

of silver Latinity, while its difficulties force the reader to 
stop and reflect on his way through the work. 

1. On his praenomen, perhaps Publius. In the Med. I. the 
heading P. Cornelii Taciti is by a modern hand; the subscriptions have 
P. Cornelii, and even these partly by later hands. W. Studemund, 
Eos II p. 224 sq., cf. L. Urlichs, ibid. II p.227. I p. 246. The prae- 
nomen C. is found e. g. in the codex Farnesianus (C. Cornelii Taciti . . 
liber primus etc. incipit) and in the mss. of Sidonius Apollinaris Ep. IV 
14 in. (C. or Caius Tacitus . . Ulpianorum temporum consularis) and 
22 (cum Cornelius C. Secundo paria suasisset), in either rather an 
abbreviation of Cornelius or (as in other cases, see above 82, 1) 
originated from the first letter of the principal name. The ancient 
writers who mention Tacitus (e. g. Pliny the younger, Flav. Vopisc, 
Aurelian. 2, 1; Oros. VII 10, 19; Sidon. Apoll, carm. XXIII 154) do not 
mention his praenomen. In the subscriptions of the Med. II he is 
simply called Cornelius Tacitus. 

2. His birthplace. Flavins Vopiscus (Tac. 10, 3) relates of the 
Emperor Tacitus (a 275 — 276): Cornelium Tacitum, scriptorem historiae 
augustae, quod parentem suum eundem diceret, in omnibus bybliothecis 
conlocari iussit, et ne lectorum incuria deperiret librum per annos 
singulos decies suribi publicitus in cunctis archivis iussit et in byblio- 
thecis poni. As this Emperor was a native of Interamna and had 
there, like his brother Florianus, a statue with a cenotaph (Vopisc. 
Florian. 2, 1 = Tac. 15, 1), it was rashly assumed that the historian 
was likewise born there, and the modern town of Terni raised him a 
statue in 1514 (Angeloni, storia di Terni p. 42 sqq.). But even though 
the Emperor and the historian Tac. were actually related, this would 
not yet establish the identity of their birthplace; nay the designation 
of Sejanus as municipalis adulter (A. IV 3) renders it inprobable that 
the historian was born in a municipium. We should then assume that 
he was born at Kome. 

3. Plin. n. h. VII 17, 76 after mentioning a case of premature 
bodily development attended by premature death: ipsi non pridem 
vidimus eadem ferme omnia . . in filio Corneli Taciti equitis romani, 
Belgicae Galliae rationes procurantis. He probably was the father of 
the historian; at least the time agrees with this assumption. It is 
certain that Tacitus was descended from a noble and rich family, as 
his education and political career show this. 

4. The year in which Tac. was born can only conjecturally be 
found out by combining various facts. If Dial. 1 he says that he 
listened to that conversation (which happened a. 75 or 76, below 329, 
n. 2) iuvenis admodum, this would lead us to his eighteenth or 
twentieth year, so that his birth would be placed about a. 56—59, 
Tacitus himself (Agr. 7) describing Domitian at the age of 18 or 19 
as iuvenis admodum. But other writers use the same expression of 



I 



Tacitm. 165 

persons at the age of 21 to 23 years. Agr. 9: consul (a. 77 = 830) 
egregiae turn spei filiam iuveni mihi despondit ac post consulatum 
(i. e. a. 78) collocavit et statim Britanniae praepositus est. Tac. does 
not seem to have had children by this marriage about the time of 
Agricola's death, as they could not well have remained unnoticed 
in the epilogue to the life of Agricola. 

5. On his rhetorical training and practice. Dial. 2: M. Aper et 
Julius Secundus (above 310, 3 sq.), . . quos ego in iudiciis non utrosque 
modo studiose audiebam sed domi quoque et in publico assectabar, 
mira studiorum cupiditate et quodam ardore iuvenili etc. It is possible 
that Quintilian (above 320, 4) instructed also Tacitus. Cf. Plin. Ep. 
VII 20, 4: equidem adolescentulus, cum iam tu fama gloriaque (as orator) 
floreres, te sequi, tibi 'longo, sed proximus, intervallo' et esse et haberi 
concupiscebam. IV 13, 11 to Tac: rogo ut ex copia studiosorum quae 
ad te ex admiratione ingenii tui convenit circumsx)icias praeceptores 
quos soUicitare possimus. IX 23, 2: numqum maiorem cepi voluptatem 
quam nuper ex sermone Cornell Taciti. narrabat sedisse se cum 
quodam circensibus proximis. hunc post varios eruditosque sermones 
requisisse: 'Italicus es an provincialis .?' se respondisse: 'nosti me, et 
quidem ex studiis.' ad hoc ilium: 'Tacitus es an Plinius?' Of the 
philosophical systems Tac. is acquainted only with the Epicurean and 
Stoic, but even there his studies cannot have been very deep; see 
Agr. 4 (above 40, 2). On his speeches see Plin. Ep. 11 1, 6: laudatus 
est (Verginius Rufus) a consule Cornelio Tacito; nam hie supremus 
felicitati eius cumulus accessit, laudator eloquentissimus. id. II 11, 2: 
ego et Cornelius Tacitus, adesse provincialibus (of Africa) iussi (a. 100); 
11, 17: respondit Cornelius Tacitus eloquentissime et quod eximium 
orationi eius inest, asjui/üig. 11, 9: quod ego et Tacitus iniuncta ad- 
vocatione diligenter et fortiter functi essemus. 

6. His political career. Hist. I 1: dignitatem nostram a Ves- 
pasiano (f 79 A. D.) incohatam, a Tito (June 79 until Sept. 81) auctam, 
a Domitiano (a. 81 — 96) longius provectam non abnuerim. The general 
commencement was the quaestorship, which Tac. obtained a. 79 at the 
very latest, and as this presupposed the age of at least 25 years, we 
should again be obliged to assume a. 54 as the latest year in which 
he could have been born. Hence Fr. Haase understands his incohata 
dignitas of the XXviratus, L. Urlichs (de Agr. p. 25 'Festgruss' 
p. 5 sq.) of the XVviratus. The next step after the quaestorship was 
the tribuneship or aedileship. Agricola had been trib. pleb. (Agr. 6) ; 
it is, however, possible that aucta is in favour of the assumption that 
Tac. became an aedile. This second dignity Tac. would have held 
a. 81 at the latest. Under Domitian his further advancement (to the 
praetorship) was delayed. A. XI 11: is quoque (Domitianus) edidit 
ludos saeculares (septimos Domitianus se XIV et L. Minucio Rufo coss., 
anno DCCCXXXXI, Censorin. d. n. 17, 11 ; i. e. A. D. 88 = 841 V. C.) 
iisque intentius affui sacerdotio quindecimvirali praeditus ac tunc praetor. 
— Of Agricola, v^ho died in August 93, Agr. 45: nobis tam longae 



166 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

absentiae (from Rome, perhaps owing to his official duties, say as a prae- 
torial legate in Germany) condicione ante quadriennium amissus est. 
But Tacitus must have returned to Rome soon afterwards, on account 
of Agr. 45 : mox (after Agricola's death) nostrae duxere Helvidium in 
carcerem manus, nos Maurici Rusticique visus, nos innocenti sanguine 
Senecio perfudit. . . praecipua sub Domitiano miseriarum pars erat 
videre et aspici. He became consul under Nerva, a. 97 see n. 5. Tacitus 
seems to have lived until Adrian's accession (Aug. 117) and his death seems 
to have taken place between 117 and 120. His intention (A. IV 24) to 
write also the history of the Augustan age remained unfulfilled. 

7. His own views concerning his position towards the past are ex- 
pressed by Tacitus in the word he attributes to C. Cassius, A. XIV 43: 
saepenumero, P. C, in hoc ordine interfui cum contra instituta et leges 
maiorum nova senatus decreta postularentur, neque sum adversatus, non 
quia dubitarem super omnibus negotiis melius atque rectius olim pro- 
visum et quae converterentur in deterius mutari, sed ne nimio amore 
antiqui moris studium meum extollere viderer. simul quidquid hoc in 
nobis auctoritatis est crebris contradictionibus destruendum non existi- 
mabam, ut maneret integrum si quando resp. consiliis eguisset. This 
is scarcely contradicted by the expressions used A. IH 55 to convey 
the writer's personal opinion: nisi forte rebus cunctis inest quidam 
velut orbis . . nee omnia apud priores meliora, sed nostra quoque 
aetas multa laudis et artium imitanda posteris tulit. Cf. H. I 3 in. 
Tacitus is very bitter when the grand antecedents of Rome are used 
as the motives of vexations in his own time, cf. A. IH 66. IV 19. Anti- 
quus and priscus are always used by him to denote praise, e. g. H. II 
5. 64. A. VI 32. It should also be observed with what warmth he ex- 
presses himself A. HI 60: magna eius diei species fuit, quo senatus 
maiorum beneficia, sociorum pacta, regum etiam . . decreta ipsorumque 
numinura religiones introspexit, libero, ut quondam, quid firmaret mu- 
taretve. Altogether Tacitus' mode of thinking is quite aristocratic even 
in its prejudices, and to noble blood he always attaches high value; 
see A. IV 3. VI 27 in. XIV 14. Concerning slaves and barbarians he 
shares the prejudices of the Romans (e. g. A. I 76. II 85. XI 36. Germ. 
23. 33. Hist. V 2 sqq. 13) and only in very rare instances (Agr. 30. 
A. II 88. IV 72) does he seem susceptible of the independent sense of 
others. 

8. Among the three possible kinds of government (cunctas nationes 
et urbes populus aut primores aut singuli regunt, A. IV 33) the repu- 
blican form is in Tacitus' opinion decidedly the freer form (A. VI 
42), but in the interest of civil peace (Dial. 36. Hist. I 1) and in con- 
sequence of the decline of the period (H. II 37) as well as the im- 
mense extent of the Empire (H. II 38) the republic has become im- 
possible and the monarchy necessary (H. I 16). It is therefore un- 
avoidable that the individual should be resigned and take things and 
people as they are (e. g. bonos imperatores voto expetere, qualescumque 
tolerare, H. IV 8 cf. 74) and attempt to steer his course through these 



Tacitus. 167 

diflficult circumstances so as neither to injure his honour nor expose 
himself to dangers, by finding a road midway inter abruptam contu- 
maciam et deforme obsequium (A. IV 20). Men who had succeeded in 
this, moderate liberals who knew how to take the extant state of things 
into due consideration, and who restrained their liberal tendencies (modum 
et temperamentum adhibere, Dial. 41. A. IV 20), non contumacia atque 
inani iactatione libertatis famam fatumque provocabant (Agr. 42), utilia 
honestis miscebant (Agr. 8), are therefore fully appreciated by Tac. ; 
e. g. Man. Lepidus (A. IV 20), L. Piso (A. VI 10), C. Cassius (A. XII 
12. XIV 43), Agricola (Agr. 8. 42). But such men as Helvidius Priscus 
(H. IV 6) and Paetus Thrasea (A. XIV 12) are not exactly men he likes ; 
he does not indeed detract the merit of those who dare die for their 
convictions (cf. A. VI 34 sq. XV 57. XVI 16), but still he feels that by 
the side of such men of action, men of the secret pen cannot occupy 
a very brilHant position. In general he followed under Domitian the 
advice of the experienced Seneca (Ep. 14, 7): sapiens numquam poten- 
tium iras provocabit, immo declinabit, non aliter quam in navigando 
procellam. (ib. 8:) sapiens nocituram potentiam vitat, hoc primum cavens 
ne vitare videatur. pars enim securitatis et in hoc est non ex professo 
eam fugere, quia quae quis fugit damnat. See above 282, 1 fin. 

9. The spectacle of a despotism spreading with fatal power and 
crushing the noblest aims and characters that are in its way, while 
those who would have deserved death a thousand times are not caught 
by punishment or but too late, often troubles the historian's ideas of 
divine justice; in his dark night he looks in vain for the guiding hand 
of some god to show him light. From what he sees, he infers the 
indifference or even enmity of the gods to mankind. H. I 3 : adprobatum 
est non esse curae deis securitatem nostram, esse ultionem. II 38: 
eadem illos deum ira, eadem hominum rabies, eaedem scelerum causae 
in discordiam egere. Ill 72: propitiis, si per mores nostros liceret, 
deis. A. IV 1: deum ira in rem Rom. XVI 33: aequitate deum erga 
bona malaque documenta. XIV 12 : quae (prodigia) adeo sine cura 
deum eveniebant ut multos post annos Nero imperium et scelera con- 
tinuaverit. Cf. Hist. I 86. IV 26. As Tac. holds these views on mira- 
cles, he scarcely ever condescends to mention them. Only in the Hist, 
(e. g. I 18. II 50. HI 56. V 13) and in the last books of the Annals 
(XII 43. 64. XIV 32. XV 7. 47) he mentions them occasionally, probably 
owing to his sources. In this detail we may also observe that Tac. 
does not follow any definite philosophical system; but his moral con- 
victions m'^st frequently coincide with those of the Stoa. 

10. Works on the political and religious views of Tac. Süvern p. 
128 sqq. C. Hoffmeister, the Moral Views of Tac. p. 13 sqq. 78 sqq. C. 
Zell, Vacation-writings HI p. 67 — 129. Kirschbaum, quid Tac. senserit 
de rebus publicis. Jena 1856. F. Haase, praef. p. XXX— XLIX. C. 
Nipperdey, edition of the Ann. p. XII— XVI. Stäudlin, on the philo- 
sophy and mode of thought of Tac, in Conz's Contributions 1786. p. 
144 sqq. and in Stäudlin's History of Scepticism II p. 297 sqq. J. Ky- 



168 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

naston, de impietate Tacito falso obiectata, Oxford 1761. 4. J. C. Wolf, 
de divina mundi moderatione e mente Taciti, Fulda 1830. F. H. A. 
Haage, Tac. ab im^Dietatis crimine vindicatus, ad Hist. I 3. Lüneburg 
1840. 4. F. A. Scharpff, on the political and religious views of Tac, 
Rottweil 1843. 4. Kahlert, Taciti sententiae de diis et deorum regimine, 
Breslau 1844, Neustadt 1847. 4. Fabian, quid Tac. de numine divino 
iudicaverit, Bresl. 1852. J. Baumann, in Jahn's Jahrb. LXXIX p. 257 
—281. J. G. Pfaff, the views of Tac. concerning morality, Marburg 
1858. Fr. Voigtland, quid senserit Tac. de divina rerum humanarum 
moderatione, Schleusingen 1870. 19 pp. 4. 

11. As his sources Tac. mentions the acta diurna (A. Ill 3. XIII 
31. XVI 22), the acta senatus (A. V 4. XV 74), Agrippinae commentarii 
(A. IV 53), G. Plinius (H. Ill 28. A. I 69), Corbulo (A. XV 16), Vipsta- 
nus Messala (H. Ill 25. 28), Cluvius (A. Xlll 20. XIV 2), Fabius Rusticus 
A. XIII 20. XIV 2. XV 61), Sisenna (H. Ill 51). But as a rule he speaks 
only generally of scriptores annalium (A. IV 53), scriptores senatores- 
que eorundem temporum (A. II 88), celeberrimi auctores (H. Ill 51), 
plurimi maximeqiie fidi auctores (A. IV 10), temporum illorum scriptores 
(A. XII 67. XIII 17), temporis eius auctores (A. V 9 and elsewhere), 
scriptores temporum qui monumenta huius belli composuerunt (H. II 
101), or omnes, plerique, plurimi, multi, quidam, alii auctores tradunt- 
The instances in which he appeals to oral sources, are not scarce (A. 
Ill 16: audire me memini ex senioribus ; cf. XI 27. XV 41. 73). Incase 
his authorities differ, he either decides for the best attested or for that 
which is of itself more probable; e. g. A. IV 11: haec vulgo iactata, 
super id quod nullo auctore certo firmantur, prompte refutaveris (as 
mprobable in themselves ; cf. XIV 2). He frequently also suspends his judg- 
ment (H. II 28. A. I 81. V 10. VI 7. XIII 20); but elsewhere he contrasts 
the result of his reflexions or investigations with the relations of his 
sources (H. II 101: scriptores . . tradiderunt. nobis videntur. A. II 37: 
nvenio apud quosdam auctores, . . ego reor. Cf. ib. VI 7). See in 
general Meierotto, de fontibus quos Tac. . . videatur secutus, Leipz. 
and Berl. 1795. fol. H. Justus, de fide Taciti, Zittau 1827. Bötticher 
ex. Tac. p. XlX— XXIII. R. E. Prutz, de fontibus quos in conscribendis 
rebus a Tiberio usque ad mortem Neronis gestis auctores secuti vide- 
antur, Halle 1838. Nipperdey in his edition of the Annals p. XVI — 
XVIII. L. Schiller in Mützell's Zeitschr. f. Gymn. VII. 1853. p. 280-291. 
Friedlieb, on Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius and Dio as sources for the 
investigation of early Christian history, in Th. Wiedemann's Austrian 
quarterly Journal for Roman Cathohc Theology I (1862). Reichau, 
de fontium delectu quem in Tiberii vita moribusque describendis Velleius, 
Tacitus, Suetonius, Dio habuerunt, Königsberg 1865. Th. Mommsen, 
Corn. Tac. and Cluvius Rufus, Hermes IV p. 295—325. Nissen, Rhein. 
Mus. XXVI p. 509 sqq. 540. Cf. n. 14 sq. 

12. The pragmatic treatment of Tac: ut non modo casus eventus- 
que rerum, qui plerumque fortuiti sunt, sed ratio causaeque noscantur 



Tacitus. 169 

(H. I 4). But on the relation of accident to human liberty and the 
necessity of fate, Tac. expresses contradictory views; see Süvern p. 
126—134. Hoffmeister, the Moral Views of T., p. 114 sq. 117—121. 
Nipperdey p. XII— XIV. Comp. e. g. A. Ill 18: mihi, quanto plura 
recentium sen veterum revolvo, tanto magis ludibria rerum mortalium 
cunctis in negotiis obversantur. IV 20: dubitare cogor, fato et sorte 
nascendi . . an sit aliquid in nostris consiliis. V4. fatali quodam motu 
. . sen prava sollertia. VI 22: mihi haec ac talia audienti incerto iudicium 
est fatone res mortalium et necessitate immutabili an forte volvantur. 
In numerous instances Tac. places the natural and the transcendental 
explanation of a fact side by side without any attempt at mediation 
(e. g. Varus fato et vi Arminii cecidit, A. I 55 cf. Süvern p. 131, n. 2) 
or also the fatalistic and the theistic view (e. g. fatum et ira dei, H. 
IV 26. Hoffmeister p. 109 sq.). In the majority of cases he prefers 
the immanent causes and only when he cannot perceive them clearly, 
he assumes the influence of fate. 

13. Despotism creates in its surroundings a perfect mastery in 
refined psychological observation. Unable to let his life issue forth, the 
individual descends into the depths of his breast; and obliged to read 
in the features of the despot both his own fate and that of others, 
he becomes skilled in the symptoms of psychic life and learns how 
to find his way in the maze of a human breast. Tacitus possesses this 
mastery to quite an unusual degree; fine psychological observations 
abound in him, e. g. A. IV 3 : neque femina amissa pudicitia alia ab-, 
nuerit. XIV 4: facili feminarum credulitate ad gaudia. Agr. 42: pro- 
prium humani ingeni est odisse quem laeseris. A. XIV 62: graviore 
odio, quia malorum facinorum ministri quasi exprobrantes aspiciuntur. 
XII 67: hand ignarus summa scelera incipi cum periculo, peragi cum 
praemio. IV 18: beneficia eo usque laeta sunt dum videntur exsolvi 
posse; ubi multum antevenere, pro gratia odium redditur. V 2: facetiiis 
acerbis, quarum apud praepotentes in longum memoria est. XIV 14: 
ut est volgus cupiens voluptatum et si eodem princeps trahat laetus. 
H. I 56: quod in seditionibus accidit, unde plures erant omnes fuere. 
11 80: quaeritur tempus, locus, quodque in re tali difficillimum est, 
prima vox. Tac. is especially skilled in tracing the secret springs of 
action, unmasking hypocrisy, anatomically dissecting psychic procee- 
dings, and in fine and pertinent delineations of characters. Especially 
famous is his showing how Tiberius gradually became a monster from 
having originally been a good ruler. See above 270, 1. Yet Tacitus' 
tendency to discover bad motives in everything appears also in his 
manner of treating even the good actions of Tiberius in the first 
part of his reign as mere hypocrisy. Still Tac. retains a mind acces- 
sible to the just appreciation of real nobility and goodness. Germanicus 
is a decided favourite of his; but even in lower spheres he likes to 
draw attention to noble elements (e. g. H. Ill 23. IV 50). His psychic 
interest frequently even surpasses his historical interest and causes Tac. 
to neglect the real connexion of the events in many instances. This 



170 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

interest does not, however, extend to real partiality, and altogether we 
should acknowledge that he remained faithful to his intention of 
writing sine ira et studio (n. 1). See also Fechner, de Taciti historica 
arte iis conspicua quae de Germanico et Seiano memoriae prodita sunt, 
Bromberg 1867. 4. 

14. Hist II 50: ut conquirere fabulosa et fictis oblectare legentium 
animos procul gravitate coepti operis crediderim, ita volgatis traditisque 
demere fidem non ausim. Historical excursuses are therefore compa- 
ratively scarce, though some are found H. H 3. 38. HI 72. IV 83 sq. 

V 2 sqq. A. IV 26 sqq. (de principiis iuris). VI 11 (praefecti urbis). 
12 (libri sibyllini). 16 (leges funebres). 21 sq. (astrology). XI 22 (quae- 
storship). Such long speeches as we have in Agricola do not recur in 
the later works ; brief ones occur e. g. H. I 83 sq. II 76 sq. IV 42. 58. 
64 sq. 73 sq, A. I 42 sq. 58 sq. II 37 sq. 71. HI 12. 50. IV 34 sq. 37 sq. 

V 6. VI 8; in or. obliqua A. II 14 sq. 45 sq. Expositions of motives 
in speeches pro and con occur e. g. A. II 76 sq. Documents (chiefly 
letters) A. Ill 16. 53 sq. IV 39 sq. In agreement with the general 
rhetorical treatment of his subjects, Tac. does not think very highly of 
details. A. HI 65 : exequi sententias (votes of the Senate) hand institui 
nisi insignes per honestum aut notabili dedecore, quod praecipuum 
munus annalium reor ne v-irtutes sileantur utque pravis dictis factisque 
ex posteritate et infamia metus sit. Cf. XIH 31 (cum ex dignitate po- 
puli rom. repertum sit res illustres annalibus, talia diurnis urbis actis 
mandare). On the other hand VI 7 extr. : nobis pleraque digna cognitu 
obvenere, quamquam ab aliis incelebrata. Cf. A. IV 53. Hist. IV 83. 

15. Tacitus is never carried awa}- by passion: which would be a 
bad offence against the 'grandezza' of Roman aristocracy and unsui- 
table to the oppressed state of the minds of the time in which he lived 
and wrote. In spite of its elevation, his tone is therefore at once 
quiet and calm, so that neither hatred nor horror or contempt can 
ever push it beyond the line of moderation. Tac. also shares the 
general aversion of rhetoric to bold expressions, and ugly things are 
unpleasant to his aristocratic manner. On the other hand he does not 
disdain rhetorical or poetical embellishment, and often alludes to Virgil ; 
see E. WölffHn, Philol. XXVI p. 130—132. A. Dräger, on the Syntax 
and Style of Tac. p. 184—106. 

16. W. Bötticher sums up the principal pecuharities of Tacitus' 
style as varietas, brevitas, poeticus color. It has repeatedly been ob- 
served that these did not exist in equal extent from the beginning of 
T.'s literary career, and that T.'s style reached the acme of its pecu- 
liarities in the Annals, and also that it varies according to humour or 
subject-matter (e. g. in narrative and orations); the details have been 
collected by E. Wölfflin, Philol. XXV p. 92—108. 133 sq. Other works 
on the style and diction of Tac. are: Lundblad (Lund 1789. 4.), J. G. 
Buhle (Brunswick 1817), Günther in the Athenaeum II 2. p. 262 sqq. 
J. E. Wernicke, de elocutione Taciti, Thorn 1829. 4. 1830. 8. K. L. 



Tacitus. 171 

Roth, Tac. Synonyma et per figuram «V did dvoXv dicta, Nürnberg 1826. 
4. and in the Excursuses of his edition of Agricola. N. Bach before 
the second vol. of his edition. W. Bötticher, lexicon Taciteum, Berlin 
1830. L. Döderlein, in his ed. II 1847. p. XXII— LVIII. Jungclaussen 
de Tac. sermonis proprietate, Kiel 1848. 4. C. J. Grysar, on the pecu- 
liarities of the diction and latinity of Tac, Journal for Austrian Gymn. 
IV 1853. p. 1—42. Nipperdey in his ed. of the Annals p. XX— XXIV. 
C. Göbel, de poetico Tacitei stili colore, Berlin 1859. 39 pp. 8. P. 
Joachim, nonnulla de elocutione Taciti, I. Görlitz 1862. 4. A. Gerber, 
de particularum quadam in sermone Taciti proprietate, Kaschau 1863. 
4.; and De particula an, Pesth 1865. 4. U. Zernial, selecta quaedam ca- 
pita ex genetivi usu Taciteo, Göttingen 1864. 96 pp. 8. and Nonnulla 
de elocutione T., Burg 1868. 4. F. Hüttemann, de usu subiunctivi re- 
lativi et absoluti apud Taciturn, Münster 1864. Ph. Spitta, de Tac. in 
componendis enuntiatis ratione, I. Göttingen 1866. 160 pp. 8. E. Wöfflin. 
on a grecism in Tac. hitherto unobserved (tamquam and quasi z=z cJj), 
Philologus XXIV p. 115 — 123. M. Morgenroth, de condicionalium sen- 
tentiarum apud Tac. formatione, Salzungen 1868. P. Czensny, de infi- 
nitivo Tac. I. Breslau 1868. A. Greef, de praepositionum usu ap. Tac. 
I. Gotting. 1869. A. A. Dräger, on the Syntax and Style of Tac, Leip- 
zig 1868. Storch, Grammatical observations on Tac, Memel 1868. 4. 

17. General works on Tacitus. Meierotto de . . Taciti moribus. 
Berlin 1790. fol. Hegewisch, on the character of Tac, in his Historical 
and literary Essays (Kiel 1801) p. 70 sqq. J. S. Gestrich, diss, de vita, 
scriptis ac stilo Taciti, Berlin 1834. N. Bach, Corn. Tac, a biographical 
Essay, General School-Gazette 1831. II. Nr. 105—109; with the Addenda 
ibid. 1832, nr. 129 sq., also in his edition T. I. Conz, on the historical 
art of the ancients, in the Museum of Classical Literature (Zurich 1795) 
p. 151 sqq. Ancillon, Melanges (Paris 1809) I. p. 239 sqq. F. Roth, on 
Thucydides and Tacitus, München 1812. 4. =^ Collected Lectures (Frank- 
fort 1851) p. 1 sqq. Süvern, on the artistic character of Tac, in the 
Trans, of the Berlin Academy 1822-23 (Berlin 1825) p. 73—136. K. 
Th. Welcker, Festive speeches etc. (Freiburg 1828) p. 68 sqq. K. Hoff- 
meister, on the Moral Views of Tac, Essen 1831. Lerminier, Etudes 
d'histoire I. p. 188 sqq. A. C. v. Heusde, comm. de Hooftio et Tacito, 
Groningen 1838. 4. N. Liebert, de doctrina Taciti, Würzburg 1868. W. 
Bötticher, Prolegomena to his Lexicon Taciteum (Berlin 1830) p. I — CIL 
Prophetic Voices in Roman Literature, or on the Christian element in 
Tac, Berlin 1840. 3 parts. R. v. Bosse, on and against Tac. as historian, 
in Jahn's Jahrb. Suppl. XI p. 452—467. F. D. Gerlach, Roman Histo- 
rians (Stuttgard 1855) p. 197 — 207. Th. Finck before his edition of 
the Germania (1857) p. 1 — 224. P. Dubois-Guchan, Tacite et son siecle, 
Paris 1862. 2 vols. F. Savalete, fitude sur Tacite, Paris 1864. Daunou 
in the Biographie universelle XLIV p. 165 sqq. Naudet in Höfer's Nou- 
velle biographic generale XLIII. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc VI 2. p. 
1568-1578 and: On Sallust and Tacitus (Tübi. 1868. 4.) p. 22—47. 
Nipperdey (p. Ill — XXIV) and F. Haase in their editions. 



172 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

329. The extant works of Tacitus are as follows in 
chronological order: 

1. Dialogus de oratoribns, composed under Titus or in 
the beginning of the reign of Domitian, an attempt to prove 
and explain the decay of eloquence in the imperial period, 
in the form of a dialogue between literary celebrities of the 
time of Vespasian. This ingenious treatise shows the same moral 
and political views, the same fineness of psychological observation 
and the same characteristics as the other works of Tacitus: 
but his bitterness is still wanting and even artistic serenity 
may be observed. In point of style this treatise is an in- 
teresting proof of Tacitus' endeavour to imitate the rotundity 
and fullness of Cicero's style in his rhetorical works, though 
numerous phrases and constructions involuntarily betray an 
author of the first century of the Christian era, and in many 
details the diction approaches the subsequent writings of Tac. 
All the mss. we possess are derived from one and the same 
source, and all have the same large gap at the close of ch. 35. 

1. Undue importance has been attached to the deviation of the style 
of this work from the later style of Tac, and the entire neglect of the 
causes of this discrepancy and also the agreement which is almost as 
striking (and which has recently been proved in details by Fr. Wein- 
kauff), have since the time of J. Lipsius caused many to consider the 
work as not Tacitean and to guess all manners of other authors, e. g. 
Pliny the younger (Eckstein Prolegg. p. 46 sqq. Fr. Hesse, de Plinio 
minore dialog! de orr. auctore, Magdeburg 1831. 4. A. Wittich in Jahn's 
Archiv 1839. V p. 259—292. J. J. Kramarczik, Heiligenstadt 1841. 4.), 
Suetonius (Eckstein p. 44 sqq.), QuintiHan (Eckstein p. 52 sqq.). And 
yet Pliny himself (as was first pointed out by A. G. Lange, Miscellaneous 
Writings -p. 5 — 7) and moreover in a letter addressed to Tacitus, proves 
Tacitus' authorship of this work, as Ep. IX 10, 2 (poemata quiescunt, 
quae tu inter nemora et lucos commodissime perfici putas; cf. ib. I 6, 
2 sq.) is an evident allusion to dial 9. 12. In the whole period there 
is absolutely nobody whom we might credit with sufficient talent and 
character to be the author of the Dialogus. And indeed all details 
underlying the Ciceronian surface of the work bear the greatest resem- 
blance to the other works of Tacitus. Hence all authorities are nowa- 
days agreed as to the Tacitean origin. See A. G. Lange, in the acta semin. 
Lips. I p. 77 sqq. = Miscellaneous Writings p. 3—14 = Dronke's edition p. 
XVI sqq. H. Gutmann, diss, qua Tacitum dialogi de or. scriptorem non esse 
demonstratur, in Orelli's edition p. 101 sqq. ; his translation (Stuttgart 1830) 
p. 145 sqq. and in Jahn's Archiv XV p. 139—156 (on A, Düpre's proof of the 
Tacitean origin of the Dialogue). F. A. Eckstein, Prolegg. p. 62 sqq. H. 
C. A. Eichstädt de dialogo qui inscribitur de orr., Jena 1839. 4. W. Teuffel 



Tacit?fs. 173 

in Jahn's Jahrbb. LXXVII p. 285 sq. and in his Translation of the 
smaller Writings (Stuttgart 1858) p. 18—21. Fr. Weinkauff, de Tacito 
dialogi de or. auctore, Cologne 1857 and 1859. 4. J. G. Ek, the present 
state of the question concerning the author of the Dialogus de or,, in 
the Danish Journal for Philology, July 1859 p. 1—11 (Philol. XV p. 
191 sq.), H. Sauppe Philol. XIX p. 156—263 with J. Classen in the 
Journal Eos I. (1864) p. 1 sqq. J. W. Steiner, on Tacitus' Dialogus 
de or., Kreuznach 1863. 36 pp. 4. 

2. The time of the dialogus (between Curiatius Maternus, M. Aper, 
Julius Secundus and Vipstanus Messala) is c. 17 laid in sextam (a. 75 
= 818; L. Urlichs 'Festgruss' Würzburg 1868, p. 1—16: VII am, i e. 
a. 76) felicis huius principatus stationem qua Vespasianus remp. fovet. 
Then, the writer says, he was iuvenis admodum (see above 328, 4) 
and was therefore much older when he wrote the treatise. The 
candour observable throughout the treatise proves that it was written 
under a mild ruler, perhaps under Titus a. 81, or in the last years of 
the reign of Vespasian, at the very latest in the fiirst (good) years of 
the reign of Domitian. The treatise does not contain any more accu- 
rate indications of the time, though it must have considerably preceded 
the composition of Agricola, as there the author had adopted very 
different views of style and followed other models. See W. Teuffel, 
Studies and Char. p. 439—441. 

3. Conjointly with its general literary tendency the work seems 
also to have a personal tendency, viz. to state the reasons why Tacitus 
in spite of his extensive rhetorical studies finally did not adopt the 
profession of orator, but preferred the quiet sphere of the scholar and 
writer. The influence of his studies, especially his imitation of Cicero, 
appears most strongly in the dialogus (cf. A. Dräger, on the Syntax 
and Style of Tac, p. 103 sq.) ; but even in the later works of Tac. it 
is to be perceived, though it constantly decreased, until in his last 
work, the Annals, he arrived at the other extreme, the epigrammatic 
pointedness and dissection of style. 

4. All mss. of the dialogus, the Germania and of the fragment de 
grammaticis et rhetoribus by Suetonius are derived from a Fulda ms. 
saec. VIII or IX or rather from a copy of it (perhaps saec. XIII) found 
by Henoch of Ascoli in the Monastery of Hersfeld (L. Urlichs Eos 
II p. 230. 351 sqq.) and brought to Italy (perhaps in a copy taken by 
himself, X) c. a. 1457, and there his discovery was propagated in new 
copies. Hence are derived Vaticanus 1862 (A, in Reiferscheid V) and 
(through the copy of Pontanus) Leidensis XVIII (B, in Reifferscheid L), 
from a copy n\ade wuth more sagacity, but also arbitrary emendations 
(Y) the others, especially the Neapolitanus, or Farnesianus (C, in Reif- 
ferscheid N). See below 331, 5. Reifferscheid's Suetonius p. 409—417. 
A. Michaelis in his edition of the dial, especially p. VHI — XIX. — G. 
Thomas, on a cod. Ven. of the dialogus and Germania of Tacitus, Munich 
Gel. Anz. 1853, nr. 1 sq. 



174 The First Century of the Imi^erial Epoch. 

5. Separate editions. Cum. varr. notis ed. E. Benzel, Upsala 1706. 
Rec. et illustr. C. A. Heumann, Gotting. l7l9. Ed. et ill. I. H. A. Schulze, 
Lips. 1788. Text by G. Seebode, Gotting. 1813. Hanover 1816. Rec. 
et annot. instr. E. Dronke, Coblenz 1828. Rec. et ann. crit. inst. 
F. Osann, Giessen 1829. Repurg. op. J. C. Orelli, Zürich 1830; cum 
nova collatione cod. Perizonian. (Leidensis) Zürich 1846. 4. Ed. illustr. 
W. Bötticher, Berol. 1832. Recogn. Fr. Ritter, Bonn 1836. 1859. 
Recogn. var. lect. et ann. inst. Ph. C- Hess, Lips. 1841. With notes by 
C. Ph. Pabst, Leipzig 1841. Ed. L. Tross (with the Germania), Hamm 
1841. Ad codices denuo conlatos recogn. A. Michaelis, Lips. 1868. 

6. Critical contributions by Dryander (Coniecturae in dial, de orr., 
Halle 1851. 4.), L. Spengel (Spec, emend. München 1852. 4. p. 9—15), 
C. L. Roth (Stuttgarter Correspondenzblatt 1854, p. 9—15. 19—25), 
L. Schopen (Diorthotica in Tac. dial., Bonn 1858. 4.), Nipperdey (Rhein. 
Mus. XXI p. 270—292. 559—590), C. Halm (in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 
LXXXIX p. 148-151) F. Ritter (Rhein. Mus. XX p. 518—532 XXI 
p. 534-550), G. Andresen in Ritschl's Acta soc. phil. Lips. I 1 (1870). 

7. J. F. Klossmann, Prolegomena in Dial., Breslau 1819. 8. 1833. 4. 
F. A. Eckstein, Prolegomena in Tac. qui v. f. dial., Halle 1835. 4. 
A. Goring, diss, de dial. d. o. praestantia, Lübeck 1829. 4. G. F. 
Strodtbeck, ostenditur Materninae personae in d. d. o. obviae vultus 
ironicus, Heilbronn 1831. 4. A. Westermann, History of Roman 
eloquence p. 233 — 241. Vidal, in Tac. d. d. o. disputatio, Paris 1850. 
F. Deycks, de dial. Tac. d. or., Münster 1856. 4. A. Schaubach, de 
vocum quarundum quae in T. dialogo leguntur vi ac potestate, Mei- 
ningen 1857. P. Voss in the Tidskrift for Philologi VII. See above 
n. 1, and the Introductions to most of the editions and translations, 
also to Bötticher's Lexicon Taciteum p. VIII — XIII. Andresen on the 
Dial, de or. as school-reading, Berlin Journal for Gymn. 1871, 
p. 305 — 308. A school-edition by the same, Leipzig 1872. 

330. 2. De vita et moribus lulii Agricolae liber, a 
biography of Tacitus' father-in-law, composed in the commence- 
ment of Trajan's reign, A. D. 98. The very rhetorical dis- 
position as well as execution of the work remind the reader 
of the laudationes funebres and of the manner of Sallust, 
with which it shares its character of monograph, its indiffe- 
rence to general historical events and numerous other turns of 
phrases. But besides this the work contains much to remind 
us of Cicero. In general, the historical style of Tac. does 
not appear to be much developed in this work, but a kindly 
warmth of humour and sympat hypervades the whole. 

1. Agr. 3: quamquam . . augeat quotidie felicitatem temporum 
Nerva Traianus; cf. 44: durare in banc felicissimi saeculi lucem ac 



I 



Tacitus. 175 

principem Traianum videre. Trajan was therefore princeps already 
(not only Caesar), and Nerva was dead (f 27 Jan. 98), which is not 
contradicted by his not being called divus; see Th. Mommsen Hermes III 
p. 106 n. 4. The close of the powerful preface (c. 3 extr.) promises 
an extensive historical work on Domitian's reign and on the time of 
Nerva and Trajan (i. e. the Historiae), of which the biography of 
Agricola should be considered merely the forerunner. 

2. Just as Tacitus' Ciceronian period is represented in the 
Dialogus, so his Sallustian epoch finds its expression in Agjicola and 
the Germania, though the influence of the first is not quite 
extinct, but considerably on the decline. The end of Agr. 44 and the 
beginning of ch. 45 greatly resemble Cic. de or III 2, 8, 9, 10 sq.; 
quies et otium (c. 6. 21. 42 = Cic. de leg. agr. II 37, 102) and forma 
ac figura animi (Agr. 46) are quite in Cicero's style (Tusc. I 16, 37 
and elsewhere), and altogether pleonasms are not scarce (E. Hübner, 
Hermes I p. 446 sq.), and there are numerous Ciceronian periods (c. 16, 
18, 25 in.), nay c. 4 extr. reminds us of Cic. pro Mur. 31, 65. More 
numerous indeed are the traces reminding us of Sallust, whose influence 
pervades more or less all the other writings of Tacitus ; see W. Teuffel 
in his translation (1859) p. 131 note. Bernays, Rh. Mus. XVI p. 319 sq.: 
and especially E. Wölfflin, Philol. XXVI p. 122—129; also A. Gerber 
in the Leutschau Program 1861 p. 13 sqq. Agricola and Germania 
occupy the same position to the Historiae of Tacitus as Sallust's 
Catiline and Jugurtha to his Historiae. See Urlichs in the Eos I p. 
549 sqq. The study of Sallust evidently formed Tacitus' historical style, 
and great as the mastery is to which Tacitus attained in his peculiar 
manner, he still reached it only by degrees, and Agricola represents 
that degree when his originality was as yet proportionately small- 
It is a rhetorical and psychological portrait quite in the manner of 
Sallust, with a preface like those of Sallust, speeches and excursuses, 
a certain neglect of numerical and chronological statements (c. 41 sq.), 
with antitheses and other figures, and also a regular epilogue. But 
in spite of all these peculiarities we should not follow E. Hübner 
(Hermes I p. 438—448) in denying that this treatise is a biography with 
rhetorical colouring and with general historical outlooks. The speech 
of Calgacus (c. 30) contains many allusions to Sallust (Cat. 58, 17 sq. and 
to the letter of Mithridates) ; but many other passages read just like 
Sallust and the whole contains reminiscences and variations of Sallustian 
expressions. See Urlichs de vita Agric. (1868) p. 4 sq. Such occur 
also in the Annals, but are proportionately most numerous in Agricola. 
— The historical study on Britain and the earlier Roman expeditions 
to that island (c. 10—17) were later on (in his Annals, especially XIV 
29 sq.) employed by Tacitus in a freer manner, some details being 
rectified and enlarged. 

3. The text of Puteolanus was long considered the sole authentic 
one, until Wex proved that his Codex contained only what the two 



176 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Vatican mss. of the second half of the 15th century contain, in which 
the Agricola has come down to us, Vat. 4498 := ä Wex, d Halm, and 
Vat. 3429 ^ rWex, g Halm, and that all deviations from these mss. 
should be considered either as emendations by Puteolanus, or as the 
errors of his copyist or compositor. See L. Spengel, Munich Gel. Anz. 
1853, nr. 25—27 and Spec, emendationum in Tac, Munich 1852. 4. 
p. 15. G. Kämmerer, de indole ac pretio codd. mss. Tac. Agr. et edd. 
vett. usque ad Lipsium, Breslau 1842 r bears the heading Cornelii 
Taciti de vita et moribus lulii Agricolae, J Cai Cornell T. de v. et 
m. I. A. In some passages the marginal notes of T (M in Wex) may 
be taken into consideration; Schenkl, Journal for Austrian Gymn. XII 
p. 421—437. J. Müller, Innsbruck 1863. 4. 

4. Editions: at the end of the Panegyrr. latt. of F. Puteolanus, 
Milan 1476? 4. Cum notis Boxhornii ed. J. A. Bosius, Jena 1664. 
Cum notis Buchneri ed. C. Schubart, Lips. 1683. Ed. M. Engel, Lips. 
1788. Lat. and Germ, by J. Ch. Schlüter, Duisburg 1808. C. F. Renner 
and J. C. Fincke, Götti. 1802; a second edition by A. Schlegel, Göt- 
tmgen 1816. Obss. ill. N. J. Bloch, Copenhagen 1814. Ed. E. Dronke, 
Coblenz 1824: ed. 2 Fulda 1843. Ed. E. H. Barker, London 1824. 
Textum rec. et ad fid. cod. Vat. emend. Ü. J. H. Becker, Hamburg 
1826. Ed. F. G. V. Hertel, Lips. 1827. Ed. et ann. ill. P. Hotman- 
Peerlkamp, Leyden 1827; ed. II 1864. Text, translation and notes by 
G. L. Walch, Berlin 1828. With notes and excursuses by C. L. Roth, 
Nürnberg 1833. Recogn. F. Ritter, Bonn 1836. Brevi ann. expl. F. 
Dübner, Paris 1843. 1866. 12. Ad fidem codicum denuo collatorum 
rec. et commentariis enarravit F. C. Wex, Brunswick 1852. 338 pp. 
Ex Wexii rec. recognovit et perpetua annotatione illustravit Fr. Kritz, 
Berlin 1859. 1865. Explained by C. Tuecking, Paderborn 1869. For 
school-use by A. A. Dräger, Leipzig, Teubner 1869. The text also by 
Fr. Ritter e. g. ed. Ill Bonn 1852. 

Among the translations we notice the French translation by 
N(apoleon). L(ouis). B(onaparte), Florence 1829. 4. 

5. Critical treatises by Brüggemann (Düsseldorf 1824), Eichstädt 
(Jena 1830), E. Foss (Altenburg 1837. 4.), Fr. Brandes (Rostock 1838. 4.), 
Gernhard (Weimar 1838. 4.), Heimburg (Jena 1839), Wex (Contributions, 
Grit, and exeg., on Tac. Agr., Schwerin 1840. 4.), Pfitzner (Neubrandenb. 
1842. 4.) Zeitschr. f. Alt. Wiss. 1847. nr. 13 sq.), E. Dronke (Fulda 
1842. 4.), Ch. G. Herzog (Gera 1843. 4.), Seyffert (Kreuznach 1845. 4.), 
Hutter (Munich 1849. 4.), J. G. Schneider (Coburg 1850 sqq. 4.), G. U. 
Busch (Rostock 1853. 4.), Fr. Kritz (de glossematis falso Taciti Agricolae 
imputatis, (Erfurt 1857. 4.), J. Müller (Fiume 1858. 4.), A. J. F. Hen- 
richsen Lat. and Germ, with crit. and exeg. notes, Altona 1858. 74 p. 
4. c. 1—22 II 1, Altona 1871. 48 pp. 4., G. F. Schömann (Greifswald 
1859. 4.), G. Liep (Kreuznach 1861. 4.), C. Nipperdey (Rhein. Mus 
XVm p. 350-365. XIX p. 97-113), Fr. Ritter, (ibid. XX p. 518—532), 
J. Classen (Symb. criticae, P. III, Hamburg 1866. 4.), S. Pfaff (Exegetical 
and crit. Observations on Agr. 1 and 36, Erlangen 1867. 4.), L. ürlichs 



I 



Tacitus. 177 

(Festgruss, Würzburg 1868, p. 6— 8), K. Meiser (Blätter f. d. bair. 
Gymn. V 3). J. Gantrelle (c. 1 — 3; Revue de I'instruction publ. en 
Belgique XIV p. 333—353). 

6. On Agrioola see Niebuhr, Minor Historical and Philological 
Writings I p. 331 (with N. Bach, Schulztg. 1831, II p. 851 sq.). Welt- 
mann in his transl. VI p. 34—34 (Prague 1817). A. Mohr, Observations 
on Tacitus' Agr., Meiningen 1823. Walch, on the form of ancient bio- 
graphy with special attention to Tacitus' Agricola, in his Edition p. 
XXXVIII— LXXIV. Hofmeister, Moral Views of Tac, p. 80 sqq. 206 
sqq. 228 sqq. J. Held, commentat. de Agr. vita quae vulgo Tacito 
adsignatur, Schweidnitz 1845. 4. E. Hübner, Hermes I. (1866) p. 438 — 
448. J. Gantrelle, sur la vie d'Agr., Revue de I'instr. belgique, 1 May 
1870. 46 pp. Em. Hoffmann, Vienna 1870. 35 pp. (Journal for Austrian 
Colleges), and against him C. Hirzel, on the tendency of T's Agr., 
Tübingen, 1871. 38 pp. 4. (Gymn.-Progr.). 



331. 3. Germania, an ethnographic monograph, occa- 
sioned hy the great interest which that land and nation then 
caused, perhaps also by the author's own knowledge which he had 
acquired in the course of his official duties. The work is pene- 
trated by the genial warmth of sympathy and highly coloured 
by rhetorical means, though it frequently approaches sentimen- 
tality. The author is fond of contrasting the simplicity of the 
Germans with the intricate and corrupt life of his contempo- 
raries. 

1. The title in Vat. 1862 and Farnesianus: Corn. Tac. de origine 
et situ Germaniae; more lengthy is Pontanus : Corneli Taciti de origine, 
situ, moribus ac populis Germanorum liber. The treatise is divided 
into two parts, the first of which treats in commune de omnium Germa- 
norum origine ac moribus (c. 27 extr.), the second (c. 28 — 46) on the 
single tribes. In the latter the author fixes his quarters on the Rhine 
and progressing from there describes the tribes first from West to 
East, then (c. 35 sqq.) from North to South. When he arrives at the 
Danube, he follows its course (c. 41) and winds up with the shores of 
the Baltic. Among his sources he mentions only Caesar (c. 28), but 
traces of the critical employment of authorities appear also c. 3. 
8. 27. 28. 33. 34. 41. 45. Pliny's bella Germaniae (above 307, 2) were 
no doubt employed. On the use made of Sallust see R. Köjike, on the 
criticism of the sources of the Germania, in his Germanic Investigations 
(Berlin 185^) p. 223—226, and Th. Wiedemann in the Investigations on 
German History IV 1 (1864) p. 171 sqq.; an Addendum ibid. X (Gott. 1870) 
p. 595—601. C. Breuker, quo iure Sallustius Tacito in describendis 
Germanorum moribus auctor fuisse putetur, Cologne 1870. 14 pp. 4. 

12 



178 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

2. As in ch. 37, 210 years are counted from the first invasion of the 
Cimbrians (a. 641) to the second consulate of Trajan (a. 98 = 851 V. C), 
the latest revision and publication of the work must be assumed 
between a. 98 and the third consulate of Trajan (A. D. 100). The 
omission of this work Agr. 3, where the literary designs of Tac. are 
mentioned, may be most simply explained by assuming that originally 
this treatise was intended to form an excursus in the Hist., but was 
afterwards treated and edited as an independent work, perhaps because 
its rich materials would not have suited the greater work, or in order 
to use them in a rhetorical and paraenetic tendency (n. 3). A. Riese, 
Eos II p. 193—203. A. Eussner, Pleckeisen's Jahrb. 1868, p. 650. 

3. The Germania is neither an idyl nor a novel nor a political 
pamphlet (calculated e. g. to dissuade Trajan from an expedition to 
Germany), but a contribution to the task which is A. IV 33 acknow- 
ledged to be very interesting, situs gentium describere, and to which 
the Agricola had already contributed. But the execution is indeed 
characteristic of Tac. Just ks Horace (0 III 24, 9 sqq.) had spoken 
of Scythians and Getes in an ideal way as compared with the corruption 
of Rome, Tacitus does the same in respect of the Germans. He de- 
scribes them with constant reference to his contemporaries, and fre- 
quently observes how much the Germans fortunately ignore (c. 8. 9. 
11. 13. 18. 19. 20. 24. 25. 27. 38). Sometimes the description becomes 
quite sentimental (e. g. c. 5. 7. 18 sq. 27). Yet the writer is far from 
merely holding up the Germans to his time as pure models; on the 
contrary, he finds more than once fault with them (c. 11. 15. 17. sq. 
23 sq.) and even shows himself as a thorough Roman as opposed to 
their peculiarities (c. 33, cf. 23). See n. 9 and W. Teuffel's Introduction 
to his translation (1859) p. 132 sq. 

4. The rhetorical character of the style appears in the numerous 
general sentences, the numberless instances of anaphora (c. 11 even 
of prout) and other figures. Cf. Mützell, Journ. for Gymn. I. (1847) 
p. 86 sqq. On the pleonasms of thii. treatise see C. Halm, Reports of 
the Meetings of the Munich Academy 1864, p. 12 sqq. Here also we 
have numerous reminiscences of Sallust (cf. Ph. Hess, variae lectiones 
et obser\a'iones in T. Geim., Helmstädt 1827. 1828. 1834. 4. Wol Hin 
Philologus XXVI p. 122 cf. n. 1 and 330, 2), and many passages remind 
us of the other works cf Tacitus, especially of his Agricola (Agr. 11 
extr. 1= Germ. 28; haud perinde, Agr. 10 =: Germ. 34; in Universum 
aestimanti Agr. 11 = Germ. 6; patiens frugum, Agr. 12, cf. Germ. 5). 
Hexameters occur Germ. 18. 32. 39; an iambic dimeter c. 27. 

5. The Germania has been preserved to us in the same ms. as 
the dialogus (see above 329, 4), though the number of copies made 
of it is very much larger; one of the better copies is at the Stuttgart 
Library. Massmann, Berl. Jalirbb. 1841, Nr. 87 sqq. R. Tagmanti, de 
codicibus mss. atque editionibus vett. Tac. Germ. I. Breslau 1846; de 
Tac. Germ, apparatu critico, Breslau 1847. Except in Rudolf of Fulda, 




Tacitus. 1 79 

the work does not appear to have been used in the Middle Ages; 
G. Waitz, Investigations on German History X (Gott. 1870) p. 602. 

6. Editions. Cum notis Willichii, Glareani, Melanchthonis. Frkf. 
a. 0. 1551. Cum comm. Chr. Coleri, Hannov. 1G02. E reo. Conringii, 
Helmst. 1652. 4. Cum varr. notis ed. J. C. Dithmar, Frkf. 1725 and 
elsewhere. Ed. C. H. Joerdens, Berl. 1783. 1794. Cum obss. Longolii 
ed. J. Kapp, Lips. 1783; ed. U. cur. Ph. Hess, Lips. 1824. Cum varr 
lectt. ed. G. G. Bredow, Helmst. 1808. 1816. Ed. illustr. R. Belham 
(with Agr.) ed. IL Cambridge 1813. Reo. Fr. Passow, Breslau 1817. 
With notes by Ammon and Biiumlein, Tub. 1817. Lat. and German 
with notes by G. and K. Sprengel, Halle 1819. Explained by J. F. K. 
Dilthey, Brunswick 1823. Ed. illustr. Ph. C. Hess, Lips. 1824. By E. 
H. Barker, London 1824. Trad, avec un comm. par C. L. F. Panckoucke, 
Paris 1824. With notes by Fr. W. Altenburg, Hildburgh. 1826. Recogn. 
cum brevi adnot. ed. G. F. C. Günther, Helmstedt 1826. Text, trans- 
lation etc., by G. L. Walch. 1. number Berlin 1829. Comm. inst. Th. 
Kiessling, Lips. 1832. With critical, grammatical and historical notes 
by J. v. Gruber, Berl. 1832. Ed. et quae ad res Germanorum pertinere 
videntur e rehquo Tac. opere excerpsit J. Grimm, Gott. 1835. Text, 
translation and notes by F. D. Gerlach, 2 parts, Basle 1835—1837. In 
usum schol. recogn. Fr. Ritter, Bonn 1»36. 1853. Ad fidem codicis 
Perizon. ed. L. Tross, Hamm 1841. Recogn., isag. instr., comment, 
illustr. etc. M. Weishaupt, Solothurn 1844. Ed. Masemann, Quedlinburg 
1847. Lat. and German by Döderlein , Erlangen 1850. Lat., with 
ethnol. diss, and notes by R. G. Latham, London 1851. With Agr. 
til skolebrug af Bloch, Copenhagen 1854. In us. schol. recogn. M. 
Haupt, Berlin 1855. Ed. Schrant, Leiden 1866. XLI and 334 pp. 
Edited and explained by Th. Fink, I. Tac.'s life, the text, and principal 
apparatus, Göttingen 1857. 250 pp. Ex Hauptii rec. recogn. et perpetua 
adnot. illustr. F. Kritz, Berlin 1860. 1865. 1869. Explained by C- 
Tucking, Paderborn 1867. Explained by L. Curtze, Leipzig 1868. 424 p, 
(on c. 1—10). With notes by B. Hüppe, Münster 1868. By H. Schweizer- 
Sidler, Halle 1871. 

7. Critical commentations l)y J. C. Orelli (Zürich 1819. 4.), Ph. 
Hess (Helmstädt 1827. 1828. 1834. 4.), Schober (Naumburg 1827. 4.), 
Selling (observ. critt., accedit collatio cod. Hummeliani, Augsburg 1830. 4.), 
Pfitzner (Neubrandenburg 1843. 4.), Wex (Schwerin 1853. 4.), W. Th. 
Rudolphi (Observ. grammaticae et criticae, Münster 1855), C. Nipperdey 
(Rhein. Mus. XVIH p. 342—350), L. v. Jan (Eos I. p. 76—79), C. Halm, 
(on some doubtful passages, Munich 1864 ^ Reports of the Meetings 
of the Munich Academy), Fr. Ritter (Rhein. Mus. XX p. 195—217), 
A. Reifferscheid (Coniectanea, in the Symbola philol. Bonn. p. 623 — 628), 
A. Planck (Heilbronn 1867. 4.). K. Meiser (Eichstatt 1871, p. 35—56). 

8. Works on the Germania and in explanation of it. G.A. Arndt, 
disp. quatenus Tac. de Germ, libello fides sit tribuenda, Lips. 1775. 4. 
L. Völkel, de fontibus unde Tac. quae de patria nostra trad, hausisse 



180 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

videatur deque consilio in scribend. Germ., Marburg 1789. 4. C. C. E. 
Charitius, diss, utrum satis fide digna sint quae T. in G. tradit, Witten- 
berg 1792. 4. C. A. Rüdiger, de fide historica Tac. in Germ, descr,, 
Freiberg 1823. Barby, de consilio quo T. Germ, conscripserit et de 
fide ei tribuenda, Berlin 1825. So also Spilleke, Berlin 1825. 4. 
V. Leutsch, on the trustworthiness of Tac. in his Germania, Reports of 
the German Society at Leipzig 1829. p. 46 sqq. Chr. Rommel, de Tac. 
descr. Germaniae, Marburg 1805. 4. F. Rühs, A careful commentary 
on the first ten chapters of T. G., Berlin 1824. F. Passow in Wachler's 
Philomathia I and in his Miscellaneous Writings p. 40 — 64. F. W. 
Altenburg, On Caesar's and Tacitus' views concerning the religion of 
the Germans, Schleusingen 1847. 4. U. J. H. Becker, Notes and Ex- 
cursuses on T. Germ. 1 — 18, Hannover 1830. C. Reischle, comm. de 
locis quibus Tac. et Caes. de vett. Germm. inter se differunt, Kempten 
1831. 4. Fr. Göller, de scriptis Caes. et Tac. ex monumentis medii 
aevi illustrandis, in the Act. soc. gr. I p. 43 sqq. F. D. Gerlach, On 
the Germania of Tac, in the Journal of the Basle Teachers 1825. 
II and On the Idea of Tac. Germ., in the Trans, of the Philological 
Congress at Gotha, 1841 p. 55 sqq. = Historical Studies, Hamburg 
1841. p. 308 sqq., and also in the Trans, of the Philological Congress 
at Hanover p. 104 — 111. See also Hoffmeister, the Moral Views of Tac, 
p. 201 sqq. 220 sqq. Welter, de fide Tacit, in rebus Germm. quaest, 
Münster 1846. 4. Greverus, Observations on T. Germ., Oldenburg 1850. 
E. Keferstein, Views on the Celts etc III 1 (Halle 1850): Tac's Ger- 
mania. W. Engelbert, on the G. of T. and the Geography of Ptolemy 
as the principal sources of the Geogr. of ancient Germany, in the Jour- 
nal for German History and Antiquities III. Münster 1852. Müllenholf, 
Corrupt (German) Names in Tac, Journal for German Antiquities IX 
p. 223—261. B. Hüppe, annotationes aliquot ad T. G., Coesfeld 1853. 
4. J. N. Schmeisser, Remarks on the G. of T. in connexion with the 
Nibelungen and other old poems, Constance 1853. H. Schweizer-Sidler, 
Remarks on T. G., Program of the Zürich Cantonschool 1860. 24. 4. 
1862. 30. 4.: Jahn's Jahrbb. LXXXV. p. 115—123. J. V. Zingerle in 
Franz Pfeififer's Germania, 1860, p. 219 sq. G. Waitz, on the principes 
in the Germ, of Tac, in the Investigations on German History II 2 
(Göttingen 1862), see also Waltz's History of the German constitution, 
sec. ed. I. Kiel 1865. E. Thudichum, the ancient German state, with a 
transl. of the Germ., Giessen 1862. H. Brandes, the nobiles of the 
Germans, in his First Report on the German Society at Leipzig (Leip- 
zig 1863) p. 19—44. P. D. Ch. Hennings, the agrarian laws of the old 
Germans (on Germ. 26. 30), Kiel 1869. Latham, on the authority of the 
etc. in the Journal of class, and sacred philology XII. p. 324—346. 
Th. Malina, de consilio quale T. in seribendo de G. libro secutus esse 
videatur. Deutsch- Crone 1860. 4. Künssberg, Excursions into German 
antiquity (Berlin 1861) and against him Boot, Verslagen der hoUänd. 
Akad. VII, 1863. p. 66—82. A. Baumstark, on the novelistic element 
of the Germ, of T., Eos I. p. 39—64 and II. p. 487—496. Ed. Göbel, 



Tacitus. 181 

ibid. 1. p. 516—525. A. Riese, on the original intention of the Germ- 
of Tacitus, ibid. II p. 193 — 203. Fr. Münscher, Exegetical contributions 
on the Germ., Marburg 1863. 34 pp. 4. 1864. 48 pp. 4. A. Baumstark, 
ancient German antiquities, in defence and explanation of the Germ, 
of Tacitus, Leipzig 1872. 

332. 4. Historiae, being the narrative of the events 
of the reigns of Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, Titus and 
Domitian A. D. 69 — 96, i. e. chiefly the Flavian Dynasty, 
written under Trajan and founded on excellent sources, prob- 
ably on the historical work of Pliny the Elder. The whole work 
originally consisted of fourteen books, of which however only 
the first four and the first half of the fifth have come down 
to us. They contain the history of the years 69 and 70 (822 
v. c), though not quite complete. 

1. Tertullian, apol. 16: Cornelius Tacitus in quinta Historiarum 
suarum. This title follows the precedence of Sisenna, Sallust and Asi- 
nius Pollio and (treating of nostra aetas, H. I 43) agrees with the 
technical meaning- of the word historiae, see above 32, 1. Wölfflin, 
however, is of opinion that this title was doomed to disappear (and 
remained only as a special title) when by writing also the history of 
the Julian Dynasty (in the Annals) the whole work was completed in 
three decads (see n. 21) ab excessu divi Augusti. The Historiae are 
the work announced Agr. 3, the original design being extended to all 
reigns after Nero's death, while the history of the reigning prince Tra- 
jan and his adoptive father, Nerva, was put oft' to later years (Hist. I 
1) and not even then carried out. 

2. Jerome on Zachary III 14 relates that Tac. had written the 
history of the Emperors after Augustus to the death of Domitian tri- 
ginta voluminibus, 16 books of which would appertain to the Annals 
and 14 to the Historiae. In the Med. II and in other mss. this nume- 
ration is adopted. The successive order of the composition of these 
two works appears from A. XI 11: utriusque principis (i. e. Augustus 
and Claudius) rationes (concerning the ludi saeculares) praetermitto, 
satis narratas libris quibus res imperatoris Domitiani composui (in that 
part of the Hist, which contained the history of Domitian). nam is 
quoque edidit ludos saeculares. Nerva is styled Divus, Hist. I 1. The 
sixth book is quoted by Oros. VII 10. 19. The work was employed by 
Sulpicius Severus ; see below 435, 2. 

3. Pliny's Letters (a. 106 or 107) YI 16. 20. VII 33. (historias 
tuas) were written to be contributions to the Historiae which Tac. 
was then composing. Part of the work was probably the liber which 
Tac. sent Pliny (according to Ep. VII 20, 1, cf. ib. 33, 1. VIII 7) ad 
adnotandum. Successive reading and publication of the single books. 



182 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

appears probable for other reasons also ; Mommsen Hermes III p. 107, 
cf. IV p. 298, n. 3. Nissen, Rh. Mus. XXVI p. 535. 548. The extant 
parts are reviewed by Süvern, Trans, of the Berlin Academy 1822 sq. 
p. 97—107. 

4. Tacitus and Plutarch wrote at one and the same time, or more 
probably Plutarch wrote his biographies of Galba, Otho and Vitellius 
even before Tac. (Hermes IV p. 298). The general agreement of these 
two writers should not be considered as dependence of the one upon the 
other (though 0. Clason thought that Plut. had used the Hist. ; see his 
works: Plut. and Tac, an investigation of sources, Berlin 1870, 73 pp.; 
Tac. and Suetonius, Breslau 1870. 134 pp.), but is due to their com- 
mon use of one and the same source. C. Hirzel in the Maulbronn 
Program of 1851 (comparatio eorum quae de Impp. Galba et Othone 
relata legiraus apud Tacitum, Plut., Suet., Dionem) assumes this to have 
been the acta publica ; Th. Wiedemann (de Tacito, Suet., Plut., Cassio 
Dione scriptoribus imperatorum Galbae et Othonis, Berlin 1857.) Pliny 
and Cluvius, A. Schmidt (de quibusdam auctoribus rom. quos in descri- 
bendis annor. 68 et 69 p. Chr. n. gestis Tac, Plut., Suet, secuti sunt, 
Jena 1860. 4.) a number of writers; H. Peter (on the sources of Plu- 
tarch, Halle 1865, p. 40 sqq.) and Mommsen (Hermes TV p. 298—316) 
Cluvius Rufus. But quite recontly H. Nissen, Rh. Mus. XXII p. 508 
— 544 (cf. 0. Clason, Tac. and Suet., p. 76 sqq.) has proved that the 
historical work of Pliny the Elder (above 307, 5) was the principal 
source of Tacitus. He abridged it first of all, by replacing the anna- 
listic arrangemant by a comprehensive arrangement according to the 
subject-matter, by rendering the diffuse style precise, omitting insigni- 
ficant details (e. g. quotations and the discussions of deviating state- 
ments), compressing the accounts of military operations etc. Then he 
also altered Pliny's military standpoint, allowed his aristocratic and sena- 
torial sympathies for Galba to have full sway instead of the Flavian 
character of his source, and thus disguised the faithless conduct 
of the nobility and the generals towards Otho. As regards stylistic and 
artistic treatment, Nissen says that Tac holds the same position to 
Pliny as the sculptor to the stone-mason. Pliny thus forming the 
foundation of the work, Tac seems to have added parts or observations 
from other works, especially from Vipstanus Messala (above 309, 3.). 

5. The principal ms. of the Historiae is the (already interpolated) 
Mediceus II saec. XI (written at Monte Cassino between 1053 and 1087) 
in Langobardic writing, containing eleven books Cornelii Taciti ab ex- 
cessu d. Augusti, i. e. book XI to XXI (incl.) =^ A. XI— XVI, Hist. 
I — V. All the other mss. are of secondary value, being more or less 
interpolated copies either directly or indirecty derived from the Mc- 
dicean ms. 

6. Editions of the Historiae by Th. Kiessling (Lips. 1840) and C. 
Heraeus (explained for School-use, I Teubner 1864. 1871. H 1870). Cf. 
E. Wölfflin, Philol. XXVn p. 113 sqq. 



I 



Tacitus. 1 83 

7. Contributions to the Historiae by A. Böckh (H. I 52. Berol. 
1830. 4.), F. Jacob (on Tac. Hist. Y 2—5, Lübeck 1840. 4.), L. Döder- 
lein (Emendationes Hist. T., Erlangen 1841. 4.), C. Nipperdey, (Emend. 
H. T., Jena 1855. 4.), L. Urlichs (Eos I p. 250 sqq.), .). Classen (Sym- 
bolae criticae, P. II Frankfort 1863. 4. IH Hamburg 1866. 4.), F. Ritter 
(Philol. XXI p. 601—653), J. Müller (1. Innsbruck 1865. H 1869), E. 
Wölfflin (Philol. XX VH p. 117—144), Borghesi (Oeuvres V p. 287-328: 
Annotazioni agli Ann. ed alle Storie di Tac). 

8. Völcker, the struggles for liberty of the Batavians under Clau- 
dius Civilis, Elberfeld 1861—1863. C. Hagge, Notes on the Expedition 
of Vitellius and Otho according to Tacitus, Kiel 1864, 23 pp. 4. J. G. 
Müller, a ciitical investigation of Tac.'s account of the origin of the 
Jews, in the Theological Studies and Criticisms 1843, p. 893 — 958. 
Leonhard, on Tac.'s account of the Jews, Hist. V 2—6, Ellwangen 
1856. 4. H. E. Dirksen, the juridical passages in Tac.'s Hist., Berlin 
1860. 4. 3= Posthumous Writings I p. 204—212. Mommsen, the two 
battles of Betriacum, Hermes V p. 161 — 173, and H. Nissen, Rh. Mus. 
XXVI p. 538—540. J. Kipper, ex Tac. Hist, intellegi non posse osten- 
ditur quomodo bellum inter 0th. et Vit. gestum sit, I Rostock 1870. 
10 pp. 4. 

333. 5. Ann ales or rather ab excessu divi Augusti, in 
sixteen books, containing the history of the JuHan Dynasty 
after Augustus' death (Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero) or 
the years 14— G8 (767—821 V. C), written under Trajan and 
published between a. 115 and 117. We possess, however, only 
the first and last third of the work, being the first four books 
with parts of the fifth and sixth, and (with gaps both at be- 
ginning and end) books XI — XVI, i. e. we have lost the whole 
reign of Caligula, and have only the beginning of the reign 
of Claudius until a. 47, and a. 66 — 68 of the reign of Nero. 
This work observes more strictly the arrangement of Annals 
than the History. 

1. According to the Mediceus I the only genuine title is ab ex- 
cessu d. Augusti, which would be analogous to the title of the history 
of Livy, ab urbe condita, and of Pliny the Elder, a fine Aufidii Bassi. 
Though Tac. himself repeatedly (A. IV 32, cf. Ill 65. XHI 31) describes 
his work as annales, he does not give this as the title, but to denote 
the manner of the relation according to the annual succession of the 
events. (Hence Jornandes de reb. get. I 2 speaks of Cornelius anna- 
lium scriptor, though he means a passage in Agricola). But precisely 
because the books ab excessu d, Augusti are actually Annals, we need 
not hesitate for brevity's sake to call them Annales, which title dis- 
stinguishes them also from the History. 



184 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

2. The time of publication appears from A. ü 61. The boundaiies 
described in that passage presuppose the conquests of Trajan a. 115, 
which were, however (at least so far as they extended beyond the Eu- 
phrates), given up by Adrian immediately on hi^ accession to the throne 
(August 117: Spartian. Hadr. 5, 1—4. Eutrop. VIII 6). The division 
into books was the author's own work, as appears from VI 27 (in prio- 
ribus libris) and XI 11 (see above 332, 2). 

3. The arrangement is intentionally in the manner of Annals, see 
A. IV 71 in. : ni mihi destinatum foret suum quaeque in annum referre, 
avebat animus antire statimque memorare exitus etc. Whenever Tac. 
deviates from it, he considers it his duty to apologize (e. g. VI 38: 
quae duabus aestatibus gesta coniunxi, quo requiesceret animus a do- 
mesticis malis, Cf. XII 40 extr. XIII 9) and for subsequent facts he 
refers to later parts (in tempore memorabo, I 58 cf. IV 71, VI 22; in 
loco reddemus 11 4 cf. H. IV 67: suo loco reddemus). It is true that 
from the fragments of the History which scarcely embrace two years 
we cannot conclude with certainty how far the same design was worked 
out there ; but it was almost a matter of course that it should be more 
strictly carried ont in the later work, as it extended over a larger 
number of years and embraced some reigns of considerable extent. 
Tacitus has, however, succeeded in depriving this arrangement of its 
monotonous character by abandoning it whenever the subject seemed 
to excuse his deviation from the traditional order. Niebuhr's distinction 
of the title of annales and historiae is too refined; see his Essay on 
the diflference between Annales and Historiae, Rh. Mus. II 2 (Bonn 
1828) p. 284 sqq. =: Minor Hist, and Phil. Essays II p. 229 sqq. (See 
37, 4 in the Add.) 

4. The first six books have been preserved only in the Medicean 
I (saec. XI), i. e. books I — IV complete, the commencement of b. V, 
after which there is a considerable gap, in which also the beginning 
of b. VI was lost. This gap contained the continuation of a. 29, the 
whole of a. 30, and the greater part of a. 31. This ms. was discovered 
in the Westphalian monastery of Corvey, was brought to Rome a. 1508 
when it came into the possession of the then Cardinal Medici (sub- 
sequently Pope Leo X) and hence finally found its way into the Me- 
dicean Library at Florence, where it remains up to the present day. 
A. 1515 the contents of this ms. were first published by Ph. Beroaldus, 
at Rome. Against the doubts of Fr. Ritter, on the age and origin of 
the first ms. of Tac. at Florence (Phil. XVII p. 662-672, see also his 
ed. of Tac, 1864, p. V sqq.) see L. Urlichs, Eos I p. 243—247. II p. 
223—232. The last third of the Annals (b. XI— XVI) we owe to the 
Mediceus II, in which it is preserved together with the first third of 
the History (see above 332, 5). But the beginning of b. XI, and about 
the second half of b. XI are wanting. This ms. is likewise at Florence, 
but there are a large number of copies of it; see above 332, 5. It is 
doubtful whether both these mss. are copies of one and the same ori- 



Tacitvf. 186 

ginal; though it is certain that Med. I is a copy of a Fulda ms. saec. 
IX, which was made either at or for Corvey in the eleventh century. 
The first part of this Corvey copy (which contained the Dialogus and 
the Germania) was sent to Hersfekl in the 13th century and there co- 
pied; subsequently it disappeared. The single parts of this third 
(Hersfeld) copy (of dial., Germ., Suet, de gramm. et rhetor.) were then 
in the 15th century carried to Italy (probably in a copy made by Henoch, 
see above 329, 4), and then the Agricola was added to them. L. Ur- 
lichs, 1. 1. especially II p. 232. 

5. C. Heraeus, studia critica in Mediceos Tac. codices, Cassel 1846, 
and on the criticism and explanation of Tac, Hamm 1859. 30 pp. 4. 
E. Wölfflin, Philol. XXVI p. 94-96. 

6. Editions of the Annals by Ruperti (Gotting. 1804. 2 vols.), Th. 
Kiessling (Lips. 1829), C. Nipperdey (Vol. I, Leipzig 1851. Berlin 1855. 
1862. 1864; Vol. II, Leipzig 1852. Berlin 1857), F. W. Otto (b. I— VI 
with extensive notes, Mayence 1854), Orelli-Baiter (Zürich 1859), A. 
Dräger (School-edition, Leipzig, Teubner 1861 sq. 2 vols). By the Rev. 
Percival Frost, London 1872. 

7. Contributions to the criticism and explanation of the Annals 
by J. P. E. Greverus (annotatiunculae, Oldenburg 1827. 4.), F. Jacob 
(Obss. ad T. Ann. et Hist., 4 parts, Lübeck 1837—1842. 4.), 0. Müller 
(de A. HI 55. Gotting. 1841. 4.), Bischoff (Obss. in libr. I, Wesel 
1845. 4.), C. Halm (Speier 1846. 4.), Schmoller (Explic. loci 1. I, Blau- 
beuren 1849. 4.), Held (ad loc. diffic. Schweidnitz 1851. 4.), Urlichs (in 
Jahn's Jahrbb. 1854, p. 52 sqq. 154 sqq. 300 sqq.), L. Spengel (on the 
first book of the A., München 1855. 4. = Commentations of the Munich 
Academy VII 2. p. 695—727; Notes on T. A., Philologus XXIII p. 
644—651), E. Wurm (Philologus VIII p. 361—370. IX p. 86—105), 
W. G. Pluygers (spec, emend., Leiden 1859. 4.), C. Sirker (Animad- 
vers., Treves 1860; Critical Observ. on T. A., Neuwied 1867. 4.), C. Krafft, 
(historical and geographical Excursuses on Tac. A. I and II, Maulbronn 
1864. 4.), Borghesi (see above 332, 7). 

8. E. Egli, On the wars in Armenia A. D. 41—63, a contribution 
to the criticism of Tac, in M. Büdinger's Investigations on the Impe- 
rial History of Rome I (Leipzig 1868) p. 265—363. H. T. Karsten, de 
Tac. fide in sex prioribus annalium libris, Utrecht 1868. R. Weide- 
mann, The sources of the first six books of T. Ann., Cleve 1868. 4. 
W. Pfitzner, a critical examination of the Annals. I (b. 1 — 6), Halle 
1869. Tacitus' account of the reign of the Emperor Tiberius (Ann. 
I — 6) translated and explained by A. Stahr, Berlin 1871. 0. Clason, 
de Tacit, annal. aetate quaestiones geographicae ad mare rubrum et 
Aegyptum maxime pertinentes, Rostock 1871. 58 pp. 

334. On the completion of his Annals Tacitus could sup- 
plement the historical account already ^iven by him either 



186 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 



r 



at the commencement or at the end, by relating the reign of 
Augustus or, as he had originally promised, those of Nerva 
and Trajan. It seems that he finally preferred the first sub- 
ject, either because it attracted him more or because Trajan 
was still reigning. Tacitus did not, however, carry out his 
intention, no doubt prevented by death. There are no other 
genuine writings by Tacitus. 

1. Hist. I 1: principatum d. Nervae et imperium Traiani . . se- 
nectuti seposiii. A. Ill 24: cetera illius aetatis (the Augustan) memo- 
rabo si efFeetis in quae tetendi phires ad curas vitam produxero. 

2. Fulgentius exposit. serm. antiq. p. 782 St. = p. 566 sq. M. : Cor- 
nelius Tacitus libro facetiarum : „cessit itaque morum elogio in filiis 
derelicto." Fr. Haase (Ed. p. XIV) considers this as some youthful work 
of Tacitus, but L. Müller (Fleck.'s Jahrb. 95, p. 789 sq.) is probably 
right in considering it as a forgery or as mere fiction. 

3. Complete editions of the works of Tacitus (cf. Panckoucke 
vol. VII: Bibliographie de 1055 editions de Tac.) : Ed. princeps, Venet. 
Vendelin. de Spira, c. 1470. fol. (A. XI— XVI, Hist., Germ., Dial.). Ed. 
Fr. Puteolanus (with Agr., Milan c. 1475. Venet. 1497. fol.), Ph. Be- 
roaldus, the first really complete edition, Rome 1515, and elsewhere, 
fol.), B. Rhenanus (Basle 1519. 1533. fob), Aid. (Venet. 1534), J. Lipsius 
(Antverp. 1574. 8. 1600. 4. 1607. 1668. fol. and elsewhere), C. Pichena 
(Florent. 1600. 4. Francof. 1607), J. Gruter (Frankf. 1607), M. Bernegger 
(Strasburg 1638. 1664), J. Fr. Gronovius (Amsterdam 1672. [1673.] 1685. 

2 vols), Th. Ryck (Leiden 1687. 12. 2 vols), J. and Abr. Gronovius (Ut- 
recht 1721. 4. 2 vols), J. A. Ernesti (Lips. 1752. 1772. 2 vols; a new 
ed. by J. J. Oberlin, Lips. 1801. 2 vols), J. Lallemand (Paris 1760. 12. 

3 vols), Gabr. Brotier (with Supplements in the manner of Freinsheim's 
supplements to Livy, Paris 1771. 4. 4 tomi. 1776. 7 tomi. 12. Edinburgh 
1796. 4. 4 tomi), Bipont. 1779. 1792. 4 vols. (cur. Fr. Chr. Exter), J- 
Naudet (Paris 1819. 6 vols.), Imm. Bekker (cum notis vir. doctt., 2 vols.. 
Lips. 1831), G. H. Walther (Halle 1831—1833. 4 vols.), G. A. Ruperti 
(Hannover 1832 sqq. 4 vols.), N. Bach (Lips. 1834 sq. 2 vols.), Fr. 
Ritter (recogn., brevi adn. instr., Bonn 1834—1836. 2 vols.; emend., 
comment, critico illustr., Cantabrig. 1848. 4 vols.; e codd. denuo col- 
latis rec. Lips. 1864), L. Döderlein (Halle 1841—1847. 2 vols.), G- L. F. 
Panckoucke (the text with a French translation, Paris 1840 sqq., 7 vols.), 
Fr. Diibner (concisa adnotatione, prooemio de grammatica Tac. et no- 
menclatore geographico explic, Paris 1845. 12.), J. C. Orelli (rec. atque 
interpr. est, Zürich 1846. 2 vols. Ed. II, vol. I, 1859). J. Stock (ed. 
illustr. Dublin 1862. 2 vols.). 

Texts by Imm. Bekker (Berol. 1825), Lünemann (Lips. 1825), Fr. 
Haase (Lips. Tauchnitz 1855, 2 vols.) and especially by C. Halm (Lips. 
Teubner 1850 sq.; iterum recogn. 1857, 2 vols. Cf. Munich Gel. Anz. 
1851, p. 31—63), and Mpperdey (Berol. 1871 sqq.) 



I 



TacUifs. Pliny the yoimaer. 187 

4. H. WölflFel, Emendationes in Cornelii Taciti libros, Nürnberg 
1856. 68 pp. 8. Fr. Ritter, Notes on Tacitus, Rhein. Mus. XVI. p. 454 
—469. XVII. p. 99—137. XX. p. 195-217. 518-532. X.KI. p. 534—550. 
Philologus XIX. p. 264-281. 665-679. XX. p. 109-127. 275—292. 
648—680. XXII. p. 48—62. 639—680. Fr. Thomae, Observationes cri- 
ticae in Corn. Taciturn, Bonn 1866. 52 pp. 8. E. Wölfflin, Annual 
Report on Tacitus, Philologus XXV. p. 92—134. XXVI. p. 92—166. 

335. The literary activity of Pliny the younger, the nephew 
and adopted son of the Elder, belongs to the time of Nerva and 
Trajan even more exclusively than that of Tacitus. C. Plinius 
Caocilius Secundus (A. D. 62—113) from Comum held public and 
municipal offices under Domitian, and finally the Consulate under 
Trajan (a. 100) and also the place of Imperial Legate in 
Bithynia (a. Ill sq. or Wl sq.). As Phny had frequently 
pleaded in lawsuits before the Centumviri and in the Criminal 
Courts, he began under Nerva to revise and publish his former 
speeches. We possess of him the speech in which he returned 
thanks for the Consulate, a work important enough in its 
bearing on the history of Trajan, but tiresome by loquacity 
and the bombastic praises bestowed upon the Emperor. Shortly 
after Nerva's accession to the throne, Pliny began to compose 
letters with a view to publication. Theie are altogether 
nine books of them, composed and successively edited from 
a. 97 — 108, to which is added Pliny's correspondence with 
Trajan during his presidency in Bithynia, though this is not 
finished. These letters extend in a studied variety over a 
large number of subjects, but are chiefly intended to exhibit 
their author in the most favourable light. Still the great can- 
dour with which the author confesses his vanity, and his evident 
love for good and noble aims compensate the impression of 
vanity. The diction is fluent and smooth. Pliny ventured 
even on the composition of verse, but of these lusus and 
ineptiae nothing has come down to posterity. 

1. Next to Cicero scarcely any other ancient writer is so well and so 
accurately known to us as Pliny, chiefly through his own works, but 
also through Inscriptions (collected by Mommsen Hermes III p. 108 — 113). 
The longest ijiscription concerns the thermae which he bequeathed to 
Comum in his will (T. F. I.), but which was somehow or other carried 
to Milan (Orelli - Henzen 1172, cf. Ill p. 124). He is there styled C. 
PHnius L. f. Guf. Caecilius Secundus, Cos., Augur, Legatus pro pr. pro- 
vinciae Ponti et Bithyniae consulari potestate, e[xSC. missus ab] Imp. 



188 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Caesare Nerva Traiano . . , Curator alvei Tiberis et riparum et cloacar. 
urb., Praef. aerari Saturni, Praef. aerari milit., [Praetor, Trib. pleb.,] 
Quaestor imp., Sevir equitum rom., Trib. milit. leg. Ill gallicae, Xvir 
stlitib. iudicand. ; on the inscription from Vercellae he is also called 
l'l(amen) divi T. Aug. (at Comum? Mommsen p. 99 sq.). In the reign 
of Domitian he was Quaestor Caesaris (Ep. VII 16, 2), probably from 
1 June 89 until 31 May 90 (Mommsen p. 86), trib. pleb. (Ep. I 23, 2 
sqq., cl. IV 16, 2. Panegyr. 95, probably 10 Decbr. 91 — 9 Dec. 92), 
praetor (Ep. Ill 11, 2. VII 11, 4. 16. Paneg. 95) c. 93 or 94 (Momm- 
sen p. 37 sq. 89); under Nerva (and Trajan) praef. aerari Sat. from 
January 98 until 100 or 101 (Mommsen p. 42. 89—91. Stobbe, Philo- 
logus XXVII p. 641); under Trajan he became cos. suff. with lulius 
Cornutus Tertullus 1 July — 30 Sept. or 1 Sept. — 31 Oct. 100 (Ep. V 
14, 5. Paneg. 60. 92. Mommsen p. 91—95), augur a. 103 or 104 (Ep. IV 
8. Mommsen p. 44. 95), curator alvei Tib. (Ep. V 14) probably 105 
—107 (Mommsen p. 47. 95), Legate in Bithynia a. Ill and 112 or 112 
113 (Mommsen p. 55. 96). Pliny appears to have died before 114 either 
in his province or soon after his return home (ibid. p. 99), at an age 
of perhaps 52 years, as he was 18 years on the 24 Aug. 79 (Ep. VI 
20, 5), and was born 61 — 62. Pliny was married three times, twice 
under Domitian (ad Trai. 2, 2), and the last time with Calpurnia (IV 19, 
cf. VI 4. 7. VIII 10 sq.), though without getting children. His pecuniary 
circumstances were splendid. J. Masson, C. Plini . . vita ordine chro- 
nologico digesta, Amsterdam 1709. Geisler, de Plinii min. vita, Breslau 
1862. 16 pp. 4. Tanzmann, de PI. vita, ingenio, moribus, Breslau 1865. 
Th. Mommsen, on the life of Pliny the younger, Hermes III p. 31 — 114 
(139). H. F. Stobbe, on the chronology of the letters of Pliny, Philol. 
XXX p. 347 — 393 (containing the actions against Prisons and Clas- 
sicus). 

2. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2126 =Trai. 13 = 110 A. D. (Petav. and 
Freher. ad 2125) : Plinius Secundus Novocomensis orator et historicus 
insignis habetur, cuius plurima ingenii opera extant. For his masters 
in eloquence see above 320, 4. Epist. V 8, 8: unodevicesimo aetatis 
anno dicere in foro coepi. I 18, 3 : causam luni Pastoris . . acturus 
adulescentulus adhuc, in quadruplici iudicio (cf. IV 24, 1). VI 12, 2: 
in arena mea, h. e. apud centum viros (cf. IV 16. IX 23, 1. Martial. X 
19, 14 sq.). Thus he pleaded for Arrionilla (Ep. I 5, 4 sqq., Attia Vi- 
riola (VI 33, 1 sq.), Corellia (IV 17, 1 u. 11), Vettius Priscus (VI 12,2). 
Also pro Firmanis (VI 18), pro Clario (IX 28, 5) and others Ep. VI 
29, 7 sqq. : egi quasdam a senatu iussus. . . (8.) adfui Baeticis contra 
Baebium Massam (together with Herennius Senecio, a. 93, cf. VII 33). 
. adfui rursus isdem querentibus de Caecilio Classico (a. 101, cf. I 
7, 2 sqq. Ill 4. 9). . . (9.) accusavi Marium Priscum (a. 99? cf. II 19,8. 
ad Trai. 3). . . (10.) tuitus sum lulium Bassum (after 105? cf. IV 9, 
4 sqq. 13, 1 sq.). . . (11.) dixi proxime pro Vareno (Rufo, a. 106 sq. 
cf. V 20. 2. VII 6. 10). Other criminal actions are mentioned Ep. 
Vn 6, 8-13. 



ii 



Pliny the yovnger. 189 

3. Pliny was accustomed to enlarge and revise, then to polish 
and finally to publish his speeches after much elaboration. Ep. IV 14, 1 . 
V 8, 6: egi raagnas et graves causas, has . . destino retractare, ne 
tantus ille labor meus . . mecum pariter intercidat. Cf. ib. 12. 1 sq 
VII 17. VIII 3, 2. IX 10, 2 sq. 15, 2. 28, 5 (est uberior, multa enim" 
postea inserui). Thus he edited the sermo quern apud municipes meos 
(decuriones) habui bybliothecam dedicaturus (I 8, 2 sqq. 16), an actio 
pro patria (II 5, 3), that pro lulio Basso (IV 9, 23), pro Vareno (V 

20, 2), pro Attia Viriola (VI 33, 1 sq. cf. Sid. Apoll. Ep. VIII 10), pro 
Clario (IX 28, 5). For others see VIII 19. IX 4. On his speech to 
Trajan see n. 12. But to the narrative kind (see IX 13, 14, cf. IV 21, 3 
the distinction between actio and libri) belonged Pliny's libelli de ultione 
Helvidi (to his accuser Publicius Certus) Ep. VII 30, 4 sq. IX 13, 1; 
also the panegyric life of young Vestricius Cottius (ib. Ill 10 cf. II 7). 
Pliny himself says of his speeches: temptavi imitari Demosthenen . . 
in contentione dicendi (Ep. I 2, 2 sq. cf. VII 30, 5) ; but even in his 
time there were some sober judges of his style (e. g. Lupercus), against 
whom he vainly attempts to defend himself by appealing to Demosthe- 
nes, Ep. 1X26, 5. ib. 5: visus es mihi in scriptis meis adnotasse quae- 
dam ut tumida quae ego sublimia, ut improba quae ego audentia, ut 
nimia quae ego plena arbitrabar. Cf. VII 12, 4: cum suspicarer futu- 
rum ut tibi tumidius videretur quoniam est sonantius et elatius. He 
vividly defends himself against the charge of not being sufficiently 
concise, ib. I 20, V 6, 42 sqq. cf. YI 2, 5 sqq. Macrob. V 1, 7: 
pingue et floridum (genus), in quo Plinius Secundus quondam et nunc . . 
Symmachus luxuriatur. 

4. Plin. Ep. VII 4, 1 sqq.: numquam a poetic e alienus fui: quin 
etiam quattuordecim natus annos graecam tragoediam scripsi. . . (3.) mox 
cum e militia rediens in Icaria insula ventis detinerer, latinos elegos 
in illud ipsum mare ipsamque insulam feci, expertus sum me aliquando 
et heroo, hendecasyllabis nunc primum. (7.) transii (from hexameters) 
ad elegos: hos quoque non minus celeriter explicui. addidi alios (iam- 
bos, according to Mommsen's emendation), facilitate corruptus. . . 
(8.) inde plura metra, si quid otii, maxime in itinere temptavi. postremo 
placuit exemplo multorum unum separatim hendecasyllaborum volumen 
absolvere. nee paenitet: legitur, describitur, cantatur etiam. The first 
mention of this collection occurs ib. IV 24, 2 sqq. accipies cum hac 
epistula hendecasyllabos nostros, quibus nos in vehiculo, in balineo, 
inter cenam oblectamus otium temporis. (3.) his iocamur, ludimus, 
amamus, dolemus, querimur, irascimur, describimus aliquid etc. (4.) 
ex quibus si non nulla tibi paulo petulantiora videbuntur etc. (8.) . . 
cogitare me has nugas inscribere Hendecasyllabi. Cf. V 3. 10. VIII 

21, 4 (liber et opusculis varius et metris). IX 10, 2 (poemata crescunt, 
according to Mommsen's emendation). 16, 2 (novos versiculos tibi . . 
mittemus). 25, 1 (lusus et ineptias nostras) and 3 (passerculis et colum- 
bulis nostris). Besides this, Pliny translated into Latin thee Greek 
epigrams of Arrius Antoninus (above 319, 4) about the same time (ib 



190 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

IV 18, cf. V 15). Hence perhaps Anthol. lat. 710 R. In general he 
confesses Ep. IX 29, 1 varus me studiorum generibus, nulli satis con- 
fisus, experior. 

5. Plin. Ep. I 1, 1: frequenter hortatus es ut epistulas, si quas 
paulo curatius scripsissem, colJigerem publicaremque. collegi non ser- 
vato temporis ordine (neque enim historiam componebam), sed ut quae- 
que in manus venerat. This pretended want of design can scarcely be 
admitted of the first book. On the contrary, Tillemont saw and Momm- 
sen (Hermes III p. 31 — 53) proved that the whole collection is arranged 
in chronological order, both as concerns the books and again in the 
letters themselves (Stobbe, Philol. XXVII p. 640 sq.). Like the works 
of Martial and Statius, the single books were published successively. 
Not a single letter obliges us to assume the beginning of the collection 
before the death of Domitian. The first book dates from the end of 
96 and a. 97, II from a. 97-100, HI a. lOl sq., IV a. 104 sq., V was 
published 106, VI a. 106 sq., VII a. 107? VIH and IX a. 107-109. 
The collection was published complete when Pliny set out for Bithynia, 
His correspondence with Trajan is generally arranged chronologically, 
and the Emperor's answer is added to each letter. The fifteenth 
letter down to 122 are of the time of his Bithynian presidency (Sept. 
Ill — Jan. 113), without, however, reaching its end. Mommsen 1. 1. p. 
36—59. 99. The persons addressed by Pliny are always denoted by 
two names in the first book, and generally so in b. IH — V, but in b. II 
and VI — IX always only by one. Cf. n. 10. 

6. It is evident that these letters were written with a view to pu- 
blication even from the very beginning. Every person mentioned in 
them and which is not either dead or exiled, is praised; the sole ex- 
ceptions being Regulus (above 321, 3) and perhaps lavolenus Priscus 
(see below 337, 3). The names ot all others are suppressed in case 
they are blamed (see H 6. VI 17. VII 26. VIH 22, 4. IX 12. 26, 1. 
27, 1). Each letter deals with only one subject, so that letters of in- 
troduction, congratulations and condolence succeed accounts ol news, 
descriptions (especially of villas), essays on points of morality (some- 
times very trivial, e. g. VII 26. IX 11) in intentional variety. Most of 
them are devoted to the good and excellent performances or clever 
sayings, to the principles, mode of life etc. of the author himself, 
and exhibit him as a tender husband, good friend, humane master of 
slaves, admired speaker or writer, noble-minded citizen, and liberal 
patron of good aims. On the other hand, the correspondence with 
Trajan serves to illustrate the patience and calm insight of the Emperor 
as contrasted with the fidgety and yet selfconscious bearing of his 
governor. In VIII 14, 12—14 the very great profusion of words with 
which a simple question is treated shows scanty practice in business- 
like habits. But the form and diction are treated with great care; cf. 
I 1 (n. 5) and VII 9, 8: volo epistulam diligentius scribas. . . pressus 
sermo purusque ex epistulis petitur. 



Flint/ the youncfer. I9l 

7. In his virtues and his weaknesses Pliny resembles his model 
Cicero (M. Tullius, quern aemulari studiis cupio, Ep. IV 8, 4 cf. I 5, 
11. IX 2, 2). He has his softness and thirst for praise, but is without 
his humour and malice as well as without his eminent talent. Pliny 
who is conscious of his limits always keeps his note-book at hand, not 
to lose the chance of a 'happy thought'. He candidly confesses: me 
nihil aeque ac diuturnitatis amor et cupido sollicitat, Ep. V 8, 1 cf. 
VIII 2, 8. IX 3, 1. 14. (nostro studio et labore et reverentia poste- 
rorum). 23. 31. His softness (mollitia animi mei, Ep. IV 21, 5) makes 
him indulgent in judging others, both in life (Ep. VIII 22. IX 17) and 
literature (VI 17. 21, 1) so that some blamed him tamquam amicos ex 
omni occasions ultra modum laudet (VII 28, 1), perhaps silently hoping 
an equal return. Owing to his mild and tender heart he deeply feels the 
loss of friends and relations, even of slaves (VIII 16) and easily sheds 
tears (e. g. V 21, 6. VIII 16. 5. 23, 8). He also has an open heart for 
the charms of inanimate nature (e. g. I 6, 2. 9, 6. II 17, 3 sqq. V 6, 
13 sq. VI 31, 15 sqq. VIII 8. 20, 4 sqq. 10: me nihil aeque ac na- 
turae opera delectant. IX 7, 2 sqq. H. Motz, on the perception of 
natural beauty p. 68 — 73 and elsewhere). This quality frequently 
approaches downright softheartedness and womanly conduct ; e. g. VI 4. 
VII 5. On the whole, Pliny may be said to be great in nothing and 
small in many things, but he always aimed at good ends (VIII 2, 2: 
mihi egregium in primis videtur . . agitare iustitiam) and avoided 
vulgarity. 

8. Chr. ß. Lehmus, on the character of Pliny the younger, Soest 
1776. J. A. Schäfer, (same title) Ansbach 1786—1791. 4. G. E. Gierig, 
on the life, moral character, and literary position of Pliny the younger, 
Dortmund 1798. E. Cauvet, etude sur Pline le jeune, Toulouse 1857. 
Grasset, Pline le j., sa vie et ses oeuvres, Montpellier 1865. 187 pp. 

J. Held, on the value of the correspondence of Pliny the younger 
in its bearing upon Roman literature, Breslau 1833. 

Wensch, lexici pliniani spec. I. U. Wittenberg 1837. 1839. 4. H. 
Holstein, de PI. min. elocutione, Naumburg 1862. 36 pp. 4.; disp. altera, 
Magdeburg (Lips. Teubner) 1869. 26 pp. 4. Cf. E. Klussmann, Philol. 
Anz. 1870, p. 159—165. 

9. Apoll. Sidon. Ep. IX 1 : addis et causas quibus hie liber nonus 
octo superiorum voluminibus adcrescat, quod C. Secundus, cuius nos 
orbitas sequi hoc opere pronuntias, paribus titulis opus epistulare de- 
terminet. The correspondence with Trajan was arbitrarily counted as 
the tenth book by Aldus and is now not found in any ms. But in 
the 16th century there was one still extant in France, from which the 
last 81 letters were edited by H. Avantius (1502) and others (Ph. Be- 
roaldus 1502, Catanaeus Mil. 1506), the others (1 — 41) being added by 
Aldus 1508 from the ms. which had meanwhile been brought to Italy. 
Subsequent editors changed the order, by placing together all letters 
.Niithout answers and those to which Trajan's reply is given. But 



192 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Keil has restored the original order, though not counted nr. 4. The first 
methodical treatment of these letters by J. C. Orelli, Turici 1833, emen- 
ded and augmented with a historia critica epistolarum Plinii et Traiani, 
ind. lect., Turici 1838. 4. Other contributions by J. Held (Prolegg. ad 
etc., Schweidnitz 1835. 4.), Gr. Thomsen (Dansk Maanedskrift 1858, p. 
425-455. 1859, p. 152—158), Holm (ibid. 1859, p. 158—168) and J. L. 
Ussing (om de k. Tr. tillagte breve til PI., Copenhagen 1861. 26 pp. 4). 

10. The only manuscript which contains all the nine books of 
letters is the Mediceus (M) saec. X, of which Titze's Prague Ms. is a 
faulty copy. From the same source as M is derived the Vatican ms. 
3864 (V) saec. X, which, however, contains only b. I — IV. All the other 
mss. are later and contain either only b. I — V 6 (together 100 letters) 
e. g. especially the Florentinus (F) saec. XI and the lost Riccardianus, 
(employed by Corte), or only eight books, omitting b. VIH and coun- 
ting IX as the eighth, and giving also the last book and the fifth in 
bad order. The earliest ms. of this kind is the codex archivii Cassi- 
natis 332 of a. 1429. Also the Dresdensis (D) belongs to the same 
class, though in this as well as in others the text is corrected accor- 
ding to a copy of the class containing 100 letters. D and M give only 
one name to the person addressed, while F and Riccard. have frequently 
preserved both names (cf, n. 5 fin.). All mss., however, contain numerous 
arbitrary changes and interpolations by the grammarians. See H. Keil's 
preface to his edition, and De Plinii epistulis emendandis disp. I (Er- 
langen 1865. 23 pp. 4.) and II (Erl. 1866. 23 pp. 4.). 

11. The first edition of the letters (Venet. 1471) contained only 
eight books, that by J. Schurener (Rome 1474?) added part of b. VIII 
without 8, 3 — 18, 11). The first complete edition is the Aldine, Venet. 
1508. from a ms. different from M. Subsequent editions by J. Gruter 
(1611), J. Veenhusen (cum notis Casaub., Gruteri, J. Fr. Gronovii etc., 
Lugd. B. 1669), G. Cortius et P. D. Longolius (Amstelod. 1734. 4.). Ed. 
F. N. Titze, Prague 1820. A Selection with notes by G. A. Herbst, Halle 
1839. With a commentary by M. Döring, Freiberg 1843, 2 vols. 

12. The speech in which Pliny returns thanks to Trajan for con- 
ferring the Consulate upon him (Ep. II 1, 5. Ill 13. 18. IV 5, VI 27, 
2 sq. Paneg. 1, 6. 2, 3. 3, 1. 90, 3) is called Panegyric us as early 
as by Sidonius Apollinaris Ep. VIII 10. 'It is very probable that it 
lost by being enlarged and by too careful elaboration, when it was 
subsequently written down. As we have it now, pompous and loqua- 
cious, full of flattery in the guise of candour . . we understand the 
judgment of F. A. Wolf (praef. to Cic. p. Marcell. p. XII): enecuisset 
principem novus consul si ita dixisset ut scripsit". M. Hertz, Renais- 
sance etc. p. 11. It has come down to us in two texts, both corrupt. 
The earlier text is represented by the three palimpsest leaves (saec. 
VI— VIII) from Bobio published by A. Mai in his edition of Syramachus 
(Mediol. 1815), more accurately by H. Keil, de schedis Ambrosianis re- 
scriptis paneg. PL, Halle 1869. 16 pp. 4. The other consists of mss 



Pliny the yomiger and other orators. 193 

of the fifteenth century (e. g. Vat. 3461) all copied from a ms. of the 
panegyric! seen a. 1433 at Mayence by J. Aurispa; H. Keil, Jo. Aurispae 
epistula, Halle 1870. 4. 

This speech was edited originally in the Panegyrici veteres of Pu- 
teolanus, Cuspinianus (1513) and others, then cum comment. J. Lipsii, 
Antverp. 1600. 1604. 4. and elsewhere Emend. J. M. Gesner, Gotting. 
1735. 1749. Cum notis varr. cur. J. Arntzen, Amstelod. 1738. 4. Cum 
comm. edit. C. G. Schwarz, Norimb. 1746. 4. Rec. G. E. Gierig, Lips. 
1796. Texte revu par Fr. Dübner, Paris 1843. 

Critical contributions by J. C. Held, Observationes in PL paneg., 
Baireuth 1824. 4. H. Haupt, Hermes V p. 26—28. J. Dierauer, On 
the Paneg. of Pliny, in M. Biidinger's Investigations on the Imperial 
period I (1868) p. 187—217. 

13. Complete editions (cf. n. 11) especially by H. Stephanus (cum 
notis Is. Casauboni, Paris 1591), M. Z. Boxhorn (Lugd. B. 1653), J. M. 
Gesner (Lips. 1739. 1770; cum notis varr. ed. G. H. Schaefer, Lips. 
1805), G. E. Gierig (rec. et prolegg. instr.. Lips. J 806), H. Keil (recogn.. 
Lips. 1853, Bibl. Teubner), especially his large edition (with index no- 
minum by Mommsen), Lips. Teubner 1870. 

336. Besides these two greatest orators of this period 
we know^ from Pliny of a large number of men of all conditions 
who pleaded before the Senate and in the Law - Courts, 
and some of whom also published their speeches. Thus we 
may mention especially Pompeius Saturninus, who also com- 
posed verse, and Voconius Romanus. The great number of 
these practical speakers and the decided preference they seem 
to have met with in comparison with the school-rhetoricians 
are proofs of the great importance public life had regained. 
A respectable representative of this scholastic eloquence is 
P. Annius Fl or us by whom we possess an interesting frag- 
ment of some length and who is also known as poet. Historical 
writing exhibits (independently of Tacitus) a certain fondness 
of biography (Claudius Pollio, C. Fannius, Pliny) and a prefe- 
rence for relating recent events (Pompeius Planta). 

1. Plin. Ep. I 16, 1: Pompeium Saturninum. . . (2.) audivi 
causas agentem . . polite et ornate etc. (3.) senties quod ego cum 
orationes eius in manus sumpseris, quas facile cui libet veterum, quo- 
rum est aemulus, comparabis. (4.) idem tamen in historia magis satis- 
faciet etc. (5.) praeterea facit versus quales Catullus aut Calvus. quan- 
tum (in) illis leporis etc. (6.) legit mihi nuper epistulas : . . Plautum 
vel Terentium metro solutum legi credidi. To him ib. I 8. V 21 
(, 1: litterae tuae . . te recitaturum statim ut venissem poUicebantur). 
Vn 7. 15. IX 38. 

13 



194 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

2. Plin. Ep. II 13, 4: Vocouius Roman us . . (7.) ad hoc in- 
genium excelsum, subtile, dulce, facile, eruditum in causis agendis. 
epistulas quidem ecribit ut Musas ipsas latine loqui credas. To him 
ib. I 5. Ill 13. IX 28 (, 3: nuntias multa te nunc dictare nunc scri- 

bere quibus nos tibi repraesentes) and others ad Trai. 4, 4: pro mo- 

ribus Romani mei, quos et liberalia studia exornant et eximia pietas. 

He is probably C. Licinius C. f. Gal. Marinus Voconius Romanus, C. I. 

lat. II 3866 cf. 3865 a. 

3. Suet. Vesp. 13: Salvium Liberalem in defensione divitis 
rei ausum dicere . . et ipse laudavit (Vesp.). Under Domitian he was 
exiled. Plin. Ep. II 11, 17: postero die (a, 100) dixit pro Mario Salvius 
Liberalis, vir subtilis, dispositus, acer, disertus. Cf. ib. Ill 9, 36 
(a, 101). Cons, probably under Nerva (Orelli 1170 and the acta of the 
fratres arvales, to whom he belonged since 1 May 78: C. Salvius C. 
f. Vel. Liberalis Nonius Bassus); see Pauly's Encycl. I 2 p. 2298, no. 35 
and the Index of KeiPs Pliny (1870) p. 424. 

4. As practical orators Pliny mentions also the following: Catius 
Fronto (Ep. II 11, 3 and 18. IV 9, 15. VI 13, 2), Claudius Capito 
(VI 13, 2), Claudius Marcellinus (II 11, 15), Claudius Restitutus (III 
9, 16), Cornehus Minicianus (VII 22), Cremutius Ruso (VI 23, 2), Eru- 
cius Clarus (Cos. 117, vir . . disertus atque in agendis causis exercita- 
tus, ib. II 9, 4 cf. Dio LXVIII 30), Fabius Hispanus (facundia validus, 
ib. Ill 9, 12), C. Fannius (see n. 8), Fuscus Salinator (VI 11. 26), 
Herennius Pollio (IV 9, 14), lulius Africanus (VII 6, 11), the grandson 
of the orator of the same name (above 292, 4), Lucceius Albinus 
(III 9, 7. IV 9, 13), Minicius (lustus? cf. ib. VII 11, 4), whose style 
is characterized by tenuitas (VII 12, 5) ; Pomponius Rufus (IV 9, 3), 
Titius Homullus (Ep. IV 9, 15. V 20, 6), Trebonius Rufinus (IV 22, 1 sq.), 
Tuscilius Nominatus (V 4, 1 sq. 13, 1 sqq.), Varisidius Nepos (IV 4, 1), 
Ummidius Quadratus (VI 11, VII 24; Cons. a. 118). 

5. Plin. Ep. VI 5, 6: et (luventius) Celsus (below 319, 2) Nepos 
ex libello respondit (in the Senate) et Celso (Licinius) Nepos ex pugil- 
laribus. V 13, 6 sq.: Nigrinus trib. pleb. recitavit (in the Senate) libel- 
lum disertiim et gravem, quo questus est «vaenire advocationes etc. cf. 
V 20, 6 (dixit . . Nigrinus presse, graviter, ornate). 

6. As school-declaimers we know in this time (except Licinianus, 
above 321, 15) the following — Isaeus (Plin. Ep. II 3. Juv. 3, 74. Philostr. 
vit. soph. I 20) and lulius Genitor (rhetor latinus, Plin. Ep. Ill 3, 3 sqq. 
to him ib. Ill 11. VII 30. IX 17), also Vettius (Juv. 7, 150). Suetonius 
too, is called scholasticus by Plin. Ep. I 24, 4. cf. 18, 1 (ne quid ad- 
versi in actione patiaris). 

7. The introduction to P. Annius Florus' dialogue on the 
question Vergilius orator an poeta was discovered by Th. Oehler in a 
Brussels ms. and first edited and commented on by F.Ritschl (Rh. Mus. I. 
1842. p. 302—314), then in the editions of lulius Florus (below 343) by 



J 



Orators: Annius Flurns and others. 195 

0. Jahn p. XLI-XLIV and by Halm p. 106—109. Contributions to the 
criticism of the text by J. Freudenberg (Rh. Mus. XXII p. 30 sq.) and 
E. Bährens (lect. latt., Bonn 1870, p. 19—22), From this dialogus we 
gather that the author appeared in the Capitoline contest at Rome as 
puer sub Domitiano, but was not crowned owing to partiality; dismayed 
by which he started on his journeys, finally settled at Tarraco and de- 
voted himself to professio litterarum. There his 'interlocutor' meets 
him and puts the question: quid tu tam diu in hac provincia? nee . . 
urbem illam revisis ubi versus tui a lectoribus concinuntur et in foro 
omni clarissimus ille de Dacia triumphus (of Trajan, a. 102 or 106) 
exultat? And indeed in the reign of Adrian we see him at Rome, as 
he is no doubt the Florus poeta with whom Adrian exchanged jocular 
poetry (Spartian. Hadr. 16) ; cf. Charis. I p. 53, 14 and 140, 6 K. (Annius 
Florus ad divum Hadrianum: poematis delector). 123, 17 (Florus ad 
divum Hadrianum). It is also quite credible that he is the author of 
the pleasing 26 trochaeic sententious tetrameters which are in the 
codex Salmasianus and Thuaneus entitled Flori de qualitate vitae 
(Nr. 245—252 in A. Riese, Anthol. lat. p. 168—170) and of the five 
hexameters Flori on roses (ib. Nr. 87, p. 101). Both in L. Miiller's 
edition of Rutil. Nam. p. 26—31. E. H. 0. Müller, de P. Annio Floro 
poeta et carmine quod Pervigilium Veneris incriptum est, Berlin 1855. 
46 pp. On his relation to the Florus of the Bella see below 343, 1. 

8. Plin. Ep. V 5, 1 : nuntiatum mihi est C. Fannium decessisse, 
. . hominem elegantem, disertum etc. (2.) . . pulcherrimum opus imper- 
fectum reliquit. (3.) quamvis enim agendis causis distringeretur, scribe- 
bat tarnen exitus occisorum aut relegatorum a Nerone et iam tres libros 
absolverat, subtiles et diligentes et latinos atque inter sermonem histo- 
riamque medios, ac tanto magis reliquos perficere cupiebat quanto 
frequentius hi lectitabantur. Cf. ib. 5: primum librum quem de scele- 
ribus eius (of Nero) ediderat etc. 

9. Schol. Vallae on Juv. 2, 99: quod bellum (of Galba, Otho, Vi- 
tellius) descripsit Cornelius Tacitus, post Cornelium vero, ut Probus 
inquit, Pompeius Planta, qui ait Bebriacum etc. Plin. Ep. IX 1 
(Maximo suo), 1 : saepe te monui ut libros quos vel pro te vel in Plan- 
tam . . composuisti quam maturissime emitteres : quod nunc praecipue 
morte eius audita et hortor et moneo. He is probably the Pomp. 
Planta mentioned by Pliny ad Trai. 7 and 10 as praefectus Aegypti,, 
and Maximus is that Nonius Maximus whose libri are praised by Pliny 
Ep. IV 20, and to whom also Ep. V 5 (see n. 8) is addressed. A Mes- 
sius Maximus ibid. Ill 20. IV 25. 

10. On an anonymous person who 'recitaverat verissimum librum' 
on recent events, see Plin. Ep. IX 27. Cf. ib. 31 (Sardo): legi librum 
tuum, identidem repetens ea maxime quae de me scripsisti. 

11. Plin. Ep. VII 31, 5: Claudius Pollio quam fideliter amicos 
colat multorum supremis iudiciis, in his Anni Bassi, gravissimi civis^ 
credere potes, cuius memoriam tam grata praedicatione prorogat . . 



196 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

ut librum de vita eius (nam studia quoque sicut alias bonas artes vene- 
ratur) ediderit. 

12. Pliny hints (Ep. V 8) that after the revision and edition of 
his letters he intended to turn to historical composition. But the bril- 
liant performances of Tacitus were calculated to deter him, and his 
rhetorical and biographic works on Helvidius and Vestricius Cottius 
(above 335, 3) remained his sole achievement in the department of 
history. The conjecture of H. Nissen (Rh. M. XXVI p. 544—548) that 
Pliny took a share in the edition and prejDaration of his uncle's history 
(see above 307, 5) is not very convincing. 



337. Jurisprudence is represented under Trajan by a 
number of excellent men. Thus we mention the last Proculians 
Neratius and Juventius Celsus who both attained the consular 
dignity and were advisers of Adrian, both also fertile writers. 
On the side of the Sabinians w^e have Javolenus Priscus, and 
probably Pliny's friend Titius Aristo, a man of great strength 
of character, also Minicius who was commented on by 
Salvius JuHanus. Of less importance and less known are 
Laelius Felix, Varius Lucullus, Arrianus, Octavenus, Vivianus, 
and others. 

1. Pompon. Dig. I 2, 2, 53: successit . . patri Celso Celsus filius 
et Priscus Neratius, qui utrique consules fuerunt, Celsus quidem et 
iterum (see n. 2), but Ner. Pr. probably with the grandfather of M. 
Aurelius, Annius Verus (Dig. XLVIII 8, 6), probably under Domitian, 
perhaps a. 83 according to Sickel and Borghesi in Mommsen I. R. N. 
4931 (from Altilia): L. Neratio L. f. Vol. Prisco, praef. aer. Sat., Cos., 
Leg. pr. pr. in prov. Pannonia (a. 98), in exact agreement with which 
we have ibid. 4932 from Saepinum, in which also a younger Ner. Pr. 

(son to the jurist?) is mentioned (L. Neratius L. f. Vol. Pr 

Vllvir epul., leg. Aug. pr. pr. . . . inferiore et Pannonia), whom Dirksen 
(Commentations of the Berl. Acad. 1852, p. 202—204) considered to be 
the jurist, relying on a spurious inscription (of Pratilli), Orelli 753 = 
Mommsen 520*). Spart. Hadr. 18, 1 : cum iudicaret in consilio habuit 
. . iurisconsultos et praecipue lulium Celsum (cf. Muratori Inscr. p. 2005, 
1. Orelli 2369), Salvium lulianum, Neratium Priscum aliosque according 
to which Neratius must have attained to a high old age. His influence 
was greatest under Trajan; see Spart. Hadr. 4, 8: frequens opinio fuit 
Traiano id animi fuisse ut Neratium Priscum . . successorem relinqueret, 
. . usque eo ut Prisco aliquando dixerit: commendo tibi provincias, si 
quid mihi fatale contigerit. Cf. Dig. XXXVII 12, 5: divu3 Traianus 
. consilio Neratii Prisci et Aristonis etc. About 64 passages of his 
works are inserted into the Digest (see Hommel, Palingenesia I. p. 501 
— 512) : Responsorum libri HI, Membranarum libri VII and Regularum 



Jurists: Jitventhis Celsits and others. 197 

libri XV; there are also quoted Neratius libro IV° Epistolarum (Dig. 

XXXIII 7, 12. § 35 and 43; from which is perhaps epistola Neratii ad 
Aristonem, ib. XIX 2, 19, 2), libri ex Plautio (Dig. VIII 3, 5, 1 see 
above 311, 5) and a liber de nuptiis (Gellius IV 4, 4). See also n. 3. 
J. C. Sickel, de Neratio Prisco icto, Lips. 1788. 4. Rudorff, History 
of Ptoman Law I p. 181 sq. K.Viertel, de vitis ictorum (1868) p. 26— 30. 

2. P. luventius Celsus T. Aufidiiis Hoenius Severianus (Dig. V 
3, 20, 6. Orelli-Henzen 7182), son to the Jurist luv. Celsus (above 
311, 4) one of the conspiracy against Domitian a. 95 (Dio LXVII, 13), 
Praetor 106 or 107 (Plin. Ep. VI 5, 4), Cons. I probably under Trajan, 
II under Hadrian a. 129 (Dig. 1. 1. Cod. lust. VII 9, 3. Gruter p. 573,2). 
His works : Digestorum libri XXXIX, arranged in agreement with Adrian's 
code of laws (b. 1 — 12 and 24 — 27 according to the order of the edict, 
b. 13 — 23 on wills and legacies, 28 — 39 on other points of Civil Law), 
142 passages of which occur in the Digest, very lengthy ones VIII 6, 6. 
XXVm 5, 59. XXXm lO, 7. XLVH 2, 67; see also fragm. Vat. 75. 
77. 79. 80. Merely quoted are his Commentarii in at least 7 books (Dig. 

XXXIV 2, 19, 6). Epistolae in at least 11 (ib. IV 4, 3, 1) and Quae- 
stiones in at least 19 books (ib. XII 1, 1. XXVIII 5, 9, 2. XXXIV 
2, 19, 3): In these fragments Celsus appears fond of appealing to the 
Jurists of the Republic (especially Servius, Labeo and Tubero) and 
frequently alleges oral explanations by his father (Dig. XXXI 20: et 
Proculo placebat et a patre sic accepi. ib. 29: pater mens referebat 
etc.). Grecisms Dig. XIII 3, 3. XXXIII, 10, 7. He displays much 
sharpness and at times even rudeness. The earlier Jurists called a 
rude reply to a foolish question 'responsio Celsina' to a 'quaestio Do- 
mitiana', on account of Dig. XXVIII 1, 27: Domitius Labeo Celso suo 
salutem. Quaero an etc. (whether a lawyer who had drawn up a will 
might also witness it). luventius Celsus Labeoni suo salutem. Aut 
non intellego quid sit de quo me consulis aut valide stulta est con- 
sultatio tua. plus enim quam ridiculum est dubitare an aliquis etc. 
Cf. ib. HI 5, 10, 1 : istam sententiam Celsus eleganter deridet. Hom- 
mel. Palingenesia I p. 149 — 172. Heineccius, de P. luventio Celso Icto 
eximio, Frankf. a. 0. 1727. 4. = 0pp. II. p. 518—532. Rudorff, Hist, 
of Roman Law I p. 181. 

3. Pompon. 1. 1. (see n. 1): successit . . Caelio Sabino Prisons 
lavolenus, .. lavoleno Prisco Aburnius Valens et Tuscianus, item 
Salvius lulianus. Dig. XL 2, 5: lulianus: . . ego, qui meminissem la- 
volenum, praeceptorem meum, et in Africa et in Syria servos suos ma- 
numississe cum consilium praeberet. Plin. Ep. VI 15 : Passennus 
Paulus . . scribit elegos. . . is cum recitaret ita coepit dicere: 'Prisce, 
iubes.' ad hoc lavolenus Priscus (aderat enim, ut Paulo amicissimus) : 
'ego vero non iubeo.' cogita qui risus hominum. . . est omnino Pris- 
cus dubiae sanitatis, interest tamen officiis, adhibetur consiliis atque 
etiam ius civile publice respondet. There may have been little fear of 
his sanitas or even deliratio (ib. 4). Pliny has no perception of a joke 
and his vanity was perhaps offended by lavolenus. It is very doubtful 



198 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

whether lavolenus was still alive under Pius, as the mss. have Diabo- 
leno Capitol. Ant. Pi. 12, 1. His juridical works are excerpted in the 
Digest in 206 places. We know as such: libri XV ex Cassio, Episto- 
larum libri XIV, ad Plautium or ex Plautio libri V, libri ex Posterio- 
ribus Labeonis or Posteriorum Labeonis (above 260, 2) a lavoleno epi- 
tomatorura, at least six. Ilommel, Paling. I p. 197 — 220. It is questio- 
nable whether in those places where Priscus is merely mentioned he 
is meant or Neratius; for Dig. VII 8, 10, 2 (et Priscus et Neratius pu- 
tant) Mommsen follows the translation of Stephanos (xai (fuai ÜQoxovkkog 
Tf (cua y.cu NfQcniog) in writing et Proculus et Neratius. G. A. Jenichen, 
de Pr. lav. icto incomparabili, Lips. 1734. 4. H. van Alphen, spicilegia 
de I. Pr, icto, Utrecht 1768 and in Oelrichs thesaur. nov. Ill 1. J. G. 
Lindner, prolusio de I. Pr. ad Plin. Ep. VI 15, Arnstadt 1770. 4. 
C. L. Neuber, on the Classical Writers on Roman Law (Berl. 1806) p. 
146-182. 

4. Plin. Ep. I 22, 1 sqq. (c. a. 100) : perturbat me longa et per- 
tinax valetudo Titi Aristonis, quern singulariter et miror et diligo. 
nihil est enim illo gravius, sanctius, doctius etc. (2.) quam peritus ille 
et privati iuris et publici; quantum reruni, quantum exemplorum, quan- 
tum antiquitatis tenet! etc. (3.) . . et tamen plerumque haesitat, du- 
bitat diversitate rationum, quas acri magnoque iudicio ab origine cau- 
sisque primis repetit etc. (6.) in summa, non facile quemquam ex istis 
qui sapientiae studium habitu corporis praeferunt huic viro comparabis. 
. . in toga negotiisque versatur, multos advocatione, plures consilio 
iuvat. From the succeeding observations it also becomes certain that 
he professed the Stoic system. At that time he recovered, as we find 
that Pliny addressed to him Ep. V .3 (Titio Aristoni suo) a. 105 and 
VIII 14 a. 108 (1 : cum sis peritissimus et privati iuris et publici etc. 
10: scientia tua, cui semper fuit curae iura . . sic antiqua ut recentia 
. . tractare). Dig. XXXVII 12, 5 (above n. 1). Pliny does not mention 
any writings by him, nor are any excerpted in the Digest, though oc- 
casionally (especially by Pomponius, below 345, 8) his notes (notat, ad- 
notat etc.) on (Labeo, Cassius and) Sabinus (according to which Aristo 
was a Sabinian), Dig. II 14, 7, 2 (eleganter Aristo Celso respondit). 
IV 8, 40 (Cassium audisse se dicentem Aristo ait). XX 3, 3 (Aristo 
Neratio Prisco scripsit etc. Cf. XL 4, 46). VII 1, 7, 3. VII 8, 6 (Ar. 
apud Sabinum). XXVIII 5, 17, 5. XXIX 7, 9. XXXIII 9, 3, 1. fragm. 
Vat. 68. 83. 88. 199; once (Dig. XXIX 2, 99) Aristo in decretis Fron- 
tinianis (above 322?). Gell. XI 18, 16: memini legere me in libro Ari- 
stonis icti, haudquaquam indocti viri, etc. Dig. XXXVII 5, 6 (when 
Salvius Aristo addresses a legal question to Julianus) we should pro- 
bably strike out Salvius or at all events some other Aristo should be 
understood. J. J. Enschede, de T. A., Lugd. B. 1829. Th. Mommsen, 
Zeitschr. für Rechtsgesch. VII Weimar 1868) p. 474—478 IX. p. 87 
sq. n. 13. 

5. Dig. XLI 1, 19: Aristo ait; . . quod et Varium LucuUum ali- 



I 



Jvrists: Aristo, Minicws and others. 199 

quando dubitasse. He must, therefore, have been an older contempo- 
rary of Aristo. Mommsen: Varronem Luculhim (cf. Cic. p. Tull. 8)? 

6. A certain Minicius is known as a writer on law by the notes 
of Julian on his work which are quoted 40 times in the Digest (ex 
Minicio, apud or in Minicium). Very doubtful is his identity with the 
(L.) Minicius Natalis to whom divus Traianus rescripsit (Dig. 11 12, 9), 
who was Consul a. 107 together with Q. Licinius Granianus (Mommsen 
I. R. N. 4496. Bull, archeol. 1846 p. 42) repeatedly mentioned in in- 
scriptions as well as his son who bore the same name (L. Minicius 
L. f. Gal. Natalis Quadronius Yerus, cos., procos. prov. Africae etc.), 
the praef. rei alimentariae under Adrian. Annali dell' inst. arch. 1849 
p. 223—226. E. Hübner, Monthly Reports of the Berl. Ac. 3860, p. 232 
sq. F. Kämmerer, de Minicio Natali icto romano, Rostock 1839. K. 
Viertel, de vitis ictorum p. 20 — 26. 

7. Gellius XV 27, 1 : in libro Laelii Felicis ad Q. Mucium (above 
141, 2) primo scriptum est Labeonem (above 260, 1 sq.) scribere etc. 
Cf. ib. 4: in eodem Laeli Felicis libro haec scripta sunt etc. (on repu- 
blican institutions, especially the comitia). He is perhaps the jurist 
Laelius who was still alive under Adrian, see Dig. V 4, 3: Laelius 
scribit se vidisse . . mulierem quae ab Alexandria perducta est ut Ha- 
driano ostenderetur. Cf. ib. XXXIV 5, 7. Also ib. V 3, 43 (idque et 
Laelius probat). Mercklin, Philologus XVI p. 168 — 172, refers to him 
also Macrob. I 6, 13 (M. Laelius augur refert etc.) and Gell. XIII 
14, 7: quod ego in Elydis, grammatici veteris, commentario offendi, 
reading there Felicis (cf. Rhein. Mus. XVIII p. 297—300), but M. Hertz 
(Rhein. Mus. XVII p. 580 sqq.) proposes Heraclidis with more pro- 
bability. 

8. Ulpian. Dig. V 3, 11: Arrianus libro II de interdictis. XLIII 
3, 1, 4: bellissime Arrianus scribit. Cf. XXVIII 5,19: quam sententiam 
et lavolenus probat et Pomponius et Arrianus. XXXVIII 10, 5 (from 
Paulus). XLIV 7, 47 (from Paulus). He is perhaps the Arrianus Ma- 
turus to whom Pliny addressed Ep. 12. II 11 sq. IV 8. 12. VI 2. 
VIII 21. Cf. ibid. Ill 2, 2 sqq. A certain Arrianus Severus, praef. 
aerarii in the time after Trajan, Dig. XLIX 14, 42 (from Aburius 
Valens). 

9. Dig. XXXVIII 1, 47 from Aburius Valens: Campanus scribit 
etc. Cf. Pompon, ib. XL 5, 34, 1 from Pomponius: Campanus ait etc. 

10. Dig. XXXI 49, 2: quod (Labeonis) merito Priscus Fulci- 
nius falsum esse aiebat. XXV 2, 3, 4 : Mela, Fulcinius aiunt. XXXIX 
6, 43 froni Neratius libro I Responsorum: Fulcinius (putat or dicit) etc. 
Cf. XXIV 1, 29 (from Pomponius): . . Fulcinius scripsit. XXV 1, 1, 3 
(Fulcinius inquit). 

11. Paulus Dig. IV 6, 35, 9: Vi vi anus scribit Proculum (above 
276, 5) respondisse; and XIII 6, 17, 4: Vivianus scripsit. Cf. XXIX 



200 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

7, 14: quidam referunt . . apud Vivianum Sabini et Cassii et Proculi 
expositam esse controversiam. See also ib. IX 2, 27, 24. XIX 5, 17, 
XXI 1, 1, 9. 17, 3. below n. 13. K. Viertel p. 15 sq. places him before 
Celsus and Octavenus. 

12. Dig. XXIII 2, 44, 3 (from Paulus): Octavenus ait. XL 9, 
32, 2 (from Terentius Clemens) : idem Octavenus probat. Pomponius 
Dig. XL 5, 20 (bellissime Aristo et Oct. putabant) and 4, 61, 2 (hoc 
amplius Oct. aiebat). XXX 9 (0. scripsit). FromDosith. 12 it appears 
that he knew the lex lunia Norbana of a. 772. But he is not acquain- 
ted with the Sctum luventianum and should, therefore, be placed 
later than Trajan. K. Viertel, .de vitis ictorum (Königsb. 1868) p. 13 — 15. 

13. Dig. XXXVII 14, 10 from Terentius Clemens: id etiam Pro- 
culo placuisse Servilius refert, where Mommsen thinks of placuisse Vi- 
viano (n. 11). 

14. Dig. Ill 5, 30 from lulianus : Valerius Severus respondit etc. 
Cf. Ulp. ib. Ill 3, 8 pr. : Valerius Severus scribit. One C. Val. Sev. was 
COS. suff. 124 A. D. Orelli-Henzen 5455. 

15. Dig. XXXVII 12, 3 from Paul. VIII ad Plaut.: Paconius ait. 
Against the conjectures proposed by A. Schmidt in Bekker and Muther's 
Jahrb. d. gem. Rechts III 1859. p. 391 sqq. see K. Viertel, de vitis 
ictorum p. 10 — 13. 

338- The principal grammarians in the time of Trajan 
were Urbanus, Velius Longus, and probably also Flavins 
Capei% Under the name of Caper we possess two small 
treatises de orthographia and de verbis dubiis, which are, 
however, but scanty excerpts of his original works. Urbanus was 
a commentator on Virgil, and the same may be said of Velius 
Longus, of whom we possess a treatise de orthographia. 
Caesellius Vindex (a man who had to struggle against much 
enmity) wrote, probably about this time, a work entitled Stro- 
mateus or lectiones antiquae in alphabetic order and in the 
form of a dictionary. Cloatius Verus should also be assigned 
to this time. 

1. An observation of Urbanus directed against Cornutus (see Lon- 
gus ap. Schol. Veron. Ae. V 488, p. 96, 10 sqq. K.) is quoted by Serv. 
Ae. V 517. Hence it follows that Urbanus was later than Cornutus 
(above 294, 2) and somewhat earlier than (Velius) Longus. His labours 
on Virgil were more praiseworthy in intention than in execution. Rib- 
beck, proll. ad Verg. p. 167 — 169. 

2. Gellius XVIII 9, 4: Velio Longo, non homini indocto, fidem 
esse habendam, qui in commentario quod feoisset de usu antiquae 



I 



Jurists and Grammarians. Velins Longus and Flavins Caper. 201 

lectionis scripserit etc. Charis. p. 175, 14 K.: Velius Longus in II Aenei- 
dos (i. e. iü his Commentary on Aen. II). ib. p. 113, 29 sq. (cf. 556, 22) 
K. : Velius Longus de hac regula dixit in V ea parte (in his note on 
Ae. V 380). Hence also ibid. p. 210, 7 K. ; see Lachmann on Lucr. 
p. 146. Non doctum modo sed omni fere ex parte egregium, accura- 
tum et prudentem et elegantem Aeneidos (nam de ceteris libris nihil 
traditur) interpretem habuerim, qui Probi exemplo ad uberiores de 
rebus maxime grammaticis quaestiones digressus est; Ribbeck prolegg. 
p. 169 ( — 171). In the extant treatise of Vel. Long, de orthographia 
(p. 2213 — 2228 P.) Virgil is frequently quoted. The author appears 
there as a careful observer, though he accumulates facts without much 
discrimination ; Brambach, on Latin spelling p. 96 sq. Long, proved in 
a special commentation that thermae Titianae (not Titinae) was the 
correct appellation. 

3. The statement of Pomp. p. 154, 13 K. (Gramm. V): Caper, 
ille magister Augusti Caesaris, elaboravit vehementissime et de epistu- 
lis Ciceronis coilegit haec (?) verba uti dixerat ipse Cicero 'piissimus', 
is certainly erroneous. Cf. Excerpta ib. p. 327, 15 : Caper, antiquissi- 
mus doctor. If Caper ever instructed an Emperor, he may, have taught 
a Flavins, certainly not Augustus, as he must have lived after Valerius 
Probus and Suetonius. He is, therefore, identical with the grammarian 
Flavius C aper who quoted Probus (Charis. p. 118, 1 K. from Ro- 
manus : Fl. Caper . . Valerium Probum putare ait) and used him as 
his principal source, if we may believe appearances. It would be cer- 
tain that he wrote not only before Romanus (who quotes him repeatedly) 
but also before Terentius Scaurus, if the quotation in Dausquius (Or- 
thographia I p. 162) 'Scaurus libro IX de orthographia: raro Capri 
testimonio s. . . exprimitur' were anyway trustworthy. See Christ, Philol, 
XVIII p. 166, and Steup de Probis p. 192 (who thinks it to be derived 
from Agroec. p. 2269 P. and Priscian I p. 170, 9). Suetonius does not 
mention Caper among the earlier grammarians, probably because he was 
still living in his time, or perhaps because he was later. As far as the 
tendency of his studies is concerned, Fl. C. should not be placed later 
than saec. II. Prise. II p. 772 P. = 354,9: Caper, antiquitatis doctissi- 
mus inquisitor. Charisius, Servius, and Priscian often quote passages 
of his works, entitled de latinitate (= orthographia) or de lingua la- 
tina, also de dubiis generibus or dubii generis or dubii sermonis, also 
enucleati sermonis (identified by Christ p. 168 sq. with the work de 
latinitate) and on ex. Jerome c. Rufin. H 9 (II p. 497 Vail.): in Capri 
commentariis indicates merely grammatical works. Caper probably did 
not write commentaries on Plautus and Terence (Ritschl, Par. I p. 361 
— 364) or on Virgil (Ribbeck, proll. p. 166) nor did he write on Cicero, 
in spite of Agroec. prooem. where Caper is called multis litterarum 
operibus celebratus, in commentando etiam Cicerone praecipuus. The 
works de orthographia (p. 2239—2246 P.) and de verbis dubiis (p. 2247 
— 2250 P.) which bear his name are not remarkable for the abundance 
of quotations from the ancient writers by which Caper is distinguished 



202 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

They are meagre and desultory, the one even in alphabetical order, 
that de orthogr. less disfigured by the additions of the compiler. F. 
Osann, de Fl. Capro et Agroecio grammaticis (Giessen 1849. 4.) p. 3. 
5—20. W. Christ, Philol. XVIII p. 165-170. W. Brambach, on Latin 
spelling p. 43 sq. 

4. Gellius YI (VII) 2, 1 sq. : turpe erratum offendimus in illis cele- 
bratissimis commentariis lectionum antiquarum Caeselli Vindicis, 
hominis hercle pleraque haud indiligentis. (2.) quod erratum multos 
fugit, quamquam multa in Caesellio reprehendendo etiam per calumnias 
rimarentur (especially his younger contemporaries Terentius Scaurus 
and Sulpicius Apollinaris). The same work is quoted ib. II 16, 5 sqq. 
Ill 16, 11. XI 15, 2 sqq. XX 2, 2 and probably also meant IX 14, 6. 
XVIII 11. The arrangement was alphabetical; see Charis. p. 117, 13 K. 
(Vindex A litterae libro I). 239, 21 (Caesellius Vindex libro B litterae). 
195, 26 (Caes. Vind. libro L). The identity of the contents renders it 
probable that Stroraateus was merely another title of the same work ; 
see Priscian p. 210, 7 (Caesellius Vindex in stromateo). 230, 11 (Cae- 
sellius in stromateo) cf. p. 229, 10 Htz. F. Ritschl, Parerga I. p. 360. 
To him we should probably also refer the excerpts of Cassiodorus (p. 
2314 sqq. P.) ex orthographo Caesellio and ex Lucio Caecilio Vindice; 
see Gräfenhan, Hist, of class. Philol. IV. p. 121 sq., cf. p. 68—71. W. 
Brambach, on Latin spelling p. 38 — 41. Arnob. adv. gent. I 59 extr. : 
Epicados omnes, Caesellios, Verrios ac Scauros teneatis et Nisos. Rufin. 
de metr. p. 2713 P. J. Kretzschmer, do Gellii fontibus (1860) p. 95—98. 

5. Gellius XVI 12, 1 sqq. Cloatius Verus, in libris quos in- 
scripsit verborum a Graecis tractorum (also in Macrob. Ill 18, 4), non 
pauca hercle dicit curiose et sagaciter conquisita, neque non tamen 
quaedam f itilia et frivola. . . (5.) commode haec sane omnia et con- 
ducenter. sed in libro quarto faenerator, inquit, appellatus est quasi 
(fan^f-QchioQ, dno tov i^aivio&ai etc. (6.) idque dixisse ait Hypsicraten 
quempiam grammaticum, cuius libri sane nobiles sunt super his quae 
a Graecis accepta sunt. This Hypsicr. is mentioned by Varro de 1. 1. 
V 88 (cohortem in villa Hypsicrates dicit esse graece /oqtov) and per- 
haps by Festus v. aurum (Paul. p. 8 M.). Cloatius might thus have be- 
longed to the Augustan period. But he is evidently more familiar to 
Gellius than Hypsicr. and therefore nearer to his own time. Besides 
this etymological work, Cloatius wrote Ordinatorum graecorum libri, 
which seem to have rather contained illustrations of subjects; .a second 
book of them is quoted by Macrob. Ill 6, 2 (on the altar of Apollo at 
Delos) and a fourth ib. 18, 8 (on nux) and 19, 2 (an enumeration of the 
various kinds of apples in alphabetical order). 

6. Gellius XX 11, 1 sqq.: P. Lavini liber est non incuriose factus. 
is inscriptus est de verbis sordidis. in eo scripsit sculnam volgo dicj 
etc. . . (4.) sculnam autem scriptum esse in logistorico Varronis . . 
idem Lavinius in eodem libro admonet. The Laevinus mentioned by 
Macrob. HI 8, 3 is not identical with this Lavinius for the simple 



i 



Grammarians and Writers on Gromatics. 203 

reason that the quotation from him is evidently in metre: he might 
rather be identical with Laevius (above 138, 5). 

7. On L. Cotta, v^ho wrote on the history of literature, see above 
156, 13 [in the Add.] 

339. Several grammarians wrote likewise in the reign of 
Trajan: e. g. Hyginus by whom we possess fragments of a 
large work de munitionibus. In the treatise de limitibus 
(constituendis) which is also attributed to him Frontinus is 
also much used. Balbus is the author of an extant work 
on the elementary notions of geometry, but not of the work 
de asse. Not much later than Trajan is the gromatic writer 
Siculus Flaccus, whose technical work de condicionibus 
agrorum we possess complete and in a good text. 

1. The fragments of the gromatic writer Hyginus may be seen 
especially in Lachmann's edition of the Works of the Roman Groma- 
tics I (1848) p. 108 — 134. The whole was divided into three parts, de 
limitibus (p. 108—113), de condicionibus agrorum (p. 113 — 123), de 
generibus controversiarum (p. 123 — 134). Cf. Blume, Rhein. Mus. VII 
p. 142—154. Lachmann, Grom. II p. 136 — 141. On the original con- 
nexion see p. 123: hae sunt condiciones agrorum quas cognoscere potui. 
nunc de generibus controversiarum perscribam quae solent in quaestio- 
nem deduci. On its date of composition (perhaps a. 103, Hultsch, 
metrolog. script. II. p. 6. not. 4) of. p. 121, 7 sqq. (nuper quidam evo- 
catus Augusti, . . cum in Pannonia agros veteranis ex voluntate . . 
imperatoris Traiani Aug. Germanici adsignaret) and p. 131, 17 sqq. (ac- 
cording to which veteran soldiers who had received estates in Samnium 
from Vespasian were still alive). The work of Frontinus (above 322, 3) 
is made use of, but independently; the diction is somewhat more tech- 
nical, and shows a careful acquaintance with the subject, and the Latin 
is after all good. C. Lachmann, 1. 1. II p. 139. On another work of 
Hygin. ib. I p. 133, 14 sqq.: cuius edicti (by Domitian) verba, itemque 
constitutiones quasdam aliorum principum itemque divi Nervae in uno 
libello contulimus. Hyginus' name is also prefixed to a treatise de 
castrametatione or de munitionibus castrorum , the beginning of which 
is mutilated; the last editor of it, C. C. L. Lange (Gotting. 1848) in 
his Prolegomena critica et historica in Hyg. de mun. castr. libellum, 
(Gotting 1847, p. 51—63) has successfully defended its claim to this 
name. 

2. The assumption of Blume and Lachmann of two gromatics of 
the name of Hyginus, the later one of whom was to be considered as 
the author of the work de limitibus constituendis (in Lachmann's Works 
of the Rom. Grom. I p. 166—208) has been successfully impugned by 
L. Lange, prolegomena 1. 1. p. 44—51, and Gott. Gel. Anz. 1853, p. 
527-530. 



204 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

3. In the Arcerianus (see above 322, 2 extr.) Balbus' work bears 
the title: Balbi ad Celsum expositio et ratio omnium formarum (i. e. 
geometrical figures; but in the extant part the writer treats only of 
the mensurae), in Lachmann's Ed. of the Grom. I p. 91—108 cf. Lach- 
mann ibid. II. p. 131—136. Th. Momrasen ibid. II, p. 146—150. 151 
— 157. It is a manual of geometry for landsurveyors, mostly derived 
from EucHd and Heron, but of which we possess only a very small 
part. Hultsch, metrolog. script. II p. 7—13. According to the pref. 
the author had already commenced his work, when intervenit clara 
sacratissimi impcratoris nostri (i. e. Trajan) expeditio (p. 92, 7 sq.). In 
the field he learned by practice the value of the venerabilis Ai (i. e. 
trianguli, according to Hultsch; Gud. di) ratio, postquam ergo maxi- 
mus Imperator victoria Daciam proximo reseravit (probably by the first 
war in Dacia) statim ut e septentrionali plaga annua vice transire per- 
misit ego ad Studium meum . . reversus multa . . recollegi (p. 93, 6 sqq.) 
Celsus to whem the work is dedicated had made an invention in a 
gromatic instrument (dioptra according to Hultsch p. 8 sq.), invento 
tuo p. 92, 16, and seems to be an officer of higher rank. Balbus is 
repeatedly quoted by the later gromatics, but it is not clear whether 
lost parts of the same work or other writings by the same author 
are meant. 

4. In the Arcerianus the subscriptio of the liber coloniarum (Rom. 
Grom. I p. 239) is: huic addendas mensuras limitum et terminorum ex 
libris Augusti et Neronis Caesarum, sed et Balbi mensoris, qui tempo- 
ribus Augusti omnium provinciarum et formas civitatium et mensuras 
compertas in commentariis contulit et legem agrariam per diversitates 
provinciarum distinxit ac declaravit. It appears, therefore, that the 
author of this subscriptio considered a certain land-surveyor Balbus to 
be the source of the lib. col., and him he placed under Augustus, pro- 
bably because the lists by Balbus of the ager divisus adsignatus ap- 
peared to him as the results of Augustus' Survey of the whole Empire. 
If the extant lists of towns (liber coloniarum) are actually derived 
from Balbus, we should assume that they were continued by other sur- 
veyors after his death, as they go down to the age of M. Aurelius and 
Commodus (a. 177—180). Th. Mommsen, Works of the Rom. Grom. II 
p. 176 — 181. The text of this lib. col. revised by Lachmann, ibid. I 
p. 209—262. An essay on it by Mommsen ibid. II p. 157—188, accor- 
ding to which we should discriminate two texts: a better one (lib. 
col. I in Lachmann's ed.), chiefly represented by the Arcerianus (A in 
Lachmann's work) in the Palatinus (P) saec. IX or X with the later 
one (liber col. II in Lachmann, p. 252 sqq.), the chief source of which 
is the Gudianus saec. IX or X. The text handed down in the Arc. is 
on the whole the work of a good epoch, full of information and pre- 
cise and technical in diction; it was epitomized about A. D. 450; but 
the later text (of the sixth century) is full of confusion and ignorant 
statements (1. 1. especially p. 165—174. 181 sqq.) 



Gromatic Writers: Balbvs and others. 205 

5. The treatise de asse minutisque eius portiunculis, first edited 
by Fabius Calvus of Ravenna in his translation of Hippocrates (Rome 
1525) from the last leaves of the cod. Arcerianus (Th. Mommsen in 
the Grom. II p. 150 sq., cf. Lachmann ibid. p. 134 sq.), better by J. Fr. 
Gronovius in his edition of Maecianus and by the subsequent editors 
of the latter (see below 356), last of all by F. Hultsch (Metrolog. scr. II 
p. 72 — 75), is precise and full of important and interesting information. 
It must, however, be of the third century (or rather that would be the 
period of the work from which it is excerpted), as the tremissis is men- 
tioned among the parts of the as, a coin not struck until Alexander 
Severus ; see W. Christ, Reports of the meetings of the Munich Aca- 
demy 1863, p. 105 sqq. F. Hultsch, metrol. scr. II p. 14—16. 

6. The work of Siculus Flaccus de condicionibus agrorum is in 
its present shape limited to Italy. It begins: condiciones agrorum per 
totam Italiam diversas esse plerisque etiam remotis a professione nostra 
hominibus notum est; after which this fact is explained on historical 
grounds. The style is in its way careful. The manner in which 
Domitian is mentioned p. 163, 13 L. (de quibus Domitianus finem sta- 
tuit) renders it probable that Fl. wrote not long after his reign. More 
about his age is not known to us; see L. Lange, Götting. Gel. Anz. 
1853, p. 530 sq. This work has come down to us in the second class 
of the mss. of the Land-surveyors (see n. 4) the nomina limitum 
being appended to it; in those of the first class some leaves have got 
mixed up with Hyginus (Lachmann II p. 132. 137 sq.) The work is 
found in the collection of the Gromatics, last of all in that by Blume, 
Lachmann and Rudorff I (Berlin 1848) p. 134 — 165. A separate edition 
by J. C. Schwarz, Coburg 1711. 4. 

7. Under Trajan was written the Tay.ny.rj S^sajQui which bears the 
name of Aelianus. Cf. Köchly and Rüstow, the Greek Tacticians II 1. 

8. A treatise entitled In artem medendi isagoge professes to be 
the work of Soranus Ephesius, insignis peripateticus et vetustissimus 
archiater, i. e. no doubt the famous methodician of that name, of whom 
we still possess works on surgery and gynaecology in Greek and who 
probably practised at Rome under Trajan and Adrian. This work 
(printed in the collections of the medici vett. by Torinus 1528 and 
Aldus 1547) is so insignificant and absurd, that is should rather be set 
down as a production of the Middle Ages. 



B. The second century A. D. 117—211. 

340. The reign of Adrian inaugurates a new era the 
general character of which is very different from the silver 
age. The exhaustion resulting from the excitement of the 
preceding years is evident in the complete inability of this 
period to produce anything original or independent. It is, 



206 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

however, very accessible to foreign influence. Yet only few 
writers, who had been trained in the time of Quintilian, e. g. 
Suetonius, Florus, and perhaps also Justinus, followed the 
better models; want of taste and feebleness caused the majority 
to mix all manners of style and hunt up rare and far-fetched 
expressions. This was especially the prevailing state of things 
since Adrian, a vain and crotchety character, ruled the world 
and since the African Fronto decided on all literary 
questions. The treasures of the past were searched with much 
diligence, and in Suetonius this age possessed so to say a 
Varro on the reduced scale of the Imperial period. But after 
him all study was carried on with a constant increase of 
pedantry. These generations did not succeed in properly 
employing what had already been gained, nay they did not 
even know how to accept it. Hence arose the necessity of 
contracting the riches of the past, and the number of epito- 
mizers was constansly increasing. Erudition took possession 
of the whole life, and the affectation of it became the fashion ; 
there were plenty of grammarians and i3rofessors of rhetoric, 
and some of them filled high posts. But not guided by 
historical discrimination and swayed by vain rhetoric without 
any tact for style, erudition drifted on unadvisedly and wasted 
its treasures.*) In general, Greek literature prevailed, which 
was just reviving in a kind of Indian summer caused by 
the new Sophists. Greece and the grecized East furnished 
the majority of talents, who wrote in their native language, 
e. g. Plutarch, Appianus, Arrianus, and above all Lucian. 
But even some writers of the West, e. g. Favorinus, wrote 
only in Greek, and others both in Greek and Latin, e. g. 
Suetonius and Adrian, Fronto, Apuleius, Tertullian and 
Modestinus. Literature lost its national character, and 
became universal. It was also promoted by the habit of the 
rhetoricians to deliver lectures throughout the Empire, a habit 
adopted also by Latin lecturers, e. g. Apuleius. Only tech- 
nical studies showed independent life. Medicine boasts of such 
a man as Galenus (c. a. 131—201); but he, being a native ot 
Asia minor, wrote in Greek. Jurisprudence did not only 
maintain the traditions of the past, but also developed them 



*) See e. g. Gellius XIV 6, 3 qq. 



General Observations. 207 

with sagacity and genius. A number of brilliant names — 
especially Julianus, Pomponius and Gains — succeeded each 
other in rapid continuation and finally culminated in Papinianus. 
They influenced the development of the Law both in the 
character of teachers and of writers and partly by composing 
the Imperial rescripts, which formed, after the completion by 
Julianus of the law resulting from edicts, the sole source of 
new laws. In diction and style the Jurists represented also 
a purer taste. While Jurisprudence, erudition, and declama- 
tion swayed this century, poetry receded. The sole per- 
formance that deserves to be mentioned is the Pervigilium 
Veneris, a work composed at the close of this time. The 
prevalence of erudition manifested itself even here in the 
reappearance of the metrical forms of the Pre-Augustan time, 
such as had been employed by Varro, Laevius and Plautus, 
and which were now treated with considerable elegance, but 
without tact for proper employment. The intellectual activity 
combined with the mental impotence of this age resulted in 
Superstition. A wide -spread tendency for the supernatural 
element produced many impostors, but offered also a favou- 
rable soil to the new religion. Christianity which had hitherto 
only shown itself in Greek literature, now began to cast its 
shade upon Roman literature as well. The Christian doctrine 
of sin and mercy and a better life took hold of the poor and 
oppressed and of the female sex; it filled them with such 
eagerness for death as to rouse even the attention of the men, 
and the grand doctrine of one God, the creator of Heaven 
and Earth, produced an impression upon the most cultivated 
minds all the greater as they had long since become estranged 
from polytheism. It is true that there appeared in Christianity 
itself opposite tendencies hostile to one another. Buth even 
this served to draw public attention in this direction, and a 
living centre was formed in the removal of extreme and the 
equalizing of opposite directions. One part of the Christian 
writers, e. g. Minucius Felix and Lactantius, endeavoured to 
preserve ancient formal training and to adapt it to the spirit 
of Christianity*) ; the other part, the earliest representative of 



*) See also Jerome ad a. 2220 = A.D. 204: Musanus (Arm.: Mu- 
sianus) nostrae philosophiae scriptor agnoscitur. 



208 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

which is Tertullian, then Commodianus, were influenced by 
eastern culture and attempted to keep aloof from ancient cul- 
ture; they even returned to the indifference of the earliest 
Romans concerning formal pohsh. Under the common influence 
of place") and climate as well as of national (Semitic) pecu- 
liarities and also of the Christian and bibhcal mode of thought 
and style a peculiar diction gradually developed itself in 
the^ eastern and southern parts of the Empire, which was 
chiefly represented in Literature by natives of the North of 
Africa, and is therefore commonly called African Latin. In 
those parts there was altogether a very stirring mental life. 
The old tendencies as well as the new were for long provided 
with defenders from the North of Africa; from there came 
such men as Fronto and Apuleius; Tertullian, Cyprian and 
St. Augustin. As the personal likings of the ruler continued 
to influence the course of literature, this century is divided 
into three portions: the time of Adrian, (a. 117 — 138), that 
of the Antonines (a. 138—176), and lastly that of Commodus 
and Septimius Severus (a. 176—211). 

1. On the whole century see M. Hertz, Renaissance and Rococo 
in Roman Literature, a Lecture. Berlin 1865. 50 pp. 

1. The time of Adrian, A. D. 117—138. 

341. P. Aelius Hadrianus (a. 76—138) w^as a pecuhar 
character, in whom the most opposite qualities were combined. 
Superstitious and sceptical, pedantic and witty, meditative and 
suspicious, good-natured and cruel, he remained the same 
only in so far as his humour and crotchets were ever changeful 
and in cherishing a high idea of his own worth. He showed 
interest in everything, but zeal and perseverance in nothing. 
His restlessness was akin to morbidity, but as it caused his 
ceaseless peregrinations throughout the Empire, it led to many 
useful institutions. Literature gained and suffered most from 
his preference and caprice. But his own productions did not 
exceed dilettantism even here. 

1. Spartianus' vita Hadriani. A. Haakh in Pauly's Encycl. Ill p. 
1028—1045. J. Gregorovius, the Hist, of the Emperor Adrian and of 



'■'=^0 Apoll. Sid. ep. VIII 11: urbium cives africc.narum , quibus ut 
est reofio sic mens ardentior. 



i 



The Emperor Adrian. 209 

his time, Königsberg 1851. 282 pp. C. Peter, Hist, of Rome HI 2 
(Halle 1869) p. 168—187. C. Knaut, Adrian as ruler and man, Berlin 
1871. 43 pp. 4. 

2. Adrian was born on 24 January 76 (829) at Rome, though his 
family was descended from Italica in Spain, like that of Trajan, to 
whom he was related. Consul 109, adopted by Trajan a short time 
before his death (August 117). f at Bajae on 10 July 138. 

3. Spart. Hadr. 14, 8 sqq.: fuit poematum et litterarum nimium 
(omnium) studiosissimus; aritlimeticae, geometriae, picturae peritissimus. 
iam psallendi et cantandi scientiam prae se ferebat; . . idem armorum 
peritissimus. .. idem severus, laetus ; comis, gravis; lascivus, cunctator; 
tenax, überaus; simulator, verus ; saevus, clemens, et semper in omni- 
bus varius. 15, 10 sq.: quamvis esset oratione et versu promptissimus 
et in omnibus artibus peritissimus, tamen professores omnium artium 
semper ut doctior risit, contempsit, obtrivit. cum his ipsis professori- 
bus et philosophis libris vel carminibus invicem editis saepe certavit. 
16, 1 sqq.: famae Celebris tam cupidus fuit ut libros vitae suae scriptos 
a se libertis suis litteratis dederit, iubens ut eos suis nominibus publi- 
carent. nam et Phlegontis libri Hadriani esse dicuntur. Catachannas 
(cf. Fronto Epist. p. 35 and 155 N.) libros obscurissimos Antimachum 
imitando scripsit. . . amavit praeterea genus vetustum dicendi. . . Ci- 
ceroni Catonem, Vergilio Ennium, Sallustio Caelium (above 142, 5 sq.) 
praetulit, eademque iactatione de Homero ac Platone iudicavit. mathesin 
sic scire sibi visus est ut etc. sed quamvis esset in reprehendendis 
musicis, tragicis, comicis, grammaticis, rhetoribus, oratoribus facilis, 
tamen omnes professores et honoravit et divites fecit, licet eos quaestio- 
nibus semper agitaverit . . in summa familiaritate Epictetum et Helio- 
dorum philosophos et, ne nominatim de omnibus dicam, grammaticos, 
rhetores, musicos, geometras, pictores, astrologos habuit, prae ceteris, 
ut multi adserunt, eminente Favorino. doctores qui professioni suae 
inhabiles videbantur ditatos honoratosque a professione dimisit. 20, 2 
sqq. : apud Alexandriam in museo multas quaestiones professoribus pro- 
posuit et propositas ipse (ipsi 0. Jahn) dissolvit. . . fuit memoriae in- 
gentis, facultatis immensae. nam ipse et orationes dictavit et ad omnia 
respondit. ioca eius plurima extant; nam fuit etiam dicaculus. Victor 
Caess. 14, 1 sq.: Aelius Hadrianus eloquio togaeque studiis accommo- 
datior . . Romae . . Graecorum more . . gymnasia doctoresque curare 
occepit, adeo quidem ut etiam ludum ingenuarum artium, quod Athe- 
naeum vocant, constitueret. Spartian. Hel. 4, 2 : litteratis, quorum Ha- 
drianus speciosa societate gaudebat. 

4. Dio LXIX 3: ^v \4&qic(v6? . . ffyVft tfdokoyog Iv kx(iTiQ(,c tji 
ykcjGGf], xaC rtvcc y-al nfl^u xal tv tnfai noirjfiara nctyrodccna xarccUkoi- 
7i(y. (fdoTi/uicc Tf yciQ dnkriGTio i/QrJTO xal xcau tovto xal rcckka nccvra 
xal m ßquxvTcaa tnfn^dfvfy. Spart. Hadr. 3, 1 : quaesturam gessit . ., 
in qua cum orationem imperatoris in senatu agrestius pronuntians risus 
esset usque ad summam peritiam et facundiam Latinis operam dedit. 

14 



210 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

16, 5: controversias declamavit. Photius Bibl. cod. C (I p. 86 Bk.): 
^ Ai^QUivov Tov ßuGikibig ^u(kiT(ct duc(fjOQoi, sig to h^tqiov tov koyov 
aytjy/ufyut. x((t ovx (ct^dfig. Charis. II p. 222, 21 sqq. K.: divus Hadria- 
nus in oratione quam de Italicensibus . . in senatu habuit. A funeral 
speech on his mother-in-law, Matidia the Elder; see Th. Mommsen, 
Trans, of the Berlin Academy 1863 p. 483 sqq. A speech addressed 
in the camp to his troops, Renier Inscr. de I'Alger. 5 (where A II we 
read: Catullini legati mei) from Lambaese. A letter in Henzen's acta 
arv. (1868). A libel against the physicians that could not cure him, 
Epiphan. nfQi ^utiqiov p. 170 A. He gave grammatical explanations 
in the taste of his time in his sermones; see Char. II p. 209, 12 sq. 
Obiter divus Hadrianus sermonum I quaerit an latinum sit, quam- 
quam (inquit) apud Laberium haec vox esse dicatur. Anecdotes (con- 
cerning oral and written sayings) of Adrian are collected in Dositheus. 
d^fiov A&Qiuvov ((7io(fa(j(tg xal tmaTokai. D. Adriani sententiae et epi- 
stolae ed. Goldast, Genf 1601; in Schul ting's iurisprud. anteiustin. (Lugd. 
1717. 4.) p. 855 sqq., and in Fabricius Biblioth. graeca XII. (Hamburg 
1740) p. 516 — 554. The Rescripts of Adrian are collected by Hanel, 
Corpus legum p. 88—101. 

5. Spart. Hadr. 14, 7 sqq.: oracula . . quae Hadrianus ipse com- 
posuisse iactatur. . . de suis dilectis multa versibus composuit. Apulei. 
apol. 11: divus Hadrianus, cum Voconi amici sui poetae tumulum ver- 
sibus muneraretur, ita scripsit: Lascivus versu, mente pudicus eras . . 
ipsius etiam divi Hadriani multa id genus legere me memini. See above 
336, 7. Spart. Hadr. 25, 9 sq.: moriens hos versus fecisse dicitur: 
Animula etc. tales autem nee multo meliores fecit et graecos. Six dry 
epigrams under his name (though two are also attributed to Germa- 
nicus Caesar) in Brunck's Analecta 11 p. 285 =: II p. 260 Jacobs; 
Hendecasyllabics in an inscription of Thespiae, ^Etfrj/j. ccqx- 1869, nr. 408. 
Aeli Hadriani epitaphium Sorani Batavi and Borysthenis equi, in Meyer's 
anthol. lat. nr. 209 and 211; metrical lists of the Amazons attributed 
to him in some mss., see in Riese's Anthol. lat. I 1. p. 257, in L. 
Miiller's Rutil. Nam. p. 25 sq. 



342. The most important literary character of this time 
is C. Suetonius Tranquillus (perhaps A. D. 75 — 160), 
who had been solicitor and writer under Trajan and then was 
for some time private secretary to Adrian, and subsequently 
filled his leisure with literary studies in the manner of Varro, 
chiefly in the departments of the history of culture and of 
literature, always paying attention to linguistic peculiarities. The 
national and Koman element was treated by him in the first place 
but without partiality, part of these works being, as it seems, 
even written in Greek. The philosophical element appears 
also in the fashionable form of natural philosophy, but there 



Adrian. Suetonius. 211 

it is Strongly represented. Everywhere we notice a preference 
for the description of individual peculiarities and events, and 
this is most evident in the viri illustres (of which work we 
possess considerable fragments) and in the Lives of the twelve 
Emperors from Caesar until Domitian, which we possess almost 
complete. His work shares indeed the indifference of all rhe- 
torical works to chronological accuracy, and is somewhat de- 
ficient in the relation of military and political events, and 
altogether it is monotonous; but it is derived from good 
sources with great care and intelligent judgment, and contains 
rich materials in a concise and simple style. 

1. Suet. Domitian. 12: interfuisse me adulescentulum memini (at 
Rome) cum a procuratore . . inspiceretur nonagenarius senex an circum- 
sectus esset. Gramm. 4: me adulescentulo repeto quendam Principem 
nomine declamare etc. (above 321, 2). Ner. 57: cum post viginti annos 
(after Nero's death or the first mission of Vologaesus, i. e. a. 88 and 
before 91, when Vologaesus died), adulescente me, extitisset (a Pseudo- 
Nero) etc. Suetonius' adulescentia must therefore have been under Do- 
mitian, and his birth perhaps A. D. 75. In the time of Trajan we 
receive information on Suetonius in Pliny's Epp. I 18 (an action of Suet, 
is postponed on account of an unlucky dream). 24 (Request for Tran- 
quillus, contubernalis mens and scholasticus, concerning the purchase 
of an agellus). Ill 8 (Suet, asks ut tribunatum, quem a Neratio Mar- 
cello — i. e. perhaps a. 100 — impetravi tibi, in . . propinquum tuum 
transferrem). V 10 (Suetonius is requested, perhaps a. 105, to edit his 
scripta or volumina). IX 34 (an inquiry concerning some recitations 
of Pliny), ad Trai. 94 (Suetonium Tranquillum, probissimum, honestis- 
simum, eruditissimum virum, . . in contubernium adsumpsi tantoque 
magis diligere coepi quanto hunc propius inspexi. On account of his 
infelix matrimonium the ius trium liberorum is solicited for him, about 
a. 112) and 95 (the permission of that request). Sparti. Hadri. 12, 3: 
Septicio Claro praef. praet. (a. 119 — 121) et Suetonio Tranquil] o epistu- 
larum magistro multisque aliis, quod apud Sabinam uxorem iniussu suo 
familiarius se tunc (during Adrian's absence) egerant quam reverentia 
domus aulicae postulabat, successores dedit. Cf. Suet. Aug. 7 : quae 
(imago Augusti) dono a me principi (i. e. Adrian) data inter cubiculi 
lares colitur. Subsequently Suetonius seems to have devoted himself 
exclusively to literary pursuits. Fronto still says Epist. p. 118 sq. N. ; 
succidaneum sibi Tranquillum nostrum paravit etc. . . invenit me Tran- 
quillus etc. . . Tranquilli industriae etc. cf. ib. p. 182 N. (internatium 
• . Suetonius Tranquillus spinam sacram appellat, according to which 
Suetonius was then dead). 

2. Suidas II p. 1190 sq. Bernh. : TQay^vkkog o liovririaviog, X9*lf^^' 
Ticag (cf. Plin. Ep, I 18) yQ((fj,/uarix6g ^(o/uatog, iyqaxps tkqI tcou naQ 



212 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Ekkt]ffi Jiai&iiav ßvßkfa a (see n. 4), Jifql rdiv naQcc '^Poj/uccioig S^fcoQuay 
xccl dyiovMv ßißkia ß' (S. T. in libro ludicrae historiae primo, Gell. IX 
7, 3 ; cf. n. 4), ufqi tov xcctcc Putfxaiovg tvtavrov ßtßkioy a (see n. 3), 
TifQl TMV iv To7g ßtßkiotg atjfifiuyv a (Reifferscheid p. 419 sq.), nfQt rrjg 
KixfQü)t^og noknftag cc, avTikiyfi ds no /fidv/uuf. tkqI ovo/uarcou xvqCmv, 
xal Idfag iffS^rj/uctTiou xctl vnodrjfiaroiv xai twj/ aXkcay olg itg a/uqttfyyvTat 
(Suetonius in libro de genere vestium, Serv. Aen. VII 612, cf. n. 3), 
tkqI dvff(fT^iu(ou kfifMV i]toi> ßkaat^TjfXKäv xal no&fv fxaarij (Extracts 
from it in Greek in E. Miller, Melanges p. 413—426: ^ovtjtii/ov TQoyxykov 
nfQt etc. cf. ib. p. 389 — 394), nfQl '^PcjfXTjg xal jcau Iv avrrj vofn\uüiv 
xal i^S-iav ßLßktcc ß' (see n. 3), avyyfvixov, KataccQcoy iß' — nsQiix^'' ^* 
ßCovg xcad diado/dg ccvttäv ano lovkCov siog Jo/u(Tt apov — ßißkCa r]\ 
GTf/u/ua (? cf. Reifferscheid p. 370) '^Pto^adav dvdQcHv (de illustribus viris). 
Besides this TQayxvkkog tv rw tkqI iniaij/UMv noqvdiv (i^jd- de magistr. 
11164), S. Tr. in libro de vitiis corporalibus (Serv. Ae. VII 627; see n. 3), 
Suetonius in libro qui est de institutione officiorum (on State and Court 
positions and their history, Reifferscheid p. 346 — 349 cf. p. 465 sq.), 
tres Suetonii libri quos de regibus dedit (Auson. Epist. 19, cf. n. 4), 
Suet. Tr. de rebus varus (Charis. II p. 236, 17 pom. lulius Romanus); 
lastly Prata in at least ten books (see n. 3). Cf. J. Regent, de C. Sue- 
tonii vita et scriptis, Breslau (1856) 63 pp. The fragments of the de- 
perditi libri are collected in Roth's edition p. 275 — 306, and especially 
in S. Tr. praeter Caesarum libros reliquiae ed. A. Reifferscheid, Lips. 
(Teubner) 1860. XX and p. 1—360, together with his Quaest. Sueton. 
ib. p. 361—478. 

3. In Reifferscheid's Quaest. Suet, (especially ch. II and III p. 426 
sqq.) it is partly proved, partly made very probable that some of the 
titles enumerated by Suidas were rather separate headings of the parts 
of large works. The Prata e. g. seem to have contained discussions 
of Roman institutions in the first eight books (hence probably = mql 
'^P(üfif]g in Suidas), most of them in agreement with Varro, so that ex- 
planations of words and of institutions were kept side by side, with 
quotations from earlier writers. The work tkqI oyo/uccTOjy xvqimu thus 
may well have been part of the same work, and also the treatise de 
genere vestium etc. The fourth book seems to have dealt with the 
laws, the fifth with the 'mores' =: tisqI tmv tv ^Pw.w»? vo/ui/ucay xal 
rid^biv. The eighth book explained Roman chronology, the feriae, dies 
fasti etc. and may thus have been identical with the work usqI tov x. 
*^P. iyiavTov. The other books treated of subjects of natural philo- 
sophy with a certain predilection for curious parts and in pursuance 
of the parallelism of physical and ethical phenomena which was so 
much liked at Rome since the time of Sextius, who considered man a 
'little world', but here also philological details were treated carefully. 
The ninth book was perhaps entitled de mundo and treated of wind 
and weather, sea and shore, and their proper appellations; the tenth 
book appears to have been de animantium naturis. It is possible that 
botany was treated in the eleventh and mineralogy in the twelfth book. 



1 



Suetonius. 213 

This work was much used by later writers, e. g. by the Schol. Germanic, 
(above 270, 10), Ambrosius, Servius, and especially by Isidore, through 
whom the parts on natural philosophy became very important in the 
Middle Ages. But the grammatical parts also, chiefly those concerning 
synonyms, were much excerpted and employed in other ways. We 
may, perhaps, refer to this source the Differentiae sermonum published 
from a ms. at Montpellier by d'Orville (Remmi Palaemonis ex libro 
Suetoni Tranquilli qui inscribitur Pratum), printed in Roth's Suetonius 
p. 306—320 (cf. ib. p. XCV— C) and by Reiöerscheid p. 274—296 (cf. 
ib. p. 450—452). See above 277, 3 extr. On the whole they are a 
mixture of some good (old) and numerous worthless observations which 
seem to belong to the beginning of the Middle Ages. The first part 
deals, in the manner of the later grammarians, with synonyms and 
spelling; the second half is alphabetically arranged (I— V) and contains 
a citation of Nigidius Figulus, so that it may perhaps be referable to 
Suetonius. Cf. Brambach, Lat. Spell, p. 42. 

4. The three books de regibus seem to have contained an ac- 
count according to the three parts of the world (Europe, Asia and 
Africa) and to have been used by Africanus in his chronicles. The 
fact that in them (as well as in the Pornographia, Reifferscheid p. 466 
sq.) the characters of the earliest time were levelled in the manner of 
Euhemerus, facilitated the employment of this work for certain tenden- 
cies. Reifferscheid p. 458 — 461. Here also several traces lead us to 
the assumption of the existence of a History by Suetonius of the war 
between Pompey and Caesar, Antony and Octavian, which Cassius Dio 
and Jerome made use of (Reifferscheid p. 469 — 472). The ludicra 
historia (Reifferscheid p. 461 — 465) contained perhaps four books: nfot 
T(öy TiaQ Ekkrjat natö\öiv xal aycot/cjy ßißkCa ß' und nf^t riöy naocc 
^PMfxaCovg ncddioHy xal S^doQtdiy ßtßkia ß'. The fragments are collected 
by Reifferscheid p. 322—331; 332—346; on the first part see also E. 
Miller, Melanges de litt, grecque (Paris 1868) p. 435 sq. cf. p. 395 sq.; 
on the second the liber de puerorum lusibus ap. Serv. Ae. V 602. 

5. Reifferscheid (p. 455. 462) doubted, while Roth maintained, that 
Suetonius had also written in Greek. The parts of the historia ludicra 
concerning the Greek games could of course just as well have been 
translated by some later writer as composed in Greek originally; but 
the parts of the work nf^l dvaif^ij/uioy kfi^aoy edited by E. Miller (1. 1. 
p. 413 sqq.) are so specifically Greek in contents and design as to 
exclude the assumption of mere translation into Greek. We should 
therefore consider this facility of writing in two languages as a symptom 
of the increase of cosmopolitism and the preponderance of Greek 
literature, which soon became more frequent; see above p. 206. The 
horizon enlarged only as for as quantity was concerned, but the depth 
and accuracy of Varro were lost. Suetonius retained, however, Varro's 
sobriety apart from the errors of the antiquarians of his time (Reiffer- 
scheid p. 422 sq. 449); he professed the principles of Cicero and even 



214 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

pleaded for Cicero against his detractors (n. 2). The adherents of 
Fronto attempted, therefore, to obscure Suetonius (Reiff. p. 473 sq.), 
but in vain; from the third century Suetonius occupied more and more 
the position formerly held by Varro. 

6. Suetonius' diction aims above all at simplicity, lucidity and bre- 
vity (Vopisc. Firm. 1, 2: Suetonio . . familiäre fuit amare brevitatem); he 
always prefers the real expression, though it should even be improper, and 
hence he also uses a considerable number of Greek words (Thimm p. 
27 — 35), His aiming at brevity has caused many harsh omissions, and 
also his numerous participial constructions, which are more than 
even in Livy but lack his art (Thimm p. 90 sqq.). But even Suetonius 
could not quite escape the influence of his age; he betrays himself in 
many grecisms (Thimm p. 36 sq.), poetical phrases (ib. p. 61 sqq.) and 
constructions, especially a careless use of the ablative (p. 74 sqq.), sub- 
junctive (p. 80 sqq.) and infinitive (p. 85 sqq.) and also in his endea- 
vours to diversify his diction. H. R. Thimm, de usu atque elocutione 
C. Suetonii Tranquilli, Königsberg (1867) 98 pp. 

7. Of the works of Suetonius we possess only part of the viri 
illustres and the Lives of the Emperors. The work de viris illustribus 
treated in all probability de poetis, oratoribus, historicis, philosophis, 
grammaticis et rhetoribus, limiting it thus to literature and to the 
Roman part of it. After a list of the men treated of was given in the 
first place, the earlier history of the department in question was rela- 
ted and the principal representatives of it vere then discussed in chro- 
nological order. As it seems, Suetonius opened his series of orators 
with Cicero, and that of historians with Sallust; the preceding writers, 
whom Suetonius appears to have considered as possessed only of histo- 
rical interest, may have been touched upon in his introduction. Juvenal, 
Tacitus and Pliny the younger were not included in Suetonius' account, 
which (like his Caesares) terminated with the time of Domitian. His 
sources were chiefly Varro and the scriptores de viris ill. (see above 
207, 2), as well as Asconius and Fenestella. Of the earlier parts of 
the work we possess the excerpts made by Diomede (Reifferscheid p. 
370 — 379) and Jerome (in his Latin version of Eusebius' Chronicles) 
from the book de poetis are extant the lives of Terence, Horace, and 
partly of Lucanus (Virgil and Persius), thanks to the mss. of these poets; 
from the book de historicis we possess fragments of a life of Pliny the 
Elder. Last of all, of that part which was probably the last, de gram- 
maticis et rhetoribus, a section of peculiar interest and which was 
therefore copied separately at an early time, we possess the index 
(which in some instances supplies the praenomina), and the greater 
portion (25 of 26) is preserved in copies of the same ms. (of Henoch) 
which contained also the Dialogus and the Germania of Tacitus; see above 
329, 4. In general see Reifferscheid p. 363—425 (de poetis p. 370—405). 
H. Dörgens, on Suetonius' work de viris ill., Leipzig s. a. (1857). Suet. 
de gramm. et rhett. libelli . . rec. et adn. crit. instr. F. Osann, Giessen 



Suetonius. 215 

1854. H. Dörgens, Suetonius' Viri illustres in 4 books; the Latin text 
restored, translated and explained, Leipzig 1863. See also Th. Momm- 
sen, Philologus I p. 180 sqq. and below 425, 8. 

8. Suetonius' principal work is de vita Caesarum, dedicated 
to the praef. praet. C. Septicius Clarus (Lyd. de magistr. II 6), who 
held this position a. 119—121, hence published a. 120. The work is 
divided into eight books, so that the first six Emperors (Caesar until 
Nero) form one book each, the three Emperors of a. 69 the seventh, 
and the three Flavii the eighth. The beginning of the life of Caesar 
is missing, but Lydus seems still to have possessed it. The materials 
are collected from good sources with considerable care and judgment; 
Velleius, Josephus and Plutarch have not been employed, Tacitus also 
being rarely made use of and never mentioned, which is also the case 
with Pliny (above 308, 5) and Cluvius Rufus (above 309, 2). De Suetonii 
fontibus et auctoritate treatises by F. C. L. Schweiger (Gotting. 1830. 4.) 
and A. Krause (Berlin 1831. 86 pp.). Lehmann, Claudius p. 39 sqq. 
Oct. Clason, Plut. and Tac. (Berlin 1870) p. 70—73. Tac. and Suetonius, 
Breslau 1870. 134 pp. S. G. Dedering, de Suet, vita Caesaris P. I. Jena 
1870. 47 pp. The work is biographical, not properly historical, so that 
an account of contemporary events and pragmatical treatment might 
well be omitted, but a comprehensive sketch of the character of the 
subject of each biography ought not to have been omitted. The author 
does not possess the slightest psychological insight. Numerical state- 
ments but rarely occur, nor is there much chronological discrimination 
or political valuation. His Lives are not works of art. The treatment 
is monotonous : the early history of the Emperor, chronologically ar- 
ranged, his reign according to certain sections (his virtues and vices, 
mode of life, personal habits etc.), last of all death and signs announ- 
cing it, burial, subsequent events. In collecting details, even minute 
and obscene ones, Suetonius is indefatigable, and we may believe that 
he has never knowingly gone against or concealed truth. He rarely 
gives his individual judgment, though he is not wanting in moral 
earnestness (cf. e. g. Tib. 42 sqq. 49) and Commodus knew well why 
eum qui Tranquilli librum vitam Caligulae continentem legerat feris 
obici iussit (Lamprid. Comm. 10). That Suetonius was unable to flatter 
appears from his terminating with Domitian. Cf. C. L. Roth's pref. 
p. IX-XVL 

9. All the mss. of Suetonius have the same gap at the beginning 
andare, therefore, derived from the same original, which was, however, 
faulty and not free from interpolations. After the time of Charlemagne 
that ms. was repeatedly copied. The earliest and by far best ms. is 
the Memmianus (so-called from its earliest possessor de Mesmes), of 
the end of saec. IX, now at Paris (nr. 6115). Next to it we have 
the Vaticanus Lipsii saec. XI or XII, (G. Becker in the Symb. phil. 
Bonn. p. 687 sqq.), also the Mediceus tertius saec. XI. Other classes 
are represented by Mediceus I and Paris. 6116; the numerous mss. of 



216 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

saec. XV are worthless. Roth praef. p. XVII sq. XX— XXXII. On Ex- 
cerpts in miscellaneous mss. ib. p. XXXII— XXXIV. See also Becker's 
Quaest. critt. (n. 11). 

10. There were at one and the same time three Edd. princ, two 
of which appeared at Rome 1470, one Ven. 1471. The most important 
later editions are those of Phil. Beroaldus (Bologna 1493. 1506), Des. 
Erasmus (1518), Rob. Steplianus (Paris 1543), Is. Casaubonus (Geneva 
1595. 4. Paris 1610. fol.), J. G. Graevius (Utrecht 1672. 1691. 1703. 4.), 
S.Pitiscus (Utrecht 1690. Leovard. 1714. 2 vols.), P. Burmann (Amstelod. 
1736. 4. 2 vols.), J. A. Ernesti (Lips. 1748. 1775; recogn. F. A. Wolf, 
Lips. 1802. 4 vols.), Fr. Oudendorp (Lugd. Bat. 1751), J. H. Bremi (with 
explanations, Zürich 1800. 1820), C. G. Baumgarten-Crusius (Lips. 1816, 
3 vols.), C. B. Hase (Paris 1828. 2 vols.), and especially rec. C. L. Roth, 
Lips. Teubner 1858. 

11. Critical and exegetical contributions by D. Ruhnken (scholia 
ed. J. Geel, Lugd. B. 1828), H. E. Dirksen (Berlin 1850. 4.), G. Becker 
(Quaestiones criticae de Suet. Caess., Königsberg 1862. 4.; in Fleck- 
eisen's Jahrbb. 87, p. 193 sqq. 89, p. 839 sqq. and Symbola philol. Bonn, 
p. 687—694), R, Unger (Suetoniana, Friedland 1864. 4.), and others. 

343. An abridgment of Roman History until Augustus, 
Bellorum omnium annorura DCC libri duo, was composed by 
Fl or us, chiefly from Livy, but especially with rhetorical pur- 
poses, not without spirit, but with little taste, and much 
phraseology, historical truth being frequently misrepresented 
either intentionally or unconsciously. 

1. The title is in the cod. Bamberg.: luli Flori epitomae de T. 
Livio bellorum omnium annofum DCC libri duo. As the agreement in 
the name of Florus and in the period (n. 3), also in the rhetorical 
character and in many phraseological details (n. 4) tempt us to identify 
the author of the Bella with the rhetorician and poet P. Annius Florus 
(above 336, 7), as Mommsen and Halm do, we should be obliged to 
consider luli as a corruption of Publi, and Annei in the inferior mss. 
(n. 5) as a depravation of Annii. See Halm in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 69, 
p. 192 sq. 

2. Malalas VIII p. 211, 2 Bonn : xa^oig 6 oot^Mrarog <Pk(ÖQog vTif/uytj/ud- 
Ttcfp tx Tiöy Jtßiov ovyyQccjUjuccTioy.Ijixy is often copied verbatim, especially 
jn rhetorical phrases, but he is not the sole source of the abridgment; 
see U. Köhler, qua rat. Liv. ann. (1860) p. 23—25. 27—29. Lucan is 
also employed, 0. Jahn p. XL VII sq. Meinert, Wiener Jahrbb. XXVIII 
p. 186—191. See also Caesar and Sallust (Heyn p. 36—53). The author 
intends to give a panegyric on the Roman People. Praef. 3: in brevi 
quasi tabella totam eius imaginem amplectar, non nihil, ut spero, ad 
admirationem principis populi collaturus si pariter atque insemel uni- 



Suetonitis. Florus. 217 

versam magnitudinem eius ostendero. He intended non tarn narrare 
bella romana quam romanum imperium laudare (Augustin. civ. dei in 
19). Hence he always prefers the account most favourable to the Ro- 
mans, wherever he may chance to find it. Heyn p. 13—19. Indepen- 
dently of these intentional misrepresentations errorum nullum fingi 
potest genus cuius non luculenta exempla unaquaeque libri eius pagina 
suppeditet, U. Köhler p. 26, who gives a list of the writer's mistakes» 
confusions, contradictions, chronological and geographical errors etc. 
ib. p. 27, cf. 0. Jahn p. XXXIV. XLVI sq. Spengel p. 340-342. Heyn 
p. 3 — 9. 19 — 35. The arrangement is chiefly chronological, but aims 
also at a certain disposition according to the subject-matter, e. g, in 
the chapters de seditionibus (I 17, cf. II 2, 5), res in Hispania gestae 
(I 33). The author follows the division according to the various ages (see 
above 265, 3), i. e. infantia, adolescentia, iuventus, senectus, as he po- 
pulum rom. quasi unum hominem considerat (praef. 4). Jahn p. 
XXXVIII sq. Spengel p. 345 sq. After the account of the regal period 
(I 1) we get (I 2) a rhetorical 'anacephalaeosis' concerning it, and like- 
wise another at the close of the first book with rhetorical complaints 
of the increase of moral decay. The last bellum is (II 33) b. canta- 
bricura et asturicum, after which (II 34) pax Parthorum et consecratio 
Augusti. The first book treats of the good time of the Roman people, 
the second of its decline (since the time of the Gracchi). There is a 
great deal of moralizing (Spengel p. 328 — 331). As a specimen of the 
political views of the writer we quote II 1 : seditionum omnium causas 
tribunicia potestas excitavit, quae specie quidem plebis tuendae, . . re 
autem dominationem sibi adquirens, studium populi . . aucupabatur. 
Specimens of ridiculous exaggerations are given by Spengel p. 337 
— 339. 

3. On the time of composition see praef. 8: a Caesare Augusto 
in saeculum nostrum haut multo minus anni ducenti, quibus inertia 
Caesarum quasi consenuit atque decoxit, nisi quod sub Traiano prin- 
cipe movit lacertos et praeter spem omnium senectus imperii quasi 
reddita iuventute reviruit. F. N. Titze (De epitomes . . quae . . Flori 

, fertur aetate probabilissima etc. Linz 1804, and in his edition, 
Prag 1819) placed Florus under Augustus and considered all contradictory 
passages to be spurious ; see against him Meinert, Wiener Jahrb. XXVUI 
(1824) p. 169 — 201. Gossrau, de Flori qug, vixerit aetate, Quedlinburg 
1837. 4. (under Trajan). 

4. 0. Jahn p. XL VII: totus sermo declamatorem arguit et cuiusvis 
generis artificiis, figuris, sententiis male acuminatis ita refertus est ut 
pauper scriptoris ingenium et iudicium male formatum neminem latere 
possit. See the praefatio of Graevius. The multitude of bombastic and 
exaggerated passages bear down the few good ones. See Spengel 
p. 322—326. 343 sq. Just as the rhetorician's horizon is limited, 
his command of words is scanty, and he frequently repeats himself; he 
is especially fond of quasi, which he uses 125 times in his 81 chapters 
(quippe he has 75 times), and also of exclamations (Spengel p. 336 sq.). 



218 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

He imitates Lucan (n. 2) and Tacitus (E. Wölfflin, Philol. XXIX p. 557 
sq.) In his use of post he agrees with Tertullian, see Binsfeld, Rhein. 
Mus. XXVI p. 313. The bella have many phrases in common with the 
dialogue of P. Annius Florus (above 336, 7), e. g. per diversa terrarum 
in Halm's ed. p. 107, 11 and Bella I 40, 27. 41, 1. II 7, 2; victor 
gentium populus (rom.) ib. p. 106, 26 and Bella I 44, 3. II 1, 3. 34, 61. 
Halm in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 1854, p. 192 sq. 

5. Later centuries and the Middle Ages liked this abridgment on 
account o'Mts brevity and rhetoric. Jahn p. XL VIII sq. Especially Jor- 
danes employed it much (ib. p. VI sq.), and at a later time Malalaa 
(n. 2) quotes Florus probably from a Greek translation. Hence the 
number of mss. of Florus is very great. The best is the Bambergensis 
saec. IX (B. in Jahn's ed.). It resembles the ms. used by Jordanes de 
success, regn. All the other mss. are derived from a worse and inter- 
polated source ; the earliest of them is the Nazarianus (n) saec. IX at 
Heidelberg in which the work is divided into four books and attributed 
to L. Annaeus Florus. Jahn p. V — XV, and on the relation of B to L 
ib. p. XV-XXXIV. 

6. Ed. princeps Paris 1470. 4. The principal later editions are 
those by Gamers (Vienn. 1518. 4.), E. Vinetus (with Solinus 1554. 4. and 
elsewhere), J. Gruter (Heidelberg 1597), 01. Salmasius (ap. CommeL 
1609 and elsewhere), J. G. Graevius (Utrecht 1680), C. A. Duker (Lugd. 
B. 1722), J. F. Fischer (Lips. 1760), F. N. Titze (Prague 1819). The first 
critical edition is by 0. Jahn (Juli Flori epit. etc. rec. et emendavit, 
Lips. 1852); then recogn. C. Halm, Lips. Teubner 1854. 

7. Critical contributions by F. E. Köhler (Observ. criticae in Jul. 
Fl., Gotting. 1865. 42 pp.), J. Freudenberg (Rhein. Mus. XXH. p. 25— 30), 
J. P. Binsfeld (Quaest. Florianae crit., Düsseldorf 1869. 11 p. 4.). E. 
Bährens (lectiones latt., Bonn 1870, p. 5 — 19), H. Sauppe (de arte cri- 
tica in Flori BelHs recte facienda, Gott. 1870. 19 pp. 4.), H. Müller 
(Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 103 p. 565-575, and Rh. Mus. XXVI p. 350-352). 

8. On Florus see besides such earlier works as Heintze (de Floro 
non historico, sed rhetore, Weimar 1787 = Syntagm. opusc. p. 250 sq.) 
A. Baumstark in Pauly's Enc. HI p. 490—494. H. G. Plass, disp. de 
auctoribus cius quae vulgo fertur L. Annaei Flori epitome rerum rom., 
Verden 1858. 16 pp. L. Spengel, on the historical work of Florus, in 
the Transactions of the Munich Academy XXXVI (historical and philol. 
CL IX) 1861. p. 319—350. Jos. Reber, the History of Florus, Freising 
1865. 71 p. C. Heyn, de Floro historico, Bonn 1865. 53 pp. 

344. To the same period belongs, in all probability, Ju- 
stinus' abridgment of history, and Juventius Martialis' History 
of Caesar. The other historical writers were Greeks und wrote 
in Greek, e. g. Cassius Longinus and Phlegon. 

1. On Justinus see above 253, 3. 4. 6 — 11. 



II 



Florvs and other Historians. Salvitts Julianus. 219 

2. Sidon. Apoll. Epist. IX 14; si omittantur quae de titulis dicta- 
toris invicti (i. e. Julius Caesar) scripta Patavinis sunt voluminibus, quis 
opera Suetonii, quis luventii Martiali s historiam, quisve ad extremum 
Balbi ephemeridem (above 193, 1) fando adaequaverit ? 

3. Cassius Longinus, according to Eusebius Chron. I 41 (Mai scriptt. 
vett. nova collectio VIII p. 198) the author of XVIII libri quibus olym- 
piades CCXXVIII complexus est. He may, therefore, have lived about 
01. 228=A. D. 135 sqq. Cf. n. 4. H. Peter, hist. rom. I p. CLXXIV sq. 
Euseb. hist, eccles VI 13, 7: /uurjfuoyfvfi (Clem. Alex.) . . KaGaiavov w? 
xctl avTov /QoyoyQa(it'c(y nsnoirjufyov. 

4. On Phlegon sec. 341, 3. His chief work were the 14 books of 
'okvjuTiiadfg, quibus olympiades CCXXIX summatim continentur (Euseb. 
chron I 41). Cf. A. Westermann in Pauly's Real-Enc. V. p. 1540 sq. 

345. Of the Jurists of this time the most influential is 
the Sabinian Salvius Juli an us, who was charged by Adrian 
with collecting the Edicts of the praetors in the Republican 
time, which he examined and published in proper order; besides 
which he also wrote original legal works (especially a Digest). 
He enjoyed a high authority for several centuries. Junior cen- 
temporaries of this authority were the jurists Aburnius Valens, 
Pactumeius Clemens and Sex. Pomponius, the last important 
as the author of a short history of law and jurisprudence 
down to the time of Adrian which was also embodied in the Digest; 
but Pomponius was altogether a fertile writer on jurisprudence 
and remained active until a very high old age. 

1 . Pompon. Dig. I 2, 2 fin. : lavoleno Frisco (successit) Aburnius Valens 
etTuscianus (of whom nothing further is known), item Salvius lulianus. 
See above 337,3. The latter was ex Adrumetina colonia (Spart. Did. lulian. 
1, 2) in Africa and (on the mother's side) proavus of the subsequent 
Emperor Didius lulianus, bis consul (cf. Dig. XL 2, 5), praefectus urbi 
et iuris consultus (Spart. Did. lul. 1, 1). Spart. Hadr. 18, 1 : cum iu- 
dicaret in consilio habuit . . iuris consultos et praecipue lulium Celsum 
(cf. above 337, 2), Salvium lulianum etc. Fronto ad Caes. IV 1 sq. 
Julian is ill and Fronto visits him to please M, Aurelius. Even the 
Divi fratres Dig. XXXVII 14, 17 pr.: plurium etiam iuris auctorum, sed 
et Salvii luliani amici nostri (cf. M. Aurel. ap. Fronto Ep. ad. Caes. IV 
2), clarissimi viri, banc sententiam fuisse (he was dead then, as this 
shows). His sepulchre was miliario quinto via Labicana (Spart. Did. 
lul. 8, 10). 

2. Eutrop. VIII 17: Salvii luliani, qui sub divo Hadriano perpetuum 
composuit edictum. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2147 (Hadriani 15=131 A. D.): 
Salvius lulianus perpetuum composuit edictum. On the date seeMommsen, 



220 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

on the Chronogr. (1850) p. 673, n. 1. Justinian's Constit. Ji<fo)x(v 18: 
'A&Qi,(tv6g . . oTf T« nuQa joiv n^anta^oiv xca' trog (xaarou vofio&iiov^ufva 
tp ßgtcxft rivt Gvp^yf ßißkiio, rov xqartojov 'lovkutvov nQogrovro naQukaßüv^ 
Constit. Tanta (Cod. I 17, 2 of a. 533) 18: et ipse lulianus, legum et 
edicti perpetui subtilissimus conditor, in suis libris hoc retulit . . et 
divus Hadrianus in compositione edicti et scto quod earn secutum est 
etc. A. F. Rudorff, Edictum perpet. (Lips. 1869) p. 9 sq. Cod. Ill 33, 
15 (of a. 530) : summum auctorem iuris scientiae Salvium lulianum. IV 
5, 10 (of a. 530) : sublimissimum testem adducit Salvium lulianum, 
summae auctoritatis hominem et praetoriani edicti ordinatorem. VI 61, 
5 (of a. 473) : luliani, tantae existimationis viri atque disertissimi iuris- 
periti, Africanus and Terentius Clemens. 

3. Original works by Julianus Digestorum libri XC (Ind. Flor.) , 
376 fragments of which were admitted into Justinian's Digest, both the 
title and the design of Julian's work influencing Justinian's collection. 
It contained continuous explanations on jurisprudence in connexion 
with the questions of auditores and answers returned by the professor. 
Th. Mommsen, Journal for Jurispr. IX p. 82—88. The first 58 books 

ollowed the order of the Edict and were composed and published under 
Adrian; the later books under Antoninus Pius; see H. H. Fitting (above 
39, 5) p. 4—7. Cf. RudorfF's Hist, of Roman Law I p. 171. K. Viertel, 
de vitis ictorum, Königsb. 1868, p. 6 — 8. Notes on this work were 
written by Ulpius Marcellus and Cervidius Scaevola, as early as in the 
reigns of Pius, then by Mauricianus and Paulus. Julian himself wrote 
notes on Urseius Ferox (above 311, 3) in four books (Ind. Flor.; but 
see also Viertel, de vitis ictorum p. 18—20), which were epitomized in 
41 places of the Digest, and on Minicius (above 337, 6) in six books 
(? cf. K. Viertel p. 24 — 26). There are four fragments of Julian's liber 
singularis de ambiguitatibus in the Digest. In general see Hommel 
Paling. I p. 223 — 318. The quotation lulianus libro I ad edictum (Dig. 
Ill 2, 1) is due to a confusion of the revision of the Edictum by Julian 
(n. 2) with an original work; Zimmern, Hist, of Roman private Law 
L 1 p. 132, n. 16. 

4. Heinneccius, de Salvio luliano, Ictorum sua aetate coryphaeo, 
Halle 1732. 4 = 0pp. IL p. 798-818. VH. p. 196—261. F. A. Biener, 
de S. I. meritis de edicto praetorio rite aestimandis, Lips. 1809. 4. 

5. L. Fulvius C. f. Pupin(ia) Aburnius Valens (Orelli 3153 cf. 
Dig. XXXII 78, 6). As the inscription in Orelli 3153 (where he is called 
clarissimus iuvenis) proves that he was nominal praef. urbi a. 118 (before 
entering the Senate), he must have been born a short time before a. 100. 
He wrote Actiones in at least seven books (Dig. XXXVI 4, 15) and libri 
fideicommissorum, also in at least seven books (Dig. XXXIII 1, 15), 
which latter work is used in 19 places in the Digest. Cf. Hommel, 
Paling. II p. 533—536. As the latter quotes not only lavolenus (ib. 
XXXIII 1, 15), but also (Salvius) lulianus (ib. IV, 4, 33: lulianus . . 
respondit XXXU 94: lulianus . . putavit) and as Trajan is designated as 



il 



Junsts : Julianifs, Pomponius, and others. 221 

divus (XLIX 14, 42), he seems to have survived Julian. He is no doubt 
the Fulvius (so Mommsen instead of Salvius) Valens in Capitol. Ant. 
Pi. 12, 1: usus est iuris peritis . . Fulvio Valente. Cf. Dig. XL VIII 
2, 7, 2: divus Pius Salvio Valenti rescripsit. P. F. Smeding, de Salvio 
Aburnio Valente eiusque quae in Dig. adsunt fragmentis, Lugd. Bat. 
1824. Zimmern, Hist, of Roman private Law I 1. p. 334 sq. K. Viertel, 
de vitis ictorum p. 30 — 33. Th. Mommsen, Journal of Rom. jurispr. 
IX p. 90, n. 21. 

6. Pompon. Dig. XL 7, 21, 1: Pactumeius Clemens aiebat etc. 
He is best known to us from an inscription found at Constantine, Renier, 
inscr. de I'Alg. 1812 = Henzen 6483: P. Pactumeio P. f. Quir. Clementi, 
Xvir stlit. iud., Quaest., Leg. Rosiani Gemini (Dig. XLVHI 5, 6, 2. XLVIII 
6, 6) soceri sui procos(ulis) in Achaia, trib. pleb., fetiali, legato divi 
Hadriani Athenis . . , praetori urbano, leg. divi Hadriani ad rationes 
civitatium Syriae putandas, legato eiusdem in Cilicia, Consul! (suff". a. 
138 according to Borghesi), legato in Cilicia Imp. Antonini Aug., leg. 
Rosiani Gemini procos. in Africa, iurisconsulto, patrono IV coloniarum. 
Cf. ib. 1813 sq. 

7. Sex. Pomponius lived and wrote both under Adrian and M. 
Aurelius or at least under the divi fratres. The expression in his 
Epistolae b. VII (Dig. XL 5, 20) is significant: ego discendi cupiditate, 
quam solam vivendi rationem optimam in LXXVHI""» annum aetatis duxi. 
As he styles Antoninus divus in the same book (Dig. I 12, 14), he wrote 
this at the very earliest a. 162, and could not, therefore, have been 
born earlier than A. D. 84. That he was a contemporary of Julian, 
appears partly from the fact that he terminates his history of jurispru- 
dence (n. 10) with the latter, partly because they quote each other 
mutually (n. 8). Pomponius himself seems to have survived Julian, as 
Julian used only one work of Pomp., while Pomp, used several of Julian's; 
see n. 8. As his teachers Pomp, names the Jurists Pegasus (Dig. XXXI 
43, 2: P. solitus fuerat distinguere), Aristo (ib. XL 5, 20: putabat. 
XXXVI 1, 72: aiebat, cf. XXXIX 5, 18. Fragm. Vat. 83. 88) and Octavenus 
(XL 4, 61 : aiebat. 5, 20 : putabat). He frequently appeals in his works 
to the veteres, especially Q. Mucius, Ser. Sulpicius, Trebatius, Alfenus, 
Labeo. 

8. On the relation between Julian and Pomponius. Pomp, uses 
Julian's Digest and frequently quotes him, at least in his libri ex Plautio, 
Epistolae et variae lectiones, and also in the libri ad edictum; cf. Dig 
VI 1, 21 (Pomponius libro XXXIX« Ad edictum scribit etc. lulianus 
autem etc. idque Pomponius libro XXXIV» Variarum lectionum probat). 
XIV 6, 19 (lulianus scribit). XXXIX 2, 18, 4 (Pomponius relata luliani 
scriptura dicit non se improbare etc.). XL 4, 40 (from Pomp. libr. V. 
ex Plaut.: lulianus ait). 61 (et lul. ait). XL 5, 20 (apud lulianum ita 
scriptum est. . . ea quae lulianus scribit, from Epist. VII). XLIX 14, 
35 (from Epist. XI: apud lulianum scriptum est). Fragm. Vat. 75 
(Pomponius ait libro VII ex Plautio, relata luliani sententia. . . urgetur 



222 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

tamen luliani sententia argumentis Pomponii). Julian (in his Digest) 
employs Pomp. 's books ad Sabinum; cf. Fragm. Vat. 88 (lulianus subicit 
Sextum quoque Pomponium referre). Dig. XXVIII 5, 41 (ut refert Sex. 
Pomponius, cf. Mommsen, Journal of jurispr. VII p. 478 note). XVII 
2, 63, 9 (ait lulianus Sextum Pomponium referre Sabinum respondentem 
etc.). Cf. Fitting p. 8 sq. 11. 12. 13. The succession of lulianus et 
Pomponius Dig. XXVIII 2, 9, 2. XLV 1, 2, 5. Cf. Gai. Inst. II 218 
(luliano et Sexto placuit). There is no valid reason to distinguish two 
Jurists of the name of Pomponius. Rudorff, Hist, of Roman Law I p. 
172 sq. Fitting p. 13 sq. Mommsen 1. 1. p. 478 sq. 

9. The works of Pomponius. Enchiridii liber singularis, Ad Sabinum 
libri XXXV and Fideicommissorum libri V, all written under Adrian, 
the Notes ad Sabinum before Julian's Digest; Ad edictum at least 79 
books, written before Julian's Edition of the Edictum perpetuum under 
Antoninus Pius ; Ex Plautio libri VII, under Antoninus Pius , and 
probably also Senatusconsultorum libri V; Epistolarum et variarum 
lectionum libri (Dig. IV 4, 50. L 12, 14), if these two titles belong to- 
gether, at least 41 books, of the time of the Jivi fratres (see n. 7). 
Probably not before Antoninus Pius the work de stipulationibus in at 
least eight books, and under Pius at the very latest the Regularum liber 
singularis. We do not know the date of Enchiridii liber I. The same 
holds good of the collection of the legal views of Aristo (above 337, 4) from 
his notae, decreta, responsa and epistulae; see Dig. XXIV 3, 44 (from 
Paulus) : Nerva et Cato responderunt, ut est relatum apud Sex. Pompo- 
nium Digestorum ab Aristone libro quinto; ibidem Aristoni consensit. 
The works of Pomp, are used in the Digest in altogether 585 places; 
see the collection in Hommel, Palingenesia II. p. 303 — 386. They were 
valued both for their casuistry and for the excerpts they contained from 
the works of earlier Jurists. 

10. The Enchiridion (liber sing.) seems to have contained an ex- 
planation of the fundamental Law of nations (Dig. L 16, 249) and a 
sketch of the History of Roman law and jurisprudence until Julian 
(Dig. I 2, 2). See above I p. 246, d. Separate editions by E. Booking 
(Bonn 1831) and F. Osann (recogn. et annot. crit. instr., Giessen 1847). 
§. 41—44 cum notis ed. E. Schrader, Berlin, 1837. 14 pp. 4. 

11. H. B. Reinold, de Sex. Pomponio icto, Würzburg 1710 (= Opusc. 
p. 592 — 548). Heineccius de Sex. P. eximio aevi sui icto, 0pp. Ill 2. 
p. 66 — 126. Zimmern, Hist, of Roman private Law I 1. p. 337—340, 
Fitting (above 39, 5) p. 8—14. 



346. Rhetoricians of the time of Adrian were the lear- 
ned Spaniard Antonius Julianus and Castricius. The majority 
and those who possessed most authority wrote in Greek, e. g. 
Adrian himself, Polemon, Lollianus, Dionysius of Miletus, 



1 



Jurists and Rhetoricians. 223 

Favorinus and others. Only the scholastic declamations of 
Calpurnius Flaccus (a writer not known to us from other sources) 
were written in Latin. They are in existence. 

1. Gellius I 4, 1 : Antonius lulianus rhetor perquam fuit honesti 
atque amoeni ingenii. doctrina quoque ista utiliore ac delectabili vete- 
rumque elegantiarum cnra et memoria multa fuit. ad hoc scripta omnia 
antiquiora tam curiose spectabat et aut virtutes pensitabat aut vitia 
rimabatur ut indicium esse factum adamussim diceres. ib. 8: ad hunc 
modum lulianus enodabat diiudicabatque veterum scriptorum sententias, 
quae apud eum adulescentes delectitabant. XIX 9, 2: venerat nobiscum 
ad eandem cenam Antonius lulianus rhetor, docendis publice iuvenibus 
magister, hispano ore florentisque homo facundiae et rerum litterarumque 
veterum peritus. Specimens of his erudition ib. IX 1, 2 sqq. XV 1, 4 
sqq. XVIII 5, 5 sqq. XIX 9, 8 sqq. XX 9. That he instructed Gellius, 
appears from Gell. XVIII 5, 1 : cum A. I. rhetore, viro hercle bono et 
facundiae florentis, complures adulescentuli, familiäres eins, Puteolis 
aestivarum feriarum ludum . . agitabamus. Cf. ib. IX 15, 1 sqq. cum 
A. I. rhetore per feriarum tempus . . Neapolin concesseramus. XV 1, 
1 sqq: declamaverat A. I. rhetor . . feliciter. . . ergo familiäres eins 
circumfusi undique eum prosequebamur domum. Later published writings 
seem to be alluded to ib. XVIII 5 12: hoc tum nobis lulianus . . dixit, 
sed eadem ipsa post etiam in pervulgatis commentariis scripta offendimus. 
Minuc. Fel. Oct. 33, 4: si Romanis magis gaudes, ut transeamus veteres, 
Antonii luliani de ludaeis require : iam scies nequitia sua banc eos (the 
Jews) meruisse fortunam. This is perhaps an allusion to a speech de 
lud. with numerous historical allusions. 

2. S. Castricius, rhetoricae disciplinae doctor, qui habuit Romae 
locum principem declamandi ac docendi, summa vir auctoritate gravitate- 
que et a divo Hadriano in mores atque litteras spectatus, quo . . usus 
sum magistro. Gellius XIII 22, 1. cf. XI 13, 1. I 6, 4. II 27, 3. Fronto 
epist. ad am. II 2 (Castricius noster). 

3. On Adrian's declamations see above 341, 3; on Aelius Verus 
below 149, 2; on Heliodorus below 347, 8. 

4. Philostr. vit. soph. II 14 (p. 71, 24 sqq. Bibl. Teubner) on Herodes 
Atticus Iloksfxcjya (n. 6) xcd ^'ußcoQiyoy (n. 5) xcd ^xonskiccroy iy 
(ftdctaxakoig kavrov ^y( xcd lifxovydo) tw ' A^rjvaiM i(foiTr3<J(y, . . rovg 
df x^iTtxovg Tiöy koyojy Ofccysuft Tf Tw Kpidioi xcd MovvcaiM lio ix 
Tqcdkioiv avysyiufTo xcd Tccvqco tw Tvqda (below 348, 2) Inl tcdg 
nkanovog do'^aig. 

5. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2148 = Hadr. 16 = 134 A. D.: Favorinus 
et Polemo rhetores insignes habentur. Favorinus of Arelate (Aries), 
the pupil of Dion (Chrysostomos), on friendly terms with Plutarch and 
Fronto (see below 352, 1), a writer on general culture, e. g. the author 
of philosophical treatises {üvQQoiyfioiTQÖnot and ' ATiojuyrj/doyfv^caa) and 



224 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

of a Tlat^ToöccTii] laioQia, acquainted also with Roman literature and 
opposed to the antiquarian party (Gellius I 10, cf. VIII 2. XYIH 7. 
XX 1, 20); see Philostr. vitae soph. I 8 with Kayser (Heidelberg 1838) 
p. 181 — 183. J. L. Marres, de Favorini Arelatensis vita, studiis, scriptis, 
Utrecht 1853. 146 pp. See below 358, 1. 

6. On (Ausonius) Polemo, in Smyrna (c. a. 85 — 140) see Philostr. 
vitae soph. I 25 with C. L. Kayser's notae p. 267 sq. L. Preller in 
Pauly's Enc. V. p. 1793 sq. 

7. (L. Egnatius Victor) LoUianus nQovffrr] jov 'Ad^^ypct S^oovov 
(of Sophists,) TTQiÖTog, see Philostr. v. soph. I 23 with Kayser p. 261 sq. 

8. Dio LXIX 3: toV 4*((ovoiQXvov Toy Ftdc'cTtji^ Toy if Jtoyvfftoy 
Toy Mdi^fftoy Tovg aoi^iGTccg etc. On the latter see Philostr. vitae soph. 
I 22; see below 347, 9. 851, 4. 

9. The 51 declamationes of Calpurnius Flaccus (Excerptae X 
rhetorum minorum) were first published by Petr. Pithoeus. together with 
the declamations wrongly attributed to Quintilian, (above 320, 11), 
Paris 1580; then in the editions of the latter by J. Fr. Gronov (Lugd. 
B. 1665), U. Obrecht (Strassburg 1698. 4.) and P. Burmann (Lugd. B. 
1720. 4.). The time of this Calp. Fl. is quite uncertain. 



347. The principal grammarian of the age of Adrian 
is Q. Terentius Scaurus, the author of a work on Latin gram- 
mar and poetry, and of commentaries on Plautus and Virgil, 
perhaps also on Horace. We possess by him only a small 
treatise de orthographia, which is of importance for the history 
of the language. To the same period belong also Velleius 
Celer, Aelius Melissus, and Domitius; among the Greeks the 
grammarians Vestinus and especially Heliodorus. 

1. Gellius XI 15, 3: Terentius Scaurus, divi Hadriani tempo- 
ribus grammaticus vel nobilissimus, inter ilia quae de Caeselli (above 
320, 4) erroribus composuit. Cf. Capitolin. Ver. 2, 5: audivit (Verus) 
Scaurinum grammaticum latinum, Scauri filium qui grammaticus Hadri= 
ani fuit. His principal work is quoted by Charisius and Diomede (from 
Romanus) and in the Explanationes in artem Donati (Keil IV p. 486 
sqq.). Charis. I p. 133, 1 K. : Scaurus in arte grammatica. 136, 16: 
Scaurus artis grammaticae libris. But ib. 146, 36: Scaurus lib ro III we 
are obliged by the connexion of the text to understand of the auto- 
biography of M. Aemililius Scaurus (above 131, 10). Ptufin. Excerpt, 
p. 2711 P. = 384 Gaisf. : Scaurus in commentario Plauti in Pseudulo 
dicit etc. Ritschl, Parerga p. 375 sq. Commentaries on the Aeneid 
and perhaps also on the Bucolica; see Ribbeck Prolegg. p. 172. Charis. 
p. 202, 26 sq. K. : impariter Horatius epistolarum (II 3, 75) : versibus 



Terentivs Scamnts and other rrt-ammarians. 225 

impariter iunctis, ubi Q. Terentius Scaurus in commentariis in artem 
poeticam libro X etc. The illusion raised by this of an extensive work 
on Horace's A. p. is destroyed by ib. 210, 19 sqq. Maro (Aen. I 1) : 
Troiae qui primus ab oris, ubi Q. Ter. Sc. commentariis in artem poe- 
ticam libro X etc. Gräfenhan (Hist, of class. Phil. IV p. 300 sq.) pro- 
poses grammaticam in the place of poeticam. The quotations of defi- 
nitions of rhetorical figures (e. g. hypozeuxis, macrologia) by Scaurus 
are rather in favour of a manual of poetry which comprised also rhe- 
toric. The only uncertain trace of a commentary on Horace is in Por- 
phyr, on Hor. S. II 5, 92 (II p. 308 H.) : capite obstipo : tristi ac severo. 
Scauro inclinato dicit; cf. Zangemeister (above 235, 10) p. 40 sqq. 
The fragments of Scaurus do not exhibit an antiquarian tendency, and 
he seems to have rather belonged to the Ciceronians. 

2. The small treatise de orthographia ad Theseum (ap. Putsche 
p. 2249—2264) is valuable for the old forms it contains, p. 2262: haec 
sunt quae urgent! tempore complecti tibi in presentia potui, Theseu. 
si quid exemplis defecerit vel quaestionibus, subiungetur. nam quod ad 
rem maxime pertinet, regulam vides. Then follow detailed observations 
in loose order, which do not, however, all relate to orthography; at 
least the stylistic observations concerning the use of prepositions are 
possibly by a different author. The close is: brevitatem huius libelli, 
si tibi videtur adglutinabis ei quern de litteris novis (Bergk: of the 
Emperor Claudius) habes a me acceptum. W. Brambach, on Lat. spel- 
ling p. 47—49. On the mss. of the treatise see Usener, Rhein. Mus. 
XXIV p. 108 sq. 

3. Priscian. X 57, p. 547 Htz. : Velleius (1): Vellius) Celer respon- 
dens Hadriano imperatori per epistulam de hoc (the quantity of am- 
bitus) interroganti . . ostendit etc. He is perhaps identical with KfkfQ 
Tf/yoyQai^ogy ßccfTiktxtöy /Lth' tni<Jrok(öy nQOGTurrjg, Jiorvffio) (ff rot^ ix 
/ufiQccxf'ov )(Qovov diccifOQoc ap. Philostr. vit. soph. I 22. Comp. n. 9. 

4. Gellius XVIII 6, 1 sqq.: Aelius Melissus in nostra memoria fuit 
Romae summi quidem loci inter grammaticos id temporis; sed maiore 
in litteris erat iactantia et aomoifCa quam opera, is praeter alia quae 
scripsit complura librum composuit . . cui titulus est . . de loquendi 
proprietate. 

5. Gell. XVIII 7, 1 sqq.: Domitio, homini docto celebrique in urbe 
Roma grammatico, cui cognomentum Insano factum est, quoniam erat 
natura intractabilior et morosior, ei Domitio Favorinus noster cum 
forte . . obviam venisset atque ego cum Favorino essem etc. 

6. Q. Octavius Avitus belongs perhaps to this time, see above 
221, 3. 

7. On Sulpicius Apollinaris, whose influence commenced in this 
time, see below 353, 2. 

8. On lulius Vestinus see Suidas s. v. 

15 



226 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

9. Dio LXIX 3: JtovvGtog (above 346, 8) nqog toV (ahov (Adrian) 
Miov ' Hkto&toqov, TOV rag tniorokdg avjov duiynyoyra, sinfiv kiytrcu 
oil, KcitC((Q /Qt]jLic(T(c {.i^v Goi x(cl Ti^utjy d'ovvc'.i, (XvyaTai, QtjroQCi di as 
7ioiiJG(a ov (fvycaai. Cf. n. 3. He was all the more important as g:ram- 
marian, as he is no doubt identical with the writer on metres, on whom 
see R. Westphal, allg. Metrik. (1865) p. 137—146 = Metrik^ I (1867) 
p. 214 sqq. 0. Hense, Investigations concerning Heliodorns, Leipzig 
(Teubner) 1870. 170 pp. 

348. Philosophical studies were in this period chiefly re- 
presented by the Greeks, e. g. by Plutarch and the Platonic 
philosopher Calvisius Taurus. Among the technical writers 
the most eminent is Caelius Aurelianus, an African author on 
medic art, by whom we possess two works on acute and 
chronic diseases, in which he appears as a methodical phy- 
sician and accurate observer. His diction is, however, obscure 
and incorrect. 

1. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2135 - Hadr. 3 — 119 A. D.: Plutarchus 
Chaeroneus et Sextus et Agathobulus et Oenomaus philosophi insignes 
habentur. Ad 2142 =r Hadr. 10 = 126 A. D.: Qiiadratus discipulus 
apostolorum (cf. de vir. ill. 19) et Aristides Atheniensis noster philo- 
sophus libros pro Christiana religione Hadriano dedere compositos. See 
also above 346, 4. 

2. Hie-ronym. ad a. Abr. 2161 = 145 A. D. : Taurus Berytius pla- 
tonicae sectae philosophus clarus habetur. Gellius VII 10, 1 : philoso- 
phus Taurus, vir memoria nostra in disciplina platonica celebratus. 
XVIII 10, 3: Calvisius Taurus philosophus. See also above 346, 4. On 
the method of his instruction see Gell. I 26, 1 sqq. II 2, 1 sqq. (ad 
philos. T. Athenas visendi eius gratia venerat vir clariss.) VII 13, 1 sqq. 
X 19. XVII 8 and 20. XVHI 10, 3 sqq. XIX 6, 2 sq. XX 4. All his 
works were in Greek. 

3. On a version of the genealogiae of Hyginus see above 257, 7. 

4. On a chorographia derived from Pliny's n. h. see above 308, 7. 

5. Caelius Aurelianus of Sicca in Numidia lived between So- 
ranus (above 294, 8) and Galenus, as he never mentions the latter, 
while Soranus is his chief source. Cf. acut. II 1 : Soranus, cuius haec 
sunt quae latinizanda suscepimus. II 28: cuius verissimas apprehen- 
siones latino sermone describere laboramus. chron. II 7: Mnaseas et 
Soranus, cuius etiam nos amamus indicium. The work on acute diseases 
(celerum or acutarum passionum) consists of three books (Paris 1533 
and J826), the one on chronic diseases (tardarum or chronicarum pas- 
sionum) of five (Basil. 1529 fol. Aid. 1547). Both edited together Lugd. 
1566, better Amstelaed. 1709. 4. (cur. J.C.Amman, with notes by v. Al- 
meloveen) = Venet. 1757. 4. Lausanne 1774. Also in the collected 



Catlius Aiireliamts. Anniamts. 227 

editions of the medici veteres. Cf. V. Rosen, on a fragment of C. A., 
Hermes IV p. 141 — 144. Both works are remarkable for their faithful 
and vivid description of diseases, and for numerous quotations of earlier 
writers and their opinions; the Latin is interesting as a specimen of 
African latinity. Cassiod. div. script, inst. II 31 recommends him. A 
number of other works of Aur. which he occasionally refers to (see 
Amman's ed. p. 710), such as muliebrium passionum libri, de passionum 
causis, have been lost. C. G. Kühn, de C. A. inter methodicos medicos 
baud ignobili, Lips. 1816. 4. = Opusc acad. II p. 1 sqq. Choulant, 
Manual of the bibliography of earlier medical art 206 — 209. See, 
however, below 456, 3 and 4. 

6. On the basis capitolina with a votive inscription of various 
q^uarters and numerous vici of Rome addressed to Adrian (on the Ca- 
pitol) see Gruter p. 249 sqq. E. Braun, Philologus Suppl. II p. 405 sqq. 
H.Jordan, on an Investigation of the so-called Capitoline map of Rome, 
Monthly Reports of tbe Berlin Academy, 1867, p. 526—548. A. Klüg- 
mann, Philol. XXVII p. 474—493. 

349. Adrian's time did not produce any poets of name. 
Annianus, however, wrote a poem on the charms of rural life 
(Falisca) and composed Fescennine verses. Adrian himself 
composed Latin verse, and so did also Annius Florus, L. Ae- 
lius Verus, Voconius and others. It agreed with the dilet- 
tante character of these pursuits that such metres as the 
iambic dimeter became now favourites. 

1. On Adrian's poems see above 341, 3 and 5; on Annius Florus 
above 336, 7; on Voconius above 341, 5. 

2. Spartian. Hadrian. 23, 11: adoptavit (a. 135?) Ceionium Com- 
modum Verum invitis omnibus eumque Aelium Verum Caesarem appel- 
lavit. Aelius 2, 6: hie . . primum L. Aurelius Verus est dictus, sed ab 
Hadriano adscitus in Aeliorum familiam . . et appellatus est Caesar. 
5, 1 sq.: fuit . . eruditus in litteris, . . eloquentiae celsioris, versu fa- 
cilis. 4, 7: cum de provincia Aelius redisset atque orationem pulcher- 
rimam, quae hodieque legitur, sive per se seu per scriniorum aut di- 
cendi magistros pararet, qua kalendis lanuariis Hadriano patrifgratias 
ageret, . . kalendis ipsis lanuariis (a. 891 = 138) perit. This L. Ceio- 
nius Commodus Verus Aelius (Helius) Caesar is the father of L. Verus 
(below 360, 1 and 6). 

3. Gell. VI 7, 1 : Annianus poeta praeter ingenii amoenitates 
litterarum quoque veterum et rationum in litteris oppido quam peritus 
fuit et sermocinabatur mira quadam et scita suavitate. ib. 3: se audi- 
ente Probum grammaticum (above 296) . . legisse dicit. This shows 
that Ann, was not probably born after a. 70. IX 10, 1 : Ann. poeta et 
plerique cum eo eiusdem Musae viri. XX 8, 1 : A. poeta in fundo suo 
quem in agro Falisco possidebat . . me et quosdam item alios familia- 



228 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch 

res vocavit. Auson. cento nupt. (Idyll. XIII) s, f. : nam quid Anniani 
fescenninos? Lachmann ad Terent. Maur. p. XIII — XV considers A. to 
be the poeta Faliscus to whom Terentian. v. 1816—1821 ascribes lu- 
dicra carmina, cf. ib. 1998: talia docta Phalisca legimus. Mar. Vict, 
p. 122, 12 K. (Gramm. VI.) : quod genus metri Annianus Faliscum car- 
men inscribit. L. Müller, Rh. Mus. XXV p. 337 — 344 and in his edition 
of Rutil. Nam. p. 34—44. 

4. Gellius XIX 7, 1: in agro Vaticano lulius Paulus poeta, vir 
bonus et rerum (cf. XIII 18,2: morum) litterarumque veterum inpense 
doctus, herediolum tenue possidebat. eo saepe nos ad sese vocabat etc. 
Cf. ib. V 4, 1 and XVI 10, 9 (I, P. poeta, vir memoria nostra doctissi- 
mus). I 22, 9 (homo in m. n. d.). Perhaps (according to H. Meyer) 
he is identical with that Paulus who commented on Antipater and 
Afranius (above 142, 5 extr.) H. Peter, hist. latt. I p. CCXXXI sq. 

5. Suid. V. Msao/u^drjg (II p. 791 sq. Bernh.): Kq^^, IvQixog, yfyoviag 
tni TMt^ A&Quu^ov XQouaty, anflfv^SQog avrov rj tv Tolg fiaktara <fflog. 
y^aqxt ovv fig AvrCvooj^ hnaivov . . y.cd akka fha<f)OQK /Jfkij. Capitolin. 
Ant. Pi. 7, 7 sq.: salaria multis subtraxit quos otiosos videbat accipere^ 
. . unde etiam Mesomedi lyrico salarium imminuit. Hieronym. ad a 
Abr. 2160 =: 144 A. D.: Mesomedes Crctensis citharicorum carminum 
(in Greek) musicus poeta agnoscitur. We possess his hymn on 
Nemesis. 



3. The time of the Antonines, 
A. D. 138—180. 

a) Antoninus Pius, A. D. 138 — 161. 

350. Antoninus Pius (a. 86—161), though he did not write 
himself, still gave literature peace and space by his excellent 
reign. The genius of the nation had, however, already sunk 
so much that a man like Fronto could be the highest autho- 
rity, and that a certain life was visible only in the depart- 
ments of jurisprudence and of grammar. Greek literature posses- 
sed in this time, besides vain declaimers and Pausanias, the 
ingenious writer Lucian and the astronomer Ptolemy. 

1. T. Aurelius Fulvus Boionius Arrius Antoninus, born 19 Sept. 
86, Cons. 120, Procos. in Asia probably 128, adopted, after the death 
of Verus (n. 3) by Adrian 25 Feb. 138 as T. Aelius Hadrianus Antoni- 
nus, Emperor after Antoninus Pius, frequently abridged d. A. or d. P. 
See G. R. Sievers in Pauly's Encyclop. lip. 1192—1197 and in his 
Studies on the Hist, of the Roman Emperors (Berlin 1870) p. 171—224. 
X. Bossart and J. Müller, On the Hist, of the Emperor A. P., in M. 
Büdinger's Investigations on Roman Imperial Hist. II (1868) p. 289 
—321. 



Anton'mu.f Piu.s. Fronto. 229 

2. Capitolin. Anton. Pi. 2, 1 : fuit . . eloquentiae nitidae, littera- 
tiirae praecipuae. 11, 3: rhetoribus et philosophis per omnes provincias 
et honores et salaria detulit. Cf. Modestin. Dig. XXVII 1, 6 from an 
intöToki^ -AyiMuCvov rov F.vasßovg : at ^ufy tkctjTovg nokftq dvyat/rat 
Tifrif i(a(iovg ((TfXftg */***' xat TQfig ooiftardg xat yQau/uaTtxovg lovg 
iaovg (the larger ones seven physicians and four professors, the greatest 
ten physicians and five ^ijioQfg and yQau/ucatxoi). (§. 7.) tkqI de näv 
(fjikoGoif>ioy Tj HVTi] dutra^tg tov fliov ovrio kiyfi,. (^ikoaot^ioy O'f ovx 
hii/i^f] aQi^/uog ö\d to anaviovg sjpai rovg (^tkoaotfiovj/jug. Capitol. 
Ant. Pi. 11, 3: orationes plerique alienas dixerunt quae sub eius no- 
mine feruntur ; Marius Maximus eius proprias fuisse dicit. An oratio ' 
of A. P. and Verus (gratiarum actio) is mentioned by Fronto ep. ad 
Caes. V 38 sq. Two letters of A. P. to Fronto in Naber's ed. of Front. 
Epist. p. 163 sq. 167 sq. The Rescripts issued by A. P. are collected 
by Haenel, Corpus legum p. 101 — 114. 

3. Pausanias' ten books of nf(jt,riyrjatg lijg 'j£kk('(dog were composed 
in long intervals, b. I and II still under Adrian, and not finished before 
a. 185. Cf. Hans Reichardt in Pauly's Encycl. V p. 1258—1264. 

4. On Lucian of Samosata (born c. a. 120) cf. L. Preller in Pauly's 
Encycl. IT p. 1165 — 1181. Wissowa, on the interior history of the 
second century of the Christian era from Lucian, Breslau 1848. 1853. 4. 
W. A. Passow, Lucian and history, Meiningen 1854. 24 pp. 4, 

5. On the astronomer, mathematician and geographer Claudius 
Ptoiemaeus at Alexandria see the article by Bahr in Pauly's Encycl. VI 1, 
p. 238—242, nr. 51, and also E. Schönfeld, ib. I 1, p. 783—787. 

1^51. The chiet character of this time is the rhetorician 
M. Cornelius Fronto of Cirta (probably 90—168), who held 
under Adrian a conspicuous position as orator, and under 
Antoninus Pius taught M. Aurelius and L. Verus. He was 
Consul 143. We possess by him the greater part of his cor- 
respondence with M. Aurelius both as heir apparent and as 
Emperor. The rhetorician appears in these letters vain, pre- 
tentious and perverse, with little genius and much want of 
taste, but well-versed in early Roman literature for which he 
frequently pleads and which he endeavours to make more 
generally known; at the same time his character appears 
honourable, sincere and candid; he never makes a wrong use 
of his high position, is faithful as husband and friend and 
gives fatherly advice to his pupils, whose gratitude sub- 
sequently shed resplendent lustre round his name. 

1. Fronto's birth-day was soon after New- Year; see ep. ad Caes. 
V, 32 cf. 30 sq. and p. y4 Naber. Cirtensis noster, Minuc. Fel. Oct. 9; 



230 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

cf. Fronte p. 242: JCßvq tmv Jißvooy. also p. 122. 200 sq. His official 
career previous to his Consulate in an inscription ap. Renier, Inscr. de 
I'Alg. 2717: M. Cornelio T. f, Quir. Frontoni Illvir. capital., Q. provinc. 
Sicil., Aedil. pi., Praetori, municipes Calamensium patrono. He refuses 
to become the patron of Cirta ep. p. 200 sq. Consul 143 =z 896 V. C. 
in July and August; see ep. ad Caes. H 1. 7. 8. 10. p. 32. 34. 
243, 1. 254 extr. Auson. grat. act. p. 290 sq. Bip. In his character 
of proconsul he was to govern Asia (ad Caes. V 36 ad Ant. Pi. 8), but 
obtained remission on account of his health (p. 169). He lived to see 
the reign of the divi fratres (a. 161 — 169) and Commodus invested 
with the dignity of Caesar (Oct. 166; cf. ep. p. 161 sq.: malim mihi 
nummuni Antonini aut Commodi aut Pii), but does not appear to have 
lived until the death of L. Yerus (Jan. 169). 

2. His personal circumstances. Fronto p. 232: quinque amisi li- 
beros : . . quinque omnes unumquemque semper unicum amisi. At last 
only one daughter remained to him called Gratia like her mother (Gr. 
maior and minor, ad Caes. II 13. IV 6. p. 36. 70) and who was married 
to C. Aufidius Victorinus (see below 361, 2). She had two sons, the 
one of whom, Victorinus Fronto (Fr. p. 181 sq.) was educate'd in the 
house of his grandfather Fronto, the other died in Germanj'^ at the 
age of three years. Cf. Fr. p. 137: in paucissimis mensibus et uxorem 
carissimam et nepotem trimulum amisi; p. 236: uxorem amisi, nepotein 
in Germania amisi, . . Decimanum (a friend) nostrum amisi (after the 
commencement of 162; cf. p. 94: incolumitate filiae, nepotum). Fronto 
has much to complain of his health (especially ad Caes. V). There 
was scarcely any part of his body which did not trouble the gouty old 
gentleman (Gell. II 26, 1. XIX 10, 1) ; he complains of pains brachii, 
cubiti, umeri, genus, tali, cervicum, inguinis and inguinum, digitorum 
in sinistro pede, plantae, manus dexterae, nervorum, articulorum, mem- 
brorum omnium; oculorum, internati, of cholera, morsus ventris cum 
proHuvio, fauces miseras, tussis, sleepless nights etc. He tried hydro- 
pathic treatment, e. g. p. 169: victu tenui et aqua potanda malam vale- 
tudinem . . mitigare. He possessed the Maecenatiani horti (p. 23). His 
great grandson Leo is mentioned by Apoll. Sid. ep. VIII 3. 

3. His personal character. Fronto p. 235 sq. (after the death of 
his grandson): mors cum aderit . . quae mihi conscius sum protestabor: 
nihil in longo vitae meae spatio a me admissum quod dedecori aut 
probro aut flagitio foret; nullum in aetate agunda avarum, nullum per- 
fidum facinus meum extitisse, contraque multa liberaliter, multa amice, 
multa fideliter, multa constanter, saepe etiam cum periculo capitis con- 
sulta. cum fratre optimo concordissime vixi . . honores quos ipse 
adeptur. sum numquam improbis rationibus concupivi. . . studia doctrinae 
rei familiar! meae praetuli (cf. p. 135, 2: nostrae res hand copiosae; 
but see also Gell. XIX 10, 1 sqq.). . . verum dixi sedulo, verum audivi 
libenter. . . quod cuique potui pro copia commodavi. . . neque me 
parum gratus quispiam repertus segniorem effecit ad beneficia quae- 
cumque possem prompte impertienda. Cf. M. Aurel. epist. Ill 17: a 



Fronto. 231 

Marco Cornelio ineo, oratore maximo, homine optimo. The great ten- 
derness exhibited towards him by his pupils, even after their acces- 
sion to the throne, is the best testimony in his favour; so also his let- 
ters ad amicos, cf. p. 165: numquam ita animatus fui. Imp. (Ant. Pi.), 
ut coeptas in rebus prosperis amicitias si quid adversi increpuisset 
desererem. In the amiable letter concerning his grandson p. 181 sq. 
the tenderhearted grandpapa shows even a tinge of humour. 

4. Fronto p. 244: rJQiop loxh ^ihv '.A&rji/od'oTov rov GO(fov, rorf- ö( 
JioyvGt'ov (above 346, 8) rov (>i]To(iog. p. 73: a meo magistro et parente 
Athenodoto ad imagines quasdam rerum . . animo comprehendendas . . 
institutus sum. p. 154: mens magister Dionysius. Cf. p. 169: Alexan- 
driam ad familiäres meos scripsi. As Cirtensis, he may have studied 
there. Dio LXIX 18 (a. 136): KoQPtßiog ^pQovnoi', o tu ttqiot« roh' rort 
'^PMjUdf'My tv df'xutg <if-Qof,ifvog. Even under Antoninus Pius he pleaded 
in the Law-Courts; ad Caes. V 27 (ad agendum ad forum ibam). 34 
(in plurimis causis a me defensus). p. 169 (duas amicorum causas . . 
tutatus sum) and p. 252 (a. 143) : nee tu consilium causarum agenda- 
rum dimiseris aut tecum simul omnia ora taceant. As such juridical 
speeches we know those pro Bithynis (ad amic. I 14 sq. p. 183 sq.), 
pro Ptolemaeensibus (Charis. p. 138, 11 K.), in Heroden Atticum (ep. 
J). Ill cxtr. =. 138, 3 cf. p. 42 sq.), pro Demonstrato Petiliano (ep. 
p. HI r= 137), in Pelopem (Sidon. epist. VIII 10: M. Fronto, cum 
reliquis orationibus emineret, in P. se sibi praetulit). There were also 
political speeches, e. g. ep. p. 25: divom Hadrianum . . laudavi in 
senatu saepenumero . . et sunt orationes istae frequentes in omnium 
manibus, and his gratiarum actio for the Consulate in the Senate (p. 
105, cf. p. 163. 239), the gratiarum actio in senatu pro Carthaginiensi- 
bus (p. 260 sq.) and others. 

5. His relation to M. Aurelius and Verus. Capitolin. Antonin. pliil. 
2, 4 sq. : oratoribus usus est graecis Aninio Macro, Caninio Celere, et 
Herode Attico; latino Frontone Cornelio (cf. Dio LXXI 35). sed mul- 
tum ex his Frontoni detulit, cui et statuam in senatu petit. Eutrop. 
VIII 12: latinas litteras eum Fronto, orator nobilissimus, docuit. Hieron. 
ad a. Abr. 2180 = 164 A. D. (a date nearly coinciding with the year 
in which he died, see n. 1): Fronto orator insignis habetur, qui M. 
Antoninum Verum latinis litteris erudivit. Orelli 1176 from Pisaurum : 
M. CorneJi Frontonis oratoris, consulis, magistri imperatorum Luci et 
Antonini. The tenderness exhibited by M. Aurelius towards his tutor 
in his letters (e. g. 12. II 2 sq. Ill 17 sqq.) and Fronto's love for 
his pupil is truly boundless (see e. g. p. 50: quid est mihi osculo tuo 
suavius ? ille mihi suavis odor etc. 74, 1 sq. : si quando te . . video in 
somnis numquam est quin amplectar et exosculer), frequently Fronto 
flatters hirri, but occasionally he tells him the truth (especially p. 74, 
7 sqq. cf. 64 sq. 66. 95 sqq.). When his pupil, after his accession to 
the throne, had given up rhetorical studies and devoted himself to 
philosophy, Fronto tried everything, from sadness to bitterness, to 



232 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

make him recede from this supposed error. Cf. p. 142. 144 — 146. 148. 
153 sq. 161. So p. 150: tu mihi videre . . laboris taedio defessus elo- 
quentiae studium reliquisse, ad philosophiam devertisse, ubi nullum 
prooemium cum cura excolendum, nulla narratio breviter et dilucide 
. . collocanda, nuUae quaestiones partiendae, nulla argumenta quaerenda, 
nihil exaggerandum etc. The succeeding description of the supposed 
paradise lost by the Emperor sounds almost comical. But he is very 
serious p. 155: fateor . . unam solam posse causam incidere qua causa 
claudat aliquantum amor erga te meus, — si eloquentiam neglegas. 
Somewhat maliciously he writes to him p. 227: Chrysippum tuum, quem 
quotidie lerunt madescere solitum , and even more strongly to his son- 
in-law : non sine metu fui ne quid philosophia perversi suaderet (to M. 
Aurelius). His pupil confesses to have learnt from Fronto (dg kavi. 
I 11), 10 iTiKSrrjOai, oia t] rvQayi/ncr] ßaoxuv/'ec X(cl noixikicc xcd vnoXfiKJig 
xcci oil, log ininav ol xukovfxhvov ovtoi nci^' tjjutt^ fvncc7(iid'(u aorofiyoTfQOr' 
ntog ftai. Cf. to Fronto III 12 (p. 49): me felicem nuncupo . . quod 
verum dicere ex te disco. 

6. The favourite authors of Fronto, whose study he strongly re- 
commended to his pupils, were Plautus, Ennius, Cato, Gracchus, Lucretius, 
Laberius, Sallustius; cf. p. 62. ad Caes. II 3 sq. 13 sq. Ill 11. 18. IV 5 
and other passages. He does not mention Terence and Virgil ; but we find 
in him allusions to Virgil, Horace (Hertz, Renaissance p. 47 sq. n. 76) 
and Tacitus (ep. p. 144 =-. Hist. IV 6). He has a decided antipathy to 
Seneca, both as philosopher and as his enemy in point of style; see above 
283, 1. Ironically he says p. 224: ut homo ego multum facundus et 
Senecae Annaei sectator. ^He sometimes praises Cicero, especially when- 
ever his authority appears useful against the detractors of eloquence, 
e. g. p. 145 (tribunalia Catonis et Gracchi et Ciceronis orationibus cele- 
brata). Cf. p. 125 and 84, 2 sq. (ut aestimes nostrum mediocre ingenium 
quantum ab illo eximiae eloquentiae viro abfuat). He prefers Cicero's 
letters to his speeches, see above 170, 1. He also professes p. 63: eius 
scripta omnia studiosissime lectitavi. But repeatedly the adjective tulli- 
anus has in Fronto a somewhat contemptuous meaning; cf. p. 23. 26, 
76 (oratiunculae). 98 (sententiae). His views on Cicero's style and 
diction are given p. 63 sq., e. g. : mihi videtur a quaerendis scrupulosius 
verbis procal afuisse, vel magnitudine animi vel fuga laboris vel fiducia. 
. . itaque . . in omnibus eius orationibus paucissima admodum reperias 
insperata atque inopinata verba, quae nonnisi cum studio atque cura 
atque vigilia atque multa veterum carminum memoria indagantur (which 
is Fronto's special force and fault). Yet he confesses: multo satius est 
volgaribus et usitatis quam remotis et requisitis uti, si parum significet 
(p. 63 sq. cf. Ill 1. p. 40. 161 sq.) 

7. Extant works. His correspondence with M. Aurelius as heir 
apparent (M. Caesar) in five books, and as Emperor (Antoninus Augustus) 
originally also five books (ad Marcum invicem IV, Charis. p. 197. Cf. p. 
223, 8 sq. K.; ad Antoninum quinto, ib. p. 223, 27 sq.), but of which scar- 



Fr onto. 233 

ccly two have come down to us. Further: (p. 113 — 138 N.) ad Verum 
Imp. Aarelium Caesarem two books, in which we notice II 1 the exag- 
gerated praise of an epistola of Verus. Besides these collections, we 
have a correspondence with Antonius Pius (p. 163 — 171) and two books 
ad amicos (p. 172—201), also letters in Greek (p. 174. 239—251). Also 
addressed to M. Aurelius are the treatises de eloquentia, on its value 
when compared with philosophy (p. 139 — 148), and de orationibus (p. 
155—162), likewise the letter de hello parthico (p. 217—222) and that 
entitled Principia historiae (p. 202 — 210), a panegyric on the military 
actions of Verus (or rather his lieutenant Avidius Cassius) in the East. 
To M. Aurelius as Caesar he dedicates the laudes fumi et pulveris and 
landes neglegentiae (p. 211 — 216), which he says were written facetiarum 
et voluptatis causa (p. 212 cf. 228, 2): and to him as Emperor he ad- 
dressed the Letters de feriis alsiensibus (223—231), a cheerful summons 
to employ his holidays for recreation. There is also the Emperor's 
letter^of condolence to Fronto concerning his grandson's death, and 
Fronto's reply to it (p. 231—236). Likewise the Iqmtxog (p. 255—259), 
a pendant to the two in Plato's Phaedrus, and to which letters of M. 
Caesar are prefixed from the year of Fronto's Consulate. The tale of 
Arion (p. 237 sq.) serves likewise a rhetorical purpose. Lastly an in- 
significant grammatical treatise, de diflferentiis vocabulorum (in Gotho- 
fredus p. 1327—1335, Putsche p. 2191—2203; also in Mai's and Niebuhr's 
editions of Fr.), bears Fronto's name, but its sole claim to it seems to 
consist in a certain employment of the works of Fronto. 

8. On the time when these letters were composed see Naber's 
edition p. XX — XXX. The second book ad Caes. belongs to the time 
of Fronto's Consulship; in the first Caesar appears to be 22 years (p. 
23, 3), in the fourth 25 years old (p. 75, fin.). Being a correspon- 
dence between a professor of rhetoric and his pupil, these letters do 
not furnish much information on the history of the time, but are on 
the contrary frequently monotonous and full of repetitions (p. lll=:137 
sq.; p. 135=176, 1 sq.; p. 149 — 159), yet they are interesting and in- 
structive. Latin and Greek are mixed up sometimes in quite a 
macaronic manner (in hac dxoue III 8 p. 47, 1). But at the same time 
Fronto adheres even in these letters to his peculiar manner, his distorted 
and trifling diction and the addition of antiquarian and scarce words 
(e. g. fraglo), and he cannot rid himself of showing the schoolmaster 
both after his pupil had become Emperor, and in his grief, de nepote 
amisso p. 233, 7 sqq. he says: fata fando appellata aiunt: hoccine est 
recte fari? Even stronger specimens of his elocutio novella (p. 153), 
the ornatae et pompaticae orationes (p. 55, 1) with their elaborate (ad 
Caes. II 1) dressing are his rhetorical treatises, those on history being 
at the same time models of the worst kind of historical composition, 
in which history is merely treated as a vehicle of rhetorical diction. 
Very unjust is the criticism of Eumenius (paneg. Constant. 14, 2) : 
Fronto romanae eloquentiae non secundum, sed alterum decus. Simi- 
larly the oral explanations of Fronto and his contemporaries abounded 



234 The Second Centuiy of the Imperial Epoch. 

in pedantic erudition, to judge by the specimens mentioned by Gellius 
n 26. XIII 29. XIX 8. 10. 13. None of his treatises seem to bear an 
earlier date than a. 160. 

9. The works of Fronto (except de differentiis) were made known 
by A. Mai, who discovered part of them at Milan in the Ambrosian, 
part at Rome in the Vatican Library in a palimpsest originally belonging 
to the monastery of Bobbio ; he published them Mediol. 1815 and Rome 
1823 and 1846. The ms. is of the sixth century, but cannot always be 
made out. The Milan edition was reprinted Frankf. 1816, better by 
Niebuhr (with additions by Buttmann and Heindorf) Berolini 1816. From 
a collation by du Rieu recensuit S. A. Naber, Lips. (Teubner) 1867. 
XXXVI and 296 pp. 

10. Critical contributions by L. Schopen (Bonn 1830. 1841. 4.), H. 
Alan (Dublin 1841), A. Philibert Soupe (de Fr. reliquiis, Amiens 1853), 
J. Mähly (Philologus XVII p. 176—178. XIX p. 159-161), M. Haupt (de 
emendatione librorum Fr., Berlin 1867. 4.), R. Ellis (Journal of philo- 
logy. I London 1868, p. 15 sqq.). A. Eussner, Rh. Mus. XXV p. 541— 
547. R. Klussmann, Emend, fronton., Gott. 1871. 30 pp. 

11. Frdr. Roth, Observations on the works of M. Corn. Fronto 
and the age of the Antonines, Nürnberg 1817. 24 pp. 4. =: Collected 
Lectures (Frkf. 1851) n. 3. Niebuhr Minor writings II p. 52 sqq. F. A. 
Eckstein in Ersch and Gruber's Enc. I 51, p. 442 — 446. M. Hertz, 
Renaissance etc. p. 26—29. — H. E. Dirksen, Helps in the explanation 
of some passages of Fronto, Posthumous writings I p. 243 — 253. 

12. Firmic. Mat. math. II praef. (p. 15 ed 1551): Antiscia Hipparchi 
secutus est Fronto, quae nullam vim habent nullamque substantiam. et 
sunt quidem in Frontone pronuntiationis atque apotelesmatum verae 
sententiae, antisciorum vero inefficax studium; quod quidem secutus 
est quia rationen veram non fuerat assecutus. . . apotelesmata et Fronto 
verissime scripsit, quae Graecorum libris ac monumentis abundantissime 
continentur. We do not know what Fronto Firm, means here, perhaps 
the Stoic philosopher (above 324, 3). 

352. Friends of Fronto were the rhetoricians Favorinus 
and Herodes Atticus, and the historian Appianus, all of whom 
however composed only in Greek, as did also Arrianus. L. Fabius 
Severus of Tergeste is mentioned as a historian. 

1. Gellius II 26, 1: Favorinus philosophus cum ad M. Frontonem 
consularem, pedibus aegrum visum iret etc. Fronto p. 215 N. : Favo- 
rinus noster. See above 346, 5. 

2. The two tutors and rhetoricians (351, 5) Fronto and Herodes 
Atticus were indeed often at variance, but as it seems rather owing 
to the latter (of. 351, 4), and M. Aurelius was obliged to mediate between 



Fronto. Other I'lietoricians and ara)nmarians. 2-35 

them (Fronto p. 60 sq.). At last, however, they appear to have agreed 
for good. Fronto p. Ill ad 138: fieri amicissimum, tarn hercule quam 
est Herodes summus nunc meus, quamquam extet oratio (against him). 
See on this Ti. Claudius Attious Herodes of Marathon (a 101 — 177.) 
Philostr. Vit. soph. II 1 and K. Keil in Pauly's Enc. I 2. p. 2096-2104. 
H. Kümmel in Jahn's Jahrbb. 102, p. 1 — 24. See Ijelow 354, 6. 

3. On Appianus of Alexandria see A. Westermann in Pauly's 
Encycl. I 2 p. 1340 — 1345. A letter addressed by him to FrontA and 
in which he offers him a j^resent of two slaves, also Fronto's reply in 
which he declines to accept it, p. 244—251 Naber. 

4. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2163 = 147 A. D. : Arrianus philosophu 
(and historian) Nicomedensis agnoscitur et Maximus Tyrus. Arrianus 
was governor of Cappadocia a. 131. Cf. Westermann in Pauly's Enc. 
I 2. p. 1752—1767. About the same time lived also Artemidorus o Jak- 
d\((v6g, who wrote on dreams (Westermann ibid. p. 1790 sq. no. 2). 

5. In Latin we possess in this time a funeral speech on Murdia 
L. f. mater, ap. Orelli 1860; A. F. Rudorfi', on the laudatio Murdiae, 
Berlin 1869. 47 pp. 4. (Trans, of the Berlin Acad.) 

6. On the quaestor urbanus L. Fabius Sever us, the son of 
Fabius Varus at Tergeste, see the decree in Orelli-Henzen 7168, where 
we read e. g. : ut qui a prima sua statim aetate id egerit uti . . et 
dignitate et eloquentia cresceret. nam ita multas et magnificas causas 
publicas apud optimum principem Antoninum Aug. Pium adseruisse 
egisse, vicisse . . ut quamvis ad modum adulescens senilibus tamen et 
perfectis operibus et factis patriam suam obstrinxerit. . . civilia studia, 
quae in eo quamvis admodum iuvene iam sint peracta adque perfecta 
etc. . . causis publicis patrocinando, quas . . sua eximia ac prudentis- 
sima oratione semper nobis cum victoria tirmiores remisit. 

353. Erudition and grammar were popular in this period, 
and every where, in the streets and in the market-places, in 
public buildings as well as private houses, at dinner and in 
visiting sick people, questions of scholarship were discussed 
before attentive audiences; the same being also done in writing 
in the form of questions and answers, in the manner of the 
Jurists. The principal representative of this manner is C. Sul- 
picius Apollinaris of Carthage, who taught Gellius and 
Pertinax, the author of quaestiones epistolicae and of metrical 
arguments on Plautus, Terence and on the Aeneid. Beside 
him we should chiefly mention Arruntius Celsus who likewise 
devoted himself to the investigation of archaic literature. 

1. Details which may serve to illustrate his manner. Gellius XIX 
13, 1: stabant forte una in vestibulo palatii fabnlantes Fronto Cornelius 



236 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

et Festus Postumius (below 360, 1) et ApoUinaris Sulpicius, atque ego 
ibi adsistens cum quibusdam aliis sermones eorum quos de litterarum 
disciplinis habebant curiosius captabam. XVIII 4, 1 : in Sandaliario forte 
apud librarios fuimus, cum ibi in multorum hominum coetu ApoUinaris 
Sulpicius iactatorem querapiam Sallustianae lectionis inrisit inlusitque. 
XIII 20, 1 : cum in domus Tiberianae bybliotheca sederemus . . prolatus 
forte liber est etc. tum quaeri coeptum est etc. XIX 10, 1 sqq. : 
memini me quondam et Celsinum lulium Numidam (cf. ib. 7, 2) ad 
Frontonem Cornelium, pedes tunc graviter aegrum, ire et visere. . . 
oö'endimus eum cubantem . . circumundique sedentibus multis doctrina 
aut genere aut fortuna nobilibus viris. A calculation of the expense of 
a bath occasions a discussion of the expression praeterpropter. 

2. Gell. IV 17, 11: equidem memini Sulpicium Apo Ulnarem, 
virum praestanti litterarum seien tia, . . dicere. XII 13, 1 : Sulpicium Ap. 
doctum hominem. XIII 18, 2 sq.: ad S. A., hominem memoriae nostrae 
doctissimum, . . nam id tempus ego adulescens Romae sectabar eum 
discendi gratia, ib. 20, 5: ApoUinaris, ut mos eius in reprehendendo 
fuit, placide admodum leniterque. XVI 5, 5 : Sulpicium Ap. memini 
dicere, virum eleganti scientia ornatum. XVIII 4, 1 : A. S., vir in me- 
moria nostra praeter alios doctus. On Gellius' relation to him see below 
361, 1. Capitolin. Pert. 1, 4 (see n. 5). Gellius XV 5, 3: Sulpicius Ap. 
in quadam epistula scriptum reliquit. Cf. ib. XIII 18, 3. In his quae- 
stiones epistolicae he paid great attention to Virgil (cf. Gellius II 16, 
8 sqq.), of whose Aeneid Sulpicius had perhaps published an edition, 
for which he seems to have composed the three distichs ap. Sueton. 
p. 63 Rifsch. (de qua re Sulpicii Carthaginiensis extant . . versus), and 
also the arguments on the twelve books in six hexameters each, always 
beginning with the first line of the book in question; see Riese's anth. 
lat. 658. As he also wrote arguments on the plays of Terence in twelve 
senarii each (which in the Bemb. bear the heading: C. Sulpici Apol- 
linaris periocha), Ritschl's conjecture (Trin. ed. I p. CCCXVIII) is very 
probable, that the Plautine arguments in 15 senarii (above 88, 2) are 
also by him. Gräfenhan, Ztschf. f. A. W. 1847, p. 19 sq. Ribbeck, 
prolegg. in Verg. p. 173 sq. 

3. Arruntius Celsus (Charis. p. 213, 18.222, 6 and 30 K.) is a gram- 
marian already used by Julius Romanus and whose short explanations 
of Plautine and Terentian phrases as well as of Aen. XII are repeatedly 
quoted by Charisius, Donatus (ad Phorm. I 2, 32) and Priscian, generally 
by the name of Celsus, more rarely of Arruntius. He does not seem 
to have written complete commentaries on those poets. Ritschl's Par. 
p. 367 — 370. Ribbeck prolegg. p. 25 sq. 

4. Jul. Capit. V. Antonin. philos. 2, 3 : usus . . grammaticis . . 
latinis Trosio Apro et Polione et Eutychio Proculo Siccensi. 

5. A learned dilettante was Erucius Clarus, qui praef. urbi et bis 
consul fuit, vir morum et litterarum veterum studiosissimus. Gell. XIII 



Grammarians and Philosophera. 237 

18, 2 and 3 (vir eruditus) cf. VII 6, 12. He is probably Sex. Erucius, son to 
the orator Erucius Clarus under Trajan (above 336, 4), to whom as iuveni 
probissimo Pliny procured the Quaestorship and the tribuneship of the 
people (Plin. Epist. II 9) and who was cos. II a. 146, praef. urbi later than 
a. 138; Steup de Prob. p. 74—77. Cf. Fronto p. 165 N. Dio LXVin 30. 

6. Gellius II 3, 5: venit nobis in memoriam Fidium Optatum, multi 
nominis Romae grammaticum, ostendisse mihi librum etc. 

7. Capitol. Pert. 12, 7: adhibebat (cenis) . . Valerianum, qui cum 
eo docuerat, iit fabulas litteratas haberet. 

8. In the same time (according to Mommsen and Bücheier) we should 
place the Auruncan Fusius Philocalus, magister ludi litterari, summa 
quom castitate in discipulos suos, idemque testamenta scripsitcum fide 
in an inscription Hermes 1 p. 148 = Bücheier, Greifswald Index Sum- 
mer 1870, p. 19 sq. H. Nissen, however, observes that the characters 
of the inscription and the technical execution of the monument should 
prevent ns from removing Philoc. from the first part of the Imperial 
period. 

9. Anonymous grammarians and scholars of this time occur in 
Gellius e. g. XIX 10, 7 (grammaticum baud incelebri nomine Romae 
docentem). 13, 4 (grammatico cuipiam latino, Frontonis familiari). V 4, 
2 (grammaticus quispiam de nobilioribus). XIV 5, 1 (quos grammaticos non 
parvi in urbe Roma nominis). Cf. I 7, 4 (amicus noster, homo lectione multa 
exercitus, cui pleraque omnia veterum litterarum quaesita XX 10, 2 . . 
erant). V 21 (vir adprime doctus, meus amicus). X J, 1—3. XIV 6, 1. 

354. Philosophy, especially the Stoic system, had not in- 
deed so many adherents as rhetoric, but increased in impor- 
tance ever since the heir apparent manifested a bent to it. 
Originality did not distinguish a single one of these philoso- 
phers, but Junius Rusticus possessed a very honourable 
character. Christianity was now defended in a dogmatic manner, 
at least in the East. 

1. On the relative scarcity of the (ftko<To(^>ovrT(g see above 350, 2. 

2. Capitol. M. Ant. philos. 2, 6 sqq. philosophiae operam vehe- 
menter dedit, et quidem adhuc puer. . . usus est etiam Commodi magistro» 
. . Apollonio Chalcedonio stoico philosopho (cf. ad Front. V 36 : Apol- 
lonius magister meus philosophiae). 3, 2 sq.: audivit et Sextum Chae- 
ronensem Plutarchi nepotem (cf. Dio LXXI 1. Philostr. vit. soph. II 1, 9), 
lunium Rusticum, Claudium Maximum (see in 4) et Cinnam Catulum, 
stoicos. peripateticae vero studiosum audivit Claudium Severum. Dio 
LXXI 35: didccffxakovg s7](e Ttiiv ix (ftkoco(ffag Xoyuyv top Tf Povffrixoy 
Toy lovviov xai Anokkiovtov rov Ni'Xo/urjdsa, Tovg ZrivMVffovg koyovg 
ßfkmövTc.g. Hieronym. ad a. Abr: 2165 = 149 A. D. : ApoUonius stoicus 



238 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

natione Chalcidicus et Basilides Scythopolitanus philosophi inlustres 
habentur, qui Verissimi quoque Caesaris praeceptores fuerunt. M. Aurelius 
himself {fig kavr. I 6 sqq.) mentions among those who influenced his 
philosophical studies the following: Jioyi'tjTog, l/lnokkiovwg. 2fljog, 
^Akihcvö'qog o 7ik((T(Oi/tx6g, Kinovkog. Fronte p. 115, 6 sqq. : quid nostra 
memoria Euphrates, Dio, Timocrates, Athenodotus? quid horum magister 
Musonius ? 

3. Capitol. 1. 1. (see n. 2): lunium Rusticum . . et reveritus 
est et sectatus, qui domi militiaeque pollebat, stoicae disciplinae peri- 
tissimum, cum quo omnia communicavit publica privataque consilia, . . 
quem et consulem iterum designavit (II a. 162), cui post obitum a senatu 
statuas postulavit. Dig. XLIX 1, 1, 3 from a rescriptum divorum 
fratrum : . . ad lunium Rusticum amicum nostrum, praef. urbi. M. Aurel. 
fig favT. I 7: tiuqu '^Povgtixov . . to jut] tXTQc<n^vca &lg C,rjkov Co(^iG7iy.6v 
. . xcu TO dnoOTtjpat QrjTOQtXfjg xal notrjTrx^g xccl aatfiokoyCag . . xal to 
ccxQtßiög uvuyLyvoiGxfty . . xcu to iuTV/fTp ToXg 'EntXTtjTfiotg vno/uyt]- 
/uaatp, MP olxo&fv /ufTidoyxfu. Themist. or. XIII. XVH. Orelli 1190 (L. 
lunius Rusticus philosophus stoicus). He is perhaps identical with Q. 
lun. Rust., Consul (under Antoninus Pius) with Q. Flavius Tertullus 
(Gruter p. 131, 3). See above 314, 6. 

4. The Stoic Claudius Maximus (n. 2) is probably that JW«|/.^of 
whom M. Aurelius fig eavT. I 15 [nccQaxkrjatg Mcclffxov to xqccTfTv €C(vtov) 
mentions as having influenced his education, and VIII 25 as having died 
(before his wife Secunda). He is probably that Claudius Maximus before 
whose tribunal, when Proconsul in Africa, c. 150, Apuleius had to 
appear on a charge of practising magic arts. See his apol. 19 (virum 
tam austerae sectae tamque diutinae militiae). 25 (vir severus). 36 (pro 
tua eruditione legisti profecto Aristotelis . . multiiuga volumina etc.). 
48 (doctrinae tuae congruens; cf: ib. 91). 64 (seit me vera dicere 
Maximus, qui . . legit in Phaedro diligenter etc.). 

5. Gellius XIII 8, 4: Macedo philosophus, vir bonus, familiaris mens, 
. . censebat. On lulius Aquilinus see below 361, 9. 

6. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2192 = 176 A. D,: Atticus platonicae 
sectae philosophus agnoscitur (but this is rather the year when he died, 
see above 352, 2). 

7. M. Aurel. VIII 25: dQi^/uftg /usr xäqa'^ xul Ji^/jijTQiog o Ilkcam- 
pixog xcu ft Tig TOtovTog, nc'ivTcc t^rjjXfQcc, Tf&ytjxoTcc nakai,. 

8. Hieronym. ad a. Abr. 2157 = 141 A. D. : lustinus philosophus 
librum pro nostria religione scriptum Antonino tradidit. 2170 ^= 154 A. 
D.: Crescens cynicus agnoscitur, qui lustino nostri dogmatis philosopho 
. . persecutionem suscitavit. 

9. Lucian's friend, the Epicurean Kfkaog, who had written against 
magic arts, and to whom Lucian dedicated his ' Akflavc^Qog (c. 1. 21. 
61) is identified by the Schol. on Alex. 1 with the learned and saga- 



Philosophers and Historians. 239 

cious enemy of Christianity, against whom Origenes wrote his eight books 
contra Celsum and on whom see F. C. Baur, Ecclesiastical History of 
the last three centuries, third ed., p. 382—409. 



355. Historical pursuits and studies were not much 
favoured by the prevalence of rhetorical phraseology and the 
calmness of the time. It is possible that L. Ampelius wrote 
his liber memorialis about this time, a meagre abridgment of 
the most important information concerning astronomy, geo- 
graphy and chiefly history. The abridgment of the history 
of Rome in the time of the Republic, which is also conspic- 
uous for a great predilection for miracles and fictitious tales, 
and which bears the name of Granius Licinianus, should 
be placed in this time, at least in the shape in which it has 
come down to us. 

1. The liber memorialis (in fifty chapters) is dedicated to a certain 
Macrinus (Macrino suo) who is not designated more accurately. If he 
were the same as the Emperor (from April 217 to June 218) and w^ho was 
assassinated on 8 June 218 at the age of 51 (or 52) years, the work 
would appear to have been written about the end of the century. But 
the name of Macrinus is by no means uncommon. On the other hand 
the latest name mentioned in this work is that of Trajan (47, 7 : for- 
tuna Traiani principis; cf. 23: Caesar Dacicus), and in treating of the 
wars with the Parthians the author does not mention that of L. Verus. 
Besides Nepos and the source of the liber de viris illustribus (and in 
the first chapters Nigidius Figulus) especially Florus is used. There 
are some curious passages concerning the constitution of the Roman 
state, c. 29 and 18 extr. : ex eo (Augustus) perpetua Caesarum dicta- 
tura dominatur. c. 30 it is pronounced a mixed constitution, probably 
owing to the use of a republican source: nam et regiam potestatem 
consules habent et penes senatum consilii publici summa est et plebs 
habet suffragiorum potestatem. We may also allege the extensive treat- 
ment of Eastern affairs as an argument in favour of the Non-Italian 
origin of the author. In later centuries the name of Ampelius is more 
frequent, especially in the cod. Theodos. 

2. The first edition of Ampelius by Claudius Salmasius, Lugd. 
Bat. 1638 (after Florus) from a codex Tureti now lost; then in the 
editions of Florus by Daker and others. Separately by C. H. Tzschucke 
(cum notis, Lips. 1793), F. A. Beck (with a comm., Leipzig 1826); by 
E. Wölfflin (Lips. Teubner 1854), from Salmasius' copy of the codex. 

3. C. E. Gläser, on the age of Amp., Rh. Mus. II (1843) p. 145 sq. 
E. Wölfflin, de L. Amp. libro mem. quaestiones criticae et historicae, 
Gotting. 1854. 50 pp. F. Bücheier, Rhein. Mus. XIII p. 179 sqq. H. 



240 The Second Century of the Imperial Kpoch. 

Jacob, quaestiones Amp., Cleve 1860. 4. (p. 18—25). Critical contri- 
butions by L. Urlichs (Rhein. Mus. XVH p. 632—637), M. Zink (Eos II 
p. 317—328). A. Eussner (Spec, crit., Würzburg 1868, p. 37—42). 

4. Macrob. I 16, 30: apud Granium Licinianum libro secundo. 
Serv. Aen. I 737: Granius Licinianus coenae suae (V?). Solin. polyh. 
n 12 (p. 37, 12 M.)': Liciniano placet. Merely Granius ap. Fest. v. ricae 
p. 277 M. Solin. II 40 (p. 44, 18 M.: Gr. tradit). Arnob. adv. nat. Ill 
31. 38, VI 7. The latter quotations may also relate to Granius Fl ac- 
cus (Macrob. I 18, 4), in libro quern ad Caesarem (the Dictator?) de 
indigitamentis scriptum reliquit (Censorin. d. n. 3, 2) or in libro de iure 
papiriano (above 61, 1). which is very probable at least of Festus. 

5. A. 1853-55 P. de Lagarde (Bötticher; cf. Philol. IX p. 394 sq.) 
and subsequently G. H. Pertz discovered in London at the British Mu- 
seum Licinianus in an Egyptian codex ter scriptus (at the uppermost 
a Syriac translation of Chrysostomus' Homilies, underneath this a Latin 
grammarian, and quite below Licinianus), consisting of 13 parchment 
leaves, more closely examined a. 1856 by his son C. A. F. Pertz and 
edited Berol. 1857. 4.: Gai Grani Liciniani annalium quae supersunt etc. 
The praenomen, however, rests on an unsafe reading. The fragments 
are of b. XXVI, XXVIII and XXXVI, and turn on events of a. 591 and 
676 V. C. The arrangement is in the manner of Annals. Miracles, 
anecdotes and curiosities are treated at great length, and the author 
likewise vigorously impugns Sallust's manner (see above 204, 3). The 
account appears not to have been carried beyond Caesar's death and 
to have embraced about 40 books ; the Olympieion at Athens, which 
Adrian completed, is, however, mentioned (p. 8 sq. Bonn.: aedes Olympii 
lovis Atheniensis diu imperfecta permanserat). This fact as well as 
the attention paid to Sallust while the periods are intentionally kept 
asunder (tempora reprehendit sua), also the antiquarian affectation 
(Ariobardianen, Archelauo), suit the time of the Antonines best. To 
go lower down is inadvisable on account of the quotation in Solinus 
or rather his source, the chorographia pliniana (above 308, 7). Cf. 
Mommsen, SoHnus p. XXVIII. The Bonn editors (Bücheier and others) 
assume, on account of the archaic forms already mentioned, that the 
work was published under Augustus and epitomized in the time of the 
Antonines, while Madvig fixes its composition in the third or fourth 
century of the Christian era. In giving up the idea of the Augustan 
period, we must also drop the attempt to identify the author with 
Granius Flaccus. 

6. Editions by Pertz (n. 5) and: Grani Liciniani quae supersunt 
emendatiora edidit philologorum Bonnensium heptas, Lips. (Teubner) 
1858. XXII and 64 pp. 

On Lie. see especially G. Linker in Fleckeisen's Jahrbb. LXXVII 
p. 633—640 and J. N. Madvig in the Trans, of the Copenhagen Society 
of Sciences, December 1857. 



Granivs Licinianns. Jnnsti^. 241 

7. Critical contributions by C. G. Schmidt (Philologus XIII p. 224 
-226), G. Linker (Fleckeisen's Jahrbb. 77, p. 628—633), K. Keil (ibid. 
p. 640—650), J. A. Wynne (Philologus XV p. 357-362), H. Heerwagen 
(Nürnberg 1858. 4.), D. Comparetti (Rhein. Mus. XIII p. 457 sqq.), G. 
M. Francken in Fleckeisen's Jahrbb. Suppl. Ill 2 p. 235 sqq. 

8. On Fronto's historical works see above 351, 7 and 8. 

356. The Roman Jurists were in this time divided into 
practicians who returned answers to legal inquiries or pleaded 
in actions, with or without any public position, and actual pro- 
fessors of Law. Most of the first class were pupils of Julian; 
e. g. Vindius and Sex. lulius Africanus, a man known by the 
difficulty of his definitions, then Terentius Clemens, Junius 
Mauricianus and Saturninus. M. Aurelius' teacher in legal 
matters, L. Volusius Maecianus, wrote, besides juridical works, 
a treatise (still extant) on the divisions of money, weights and 
measures. One of the Jurists most highly valued in the suc- 
ceeding centuries was Ulpius Marcellus under Pius and M. 
Aurelius. 

1. Gellius XIII 13, 1: cum . . in lucem fori prodissem quaesitum 
esse memini in plerisque Romae stationibus ius publice docentium (cf. 
fragm. Vat. 150: neque geometrae neque hi qui lus civile docent. Dig. 
XXVII 1, 6, 12. L 13, 1, 5: iuris civilis professores) aut responden- 
tium etc. Part of the latter had an official character; see above I 
p. 387. Capitolin. Antonin. Pi. 12, 1 : multa de iure sanxit usus- 
que ex iuris peritis Vindio Vero (n. 2), Fulvio Valente (above 345, 5), 
Volusio Maeciano (n. 7), Ulpio Marcello (n. 8) et Diaboleno (cf. above 
337, 3). 

2. M. Vindius Verus (n. 1) was Cons. 138. Fragm. Vat. 77 : Vin- 
dius dum consulit lulianum in ea opinione est. Maecian. Dig. XXXV 
2, 32, 4: Vindius noster. Cf. ülpian. ib. II 14, 7, 18 (Vindius scribit). 
V 1, 5 (Pomponius et V. scripserunt). Paul. ib. II 9, 2^ 1 (putat 
V. . . idque lulianus scribit etc. Pomponius et V. scribunt). 

3. Gellius XX 1, 1 sqq.: Sex. Caecilius in discipHna iuris atque in 
legibus populi rom. noscendis interpretandisque scientia usus auctori- 
tateque inlustris fuit. ad eum forte . . philosophus Favorinus accessit 
etc. in illis tunc eorum sermonibus orta mentiost legum decemviralium. 
. . eas leges cum Sex. Caecilius, inquisitis exploratisque multarum ur- 
bium legibus, . . eleganti . . brevitate verborum scriptas diceret etc. 
On his relation to Julian, see Paul. Dig. XIX 1, 45 pr.: idque et lulia- 
num agitasse Africanus refert. Ulp. Dig. XXV 3, 3, 4 : lulianus Sexto 
Caecilio Africano respondit. XXX 39 pr. : Africanus 1. XX« Epistolarum 
apud lulianum (in a work of J.) quaerit. Afric. Dig. XII 6, 38 pr.: 

16 



242 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

id maxime consequens esse ei sententiae quam lulianus probaret. Cf. 
ib. XII 1, 23 and XIII 7, 31 : lulianus ait. His works (besides the 
Epistolae) : Quaestionum libri IX, discussions of maxims and legal cases, 
frequently in the shape of questions and answers, probably following 
the oral lectures of Julian (Mommsen, Ztschr. f. Rechtsw. IX p. 90 — 93), 
composed at the latest at the commencement of the reign of Pius (Fit- 
ting, Age of the Writings etc. p. 15). In the Digest we find 131 frag- 
ments of this work, collected by Hommel, Paling, p. 3—26. With the 
Jurists of the last centuries Africani lex is a proverbial expression to 
denote something difficult. The passages in which Caecilius or Sextus 
is quoted (e. g. Gai. II 218: luliano et Sexto placuit) should in all pro- 
bability likewise be understood of him. Mommsen, Ztschr. f. Rechts- 
gesch. VII p. 479. IX p. 92, n. 29. In general see Cujacius Tractat. 
IX ad Afr., 0pp. II p. 1253 sqq. F. Kämmerer, Observ. iur. civ. (Rostock 
1827) I p. 74 sqq. Zimmern, History of Roman private law, I 1, p. 
350-352. 

4. Terentius Clemens, the author of twenty books ad legem 
luliam et Papiam, from which there are thirty-five passages in the 
Digest (Hommel, Palingenesia H p. 499—502). Dig. XXVHI 6, 6 he 
speaks of lulianus noster (hoc ita interpretari I. n. videtur) and in other 
places also pays attention to his Digest, whence his work would appear 
to belong to the last time of Pius. Fitting, Age of the Writ. p. 16. 

5. lunius Mauricianus wrote under Pius (Dig. XXXI 57 : divus 
Hadrianus . . et proxime Imp. Antoninus. XXXHI 2, 23: nuper Imp. 
Antoninus . . rescripsit. XLIX 14, 15) also Ad legem luliam et Papiam 
libri VI and at least two books De poenis (Dig. H 13, 3) and notes on 
Julian's Digest; cf. Ulp. Dig. II 14, 7, 2: puto recte lulianum a Mauri- 
ciano reprehensum in hoc etc. VII 1, 25, 1 : lulianus quidem libro 
XXXV^ Digestorum scripsit; . . Marcellus vero et Mauricianus etc. sed» 
luliani sententia humanior est. 

6. Venu lei us Saturninus wrote, according to the ind. Flor. 
10 books Actionum, 6 Interdictorum, 4 de officio proconsulis, 3 publi- 
corum or de publicis iudiciis, 19 stipulationum. Very different is the 
character of the liber de poenis pagan orum, which the ind. Flor, attri- 
butes to Venul. Sat., but Dig. XLVIH 19, 16 (after a fragment of Ven. 
Sat.) to Claudius Sat. to whom two rescripts of Pius were addressed 
(Marcian. Dig. XX 3, 1, 2 and L 7, 4 pr.: divus Pius Claudio Saturnino 
rescripsit) and who became praetor under the divi fratres (Dig. XVH 
1, 6, 7), But even in the fragments of Venul. Sat. (cf. Hommel, Palin- 
genesia II p. 539 — 549) nothing would lead us beyond the time of Pius 
or the divi fratres, whence Fitting p. 17 — 19 assumes only one Jurist 
of the name of Claudius Venuleius Saturninus. This is not disproved 
iy Cod. V 65, 1 (Imp. Antoninus A. Saturnino a. 213) or ib. VII 35, 1 
(Imp. Alexander A. Venuleio veterano, a. 224) or even by a ver}'- late 
interpolation in Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 68. But the citations of Demosthe- 
nes and of the' Iliad in Claudius Saturninus which are without a parallel 



Jurists: Africanus, MaecianuSy Ulpius MarceTltis. 243 

in Venuleius Sat., oblige us to distinguish two Jurists of the same 
cognomen and perhaps of the same time, but of different gentile names. 
Q. Saturninus Dig. XII 2, 13, 5 (Marcellus scribit etc. cui Q. Sat. con- 
sentit) and XXXIV 2, 19, 7 (Q. Saturninus libro X«» Ad edictum scribit) 
seems to be later. 

7. Capitol. M. Ant. philos. 3, 6 : studuit et iuri, audiens (c. a. 146) 
L. Volusium Maecianum. Cf. ap. Fronto p. 61 N., and above n. 1. 
He was on friendly terms with Salv. lulianus (lulianus noster. Dig. 
XXXV 1, 86. 2, 30, 7. XXXVI 1, 65, 1) and with Vindius (Vindius 
noster, ib. XXXV 2, 32, 4). Dig. XXXVH 14, 17 pr. : divi fratres . . 
rescripserunt: . . Volusianus Maecianus, amicus noster. ut et iuris civi- 
lis praeter veterem et bene fundatam peritiam anxie diligens etc. Volcat. 
Gall. Avid. Cass. 7, 4: exercitus . . Maecianum, cui erat commissa 
Alexandria, . . invito atque ignorante Antonino (M. Aurel.) interemit 
as a member of the conspiracy of Cassius, a. 175. Under Antoninus 
Pius he wrote his sixteen books Quaestionum de fideicommissis or 
Fideicommissorum (Dig. XL 5,42: Antoninus Aug. Pius noster etc.) and 
probably also the work Ex lege rhodia (ib. XTV 2, 9). Besides this 
libri XIV de publicis iudiciis. The fragments of these works are col- 
lected by Hommel, Paling. I p. 353 — 360. We possess the metrological 
manual which he composed for his princely pupil: Distributio . . par- 
tium in rebus quae constant pondere, numero, mensura. See the pre- 
face: Saepenumero, Caesar, animadverti aegre ferentem te quod assis 
distributionem, et in heredum institutione et in aliis multis necessariam, 
ignotam haberes. quare, ne tam exigua res ingenium tuum ullo modo 
moraretur, cum partes ipsas tum vocabula et notas proponendas existi- 
mavi. The end of the work is lost. Editions by J. F. Gronovius (de 
sestertiis etc., Lugd. Bat. 1691), E. Böcking (Bonn 1831 and in the 
Corpus iur. anteiust. p. 183 sqq.), Th. Mommsen (Trans, of the Saxon 
Society of literature EH. Leipzig 1853. 4.), F. Hultsch (Scriptores 
metrolog. rom. p. 61 — 71), Buschke (iurisprud. anteiust.'* p. 330 — 340). 
Cf. Th. Mommsen 1. 1. p. 281—288. Hultsch 1. 1. p. 17—22. 

8. Ulpius Marcellus (cf. n. 1) was also an adviser of M. Au- 
relius, comp, his account of a transaction proxime in cognitione prin- 
cipis, when Sententia Imperatoris Antonini Aug. Pudente et Pollione 
coss. (a. 166) Cornelius Priscianus being the solicitor of one party, and 
Calpurnius Longinus advocatus fisci. Dig. XXVIII 4, 3 (where the 
maxim is mentioned: in re dubia benigniorem interpretationem sequi 
non minus iustius est quam tutius) from (Ulp.) Marcellus libro XXIX 
Digestorum. The identity of the Jurist with the L. Ulpius Marcellus 
who leg. Aug. pr. Pannen, infer. (Gruter p. 100, 4) and was under 
Commodus governor of Britain is justly doubted by Walch and A. 
Haakh in Pauly's Enc. VI 2. p. 2713, n. 2, who considers the latter as 
the son of the Jurist. The works of the Jurist are: Digestorum libri 
XXX (? isolated and doubtful lib. XXXI in Dig. XLVI 3, 73 and lib. 
XXXIX in Dig. XLIX 15, 2), 128 passages of which occur in Justinian's 
Digest, Notae ad luliani Digesta, Ad legem luliam et Papiam libri VI, 



244 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Responsorum liber singularis, De officio consulis (libro quinto quoted 
by Marcian, Dig. XL 15, 1, 4) and perhaps (if not by Macer) Publico- 
rum (iudiciorum) libri (libro II, Dig. Ill 2, 22), De officio praesidis (Dig. 

IV 4, 43: Marcellus libro I de otf. praes.). See the collection in Hom- 
mel's Palingenesia I p. 363—396. On Dig. XXIX 2, 63 (libro singulari 
Regularum Pomponii Marcellus notat) cf. Asher, Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. 

V p. 102 sq. The Digest may be shown to have been written after 
Pius' death (Dig. IV 1, 7: Marcellus libro III Digestorum: Divus Anto- 
ninus Marcio Avito praetori . . rescripsit) and (see above) to have been 
finished a. 166 or 167. It is not known when the others were com- 
posed. Fitting, the Age of the Writ. p. 23 sq. In general see M. Tyde- 
man, de L. Ulpii Marcelli icti vita et scriptis, Utrecht 1762 (= Oelrichs 
thesaur. nov. I 1). C. F. Walch, Opusc. (1785. 4.) I 2. p. 313 sqq. (de 
aetate Ulpii Marcelli). Zimmern, Hist, of Roman private Law I 1, p. 
357-359. 



357. Gaius, a native of the East of the Roman Empire 
(about a. 110 — 180), lived at Rome both as teacher and 
writer. He was the author of many works, the most famous 
being his seven books Rerum cotidianarum (called Aurei) and 
his four books Institutionum, an introduction into Jurispru- 
dence such as there were frequently written afterwards, probably 
published a. 161. These Institutions are for the greater part 
extant, and their graceful, lively and natural style renders it 
probable that they originated from oral lectures. On account 
of its clear and easy diction the work became a favourite 
manual and served also as the foundation of Justinian's In- 
stitutions. 

1. Gai. Dig. XXXIV 5, 7 pr. : nostra quidem aetate Serapias Alexan- 
drina mulier ad divum Hadrianum perducta est. Gaius would thus ap- 
pear to have been at Rome already under Adrian. Notwithstanding 
this, Th. Mommsen, Jahrb. d. gem. deutsch. Rechts III (1859) p. 1 — 13, 
is of opinion that G. lived and taught in Asia (perhaps Troas). This 
he infers from the scarcity of mention of G. in literature (see n. 2), 
from his designation by a mere praenomen, the attention he seems to 
pay to provincial law (cf. n. 3 sq.), to foreign law and the earlier sources, 
while he apparently neglects more recent authorities, his accurate know- 
ledge of Greek, and from Dig. L 15,7: Gaius . .: iuris italici sunt TQotäg, 
BriQvioq, JvQQd/toy. But all these arguments are not sufficient to con- 
tradict other clear traces of the composition of the Inst, at Rome; see 
Buschke, iurispr. antei. ^ p. 84—86 and especially H. Dernburg, the 
Inst, of G. p. 80—98. We should not assume that the praenomen of 
Gaius was chosen in imitation of the habit of the Professor's pupils, 
but is was preferred owing to a common usage among Jurists and Empe- 



i 



Gakuf. 245 

rors; see n. 2 and 4. It is not quite impossible that Gaius brought 
this name to Rome from his hellenistic home. He may have taught 
there and acquired his knowledge of provincial law etc. before coming 
to Rome ; but during his career as teacher and writer he lived no doubt 
at Rome. 

2. Pompon. Dig. XLV 3, 39 (non sine ratione est quod Gaius 
noster dixit) relates to a deceased character, perhaps C. Cassius Longi- 
nus, who is frequently called Gaius ; see above 293, 3 ; cf. G. M. Asher, 
Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. V p. 83 sq. The Jurists of the next time never 
mention Gaius, which may be explained from Gaius' not having given res- 
ponsa, and happens also in the case of others; see Demburg p. 105 — 107. 
The earliest certain mention of Gaius occurs in the law of citation 
a. 426. After this Serv. Georg. Ill 306 (quod et Gaius homerico con- 
lirmat exemplo =; Inst. Ill 141), Priscian. VI p. 282 H. (Gaius in I In- 
stitutorum = Inst. I 113). The Lex romana Visigothorum (a. 506) con- 
tains also a liber Gaii in two books, an abridged version of G. I. of saec. 
V, which is also alloyed with additions from other sources; see Dem- 
burg p. 119 — 131. It appears from Justinian's Const. Omnem reip. 
(Dig. prooem.) 1 that until then in the first year of legal study ex tanta 
legum multitudine . . nihil aliud nisi sex tantummodo libros et ipsoa 
confusos . . studiosi accipiebant; . . in his autem sex libris Gai nostri 
Institutiones et libri singulares quattuor (so that they appear to have 
formed only two books =: liber Gai) . . connumerabantur. The expres- 
sion 'Gaius noster' employed here and Inst, prooem. 6. IV 18, 5 proves 
anything else but that G. and Justinian were compatriots. 

3. Gaius Inst. I 188: nos diligentius hunc tractatum executi sumus 
et in Edicti interpretatione et in his libris quos Ex Q. Mucio fecimus. 
Ill 33: de quibus (i. e. bonorum possessiones) in his commentariis 
consulto non agimus quia alias hoc ius totum propriis commentariis ex- 
plicavimus. 54: alioquin diligentior interpretatio (of the iura patrono- 
rum et libertorum) propriis commentariis exposita est. Hence it appears 
that G. had written fix Mucio and a commentary on the Edict pre- 
viously to his Inst. But it is not settled whether the latter means 
merely the one ad edictum praetoris urbani or includes also the libri 
XXX (with the aedil. cur. XXXII) ad edictum provinciale (ot any certain 
province? cf. Mommsen, Ztsch. f. Rechtsgesch. IX p. 95-97 A). Yet 
the latter is probable, as in the fragments of the work (cf. Hommel, 
Paling. I p. 66 — 100) nothing leads us beyond Antoninus Pius, Divus 
Hadrianus, Imp. Antoninus, princeps Antoninus being mentioned in 
them, but never divus Antoninus or divus Pius or even Verus. Fitting, 
Age of the writ. p. 19 sq. The commentary ad ed. praet. urb. (or 
edictum urbicum) was likewise an extensive work; cf. Dig. XXX 73 and 
L l7, 56: Gaius libro III de legatis ad ed. praet. (or urbicum). L 17, 
55 : Gaius libro II de testamentis ad ed. urbicum. Besides these works 
two books ad edictum aedilium curulium (Dig. XXI 1, 32. 2. 57). 

4. The title of the Institutions (or Instituta, see u. 2) is not 
preserved. According to the notion of such a work, they contain totius 



246 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

doctrinae substantiam (Lactant. inst. div. V 4, 3). Design 1, 8: omne 
ius quo utimur vel ad pereonas pertinet (b. I) vel ad res (b. II law of 
matters aud hereditary law by will; b. EI Intestate inheritance and 
obligations) vel ad actiones (b. IV). The division into four commen- 
tarii is due to Gains himself, see e. g. 11 23 (superiore commentario 
tradidimus — I 119). UI 38 (sup. comm. trad. — II 119. 148 sq.). The 
designation of commentarii [vnofjivi^fxata as differing from avyy^a^ujuara) 
is meant to disclaim any formal polish and pretension of style, and is e. 
g. used of notes taken from lectures; see Dernburg p. 55 — 62. The 
Inst, of G., in spite of accurate definitions and precise limitation of legal 
maxims (Dernburg p. 52 — 54), exhibit a certain ease of diction in re- 
petitions, variations and transitions (Dernburg ib. 40 — 50). There are 
also a number of anacoluthias (ibid. p. 50 sq.). His loose observation 
of the rules of consecutio temporum G. shares with Suetonius (above 
342, 6). On the whole G.'s diction is pure and especially free from 
archaisms in the style of Fronto. Chiefly the fourth book offers much 
new information concerning actions; the first book on public law. See 
E. Schrader, on the gains of Roman jurisprudence through G.'s Insti- 
tutions, Heidelberg 1823 {— Heidelb. Jahrb. 1823, nr. 60—64). One of 
the peculiar features of G. is his way of explaining the Roman law by 
illustrations taken from foreign law. He generally quotes only earlier 
Jurists; of his contemporaries only Julianus (II 218, 280) and (H 218) 
Sextus Pomponius ; Dernburg p. 102 sq. n. 6. The work was written 
at Rome, cf. IV 109 and Dernburg p. 85 — 93. The first book was com- 
posed at the end of the reign of Pius, who is there styled optimus, 
imp. Antoninus (I 102) and imp. Antoninus (I 53. 76), but II 195 divus 
pius Antoninus (whence II 120. 126. 151 imp. Ant. probably means 
Marcus); see Dernburg p. 67—74, cf. 74 — 80. Mommsen, Ztsch. f. 
Rechtsgesch. IX p. 107 sq. n. 37. 

5. We possess the Inst, of G. only in the palimpsest of the Chapter 
of Verona saec. V (the upper writing being works of Jerome, and only 
one leaf not being written over), but in a corrupt and defect state. 
Niebuhr first discovered the work 1816, whereupon Göschen together 
with Hollweg deciphered the text and published the first edition, Berol. 
1820. It was revised by Bluhme, Berol. 1824: ed. HI (rec. Lachmann) 
Berol. 1842. A comparative collation of the Inst, of Gains and of 
Justinian by Klenze and Booking, Berl. 1829. 4. Comp, the Collatio of 
W. van Swinderen (Annal. acad. Groning 1821) and F. Potter v. Loon 
(Groning. 1823). Editions of Gains by E. Booking (Bonn 1841. ed. V. Lips- 
1865). CodicisVeronensisapographum .. scripsit. . et publicavitE. Booking, 
Lips. 1866. Also in R. Gneist's Institutionum syntagma (Lips. 1858) and Ph. 
E. Huschke's iurisprudentia anteiustiniana (ed. H Lips. 1867 p. 101—324). 
A new collation and edition are promised by W. Studemund. 

Critical and exegetical contributions by E. Gans (Scholia on G., 
Berlin 1821), H. R. Brinkmann (notae subit., Schleswig 1821), C. A. D. Un- 
terholzner (Coniect. de supplendis lacunis, Berl. 1823), H. E. Dirksen (At- 



Gaiffs. 247 

tempts p. 104 sqq.), Puchta (Verisimilia, Lips. 1837. 4.), Assen (Adnotatt., 
Lugd. B. 1838), Ph. E. Huschke (especially: Gaius, Critical and exege- 
tical contributions to Gains' Institutions, Leipzig 1855. 244 pp. and 
Critical observations on Gaius, Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. VII 1868. p. 
161—192), M. S. Mayer (ad IV 48; Tubing. 1853), K. M. Pöschmann 
(Studies in G. I. Leipzig 1854. 11 1860. Ill 1862), F. P. Bremer (on IV 
44; Rhein. Mus. XV p. 484—488), A. F. Rudorff (on lexical excerpts 
from the Inst, of G., Berlin 1866, Trans, of the Academy) A. v. d. Höven 
(tentamina crit., Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. VII p. 257—259), W. Studemund 
(on the antiquarian gains from the new collation of G., Trans, of the 
Würzburg philological Congress, Leipzig 1869, p. 121 — 131). 
C. F. Elvers, promptuarium Gaianum, Gotting. 1824. 

6. After the death of Pius (as appears from the expression divus 
Antoninus) G. wrote Fideicommissorum libri II (Dig. XXXII 96. XXXV 
1, 90. XXXVI 1, 63, 5), and (at least the last of the) XV libri ad legem 
luliam ef Papiam (Dig. XXXI 56) and the liber singularis ad SCtum 
Tertullianum (Dig. XXXVIII 17, 8) under Marcus and Orphitianum, a. 
178 (Dig. XXXVIII 17, 9). After Julian's Digest he wrote De verborum 
obligationibus libri III and Ad legem XII tabularum libri VI, probably 
also the liber singularis de formula hypothecaria (Dig. XX 1, 15 pr.), 
and Rerum cotidianarum (s. Aureorum) libri VII, a discussion of the 
legal maxims applicable to daily life, in the order of the Institutions, 
a work also used b)^ Justinian; see prooem. 6: quas ex omnibus anti- 
quorum Institutionibus et praecipue ex commentariis Gai nostri tam 
Institutionum quam Rerum cotidianarum . . compositas etc. Cf. Dig. 
XLIV 7, 5 (from Gaius libro III Aureorum), 5 (luliano placuit). We do 
not know when G. wrote his works Ad legem Gliciam, liber (singularis 
and libri III) Regularum, libri III de manumissionibus, the libri singu- 
lares dotalicion, de tacitis fideicommissis and de casibus. See the col- 
lections of Hommel, Palingenesia p. 55 — 126. 

7. That Gaius had not obtained the ius respondendi appears both 
from his silence Inst. I 7 and the omission of his name by the Jurists 
of the succeeding time, and from his not composing either Quaestioues 
or Responsa. In his literary works G. endeavoured to go beyond the 
pale of technical scholars and gained popularity without losing his 
accuracy and logical strictness. 

8. On Gaius see Zimmern, Hist, of Roman private Law lip. 341 — 
350. Rudorff, Hist, of Roman Law I p. 173—176. Huschke, iurisprud. 
antei. ^ p. 82—100. H. Dernburg, the Institutions of Gaius, considered 
as Notes taken from Lectures A. D. 161, Halle 1869. 132 pp. 

358. The poetical productions of the time of M. Antonine 
are very insignificant, unless the Pervigilium Veneris should 
helong to this period, a strophic poem in harmonious tro- 
chaic septenarii, on the celebration of spring and in praise 



248 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

of Venus, the all-penetrating mother of the universe. It is also 
probable that the jocular epic called Vespa was composed 
in this time. 

1. lustinus Faustinus, M. . . , the author of an acrostichic poem 
on Antoninus Pius in the Anthol. lat. of Meyer I p. 252, Nr. 812. 

2. Gellius XIX 8, 3: quispiam familiaris eius (i. e. Fronto), bene 
eruditus homo et tum poeta inlustris. 

3. On the metrical compositions of Sulpicius Apollinaris see above 
3.53, 2. 

4. On Mesomedes see 349, 5. 

5. The Pervigilium Veneris is extant in the codex Salmasi- 
anus saec. VII (A) and in the Pithoeanus or Thuaneus =- Par. 8071, saec. 
IX or X (B), in the first of which the title is: peruirgilium Veneris 
trocaico metro, sunt uero versus (i. e. poems in that part of the col- 
lection, A. Riese, Anthol. lat. I p. XXI— XXIV) XXII. It consists of 93 
lines, divided by the burden 'eras am et qui numquam amavit, quique 
amavit, eras amet' into stanzas of unequal extent (of at least four lines). 
The religious views in this composition bear a universal character and 
seem to have been influenced by philosophy. Venus is conceived as 
Genetrix, whose worship had been revived by Adrian, and her festival 
as one of spring and flowers. Sicily is the scene (v. 49 sqq.). The 
diction is rhetorical and often almost sentimental. The author exhibits 
Greek culture, but once alludes to Virgil, Aen. XI 458. The poem 
closes in a melancholy strain: ilia (the nightingale) cantat, nos tacemus. 
quando ver venit meum? quando fiam uti chelidon et tacere desinam? 
which according to the spirit of the poem should be understood as 
new revival by love. The frequent and careless use of de (v. 4, 6, 12, 
24, 34, 38, 45 sq., 61, 88 Bü.) should not be considered a trace of 
African Latin. Reposianus (v. 30) uses it in a similar manner. 

6. It is of course impossible to discover the author of the Perv. 
Ven. The poem bears much resemblance to some lines of Annius Floras 
(above 336, 7) who employed the same metre, which would seem to 
have come into fashion in that time, and the burden reminds us of the 
manner of Nemesianus. Itaque, in temeritatis crimen ne incurramus, 
acquiescendum in hoc erit ut medio inter Florum et Nemesianum tem- 
pore, h. e. secundo vel tertio p. Ch. n. saeculo, conditum Pervigihum 
esse statuamus (Bücheier p. 51). The prevailing cheerful tone and the 
good taste of the poem might render us willing to place it nearer the 
time of the Antonines, if arguments of this kind were not so often 
fallacious. L. Müller assigns it to the third or fourth century, which 
is also supported by its similarity of spirit with Reposianus and 
others (below 393) . To a similiar time and taste we owe the line 
(perhaps burden) mentioned by some writers on metre: tolle thyrsos, 
aera pulsa, iam Lyaeus advenit. 



Pervigilium Veneris. Vespa. 249 

7. Editions of the Perv. V. by J. Lipsius (Elect. I 5. 1580), P. 
Pithoeus (Errones Venerii 1587), J. Dousa (Coniect. 1580. 1592), P. Scri- 
verius (Baudii amores, Hag. 1638), J. Clericus (? cum comm. varr.. Hag. 
1712), Sanadon (Paris. 1728), Wernsdorf (poetae lat. min. IH p. 463—482, 
with prooem. p. 425—462), L. C. F. Schulze (comm. ill., Gotting. 1812. 
4.), J. C. Orelli (in his ed. of Phaedrus p. 220—227 and 230—239, with 
praef. p. 215—219, and annot. p. 228 sq. 234—239), in the treatises of 
Heidtmann, Göbel, 0. Müller (see n. 8) and elsewhere; pristino nitori 
restitutum (by F. Lindemann), Lips. 1852: adnotabat et emendabat Fr. 
Bücheier, Lips. Teubner 1859. 63 pp. 16. In Al. Riese's Anthol. lat. 
I p. 144—148. 

8. Treatises De Pervigilio Veneris by H. Paldaraus (Greifswald 1830. 
4.), G. H. Heidtmann (Greifsw. 1842), Th. Bergk (commentatio de etc. 
Halle 1859), 01. Jacobi (Lund 1867. 4.), 0. Müller, de Annio Floro (Ber- 
lin 1855) p. 18 sqq. F. C. Göbel, de ephymniorum rationibus (Gotting. 
1858) p. 56-61. 

9. Critical contributions by J. Frei (Rhein. Mus. X p. 195—213), 
F. Bücheier (ibid. XV p. 446—451), L. Müller (Fleckeisen's Jahrbb. 83, 
p. 639-651), J. Mähly (Philologus XXIII p. 356—361), K. Schenkl (Journal 
of Austrian Gymn. XVHI 1867. p. 233—243), Bährens (Fleckeisen's 
Jahrb. 105 p. 55 sq.). 

10. Under the title of Vespae indicium coci et pistoris iudice 
Vulcano we possess an epic of 99 hexameters in the codex Salmasia- 
nus immediately preceding the Perv. Ven., also in the Parisinus 8071 
(Thuaneus) saec. IX— X: the last time edited by A. Riese, Anthol. lat. 
199 (I p. 140—143). It contains a contest between a cook and a baker, 
each of whom praises his art and depreciates that of the other. The 
umpire , Vulcan , gives sentence that both are of value and may , 
therefore, give over quarrelling. It is a comic epic, but follows the 
form of an idyl in representing a contest, a feature likewise connecting- 
it with the rhetorical incuvot and tpoyot. See above 269, 1. 301, 7. 
The crustula on 1 Jan. (v. 46, cf. 16) seems to indicate Rome as the 
scene of the poem. The metre is elegant; the tone and general exe- 
cution of the poem are not displeasing. The second century appears 
to be indicated in what the author says of himself: ille ego Vespa 
precor cui divae saepe dedistis per multas urbes populo spectante favorem 
(v. 3 sq.). He appears like a travelling scholar or rhetorician, who 
exhibited his art in various towns of the Roman Empire, like Apuleius 
and many others in this period of the revival of the Sophists. We may 
know the rhetorician by the subject of the poem and the scholastic 
character of his jokes; cf. v. 44 sq. Satyros — saturos. Panes — panes; 
82 gallos — Gallos, and also the play on the double meaning of ius v. 
29. 60. 6? His erudition appears in the spondaic measure of quasi (v. 
82 sq.). The author appears also well-versed in Greek literature, es- 
pecially mythology, and professes his polytheistic beliefs with an enjoy- 
ment evidently not troubled by Christian scruples. V. 6 he recom- 



250 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

mends his poem by saying aliquid quoque iuris habebit, which seems 
to suggest a time when Jurisprudence enjoyed much favour. See W. 
Teuffel, Studies and Char. p. 45 sq. 

b. The time of M. Aurelius, A. D. 161 — 180. 

359. In spite ot his own excellence, the reign of M. Au- 
relius was a time of terror for the Roman Empire, owing to 
the incessant wars in the East and North, and a fearful 
plague and famine. Under the pressure of these calamities 
mental life could not develop much, though the Emperor al- 
lowed it the most complete liberty, being himself accessible to 
all good and noble aims, severe and strict only towards him- 
self, but even too lenient towards others, especially in com- 
parison with the difficulty of his task. The literature of this 
reign was still under the influence of Fronto, though Apuleius 
manifested far more originality than Gellius. Philosophy was 
much patronized, but Stoicism shrank down to more general 
wisdom, and the so-called Platonism was alloyed with 
mysticism and declamation. Grammar was in Greek literature 
brilliantly represented by Apollonius Dyscolus, medical science 
by Galenus. The Sophist Aristides of Bithynia belongs also 
to this time. 

1. M. Annius Verus, born 26 April 121, adopted according to 
Adrian's wish along with L. Verus by Antoninus Pius; after whose 
accession to the throne he was styled M. (Aelius) Aurelius Caesar. 
As Emperor (since 1 March 161) M. Aurelius Antoninus Aug. (Fronto 
calls him Caesar, then Antonine or M. Aureli). His colleague L. Aure- 
lius Verus Aug. was after his consecration (f Jan. 169) called divus 
Verus, in legal works also divus Lucius. M. Aurelius himself is after 
his death (17 March 180) called divus M. Antoninus Pius, by the Jurists 
divus Marcus, and in the time of the joint reign they speak of divi fratres. 

2. He was taught by Fronto, see above 351, 5. G. Boissier, la 
jeunesse de Marc-Aurele et les lettres de Fronton, Revue des deux 
mondes 1 April 1868, p. 671—698. With his usual zeal the prince 
excerpted the writers recommended to him by Fronto, collected Synonyms, 
sentences, similes and other rhetorical figures, and even made 
hexameters (Fronto p. 24. 84 N.), but perceiving the emptiness of these 
pursuits he was gained over by Junius Rusticus (above 354, 2 sq.) to (Stoic) 
philosophy, to the great vexation of Fronto ; see above 351, 5. His 
turning point is about a. 146; cf. ad Front. IV 13 (p. 75 N.): Aristonis 
libri me hac tempestate . . habent male; . . nimis quam saepe erubes- 
cit discipulus tuus sibique suscenset quod viginti quinque annos natus 
nihildum bonarum opinionum et puriorum rationum animo hauserim. 



M. Aiirelms. 251 

3. We possess by Marcus Aurelius (besides his letters to Fronto 
and other letters, e. g. ap. Capitol. Clod. Alb. 10, 6 sqq.) his twelve 
books elg avrov in Greek, written a. 169—176, aphorisms and reflexions, 
good purposes manifesting very noble intentions. That he lacked 
dQt/uvTtjg, he himself admits as a fault; cf. Avidius Cassius ap. Vulcat. 
Gall. (Av. Cass. 14, 3. 5) : Marcus homo sane optimus, qui dum Clemens 
dici cupit eos patitur vivere quorum ipse non probat vitam. . . M. An- 
toninus philosophatur et quaerit de dementis et de animis et de honesto 
et iusto, nee sentit pro republica. Capitol. Ant. phil. 8, 3: dabat se 
Marcus totum philosophiae, amorem civium adfectans. 

4. Digest. XXVII 1, 6, 8 : o S^fioruTog narriQ fiov (probably M. Au- 
relius, not Pius, whose order was more limited, see above 350, 2) nc.Qfk- 
^(ov (v^vg Ini rrjv «(»/»yV diccrccy/LiccTi' rag vTiaQ)(ovccig ivfidg xal ajfkfiag 
ißfßatcoafv, yqaxjjag (fikoao(fjovg, grjTOQag, yQafJ/uari'Xovg, lajQovg arfXflg 
flvai, yv/uuaffic(QXKÖy etc. xal /u^t€ xqCvfiv uijrf nQfCßfvfiv //>/rf fig 
GTQaTftap XKTaXfyfa&cu ctxovrccg etc. Capitol. M. philos. 23, 9 : fama fuit 
quod sub philosophorum specie quidam remp. vexarent et privatos. 

5. See on M. Aurelius' life and reign the article by G. R. Sievers 
in Pauly's Encycl. I 1 p. 1197—1203. See also E. Zeller's Lectures 
and Essays (Leipzig 1865) p. 82—107. 

6. On the correspondence of Fronto and A. Verus (n. 1) see above 
351, 7. The eloquentia of Verus is praised by Fronto p. 120 sq. Verus 
orders Fronto to write a panegyric account of his deeds ib. p. 131 sq. 
Verus' gratiarum actio ib. V 38 sq. (p. 87); his orationes ad senatum et 
allocutiones ad exercitum ib. p. 131 sq. An official military report in 
the'shape of a letter (a. 163 sq.) ib. p. 126 sq. 

7. Capitol. Ant. phil. 8, 1 : adepti imperiura ita civiliter se ambo 
egerunt ut . . eos MaruUus, sui temporis mimographos, cavillando im- 
pune perstringeret. Cf. ib. 29, 2 (de quo mimus in scena praesente 
Antonino dixit etc.). Serv. Aen. VII 499 (Marullus mimographus). See 
above 8, 6 Add. 

8. Gellius XIX 11, 3 sq.: hoc distichon amicus meus, ovx a/uovffog 
adulescens in plures versiculos . . vertit; after which he places 15 
iambic dimeters. An iambic inscription of the exodiarius Ursus ap. 
Orelli 2591 = Bücheier Greifsw. Ind. lect. 1879 p. 18. Ephemeris epigr. 
I (Rome and Berlin 1872) p. 55—57. 

9. On Apollonios o dvffxokog of Alexandria see Wcstermann, in 
Pauly's'^Encycl. I 2 p. 1319 — 1321. His son was the no less celebrated 
grammarian Herodianus, whose reliquiae collegit, disposuit, emendavit, 
explicuit, praefatus est Aug. Lentz, 2 vols. Lips. 1867 sqq. Phrynichus 
Atticista lived also in the reigns of M. Aurelius and Commodus. 

10. On P. Aelius Aristides (a. 117—189?) from Bithynia cf. Pauly's 
Enc. I 1 p. 340—342. 



262 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

11. On Galenus (a. 131 — 201?) see L. Choulant, Manual of the 
Bibliography of earlier medical art p. 98—120. 

12. To the divi fratres {h^iOTUToi ßaatkftg ' AvitavTvog xcd OviJQoc;) 
the rhetorician Polyaenos, a Maxa^div avrjQ, dedicated his eight books 
of :S7QaTr]ytxa, mostly from Greek sources, some of them now lost. Re- 
censuit, auctiores edidit, indicibus instruxitE. Wölfflin, Lips. Teubner 1860. 



360. Of the other pupils of Fronto the most important 
seems to have been his son-in-law C. Aufidius Victorinus, 
Cons. II a. 183; after him we may mention Servilius Silanus 
and Postumius Festus. On the whole it would seem that 
those who lived at Rome as rhetoricians, were influenced by 
him, though not all imitated his manner. Thus e. g. Julius 
Titianus who wrote on a number of different subjects (Episto- 
lography, fables, rhetoric, geography etc.). 

1. Fronto p. 95 sq. N. : ut parentes cum in voltu liberum oris sui 
liniamenta dinoscunt, ita ego cum in orationibus vestris vestigia nostrae 
sectae animadverto, yfytj^s dV (fQ^ya JtjTio. meis enim verbis exprimere 
vim gaudii mei nequeo. p. 200: suadeo vobis (i. e. the Cirtenses) pa- 
tronos creare . . eos qui nunc fori principem locum occupant, Aufidium 
Victorinum (n. 2), quern . . mihi generum cum illis moribus tantaque 
eloquentia elegi. Servilium quoque Silanum (Cos. 189, cf. Lamprid. 
Commod. 7, 5) optimum et facundissimum virum iure municipis patro- 
num habebitis, cum sit vicina et amica civitate Hippone regio. Postu- 
mium Festum (Gell. XIX 13, 1) et morum et eloquentiae nomine recte 
patronum vobis feceritis , et ipsum nostrae provinciae et civitatis non 
longinquae. Capitol. Ant. phil. 3, 8: frequentavit et declamatorum 
scholas publicas amavitque e condiscipulis praecipuos senatorii ordinis 
Seium Fuscianum et Aufidium Victorinum, ex equestri Baebium Longum 

et Calenum. 

■> 

2. C. Aufidius (Fronto p. 75) Victorinus (cf. n. 1) was praef. 
urbi and bis consul (Orelli 1176) and held a command in Germany. 
Fronto p. 232: Victorinum, pietate, mansuetudine, veritate, innocentia 
maxima, omnium denique optimarum artium praecipuum virum. Cf. 
p. 179. A. 186 he committed succide, xafnfq xal vno tov Mccqxov *V 
lotg navv Ti/ui]^tlg xai rß rtjg ^v/rjg a^frp xal TJj tdjp koyojy naqccaxfv^ 
ovdfyog riöv xai^^ savroy dfvrfQog yfyo/ufyog, Dio LXXIl 11. His son 
(by Fronto's daughter Gratia) Victorinus Fronto (above 351, 2) is no 
doubt the same (Aufidius) Fronto consul (a. 199) who erected to his 
son M. Aufidius Fronto the monument with the inscr. Orelli 1176 (of 
Pisaurum); and also C. Aufidius Victorinus, Cons. 200, is probably a 
younger son of his. Cf. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Encycl. I 2 p. 2130 sq. 
nr. 20 and 33. 



Vietorinus and the othei^ pupils of Fronto. 2Ä3 

3. Fronto p. 191 Volumnio Quadrato : legam, fill, libenter oratio- 
nem istam quam misisti mihi et si quid videbitur corrigendum corrigam. 
Cf. ib. p. 190. 

4. Fronto p. 191: Fabianum, spectatum in iudiciis civilibus, fre- 
quentem in foro, meum familiärem. Cf. Spart. Sever. 13. 3: occidit . . 
Masticium Fabianum. 

5. On the appearance of the son of Squilla Gallicanus as orator 
see Fronto p. 188 sq. (orator noster). 

6. Fronto p. 179 N. : Antoninus Aquila vir doctus est et facundus. 
Fronto recommends him (ib.) to Victorinus for a vacant professorship 
of rhetoric in his province. 

7. Fronto p. 173: commendando Corneliano Sulpicio familiarissimo 
meo . . industrius vir est, strenuus, ingenio libero ac liberali, . . litte- 
rarum studio et bonarum artium elegantia mihi acceptissimus. 

8. Fronto p. 175: Montanum Licinium sic diligo etc. bonarum 
artium sectator est mens Montanus, turn doctrina et facundia est 
eleganti. 

9. Fronto p. 176: lulium Aquilinum, virum . . doctissimum, facun- 
dissimum, philosophiae disciplinis ad optimas artes, eloquentiae studiis 
ad egregiam facundiam eximie eruditum. . . si eum audire disputantem 
de platonicis disciplinis dignatus fueris. (p. 177:) maximi concursus ad 
audiendum eum Romae saepe facti sunt. 

10. Sidon. Apoll. Ep. I 1 : quem (Cic.) nee lulius Titianus sub 
nominibus illustrium feminarum (ficticious letters) digna similitudine ex- 
pressit. propter quod ilium ceteri quique Frontonianorum. utpote con- 
sectaneum aemulati cur veternosum dicendi genus imitaretur (the Ci- 
ceronian, instead of the fashionable style of Fronto), oratorum simiam 
nuncupaverunt. He is probably identical with Titianus senior qui pro- 
vinciarum libros pulcherrimos scripsit et qui dictus est simia temporis 
sui, quod cuncta esset imitatus (Capitolin. Maximin. 27, 5). Those libri 
are probably the chorographia mentioned by Serv. Ae. IV 42 (Barcaei 
. . secundum Titianum in chorographia Phoenieem . . superavere), cf. 
ib. XI 651 and Isid. origg. IX 2, 64 on the Amazons (unimammas). 
Also the fragment on Etna ap. Gregor. Turon. de cursu stell. 30 (ed. 
Haase 1853, p. 14: meminit et huius montis et ille lulius Titianus his 
verbis etc.), cf. A. Mai, coll. Vat. Ill p. 129, seems to have belonged 
to it. We should, therefore, probably relate to him Cassiod. divin. 
lect. 25: cosmographiae quoque notitiam vobis percurrendam esse . . 
suademus; . . quod vobis proveniet absolute si libellum lulii oratoris 

. . studiose legere festinetis. Cf. Auson. epist. 16, 81 (above 23, 2), 
according to which aesopiam trimetriam vertit (in prose) fandi Titianus 
artifex. He seems to be also identical with Titianus who wrote on 
rhetoric (Isid. orig. II 2, 1), cf. Serv. Ae. X 18: Titianus et Calvus, qui 
themata omnia de Verffilio elicuerunt et adformarunt ad dicendi usum, 



254 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

and not his son (below 375, 8). If so, it becomes credible that we 
should understand of him Diomed. I p. 368, 26 K. : Titianus (libri : ty- 
rannus) de agri cultura primo. Cf. Macrob. Ill 19, 6. Fr. Haase, Greg. 
Tur. etc. Breslau 1853. 4. p. 37 sq. 

11. To about this time we should assign Romanius lovinus, rhetor 
eloquii latini, to whom his grateful heirs put the following epitaph: 
Conditus hac Romanius est tellure lovinus, docta loqui doctus quique 
loqui docuit. Manibus infernis si vita est gloria vitae, vivit et hie 
nobis ut Cato vel Cicero. Orelli-Henzen 5606 from Rome. 

12. Capitol. Helv. Pert. 1, 4 sq.: puer litteris elementariis et cal- 
culo imbutus datus etiam graeco grammatico atque inde Sulpicio Apol- 
linari (above 353, 2) post quern idemPertinax grammaticen professus 
est. sed cum in ea minus quaestus proficeret, per Lollianum Avitum, 
consularem virum (Cons. 144), . . ducendi ordinis dignitatem petit. 
2, 1 : bello parthico (a. 163 sqq.) promeritus etc. Pertinax was born 
1 Aug. 126, Cons. 179 and 192; reigned as Emperor for three months 
and was assassinated a. 193 = 946 V. C. 

361. The twenty books of Noctes atticae by A. Gellius 
(about a. 125 — 175) are of much importance for many de- 
partments of literature and for an accurate knowledge of this 
time. Though Gellius was a man of limited capacities, who 
either admired or hated for insignificant motives, he still col- 
lected with much care and honest industry all notices he could 
find both in books and in conversations concerning archaic 
literature and language, law and philosophy and natural 
science. The arrangement of his work is merely casual, his 
diction sober, but full of archaisms. Of the eighth book 
only the tables of contents have come down to us. 

1. On his life and education. Gellius XVIII 4, 1: cum iam adules- 
centuli Romae praetextam et puerilem togam mutassemus magistrosque 
tunc nobis nosmet ipsi exploratiores quaereremus, . . Apollinaris Sul- 
picius (above 353, 2) etc. VII 6, 12: adulescens ego Romae, cum etiam- 
tum ad grammaticos itarem, audivi Apollinarem Sulpicium, quem in 
primis sectabar. XX 6, 1: percontabar A. S. cum eum Romae adules- 
cens sectarer. ib. 15: haec memini mihi Apollinarem dicere eaque tunc 
ipsa ita ut dicta fuerant notavi. In his later years also G. preferred 
in doubtful cases to apply to S.A.; cf. XI 15, 8. XII 13, 1 (cum Romae 
a consulibus iudex extra ordinem datus pronuntiare . . iussus essem, 
Sulpicium Ap. . . percontatus sum). XIII 20, 1 (ego et Ap. S. et quidam 
alii mihi aut illi familiäres). Rhetoric Gellius had been taught by An- 
tonius lulianus (above 346, 1), and T. Castricius (above 346, 2), Fronto 
also having influence upon him (XIX 8, 1). But above others Favori- 
nus (above 346, 5) engaged his attention, cf. especially XVI 3, 1 : cum 



Gellius. 255 

Favorino Romae dies plerumque totos eramus tenebatque animos nostros 
homo ille fandi dulcissimus atque eum quoquo iret . . sequebamur. 
M. Hertz, Rom. Gell. mant. altera (Breslau 1869. 4.) p. 5—9. 

2. Gell, praef. 12: volvendis . . multis admodum voluminibus per 
omnia semper negotiorum intervalla in quibus furari otium potui exer- 
citus defessusque sum. XI 3, 1 : quando ab arbitriis negotiisque otium 
est et motandi corporis gratia aut spatiamur aut vectamur. XVI 10, 1 : 
otium erat quodam die Romae in foro a negotiis etc. XIV 2, I : quo 
primum tempore a praetoribus lectus in iudices sum (for indicia pri- 
vata) libros . . de olficio iudicis scriptos conquisivi, ut homo adulescens 
(at the age of twenty-five years, see Dig. XLII 1, 57, L 4, 8), a poe- 
tarum fabulis et a rhetorum epilogis ad iudicandas lites vocatus rem 
iudiciariam . . cognoscerem. XII 13, 1 : cum Romae a consulibus iudex 
extra ordinem datus . . essem. J. Steup, de Prob. p. VII, cf. p. 77 
(vix ante a. p. Chr. 120 videtur natus esse). L. Friedländer places the 
birth of Gellius not before a. 130. 

3. As iuvenis (II 21, 1. 4. cf. VII 10, 1. XII 5, 4. XV 2, 3) i. e. 
at the age of 30 years and after his judicial duty, he continued his 
studies at Athens. Gell. I 2, 1 : Herodes Atticus . . accersebat saepe 
nos, cum apud magistros Athenis essemus, . . me et cl. v. Servilianum 
compluresque alios nostrates qui Roma in Graeciam ad capiendum in- 
genii cultum concesserant. Cf. XVIII 2, 1 sqq. 13, 1 sqq. He chiefly 
joined Taurus (above 348, 2), see XII 5, 1 sq., but had also much inter- 
course with Peregrinus Proteus (f a. 165); see XII 11, 1 cf. VIII 3. 
He staid at Athens for at least a year (XVIII 2, 1 : Saturnalia Athenis 
agitabamus, and 13, 1: Saturnalibus Athenis . . lusitabamus). Perhaps 
in the time of his return to Rome XIII 13, 1 : cum ex angulis secretis- 
que librorum ac magistrorum in medium iam hominum et in lucem 
fori prodissem (XHI 13, 1) etc.; cf. n. 2 and I 22, 6: memini ego prae- 
toris . . tribunali me forte adsistere. 

4. On the work of Gellius. Praef. 1 : hoc ut liberis quoque meis 
partae istiusmodi remissiones essent. (2.) usi autem sumus ordine rerum 
fortuito quem antea in excerpendo feceramus. nam proinde ut librum 
quetiique in manus ceperam . . vel quid memoratu dignum audieram 
. . promisee adnotabam. . . (3.) facta igitur est in his quoque com- 
mentariis eadem rerum disparilitas quae fuit in illis adnotationibus 
pristinis. . . (4.) sed quoniam longinquis per hiemem noctibus in agro 
. . terrae atticae commentationes hasce ludere ac facere exorsi sumus, 
idcirco eas inscripsimus No ctium esse atticarum. (13.) erunt autem 
in his commentariis pauca quaedam scrupulosa et anxia vel ex gram- 
matica vel ex dialectica vel etiam ex geometria, . . item paucula remo- 
tiora ex augurio iure et pontificio. (22.) volumina commentariorum ad 
hunc diem viginti iam facta sunt. (23.) quantum autem vitae mihi 
deinceps deum voluntate erit quantumque a tuenda re familiari pro- 
curandoque cultu liberorum meorum dabitur otium, ea omnia . . tem- 
pora ad colligendas huiuscemodi memoriarum delectatiunculas conferam. 



256 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

It seems, however, that this plan was not carried out, perhaps because 
G. died a short time after the completion of his twenty books. The 
beginning of the preface as well as the close of b. XX are not extant; 
and of b. VIII we possess only the headings of the single chapters. 

5. Radulphus de Diceto (above 253, 3 extr.) : Agellius scribit anno 
CLXIX (F. Rühl, on the circul. of Just. p. 33, cf. 35). This is supported 
by the fact that Gellius mentions Herodes Atticus (Cos. 143), Fronto 
(Cons. 143), and Erucius Clarus (Cons. 146) as men of consular dignity. 
That Gellius never refers to any works of Fronto's, e. g. not even to 
his Arion XVI 19, may be explained from his habit of never mentioning 
the works of living writers whom he admired, e. g. not even those of 
Herodes Atticus and Favorinus, but rather of introducing them speaking 
in propria persona. M. Hertz, mant. alt. p. 7. Very little appears 
from XX 1, 6: trecentesimo f. R. c, tabulae (XII) scriptae sunt, a quo 
tempore ad hunc diem anni esse non longe minus DCC (DC? Vogel) 
videntur. Th. Vogel I p. 7—9. 

In the same way the expression nuper which Gellius uses 
repeatedly does not teach us much, uncertain as it is. There is no 
doubt that he uses nuper of his sojourn in Italy XI 16, 2. XIII 13, 1. 
XV 4, 1. II 24, 2; but XVIII 2, 7 it is used of the Saturnalia at 
Athens. Comp, also III 3, 7: nuperrime, cum legeremus Fretum . . 
Plauti. It seems, therefore, that the collection of his materials took 
up some time. Cf. Th. Vogel I p. 7 — 9. L. Friedländer, de A. G. 
vitae temporibus, Königsberg 1869. 7 pp. 4.; Roman manners and mo- 
rals m p. 414-420. 

6. Gellius has a servile nature ; he positively cannot help admiring, 
applauding and following in the rear of great persons, should they 
even be of the most contrary character, as e. g. he praises Fronto 
and Cicero at one and the same time (cf. XVII 1, 1 sqq.). His attach- 
ment to his chosen patrons is really touching, except when it breaks 
forth in depreciation of those who belong to a different School. In 
his well-meaning and somewhat stupid mediocrity he is a faithful mir- 
ror of his time, its important-looking activity without serious aims, its 
pursuits of non -entities, its complete want of individual talent, an 
utter absence of the power of production, judgment and discrimination, 
of its erudition and pedantry. He often succeeds in giving very lively 
and amusing sketches of the pursuits of these days, though sometimes 
against his intention. His collection of excerpts from lost works of 
archaic literature is of the greater importance to us because the author 
is very trustworthy wherever he has used his own eyes. He is of 
course also infected with the endeavour of his time to appear more 
learned than he actually is, and some things he may have taken at 
second hand, though he maintains to have derived them from the 
sources themselves. See MerckKn p. 641 sqq. Kretzschmer p. 13 sqq. 

7. Vir elegantissimi eloquii et multae ac facundae scientiae G. is 
called by Augustin, de civ. dei IX 4. Nonius Marcellus and most of 



A. Gellms. 257 

all Macrobius copy him without mentioning him. See on Gellius M. 
Hertz, Renaissance p. 35—38. Th. Vogel, de A. Gellii vita, studiis, 
scriptis narratio et indicium, Zittau 1860. 4. p. 1 — 25; de A. Gellii copia 
verborum, Zwickau 1862. 4. p. 1 — 32. J. Kretzschmer, de A. G. fonti- 
bus. I. de auctoribus Gellii grammaticis, Greifswald 1860. 108 pp. 
L. Mercklin, on A. G.'s method of citation and his employment of his 
sources, Jahrb. f. class. Philol. Suppl. Ill (1860) p. 635-710; A. Gellii 
capita quaedam ad fontes revocata, Dorpat 1861. 4. M. Hertz, A. G. 
and Nonius Marcellus, in Fleckeisen's Jahrbb. 85, p. 706—726. 779 
—799. 

8. All the earlier known manuscripts of Gellius contain either 
only the first seven or the last twelve books. The text of the first 
seven books rests especially on a Palatine palimpsest of the Vatican 
Library, on Vat. 3452 and Par. 5765 saec. XHI, also on a Rottendorf ms. 
saec. Xn at Leyden ; book IX XX on Paris. 8664 saec. XIII, and Voss, 7 
(Vossianus maior of Gronov) at Leyden and a Berne fragment saec. XII. 
Quite isolated is the lost Buslidianus which embraced both halves. Cf. 
M. Hertz, Reports on the Trans, of the Berl. Acad. 1847, p. 403 sq. 
408 — 417. J. Fr. Gronovius had already discovered what mss. were of 
authority, and M. Hertz has merely followed out his theories. 

9. Editio princeps Rom. 1469 fol. 1472 fol. Ascensiana 1511. 4. 
Aldina 1515. Ed. L. Carrio, Paris 1585. Chief edition by J. Fr. and 
Jac. Gronovius. Lugd. B. 1706. 4. (Lips. 1762, by J. L. Conradi, 2 vols.). 
Ed. A. Lion, Gotting. 1824. Ex recensione M. Hertz, Lips. (Teubner) 
1853. 2 vols. 

10. Gellii quae ad ius pertinent by J. v. Glöden (Rostock 1843), 
H. E. Dirksen (On the Excerpts in Gellius from the works of the early 
Roman Jurists, Posthumous Writings I p. 21 — 63), M. Hertz (capp. IV, 
Breslau 1868. 4.). A. Fleckeisen, on the criticism of the fragments of 
the early Roman poets quoted by Gellius, Leipzig 1854. 

Other exegetical and critical contributions by Ch. Falster (Adnotatt. 
in Gellii libr. VIII, Hafniae 1721), A. Cramer (ad G. excursus I — IV, 
Kiel 1827—1832. 4.), R. Klotz (quaestiones Gellianae, Lips. 1857. 4.). 
M. Hertz (Vindiciae G., Greifswald 1858. 4. ; Ramentorum Gell, mantissae 
L H. Breslau 1868 sq. 4.), Th. Mommsen (ad GcU. IV 1. 4. in the Sym- 
bolae Bethmanno Hollw. cblatae, Berlin 1868) and others. 

362. The Platonic philosopher and rhetorician L. Apule- 
ius of Madaura lived and wrote under Antoninus Pius and 
M. Aurelius. Educated at Carthage and Athens and by his 
travels, Apuleius was during some time a solicitor at Rome, 
and then lived in Africa as a travelling rhetorician and pro- 
fessor of eloquence. He is a genuine son of his time and 
country, manysided in knowledge and literary activity, but 
utterly uncritical, phantastic and credulous in miracles, vain 

17 



258 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

and conceited, void of taste in his diction which is an inju- 
dicious accumulation of the peculiarities of all periods and 
kinds of style. But on the other hand, his vivacity, origina- 
lity and facility of production ensure to him a prominent 
place among the writers of the second century. 

1. His praenomen (in the cod. Victor, of the apol. and before de 
dogm. Plat.) might possibly be derived from the hero of his novel. 
Apuleius philosophus platonicus Madaurensis, de dogm. PI. Ill p. 203 
Bip. Cf. apol. 10. Augustm. civ. d. VIII 14: Apuleius Platonicus Ma- 
daurensis. Charis. p. 240 K. : ut apud Apuleium Platonicum de pro- 
verbiis scriptum est libro II. From this Plat, would appear to have 
formed part of his headings. Augustin. civ. dei VIII 12: in utraque 
lingua . . Apuleius Afer extitit Platonicus nobilis. 

2. On the life of Apuleius until his law-suit (see n. 3) the Apo- 
logia contains abundant information. As this suit took place under 
Pius (apolog. 85), and as Ap.'s wife was then 40 years old (ib. 89) and 
there was great disparity of age between Ap. and his wife, we are 
obliged to assume that Ap. was then not older than 25 years, so that 
he would he born about a. 125. See below 363, 2. Florid. 18, 86 : pueritia 
apud vos (Carthag.) et magistri vos, et secta, licet Athenis Atticis con- 
firmata, tamen hie incohata est et vox mea utraque lingua iam vestris 
auribus ante proximum sexennium probe cognita. 20, 97 : ego et alias 
crateras (than grammar and rhetoric) Athenis bibi : poeticae . ., geo- 
metriae . ., musicae , ., dialecticae . ., iam vero universae philosophiae. 
Met. XI 28: viriculas patrimonii peregrinationis adtriverant impensae. 
, . quae res . . victum uberiorem subministrabat . . quaesticulo forensi 
nutrito (at Rome) per patrocinia sermonis romani. 

3. On a journey from Madaura to Alexandria Ap. fell ill at Oea, 
became acquainted with a rich widow, Aemilia Pudentilla, and married 
her. Her relations became incensed by this and brought an action 
against Ap. before the Procons. Claudius Maximus (above 354, 4) char- 
ging him with having won the love of the widow by magic arts. Ap. 
defended himself in his extant apologia (see below 363, 1). He was 
no doubt absolved, and after having staid at Oea for three years (ap. 
55), went to live at Carthage, from where he undertook journeys in 
Africa to give lectures. In the next centuries that adventure procured 
him the reputation of magus and enchanter, who might rival even the 
Christian workers of miracles. Augustin. Ep. II quaest. VI (Vol. II p. 
426 c ed. Gaurae, Paris 1838) : si hoc quod de lona scriptum est Apu- 
leius Madaurensis vel Apollonius Tyaneus fecisse diceretur, quorum 
multa mira nullo fideli auctore iactitant. Epist. 136 (ib. II p. 599 a): 
Apollonium quidem suum nobis et Apuleium aliosque magicae artis 
homines in medium proferunt, quorum maiora contendunt extitisse mi- 
racula. Ep. 138, 18 (ib. p. 623 a): Apollonium et Apuleium ceterosque 



Apuleius. 259 

magicarum artium peritissimos conferre Christo vel etiam praeferre 
conantur. Lactant. inst. V 3, 7 : Apuleium, cuius solent et multa et 
mira memorari. 

4. Augustin. Ep. 138 (II p. 623 d): Apuleius, ut de illo potissimum 
loquamur qui nobis Afris Afer est notior, , . ne ad aliquam quidem 
iudiciariam reip. potestatem cum omnibus suis magicis artibus potuit 
pervenire, honesto patriae suae loco natus et liberaliter educatus magna- 
que praeditus eloquentia. . . sacerdos provinciae pro magno fuit ut 
munera ederet . . et pro statua sibi ad Oeenses locanda . . adversus 
contradictionem quorundam civium litigaret. quod posteros ne lateret, 
eiusdem litis orationem scriptam memoriae commendavit. Apul. Flor. 
XVI: vobis occipiam, principes Africae viri, gratiam agere ob statuam 
quam mihi praesenti honeste postulastis et absenti benigne decrevistis 
etc. ib. (72—74 Oud.) : testimonia mihi perhibuit in curia Carthaginien- 
sium non minus splendidissima quam benignissima vir consularis. . . 
nam . . libello misso, per quem postulabat locum celebrem statuae 
meae, . . commemoravit inter nos iura amicitiae a commilitio studiorum 
eisdem magistris honeste incohata. . . quin etiam commemoravit et 
alibi gentium et civitatium honores mihi statuarum et alios decretos. 
. . etiam docuit argumento suscepti sacerdotii summum mihi honorem 
Carthagini adesse. . . Aemilianus Strabo, vir consularis, brevi votis 
omnium futurus proconsul, sententiam de honoribus meis in curia 
Carthaginiensium dixit etc. We know nothing further on the rest of 
Ap.'s life and on his death. 

5. Apol. 55 : sacrorum pleraque initia in Graecia participavi. . . 
multiiuga sacra et plurimos ritus et varias cerimonias studio veri et 
officio erga deos didici. 63: morem habeo quoquo earn simulacrum 
alicuius dei inter libellos conditum gestare eique diebus festis ture et 
mero et aliquando victimis supplicare. The ostentatious character of 
these meritorious works arises partly from Apuleius' superstition and 
mysticism, partly from his opposition to Christianity which was sprea- 
ding fast and which he detested; see Met. XI 14: nee vel unum vitium 
nequissimae illi feminae deerat: . . saeva scaeva, virosa ebriosa, per- 
vicax pertinax, . . inimica fidei, hostis pudicitiae. tunc spretis atque 
calcatis divinis numinibus invicem certae religionis mentita sacrilega 
praesumptione dei quem praedicaret unicum confictis observationibus 
vacuit fallens omnes homines etc. The Platonism of this time which 
Ap. professed (n. I) was likewise mystical; cf. Flor. 15 (60 sq. Oud.): 
noster Plato, nihil ab hac secta (of Pythagoras) vel paululum devius, 
pythagorissat in plurimis. aeque et ipse, ut in nomen eius a magistris 
meis adoptarer, utrumque (to speak and to keep silence) meditationibus 
academicis didici. 

6. A-pol. 4: accusamus apud te philosophum et tam graece quam 
latine disertissimum. Met. I 1 : in urbe latia advena studiorum Quiri- 
tium indigenam sermonem aerumnabili labore, nullo magistro praeeunte, 
aggressus excolui. en ecce praefamur veniam si quid exotici ac fo- 



260 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

rensis sermonis rudis locutor offendero. Ap.'s diction always retained 
a foreign tinge in spite of his fluent command of the language. He 
does not perceive how very strange Plautine words and phrases sound 
in his serious style. His diction is overlaid with rhetorical figures of 
all kinds, exaggerated pathos and artificial mannerism. Erdmann, de 
Apulei elocutione, Stendal 1864. 4. H. Kretschmann, de latinitate 
Apulei, Königsberg 1865. 140 pp. Th. Jeltsch, de Apulei Floridis 
(Breslau 1868) p. 3—32. 

7. Apul. Flor. 9 (31 Oud.) : plura mea extant in Camenis quam 
Hippiae in opificiis operibus. ib. (37 Oud.): fateor uno chartario calamo 
me reficere poemata omnigenus, apta virgae {Qaßdog, to denote epic 
poems), lyrae, socco, cothurno, item satiras ac griphos, item historias 
varias, nee non orationes laudatas disertis, nee non dialogos laudatos 
philosophis, atque haec et alia eiusdem modi tarn graece quam latine, 
. . simili stilo. 20 (98 Oud.) : canit Empedocles carmina, Plato dialogos, 
Socrates hymnos, Epicharmus modos (? mimos? comoedias?), Xeno- 
phon historias, Xenophanes satiras: Apuleius vester haec omnia novem- 
que Musas pari studio colit. At the time of his accusation Ap. had 
not only delivered and published speeches (Apol. 55, cf. 73. 24. 33 
extr.), but also edited Naturales quaestiones in Greek and in Latin (ib. 
36. 38.), written poems, specimens of which are given ib. 6 (e ludicris 
meis epistolium de dentificio, trimeters on a tooth-powder, addressed to 
a certain Calpurnius) and ib. 9 (versus amatorii, in the form of an elegy, 
a far-fetched praise of the sons of Scribonius Laetus under the names 
of Charinus and Critias, cf. Auson. Idyll. XIII s. f.: esse Apuleium in 
vita philosophum, in epigrammatis amatorem); also Aesculapii hymnus 
graeco et latino carmine, cui dialogum similiter graecum et latinum 
praetexui (Flor. 18 = 91 Oud.) 

8. His other writings : an tQcjTtxog (Lyd. magg. Ill 64), Hermago- 
ras (according to the fragments quoted by Priscian possibly a novel 
like the Metamorph.); Epitoma historiarura (Priscian, II p. 482 Htz. ; 
cf. I p. 250 sq.: Apuleius in Epitoma); works on arithmetic (in imita- 
tion of Nicomachus, see Cassiod. de arithm. extr. and Isid. Orig. Ill 2), 
music (Cassiod. de mus. extr.), on astronomy (Lyd. de mens. IV 7. 
73 and de ostent. 3. 4. 7. 10. 44. 54), medicinalia (Priscian. VI 11. p. 
203, 14 H.), de arboribus (Serv. Verg. Ge. II 126) and other works con- 
cerning husbandry (Phot. bibl. cod. 163. Pallad. R. R. I 35, 9. Geopon. I 
14. XIII 5 and elsewhere; see Otto Jahn, Reports of the Saxon Society 
of Lit., 1850, p. 286. E. Meyer (Hist, of Botany II p. 196 sq.); lastly 
also a version of Plato's Phaedo (Sidon. Ap. Epist. IP 9, Priscian. X 19. 
p. 511 H.) and a work de proverbiis see n. 1. Apoll. Sid. ep. IX 13: 
a platonico Madaurensi formulas mutuare convivalium quaestionum etc. 

9. G. F. Hildebrand, de vita et scriptis Ap., Halle 1835 and in 
his ed. of Ap. 0. Jahn, Reports of the Saxon Society of Lit. 1850, 
p. 283 — 287. Chr. Cavallin, de L. Ap. scriptore latino adversaria, Lund 
1857. 54 pp. E. Goumy, de A. fabularum scriptore et rhetore, Paris 



Apuleius. 261 

1859. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. I 2. p. 1348—1353. M. Hertz, Re- 
naissance p. 32 — 34. 

363. Of the numerous works of Apuleius in Greek and 
Latin, verse and prose, the following are extant: 

1) Apologia, his self-defence against a charge of witch- 
craft, subsequently written with evident enjoyment of his rhe- 
torical power and a lively sense of his importance. 

2) Florida, an anthology from the speeches and decla- 
mations of Apuleius, of mixed contents, on history, philo- 
sophy, natural science and practical life. 

3) Metamorphoseon libri XI, a phantastic and satiri- 
cal novel, written under M. Aurelius and imitated from Lu- 
cian's Aovmoc. The subject is the adventures of a young 
man accidentally transformed into an ass, with the insertion 
of various events and especially the tale of Amor and Psyche. 

4) De deo Socratis, a lengthy explanation of the Pla- 
tonic doctrine of God and Daemons. 

5) Three books de dogmate Piatonis, the third of which 
is a treatise on formal logic according to Aristotle. 

6) De mundo, after Theophrastus. 

1. Apologia sive de magia liber. Augustin. civ. dei VIII 19: 
huius philosophi platonici copiosissima et disertissima extat oratio, 
qua crimen artium magicarum a se alienum esse defendit. See above 
362, 2 and 3. The speech is so written as to give it the appearance 
of being delivered at a tribunal, which is, however, impossible. The 
frivolous and partly foolish arguments alleged by the accusers (e. g. the 
possession of a mirror, c. 13 sqq.) made the orator's task very easy, 
and he employs the opportunity thus offered him of displaying his own 
abilities. Separate editions by Casaubonus (Heidelberg 1594. 4.), Pri- 
caeus (Paris 1635. 4.); Commentary by Gentilis, Hannover 1607. 550 pp. 
Edidit G. Krüger, Berol. 1864. Cf. H. Sauppe, Getting. Gel. Anz. 1865, 
p. 1545-1560. 

2. The Florida are extensive extracts from the published lectures 
of Apuleius, composed on unknown occasions and treating of various 
matters in various kinds of diction. The commencements are sometimes 
wanting, sometimes also the terminations. The single pieces differ in 
contents, purpose, and character; beside specimens of the floridum 
genus in the sense of Ap. we find also some of a proportionately simple 
diction. The different pieces appear also to be of diflferent times; nr. 
17 is of the time of Antoninus Pius, as the procos. Africae (Ser.) Scipio 
Orfitus praised in it was Consul a. 149. Nr. 12 is derived from a choro- 



262 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

graphia according to Pliny (above 308, 7); Mommsen, Solin. p. XXII — 
XXlV. The title of Flor, may be due to the excerptor. We do not 
know whether this selection has come down to us in its complete form, 
and when it was divided into four books (a division foreign to the ex- 
cerptor). Apulei Floridorum quae supersunt ed. Gust. Krüger, Berolin. 
1865. 4. Al. Goldbacher, de L. Apul. Mad. Floridorum quae dicuntur 
origine (p. 3 — 21) et locis quibusdam corruptis (p. 21 — 36), Lips. 1867. 
Th. Jeltsch, de Apulei Floridis (on the identity of the diction of the 
Flor, with the other works of A.) Breslau 1868. Critical contributions 
by H. Müller, Rh. Mus. XXII p. 463 sq. 645—648. XXIII p. 445—453. 

3. The Metamorphoses were certainly written after the Apo- 
logy. The time of composition is indicated I 2: a Plutarcho illo inclito 
ac mox Sexto philosopho nepote eius. See above 354, 2. The limit of 
time is furnished by Capitol. Clod. Alb. 12, 12: cum ille neniis qui- 
busdam anilibus occupatus inter milesias punicas Apulei sui (Albinus 
was a native of Africa) et ludicra litteraria consenesceret (Albinus f 197). 
The work begins: at ego tibi sermone isto milesio varias fabulas con- 
seram . . : figuras fortunasque hominum in alias imagines conversas et 
in se rursum . . refectas ut mireris exordior. . . fabulam graecanicam 
incipimus. On the transformation of human beings into animals, though 
retaining their human consciousness, but losing the power of speech 
(as we have it as early as Odyss. x 239 sq.) see Augustin. civ. d. XVIII 
17 sq. where (c. 18): et nos cum essemus in Italia audiebamus talia 
de quadam regione illarum partium, ubi stabularias mulieres . . dare 
solere dicebantur . . viatoribus unde in iumenta illico verterentur . . ; 
nee tamen in eis mentem fieri bestialem, sed rationalem humanamque 
servari, sicut Apuleius in libris quos Asini aurei titulo inscripsit sibi 
ipsi accidissc ut . . asinus fieret aut indicavit aut finxit. This error is 
caused by the relation being put into the hero's month. The subject 
is quite the same as in Lucian's Jovxiog ^"Opog, only the names being 
changed and instead of Lucian's jocose termination a serious and phan- 
tastic end, but which is altogether unsuitable to the tale, is substituted. 
In other respects, much is retained that was directed against the proneness 
of this period to believe in miracles ; whence we should less doubt that 
the Greek original was Lucian's work and not the (superstitious) work 
by the supposed Lucius of Patrae; see W. Teuffel, Studies and Char. 
p. 446—457, cf. E. Rhode, on Lucian's work Jovxiog etc. (Leipzig 1869) 
p. 14 — 18. Some similar tales were even older; see Met. X 22 = Lucian. 
Jovx. 51 with Charis. p. 223, 14 K. : Sisenna Milesiarum XIII (or XIV) ; 
ut eum paenitus utero suo recepit. Ap. has added from other (Greek) 
works of fiction, perhaps also from actual events of the time, a num- 
ber of miraculous or obscene tales, also accounts of banditti, and IV 28 
— VI 24 the bella fabella on Amor and Psyche, the original subject of 
which probably belongs to the East, but which in its present shape 
was certainly derived from a Greek work, but Romanized in many 
details. W. Teuffel I. 1. p. 451 sq. Besides the termination, Ap. has no 
doubt added manv details ot his own invention, and above all the un- 



Apule'ms. 268 

natural and pretentious tone of the diction is due to him. The work 
is of importance for the history of manners and often amusing to read. 
Separate editions: Bonon. 1500 fol. (cum Beroaldi commentariis). Venet. 
1501. fol. Ed. Pricaeus, Goud. 1650. Reo. Fr. Eyssenhardt, Berlin 1869. 
Fabula de Psyche et Cupidine rec. I. C. Orelli, Zürich 1833; rec. et 
emend. 0. Jahn, Lips. 1856. 16. 0. Jahn, Novelettes from Ap., in his 
Popular Essays concerning antiquity, Bonn 1868, p. 75—114. 

4. Augustin. de civ. d. VIII 14: Apuleius Platonicus Madaurensis 
de hac re sola unum scripsit librum cuius esse titulum voluit de deo 
Socratis, ubi disserit et exponit ex quo genere numinum Socrates 
habebat adiuuctum etc. dicit enim apertissime et copiosissime asserit 
non ilium deum fuisse, sed daemonem, diligenti disputatione pertractans 
istam Platonis de deorum sublimitate et hominum humilitate et dae- 
monum medietate sententiam. Priscian. X 17 (p. 509, 9 H.) : Apuleius 
in dialogo qui est de deo Socratis. Recens. M. Buckley, London 1844. 
Critical contributions by A. Goldbacher, Journal for the Austrian Gymn. 
XIX. 1868 p. 803-818. 

5. De dogmate Platonis libri III. The first book treats of the 
life of Plato and his philosophy of nature ; the second, addressed to 
Faustinus filius, deals with his ethics. The third, de philosophia rational! 
sive TifQi kQf.ir}vfiag, treats of logic, but following instead of Plato, 
rather Aristotle and the Peripatetics in a most dry manner, so that it 
is evident that it cannot be due to the Platonic Apuleius; it being, 
moreover, wanting in the best rass. Hildebrand I p, XLIV thinks that 
it was added by some grammarian of the third or fourth century 
(Cassiod. already quoting it) as a kind of supplement to the work of 
Ap. But 0. Jahn (Reports of the Saxon Society of Lit. 1850, p. 282 sq.) 
and C. Prantl (Hist, of Logic in the West I p. 579 sqq.) maintain the 
authorship of Ap., 0. Jahn considering the work as part of a sort of 
encyclopaedia. A. Goldbacher, on the criticism and explanation of Ap. de 
dogm. PI., Vienna 1871 (Report of the Meetings of the Ac, phil. hist. 
Class LXVI, p. 159—192. 

H. Koziol, on the criticism and explanation of the minor writings of 
Apuleius, in the sixth Annual Report of the Leopoldstadt Gymn. at 
Vienna 1870, p. 22-39. 

6. Augustin. de civ. dei IV 2: quae . . Apuleius breviter stringit 
in eo libello quem de mundo scripsit. The work is also addressed 
to Faustinus and contains much that is specifically Roman, see extr. 
(Catonem in libris Originum). 5 (in nostro mari). 17 (ut Vesuvius noster 
solet). Kölscher, on the books of Ap. de mundo, Herford 1846. 4. In 
the Prooemium: quarc nos [Aristotelem prudentissimum et doctissimum 
philosophorura et] Theophrastrum auctorem secuti the words in bra- 
ckets are not given by the best mss. They are rather an addition of 
some Grammarian who considered Pseudo-Aristotle's work ti^qI y.oGf^ov 
to be the chief source. The opinion of A. Stahr (Aristotle among the 
Romans p. 164 sqq.) and Barthelemy St. Hilaire (in his Trausl. of Arist.'s 



264 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Meteorolog., Paris 1863, p. 325 — 355), that the work TifQl xoa/uov was 
rather a Greek version of Apuleius' work made in the third or fourth 
century of the Christian era, is not very probable. See Hildebrand, in 
his edition of Ap. I p. XLIV — XLIX. Adam's view (de auctore libri 
pseudo-arist. tisqI xoa^uov, Berol. 1861), that both the Latin and Greek 
versions are due to Apuleius, is contradicted by the fact that Ap.'s work 
is addressed to Faustinus, while the Greek work professes to be ad- 
dressed to Alexander M. 

7. In the mss. the name of Ap. is also given a) to a Latin trans- 
lation of a dialogue concerning God, the world and man, entitled 
Asclepius, as Hermes Trismegistus converses in it with Asclepius. In 
this Latin translation the work was already known to Lactantius (Inst. 
VII 18) and St. Augustin (de civ. dei VIII 23. 24- 26. Orat. de haeres. 
V 2), who did not, however, connect it with Apuleius, by whom it can- 
not be. This rather absurd production of neoplatonism exhibits mani- 
fest traces of the influence of Christianity. See the materials collected 
by Hildebrand I p. XLIX— LI V. 

b) A compilation probably due to the fifth, but perhaps already 
to the fourth century, made in Africa (c. 84, comp, with Plin. N. H. 
XX 10, 43) chiefly from Dioscorides and Pliny, entitled de herbarum 
virtutibus (medicaminibus), 128—131 chapters, part of which, de beto- 
nica, was also translated into Anglosaxon, edited (frequently as Apuleius 
Barbarus) especially in Parabilium medicam. scriptores antiqui, ed. I. 
C. G. Ackermann (Norimb. 1788), cf. E. Meyer, Hist, of Botany II p. 
316—327. L. Spengel, Philologus XXI p. 120-122 and L. Müller, Rhein. 
Mus. XXIII p. 187—190 (on the cod. Leid, of it saec. VI). 

c) de remediis salutaribus (Excerpts from Pliny's N. H. XIX and 
XX., see Sillig Quaest. Plin. I p. 8 sqq. E. Meyer 1. 1. p. 317 sq.), a 
fragment of which, e cod. Salmasiano nunc primum editum, in Sillig's 
ed. of Pliny, vol. V at the beginning. Emended by M. Haupt, Hermes 
IV p. 156 sq. 

d) Not much power of conviction attaches to the arguments on 
which Val. Rose (Anecdota graeca I, Berlin 1864, p. 61—102; text p. 
103 — 169, cf. Aristoteles pseudepigr. p. 696 sqq.) has attributed to Ap. 
an anonymous Latin work on physiognomy, after Polemo with additions 
from Eudoxus and Aristotle. It seems, however, to have been written 
at the very latest in the middle of the third century of the Christian 
era. H. Sauppe, Gott. Gel. Anz. 1866, p. 22 sq. and (on the criticism of 
the text) p. 23—26. 

8. Of the manuscripts of the works of Ap. the most important 
is Flor. 3 = Laur. LXVIII 2 (F in 0. Jahn, Krüger and Eyssenhardt), 
saec. XI. All the others are derived from it, even Laur. XXIX 2 {<f in 
Jahn etc.) saec. XII, thougth this is older than the secunda manus (f) 
in F. The other mss. are interpolated. H. Keil, Observationes (above 
111, 7) p. 77 — 81. A list of them is given by Hildebrand I p. LX sqq. 



Apuleius. Jurists: Cervidins Scaevola and others. 265 

9. Editions. Ed. i^rinceps Rom. 1469. Junt. 1512. 1522. Cum 
comm. Phil. Beroaldi, Bonon. 1500. Aldina 1521. Emend, illustr. P. 
Colvius, Lugd. Bat. 1588. 2 vols. Post Colvii ed. expurg. B. Vulcanius, 
Lugd. B. 1594. Ed. sec. (cura Jos. Scaligeri) ib. 1600. Cum nott. varr. 
1614. 2 vols. Rec. Elmenhorst, Frankfurt 1621. Ed. J. Floridiis, Paris 
1688. 2 vols. Ed. Bip. 1788. 2 vols. The principal edition by F. Ouden- 
dorp, Lugd. B. 1786—1823. 3 vols. 4. Much material is collected in 
the edition of G. F. Hildebrand, Lips, 1842. 2 vols. 8. Ed. minor, Lips. 
1843. L. Spengel, on the Greek passages in Ap., Rhein. Mus. XVI p. 
27 — 37. Oeuvres completes d'Apulee, trad, en frangais par V. Betolaud, 
Paris 1835. 3 vols. Nouvelle edition entierement refondue, Paris 1862. 
2 vols. 

10. The very poor writings of the so-called Apuleius minor (at 
the earliest saec. X), de nota aspirationis and de diphthongis, were 
published by F. Osann together with L. Caecilii Minutiani Apulei de 
orthographia fragmenta (p. 3 — 13; animadversiones on it p. 14—83) 
Darmstadt 1826 (XXXIV and 158 pp.). But the latter (first edited by 
A. Mai, Rome 1823), in which there is a great show of quotations from 
all kinds of lost works, has been proved to be a forgery of the 15th 
century by Madvig Opusc. acad. I p. 1 — 25 and (against Osann, in Jahn's 
Jahrbb. XIII p. 306-337) p. 26—28. See R. Merkel in his edition 
of Ibis p. 384 sqq. 

364. As Jurists in the reign of M. Aurelius we may 
mention Maecianus, Ulpius Marcellus and others who have been 
mentioned in the preceding reign. To them we add especially 
Q. Cervidius Scaevola, the teacher of Papinian. His works, 
chiefly his forty books of Digesta, have been much used in the 
Pandects. In their exterior arrangement they followed Julian's 
system, which they further developed on the basis of actual 
cases. In the same time Papirius Justus composed a collection 
of Imperial Constitutions and Paternus wrote a work de re 
militari. Papirius Fronto was probably a junior contemporary 
of these men. 

1. Capitol. M. Philos. 11, 10: usus est Scaevola praecipue iuris 
perito. Spartian. Carac. 8, 3: memoriae traditur . . eum (Papinian) cum 
Severo (the later Emperor Septimius Sev.) professum sub Scaevola. 
Dig. XXXVI 1, 22 pr. : Scaevola divum Marcum in auditorio . . iudicasse 
refert. But that he had already been active under Pius, does not 
appear from his quotation Imp. Antoninus Pius libertis Sextiae Basiliae 
(Dig. XXXIV I, 13, 1). Tryphoninus and Paulus always call him Scae- 
vola noster, Paulus once (Dig. XXVIII 6, 38, 3) even Q. Cervidius 
Scaevola noster (dicebat), whence we may infer that they were his 
pupils, but not that they wrote in his life-time; see Th. Mommsen, 
Ztschr. f. Rechtsg. IX p. 115 sq. 



266 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

2. The chief work of Scaevola: Digestorum libri XL, composed in 
the first half of M. Aurelius' reign (Fitting p. 26); under Commodus 
(previous to a. 195) Responsorum libri VI and Quaestionum libri XX, 
the latter, as it seems, with extensive statements of the reasons of the 
decisions given in those works. Also: liber singularis quaestionum 
publice tractatarum; libri IV Regularum (cf. n. 4). The Excerpts from 
these works (in 307 places) in Hommel's Palingenesia IL p. 413 — 491. 
Merely quoted are Scaevola's Notae ad luliani Digesta and Notae ad 
Marcelli Digesta (ib, p. 457. 491 sq.), and only in the Index Florentinus 
his liber singularis de quaestione familiae is mentioned. In Claudius 
Tryphoninus and Paulus, Scaev. obtained commentators. 

3. Modestinus Dig. XXVII 1, 13, 2: ovrtag xal K&Qßidiog ^xaißökag 
xal Ilavkog Kat Jojuitwg Ovkniccpog, ol xoQVifjaioi rotv vo^uixdiv, yqa- 
(^ovGiv. Tryphon. Dig. XXXV 1, 109 : magno ingenio de iure aperto re- 
spondit. Cod. Theod. IV 4, 3, 3 the Emperors Arcadius and Honorius 
call him auctorem prudentissimum ictorum. The views of others are 
scarcely mentioned in the fragments of the Digest of Scaevola (ap. 
Hommel p. 413 — 457), but he starts all the more frequently with actual 
cases, probably in consequence of following Julian's work. But in his 
Quaestiones his predecessors are mentioned in not a few passages. 

4. J. 0. Westenberg, de iurispr. Q. C. Sc, Lugd. Bat. 1734. 4. 
(= Trias opusc. acad. ed. Püttmann, Lips. 1795). J. L. Conradi, de vita 
et scriptis Q. C. Sc, Lips. 1754 sq. 4. {■=i Opusc. I). Zimmern, Hist, 
of Roman private Law I 1 p. 359 — 361. Rudorfif, Hist, of Rom. Law p. 
186 sq. Fitting, Age of the Writ. p. 25—27. 

5. In the fourth book of his "^EQ/urjyfv/jaTa (below 370, 5) Dositheus 
gives under the heading Gvyy^afif/ccrtoy ro^uixor juakiGra nf^l tkfvO^t- 
Q0}G6MP = disputatio forensis maxime de manumissionibus, a section of 
the work of a Jurist, partly with a Greek translation. It is, therefore, 
called fragmentum Dositheanum or from its contents fragm. de iuris 
speciebus et manumissionibus. As the fragment seems to be taken from 
a work entitled Regulae (3: regulas igitur exequenti quae ad haec studia 
pertinent), Dirksen has pronounced Gains to be the author. Lachmann 
and Rudorff (Hist, of Roman Law I p. 194. 242) Paulus, Voigt Pompo- 
nius, Buschke (iurispr. antei.^ p. 341 sq.) Scaevola, because this fragment 
exhibits a special attention to Greek. It is printed in the editions of 
Dositheus by E. Booking (Bonn 1832. Corpus iuris anteiust. p. 193 sqq. 
Ulpiani fragm.. Lips. 1855, p. 159 sqq.) and in Huschke, lurisprud. 
anteiust.2 p. 343—350. 

6. On Claudius Satuininus see above 356, 6. 

7. Papirius lustus de constitutionibus libri XX according to 
Index Flor. In the Digest passages are quoted from b. I, II and VIII 
(see Hommel Paling. I p. 617—619). Those from the first two books 
commence without exception: Imperatores Antoninus et Verus Augg. 
rescripserunt, and must, therefore, belong to a. 161—169; the fragment 



Jurists under M. Aurelius. Septimius Severits. 267 

of b. VIII (Dig. II 14, 60) begins : Imp. Antoninus Avidio Cassio re- 
scripsit, and must, therefore, be of a. 169 — 175. If the work was 
arranged in chronological order, the first book would appear to have 
been written under the divi fratres, the following under M, Aurelius. 
The last third was perhaps written under Commodus and contained his 
constitutions. A. C. Stockmann, Pap. I. fragmenta illustrata, Lips. 1792. 
4. P. E. Piepers, de P. I. icto, Lugd. B. 1824. 4. Zimmer, I 1 p. 155 
sq. 356. Rudorff, Hist, of Roman Law I p. 185. 274. Fitting, Age of 
the Writ. p. 24 sq. 

8. Tarrutenius Paternus, under M. Aurelius his ab epistulis 
latinis (Dio LXXI 12: TaqQovrvjt/iov df närfQvov toV Tag intarokdg 
ccvTov Tag kaTtvug dtd /siQog h/ovTu) and also a victorious commander 
against the Marcomanni, under Commodus praef. praet., but then also 
executed; see A. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. V p. 1223 sq. His work de 
re militari contained four books, according to the ind. Flor. Two passages 
of b. I and II Dig. XLIX 16, 7. L 6, 6 of. XLIV 16, 12, 1. Veget. de 
re mil. I 8: quae Paternus, diligentissimus iuris militaris adsertor, in 
libros redegit. H. E. Dirksen, on the Jurist and tactician Paternus, 
Berlin 1856. 4. 1= Posthumous Writings II p. 412 sqq. 

9. Callistr. Dig. L 16, 220, 1: sed et Papirius Fronto libro 
tertio Responsorum ait, and XIV 2, 4 fin : haec ita Papirius Fronto re- 
spondit. Marcian. Dig. XV 1, 40 pr. : eleganter P. Fr. dicebat, and XXX 
114, 7 verius esse existimo quod et Scaevola notat et Papirius Fronto 
scribit. 



2. The time of Commodus and Septimius Severua, 
A. D. 180-211. 

365. M. Aurelius' dissimilar son Commodus (a. 161 — 192) 
was void of interest for intellectual pursuits. But the excel- 
lent Septimius Severus (a. 146 — 211), who ascended the throne 
after the brief reigns of Pertinax and Didius Julianus, wrote 
an autobiography. Papinian was especially active as a Jurist 
in this period. The Christian religion now gained ground 
even among the educated and was defended by such eloquent 
pleaders as Minucius Felix and TertulHan. As concerns 
metrical compositions, this time produced only centos from Virgil. 

1. Commodus was born 31 Aug. 161, Caesar since 12 Oct. 166, 
Emperor since 17 March 180, under the title of M. Aurelius Commo- 
dus Antoninus Pius Felix Aug., he was assassinated 31 December 192. 
Saevior Domitiano, iupurior Nerone, Lamprid. 19, 2. Habuit litterato- 
rem Onesicratem, latinum Capellam Antistium; orator ei Ateius Sanctus 
fuit, ib. 1, 6. 



268 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

2. Lamprid. Coram. 3, 4: appellatus est a mimis quasi constupra- 
tus, eosdemque . . subito deportavit. 13, 2: versus in eo (eum) multi 
scripti sunt, de quibus . . Marius Maxiraus gloriatur. 

3. P. Helvius Pertinax, Emperor from 1 Jan. until 28 March 193; 
see above 360, 12. Didius Salvius lulianus reigned after him during 
66 days; see W. Teuflfel in Pauly's Enc. IV. p. 397—400. 

4. L. Septimius Sever us Pius Pertinax Aug. (Arabicus, Adiabe- 
nicus, Parthicus etc.), in legal works briefly Severus, born 8 April 146 
at Leptisan Africa. Cons, under Commodus (185 ?), Emperor 193, appointed 
his son Caracalla to be Augustus a. 198, f 4 February 211. See A. 
Haakh in Pauly's Enc. VI 1. p. 1132—1136, Nr. 1. Spartian. Sev. 1, 4 
sq.: prius quam latinis graecisque litteris imbueretur, quibus eruditissi- 
mus fuit. . . octavo decimo anno publice declamavit. postda studiorura 
causa Romam venit (under M. Aurelius). 3, 7: Athenas petit studiorum 
sacrorumque causa. 18, 5: philosophiae ac dicendi studiis satis deditus, 
doctrinae quoque nimis cupidus. 18, 11: cum eum ex humili per litte- 
rarum et militiae officia ad imperium . . fortuna duxisset. Victor Caes. 
20, 28 : ortus medio humilis primo litteris, deinde imbutus foro ; quo 
parum commodante . . dum tentat varia . . conscendit imperium. Eutrop. 
VIII 18: hie primum fisci advocatus, mox militaris tribunus etc. Spar- 
tian. Sev. 19, 9: canorus voce, sed afrum quiddam usque ad senectu- 
tem sonans. Cf. 15, 7: cum soror sua Leptitana ad eum venisset vix 
latino loquens. Dio LXXVI 16: ncadfiag tnsx^v^ufi jucckkov rj infTvyxfo^^ 
xat did TOVTO nokvyvMfJioiV fxcilkov rj nokvkoyog rjv. 

5. Spartian. Sev. 18, 6 : vitam suam privatam publicamque ipse 
conposuit ad fidem, solum tamen vitium crudelitatis excusans. 3, 2: 
uxorem . . de qua tacuit in historia vitae privatae. Vict. Caes. 20,22: 
idem abs se gesta ornatu et fide paribus conposuit. Capitol. Clod. Alb. 
10, 1: Seveius quidem ipse haec de eodem loquitur. Dio LXXV 7: 
Xiyu) yciQ (on Albinus' death), ov/ oaa o l&ovrJQog I'yQaijjfy, ^akk' oaa 
aktjO-iog tyfffTo. A letter addressed by Sev. to the Senate Capit. Clod. 
Alb. 12, 6 sqq. 

6. Tertull. de praescript. haeret. 39: vides hodie ex Vergilio fabu- 
1am in totum aliam componi, materia secundum versus, versibus secun- 
dum materiam concinnatis. denique Hosidius Geta Medeam tragoediam 
ex Vergilio plenissime exsuxit. meus quidam propinquus ex eodem 
poeta inter cetera stili sui otia Pinacem Cebetis explicuit. A cento of 
this kind, Medea, the metre of which is rather careless, is (without the 
name of Hos. G.) preserved in the cod. Salmas., in Riese's anthol. lat. 
17 (I p. 49-66). 

366. A friend ol Severus and of almost the same age 
with him was the great Jurist Aemilius Papinianus. Under 
Severus he was praefectus praetorio, but was executed by his son 



Papinian. 269 

Caracalla soon after his accession to the throne, because he 
was faithful to the other son, Geta. Papinian was remarkable 
not only for his juridical genius, the lucidity and readiness of 
his decisions, but also for his quick sense of right and mora- 
lity, by which he frequently rose above the barriers of national 
prejudices and merited the veneration of succeeding centuries. 
The most important of his works are the 37 books of Quae- 
stiones and the 19 books of Responsa, both of which have 
been much used in Justinian's collections. 

1. Spartian. Carac. 8, 2 sq.: Papinianum amicissimum fuisse, im- 
peratori Seyero et, ut aliqui loquuntur, adfinem etiam per secundam 
uxorem (lulia, of Syria) memoriae traditur, et huic praecipue iitrumque 
filium (Geta and Caracalla) a Severe commendatum, eumque cum Severo 
professum sub Scaevola (above 364, 1 — 4), et Severo in advocatione 
fisci (see above 365, 4) successisse. Tryphonin. Dig. XX 5, 12 pr: re- 
scriptum est ab imperatore (Severus?), libellos agente Papiniano; cf. 
Vict. Caes. 20, 33 sq.: quem ferunt illo tempore Bassiani scrinia cura- 
visse, . . cum constet satis praefecturam praetorio gessisse. Paul. Dig. 
XII 1, 40: lecta est in auditorio Aemilii Papiniani, praefecti praetorio, 
icti cautio hulus modi. Dio LXXVI 10 (a. 204): avroy (a highwayman) 
Ilaniviccvog o tnccQ^og ai/f]Qf7o etc. Cf. ib. 14 (A. 208): nccQiGrrjxt cot, 
naniviavog 6 tnaQ/og. He succeeded Plautianus in the praefectura 
(Herod. HI 10, 5 sqq.), who was executed a. 203. Cf. n. 2 sq. Muratori 
p. 351, 1 = Henzen 5603 (of 28 May 205): sub Maecio Laeto et Aemilio 
Papiniano pp. pp. vv. em(inentissimis). 

2. Dio LXXI 1 (a. 211): rovg oixsiovg rovg /u(p ccnijkka'^sy [Csirsicalla. 
after his accession to the throne), cjy xal Ilaniviavog o tlnaQ'/og rjy, 
Tovg df xai antxmvtv. ib. 4: tg dvo /uvQiadag na^a^Qfj/Lia anixTf:ivtv, 
. . ix ds rial/ InK^'Civöiv avd^oiv akkovg if xal t<V Ilaniviavov. xal tü> 
yf Toy nanwiavot/ i^ovfvGavri> tTiSTi/urjasy ort ccgiyt] ccvrov xai ov greift 
dt-f/QT^accTo. Spartian. Carac. 3, 2: (after the assassination of Geta, 27 
Febr. 212) innitens Papiniano et Ciloni ad palatium redit. 4, 1 sq. dein 
in conspectu eius Papinianus securi percussus a militibus et occisus est. 
. . fihum etiam Papiniani, qui ante triduum quaestor opulentum munus 
ediderat, interemit. 8, 7 sq. : constat eum quasi fautorem Getae occisum 
(cf. Spart. Geta 6, 3). et fertur quidem Papinianus, cum raptus a mili- 
tibus ad palatium traheretur occidendus, praedivinasse, dicens stultissi- 
mum fore qui in suum subrogaretur locum nisi adpetitam crudeliter 
praefecturam vindicaret. Other accounts ib. 8, 4—6. Victor Caes. 20, 
33 sq. Zosim. I 9. 

3. Spartian. Sev. 21, 8: Papinianum, iuris asylum et doctrinae 
legalis thesaurum, quod parricidium excusare noluisset, occidit, et prae- 
fectum quidem, ne homini per se et per scientiam suam magno deesset 
et dignitas. lust. II 23, 7 and Cod. VI 25, 6, 1 : homo excelsi ingenii 



270 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Papinianus. Cod. V 71, 14 and VI 42, 16: vir prudentissimus Papinia- 
nus. VI 42, 30: acutissirai ingenii vir etmerito ante alios excellens Pap. 
Vn 32, 3: consultissimi viri Pap, VII 45, 14: Pap. summi ingenii vir. 
Cod. Theod. I 4, 3. Cassiod. VI 5. Hieron. Epist. 77, 3 and others. 
Cf. n. 4. The malcontent criticisms added by Marcian, Ulpian and Paulus 
to the work of Pap. (cf. Cod. Theod. IX 43. Dig. XVIH 1, 72. XXII 1, 
1, 2) were annulled by Constantine a. 321 (Cod. Theod. I 4, 1 : qui dum 
ingenii laudem sectantur non tam corrigere eum quam depravare ma- 
luerunt), but not altogether set aside by Justinian, who used them with 
much caution; see Cod. I 17, 1, 6: ea quae antea in Notis Aemilii 
Papiniani ex Ulpiano et Paulo nee non Marcian o adscripta sunt, quae 
antea nullam vim obtinebant propter honorem splendidissimi Papiniani, 
non statim respuere, sed si quid ex his ad repletionem summi ingenii 
Papiniani laborum vel interpretationem necessarium esse perspexeritis 
et hoc ponere legis vicem obtinens non moremini. 

4. Works of Pap. Constit. Omnem (Dig. prooem.) 6: vobis . . 
pulcherrimus Papinianus non solum ex Responsis, quae in XIX libros 
composita fuerunt, sed etiam ex libris XXXVII Quaestionum et gemino 
volumine Definitionum, nee non De adulteriis (libri II and one liber 
singularis) . . sui recitationem praebebit. ne autem tertii anni auditores, 
quos Papinianistas vocant, nomen et festivitatem eius amittere videantur 
etc. Besides those works also De officio aedilium liber singularis: cf. 
Dig. XLIII 10: ix 70V ccaTvvofxtxov ^uoroßißkov rov IlanivKxvov. A frag- 
ment ex libr. I. Respons. sub titulo de pactis in the lex rom. Visigo- 
thorum (Huschke, iurispr. anteiust.^ p. 351) ; 43 Extracts from Papinian's 
works in the Fragm. Vatic, and 595 passages in Justinian's Digest. 
The latter are collected by Hommel, Palingenesia 11. p. 515 — 614, His 
fragments were commented on by Cujacius (Op. Tom, IV). 

5. In the fragments of the Quaestiones (which follow the order of 
the edict) Pap. repeatedly mentions Optimus Imp. noster Severus (Dig. 
XXXI 67, 9. L 5, 7 cf. XXII 1, 6) but frequently omits the usual de- 
signation of Divus in the case of other emperors previously consecrated. 
In his Responsa Pap. submits to the rules of official diction in giving 
the Emperors their usual titles, except in one instance (Dig. XX 2, 1). 
That his Responsa were composed at a later time (after 198) appears 
from the designation of Severus and Caracalla as optimi maximique 
principes nostri (Dig. XXXIV 9, 16, 1 cf. fragm. Vat. 294); but book IV 
was composed after a. 206 and b. XV sqq. in the course of 211; see 
Dig. XXXIV 9, 18 pr. from b. XV: divus Severus. Fitting, the Age of 
the writ. p. 28—32. Th. Mommsen, Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. IX. p. 100 sq. 

6. Pap. never insists on his opinion to the exclusion of others, 
see e. g. Dig. XVIII 7, 6, 1 : nobis aliquando placebat. . . sed in con- 
trarium me vocat Sabini sententia. Significantly he says Dig. XXVIII 
7, 15: quae facta laedunt pietatem, existimationem, verecundiam nostram 
et, ut generaliter dicam, contra bonos mores fiunt, nee facere nos posse 
credendum est. The diction is frequently as concise as if he expressed 



Papinicm and other Jurists. 271 

an axiom, e. g. non videntur rem amittere quibus propria non fuit; 
donari videtur quod nullo lure cogente conceditur; ius publicum pri- 
vatorum pactis mutari non potest. 

7. Ev. Otto, Papinianus, s. de vita, studiis, scriptis, honoribus et 
morte Aem. Pap., Lugd. Pat. 1718 Brem. 1743. B. Voorda, Papinianus, 
s. optimi icti et viri forma in A. P. spectata, Lugd. Bat. 1770. 4. Zim- 
mern, Hist, of Rom. private Law I 1. p. 361 — 364. G. Bruns in Pauly's 
Enc. V. p. 1141—1144. Rudorff, Hist, of Law L p. 187 sq. H. E. 
Dirksen, on Pap.'s eminence as an author, Posthumous Writings II p. 
449 sqq. 

367. Contemporaries of Papinian were the Jurists Messius, 
Callistratus and Claudius Tryphoninus, the latter two known 
as authors also through the Digest. Arrius Menander, a man 
of half- Greek origin, was an adviser of the Emperor's, and 
wrote de re militari. The ecclesiastic writer Tertullian wrote 
also on law before his conversion to Christianity. 

1. Dig. XLIX 14, 50: Valerius Patruinus procurator imperatoris 
. . praedia . . addixerat. . . Papinianus et Messius novam sententiam 
induxerunt; . . pronuntiavit tamen secundum illorum opinionem . . 
Tryphonino (n. 3) suggerente etc. The Jurist Messius mentioned here 
is not known from other sources; a certain T. Messius Extricatus was 
cos. II a. 217. 

2. Callistratus' four books de iure fisci and two books of Quae- 
stiones were written under Severus; see Dig. XLIX 14. 2, 6 (from de 
lure fisci II) : imperator noster Severus Aug. constitut., and Dig. I 3, 
38 (from Quaestionum I): imperator noster Severus rescripsit. But the 
work de cognitionibus (libri VI) dated from the beginning of Caracalla's 
joint reign (a 198 — 211) ; see Dig. I 19, 3, 2 (imperatores nostri Severus 
et Antoninus) from b. VI and L 2, 11 (principes nostri) from b. I with 
which we read imp. noster Severus Aug. ib. L 4, 14, 4 (also from b. I). 
He paid special attention to the requirements of the judges, even by 
such practical observations as Dig. I 18, 19. He wrote also Edicti 
monitorii libri or Ad edictum monitorium and Institutionum libri III, 
as it seems after Gaius. The 99 passages from these writings inserted 
in the Digest are collected by Hommel, Balingen I p. 129—146. Not 
rarely Callistratus' diction and style show him to be a Greek by birth. 
G. A. Jenichen, Ep. singularia de Call, icto. Lips. 1742. 4. Pinto, de 
Call, icti scriptis quae supersunt, Lugd. Bat. 1835. 302 pp. 

3. A Claudius Tryphoninus (Cod. I 9, 1), with Papinian in the 
consilium principis (see n. 1), wrote Notae on Scaevola's Digest in which 
M. Aurelius was styled divus (Dig. XVIII 7, 10: Claudius), but which were 
already quoted by Papinian in b. XIV of his Ptesponsa (Dig. XXXIV 9, 
25, 1: apud Scaevolam libro XXX Digestorum Claudius notat). To a 



272 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

later time we should assign his 21 books Disputationum; see Dig. XXVII 
1, 44 (from b. II) and XLIX 15, 12, 17 (from b. IV): imp. noster (Ca- 
racalla) cum divo Severo patre suo: XL VIII 19, 39 (from b. X): optimi 
imperatoris nostri. Not accurately XX 5, 12 pr. (from b. VIII): rescrip- 
tum est ab imperatore (Severo), libellos agente Papiniano. The frag- 
ments collected by Hommel, Palingenesia II p. 509 — 530. Fitting, the 
Age of the Writ. p. 32. A rescript of Caracalla addressed to him a. 213 
in the Cod. I 9, 1. Chr. Rau, de CI. Tr. icto rom.. Lips. 1768. 4. 

4. Ulp. Dig. IV 4, 11, 2 in a legal case of the time of Imperator 
Severus (i. e. probably a. 193—198); cum susceptam tutelam non alii 
soleant deponere quam . . hi qui circa principem sunt occupati, ut in 
consiliarii Menandri Arrii persona est indultum (not until LFlpian's 
time?). His four books on military law were composed under Severus 
between 198 and 211; see Dig. XLIX 16, 13, 6: divus Severus et Anto- 
ninus . . iusserunt, quod . . Menander scribit, while Menander in all 
other passages omits Caracalla's joint reign; see Dig. XLIX 16, 4, 9 
(cf. ib. 5, 4): Imperator noster rescripsit. The passages and quotations 
concerning this work are collected by Hommel Paling. I p. 447—450. 
Coelest. Mirabelli comm. ad fragm. A. M., Biturig. 1667 and cum notis 
ed. J. G. Harnisch, Lips. 1752. 4. P. J. Suringar, de A. M. icto eiusque 
tragmentis, Lugd. Bat. 1840. Fitting, the Age of ihe Writ. p. 33 sq. 

5. We do not know the exact time of Rutilius Maximus from 
whose liber singularis ad legem Falcidiam a passage is quoted Dig. 
XXX 125 (between passages of Neratius and Paulus). Cf. Fragm. Vat. 
113: frustra Maximus . . iudicavit etc. and: Maximi sententia . . placuit. 

6. Two passages of Tertullian's Qnaestionum libri VIII and 
three of his liber singularis de castrensi peculio are quoted in the Di- 
gest; see Hommel, Paling. II p. 505 sq. Just as he himself quoted 
Sex. Pomponius (Dig. XXIX 2, 30, 6), he is repeatedly mentioned by 
Ulpian in the libri ad Sabinum which were written under Caracalla. 
Hence it appears that Tertullian the Jurist was at all events a contem- 
porary of the ecclesiastic writer (below 369). There is the less reason 
to assume the two to be different persons, as the latter had certainly 
been a Jurist (Euseb. h. eccl. II 2 calls him rovg Pw^w«/'ü>r youovg 
i^xQtßMxoTa ccydQ«) and as he often shows his legal knowledge in his 
theological works (e. g. apolog. 1 — 6. 28 — 14. de anima 6), and as 
lastly the difference of diction in the juridical fragments as compared 
with the theological works may be due to the discrepancy of the sub- 
ject, J. H. Blumenbach, de scto Q. Septimio Florente presbytero et 
icto Tertulliano, Hildeshcim 1743. 4. J. A. Pagenstecher, de iurispru- 
dentia TertuUiani, Harderov. 1768. 4. Zimmern, Private Law II. p. 
365-367. Rudorfi; Hist, of Law I p. 196 sq. Fitting, the Age of the 
Writ. p. 33. 

368. The earliest extant work of Latin Christian litera- 
ture is the dialogue Octavius by M. Minucius Felix. The 



Minucius Felix. 273 

current prejudices and arguments against Christianity and its 
adherents are in it developed with much vivacity and spirit, 
and refuted in an ingenious, sagacious and eloquent manner. 
The author himself possesses the usual philosophical and 
aesthetical training of his period and writes for educated rea- 
ders. In his diction he imitates ancient models and his style 
is fluent and elegant. 

1. Lactant. inst. div. V 1 (p. 230 Fri.): si qui forte litteratorum 
se ad earn (i. e. sapientia et Veritas =z Christianity, cf. n. 4) contule- 
runt defensioni eius non suffecerunt. ex iis qui mihi noti sunt Minucius 
Felix non ignobilis inter causidicos loci fuit. huius liber, cui Octavio 
titulus est, declarat quam idoneus veritatis assertor esse potuisset si se 
totum ad id studium contulisset. Septimius quoque Tertulhanus etc. 
(below 369, 2). Cf. ib. I 11 (p. 29): Minucius Felix in eo libro qui 
Octavius inscribitur. Hieronym. de vir, ill. 58: Minucius Felix, Romae 
insignis causidicus, scripsit dialogum christiani et ethnici disputantium 
qui Octavius inscribitur. sed et alius sub nomine eius fertur De fato 
vel Contra mathematicos, qui cum sit et ipse diserti hominis non mihi 
videtur cum superioris libri stilo convenire. This distinction was caused 
by the fact that Octav. 36, 5 (ac de fato satis vel, si pauca pro tem- 
pore, disputaturi alias et uberius et plenius) a work of this kind was 
promised. To judge from the order of enumeration, which is in gene- 
ral chronological, though often also inconsistent, Jerome seems to place 
Minucius under Severus. See also Hieron. Ep. 70, 5 (ad Magnum or.) : 
veniam ad Latinos, quid Tertulliano eruditius? . . Minucius Felix, cau- 
sidicus romani fori, in libro cui titulus Octavius est et in altero contra 
mathematicos (si tamen inscriptio non mentitur auctorem) quid genti- 
lium scripturarum dimisit intactum? Septem libros adv. g. Arnobius 
edidit totidemque discipulus eius Lactantius. . . Victorinus etc. Cy- 
prianus etc. Jerome places the more famous and perhaps earlier of the 
two contemporaries, Minucius and Tertullian, in the first place. But 
Ebert, Trans, of the Sax. Soc. of Lit. 1868, p. 353—379, has shown 
that Tert. in his first large Christian work, his apologeticum, employed 
the Octavius, so that the latter would appear to be earlier than Ter- 
tullian's literary works on Christianity. 

2. The form of a dialogue was chosen in imitation of the manner 
of Aristotle and Cicero, the last time adopted by Annius Florus (above 
336, 7). The Octavius exhibits an evident imitation of Cicero's work 
J,e_deorum natura; see Ebert (n. 1) p. 328—331. 354—358. 367 sq. 
E. Behr, on the Oct. of M. F. in its relation to Cic. d. d. n., Gera 
1870. 35 pp. diss. Seneca's works de superstitione and de Providentia 
are also employed. The speakers are Caecilius Natalis, Octavius lanu- 
arius, and the author (Marcus). The latter and Caecilius reside at 
Rome, Minucius' friend and companion in his studies (contubernalis) 

18 



274 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

the solicitor (28, 3) Octavius in the province, perhaps Africa. The 
scene is laid on the beach at Ostia; the time when the dialogue is said 
to have taken place being remote, when Octavius (now dead) had quite 
young children (2, 1) and Fronto, as it seems, was still alive (Cir- 
tensis nostri oratio are the words of Caecilius 9, 6; tuus Fronto 31, 2 
of Octavius). Of modern writers Thallus (21, 4) and Antonius Julianus 
(above 346, 1) are mentioned. From the candour of the statements 
and the entire absence of any bitterness of tone we might infer that 
the work was written at a time when the Christian religion had not 
experienced any persecution. 

3. Caecilius (n. 2) attacks Christianity as desertion from the belief 
of the ancestors and hurtful to morals and decency. Octavius (n. 2) 
defends it first (17 — 27) as denoting progress in comparison with poly- 
theism, the errors and evil results of which are emphatically described, 
then (28 — 38) he pleads for the moral views and usages of the Chri- 
stians. The adversary confesses to be convinced in all main points, 
though he retains certain doubts, and the author can thus dispense 
with his arbitration. See the survey of contents given by Ebert (n. 1) 
p. 332—340. 

4. This work gives us a faithful idea of Christianity such as it 
appeared to the educated class of this period, i. e. as a desertion of 
the nonsense and shamelessness of polytheism and as the vivid con- 
ception of one God. In enlarging upon this idea our writer grows 
quite warm (18) ; here his tone becomes inspired and also in those 
passages where he speaks of the pride and gladness of the Christians 
in dying, a passage which reminds us of Seneca de provid. 2, 9 c. 37: 
quam pulchrum spectaculum deo cum christianus . . libertatem suam 
adversus reges et principes erigit, soli deo, cuius est, cedit etc. Christi- 
anity appears to him as a higher degree of intellectual culture, as op- 
posed to imperitiae volgaris caecitas (3, 1) being lux sapientiae et veri- 
tatis (1, 4). The Christian doctrines are touched upon in a nice and 
fastidious manner, and very peculiar ones, such as trinity and Christo- 
logy (chiefly the doctrine of the Logos) are passed over, not even 
baptism being mentioned and no quotations of biblical passages being 
inserted. This was certainly in favour of the popular effect of the 
work. Ethical and philosophical views prevail throughout. The philo- 
sophers are recognised as such who de divinis praedictionibus prophe- 
tarum umbram interpolatae veritatis imitati sint. But 38, 5: philoso- 
phorum supörcilia contemnimus, quos corruptores et adulteros novimus 
et tyrannos et semper adversus sua vitia facundos. This treatment of 
Christianity resembles Seneca's treatment of Stoicism, and in other 
respects, too. Min. might be described as a kind of Christian Seneca 
(Ebert, p. 383, n. 67). The form of the dialogue is carried out with 
much care and ability. The diction is sometimes (especially in the 
introduction) somewhat affected, but still much more natural than that 
of Fronto and Apuleius. With the latter Min. shares some peculiar 
phrases, e. g. plurimum quantum, impiatus etc. 



I 



MinuciiAS Felix. Tertullian. 275 

5. We possess the Octavius only in a Paris ms. saec. IX (regius 
nr. 1661), where it is given as the eighth book of Arnobius adv. gentes 
and in a very corrupt text. The second ms., (Burgundicus) at Brussels, 
is merely a copy of the Paris ms. 

6. Editio princeps (from the regius) Rom. 1543 (after Arnobius). 
The first independent edition by Balduinus, Heidelberg 1560. With 
emendations by Fulvius Ursinus, Rom. 1583. Ed. Des. Heraldus (Paris 
1605. 1613), Rigaltius (Paris 1643. 1645), J. Ouzelius (cum notis va- 
riorum, Lugd. Bat. 1672), J. Davisius (cum observ., Cantabrig. 1707), 
J. Gronovius (Lugd. Bat. 1709. Rotterdam 1743), J.G.Lindner (Langen- 
salza 1760; ed. II 1773), C. de Muralt (praef. est J. C. Orelli, Zürich 
1836), Migne (Patrolog. curs. Ill, Paris 1844, p. 231—360, with various 
treatises p. 194—231. 371—652), Fr. Oehler (Lips. 1847), J. B. Kayser 
(in us. schol., Paderborn 1863), and especially rec. et comm. critico 
instr. C, Halm (Corp. script, eccl. lat. II), Vienna 1867. 

7. J. D. van Hoven, de aetate, dignitate et patria Min. Fei., Camp. 
1762. 4. (also in Lindner's ed. of 1773). H. Meier, comm. de Min. Fei., 
Zürich 1824. C. Rören, Minuciana, i. e. Annotatt. critt. ad etc. prae- 
missa commentatione de ipsius scriptoris aetate, Bedburg 1859. 26 pp. 4. 
J. B. Kayser in Th. Wiedemann's Austrian 'Quartalschrift' for Rom. 
cathol. theol. I 4. 1862. A. Ebert, Tertullian's relation to Min. Felix, 
Leipzig 1868 (Trans, of the Saxon Society of Lit. V p. 321 — 386). 
Critical contributions by E. Bährens, lectiones latin. (Bonn 1870) 
p. 22—31. 

369. Q. Septimius Florus Tertullianus (c. 145—220) is a 
very peculiar character — an author of much independence 
and genius, endowed with lively imagination and ready wit, 
and so passionate as to be often of an overpowering eloquence, 
though very frequently he oversteps all limits and consumes 
his own passion in his zeal, without giving light and warmth. 
The element of his life is in struggling and fighting, and his 
numerous writings are chiefly of a controversial character, 
either aggressive or apologetic. At first he defended Christia- 
nity against its oppressors and enemies, especially in his 
Apologeticum; but within the pale of Christianity his enthu- 
siasm was not fully satisfied until he became an adherent 
and the Western defender of Montanus' doctrine and its 
phantastical vaticinations and severe ascetic habits, though 
his penetrating mind softened the harshest parts of it. The 
tone and character of these works are the same throughout: 
thoughtful but unpolished in form, passionate and intricate, 
the diction being eloquent and powerful, concise and energetic 
and frequently obscure. 



276 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

1. Hieronym. de vir. illustr. 53: Tertullianus presbyter nunc demum 
primus post Victorem (sub Severo principe, c. 34) et Apollonium (sub 
Commodo principe, c. 42) Latinorum ponitur, provinciae Africae, civi- 
tatis Carthaginiensis, patre centurione proconsular!, hie acris et vehe- 
mentis ingenii sub Severo principe et Antonino Caracalla maxime 
floruit multaque scripsit volumina, quae quia nota sunt pluribus prae- 
termittimus. . , hie cum usque ad mediam aetatem presbyter ecclesiae 
permansisset, invidia postea et contumeliis clericorum romanae ecclesiae 
(cf. Tert. de cultu fern, I 7. Euseb. hist. eccl. II 2) ad Montani dogma 
delapsus in multis libris novae prophetiae (i. e. Montanism) meminit, 
specialiter autem adversum ecclesiam texuit volumina de pudicitia, de 
persecutione, de ieiuniis, de monogamia, de ecstasi libros VI (now lost) 
et septimum quem adversum Apollonium composuit. ferturque vixisse 
usque ad decrepitam aetatem et multa quae non (Vat. : nunc) extant 
opuscula condidisse. Such lost works of Tert. were de vestibus Aronis 
(Hieron. Ep. 64, 23); de animae submissione; de superstitione saeculi; 
de carne et anima: de spe fidelium; de trinitate; de animalibus mundis 
et immundis ; de circumcisione ; de virginitate ; contra Apellicianos ; 
de paradiso (Tert. de an. 55); in Greek de spectaculis; de baptismo; 
de velandis virginibus; de corona militis, the Latin version of which 
by Tert. is extant. On Tert. as Jurist see above 367, 6. 

2. Hieron. Ep. 70, 5: quid Tertulliano eruditius, quid acutius? 
Apologeticus eius et Contra gentes libri cunotam saeculi obtinent dis- 
ciplinam. Lactant. inst. div. V 1 (p. 230 Fri.) : Septimius Tertullianus 
fuit omni genere litterarum peritus, sed in eloquendo parum facilis et 
minus comptus et multum obscurus fuit. ergo ne hie quidem satis 
celebritatis invenit. Besides his obscurity, his Montanism was also 
much in his way. His theological works may be divided into two 
classes, one of a general Christian and one of a Montanistic character. To 
the first belong among the writings we possess his Apologeticum, Ad 
nationes libri II, De testimonio animae, De cultu feminarum II, De 
patientia, De paenitentia, De oratione, De baptismo, Ad uxorem II, 
Ad martyres, Adversus ludaeos. A certain bent to Montanism is in- 
dicated by the treatise De corona militis and further by the treatises 
in which Montanistic views are developed in a positive manner, De 
fuga in persecutione, De exhortatione castitatis. De virginibus velandis. 
De monogamia. De pudicitia. De praescriptionibus haereticorum. De 
anima. De carne Christi, De resurrectione carnis, Scorpiacum, Ad Sca- 
pulam, De idololatria. De spectaculis, and in those which are intended 
to defend them against literary or dogmatic attacks: De ieiunio ad- 
versus psychicos (= catholicos, as opposed to pneumatici or Montanists), 
Adversus Praxean, Adv. Hermogenem, adv. Marcionem libri V, Adv. 
Valentinianos. Those writings of Tert. which admit of chronological 
determination fall between 199 and 212. The most positive date given 
is adv. Marc. I 15: ad XV iam Severi imperatoris = a. 207. J. A. 
Nösselt, de vera aetate ac doctrina scriptorum Tert. in his Opusc. ad 
hist. eccl. Ill p. 1 sqq. = Tertull. ed. Oehler III p. 540—619. G. Uhl- 



Tertullian. 277 

horn, fundamenta chronologiae Tertullianeae, Götting. 1852. Kellner, 
on the chronology of Tert. 1 (de pallio and his year of conversion 193) 
Tub. theolog. Quartalschr. LII (1870) p. 547-566. II ibid. LIII (1871) 
p. 585—609. 

3. The sect of the Montanists arose in Phrygia and their 
doctrine rests on a onesided exaggeration of Christian religious feeling, 
which manifested itself in ecstatic visions and chiliastic dreams of the 
approaching end of the world {avvT^kfta) and the joys of heavenly 
Jerusalem, for which it was necessary to prepare by strict ascetic 
habits (abstinence of meat and wine, theatre, veiling of virgins, chas- 
tity etc.). Analogous appearances may be found in almost every one 
century of Christianity, e. g. Anabaptists, Camisards, Irvingians etc. 
Montanism found a very fertile soil among the female sex (prophetes- 
ses). But such a mind as Tertul. thought it interesting to occupy a 
higher pinnacle of piety than the rest of the congregation and to be 
a direct instrument of the divine spirit; his hatred of all halfness being 
naturally pleased with the strictness of the Montanists. J. C. A. Schweg- 
ier, Montanism and the Christian church of the second century, Tub. 
1841 and on this L. Georgii in the German Jahrb. 1842, p. 45—59. 
129 — 151. J. Ch. Baur, Eccles. Hist, of the three first centuries (Tub- 
1863) p. 235-245. 

4. Among the works of Tert. much interest attaches to the Apo- 
logeticum, composed a. 199, an apology addressed to the rom. 
imperii antistites (praesides) and containing elaborate explanations con- 
cerning the political and legal charges (not treated by Minucius Felix) 
brought against the Christians on account of not worshipping the Gods 
and Emperors, and being indifferent or even hostile to the State. Cf. 
A. Ebert (above 368, 7) p. 342—349. Besides the Octavius (above 368, 1) 
Tert. seems to have employed Justinus' anokoyCa. The attack is cut- 
ting and bitter, the diction rhetorical and original. Editions by S. 
Havercamp (Lugd. B. 1718), Fr. Oehler (with adnot., Halle 1849), J. 
Kayser (Paderborn 1865). J. L. Mosheim, de vera aetate apol. a Tert. 
conscripti initioque persecutionis Severi, in Oehler's ed. of Tert. Ill 
p. 490-510. 

5. Of importance for the history of general culture and the study 
of antiquities are especially the works Ad nationes. De idololatria. De 
spectaculis. De pallio (ed. CI. Salmasius, Paris 1622. Lugd. B. 1656). 
The treatise Adversus ludaeos agrees almost verbally with adv. Marc. 
Ill (Semler p. 640 — 657 ap. Oehler); adv. Valent. is a free translation 
of Irenaeus c. haer. I (Semler ib. p. 658 — 681). Ad nationes is in parts 
a repetition of the apolog. In the earlier edd. a spurious work adver- 
sus haereses is appended to the work de praescr. haer. On the treatise 
contra Praxean see R. A. Lipsius in Liebner's Annals of German Theo- 
logy Xni (1868) p. 701—724. 

6. In some mss. saec. IX and X some Christian poems (de So- 
doma, de lona) are ascribed to Tert., though without much reason, 



278 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

no doubt merely because they had once been copied or bound together 
with Tert.'s works. Comp. L. Müller, Rhein. Mus. XXII p. 329— 
344. 464. 

7. The editions of the works of Tert. are enumerated by Schöne- 
mann, Bibl. historico - litteraria patrum I p. 9 sqq. Ed. princeps per 
B. Rhenanum, Basil. 1521 fol. Cum adnotatt. J. Pamelii, Antv. 1579 
fol., Franeker 1597 and elsewhere. Cum observ. N. Rigaltii, Lutet. 
1634. 1641 fol. and elsewhere. Rec. J. S. Semler, Halle 1770. 6 vols. 
Cura Fr. Oberthür, Würzburg 1780, 2 vols. Ed. Leopold, Lips. 1839 
sqq. (in Gersdorf's Bibl. patr.). In Migne's Patrolog. curs. vol. I — III. 
Tert. quae supersunt omnia, ed. Franc. Oehler, Lips. 1853 sq., 3 vols.. 
Vol. ni (Lips. 1851) being a collection of the treatises De Tert. vita 
by J. Pamelius, P. AUix, N. de Nourry (diss, in apolog., ad nat., ad 
Scap.), J. L. Mosheim (see n. 4.), G. Zentner, J. A. Nösselt (see n. 2), 
J. S. Semler (de varia et incerta indole librorum Tert.) and J. Kaye 
(de Tert. et eius scriptis, p. 697—729). Ed. minor cum adn. crit. et 
indicibus. Lips. 1854. 

8. Coenen, comm. de Tert., Utrecht 1825. 128 pp. A. Neander, 
Antignosticus, on the spirit of Tertul., with an introd. to his works, 
Berlin 1825. 1849. K. Hesselberg, Tert's. doctrine, developed from his 
works. I. Introd., Life and Writings, Dorpat 1848. 135 pp. Grotemeyer, 
on Tert. Life and works, I. Kempen 1863. 4. A. Hauber, Tert.'s struggles 
against a second Christian marriage, theol. Studies and Criticisms by 
Ullmann 1845, p. 607—662. F. A. Burckhardt, Tert.'s doctrine on the 
soul, Budissin 1857. 4. Dupin, auteurs eccles. I (ed. 1688) p. 274—379 
(p. 320 sq. an excellent dehneation of Tert.) R. Ceillier, hist, gener. 
des auteurs s. et eccl. H (1730) p. 374—529. Eccles. hist, works, e. g. 
by F. Böhringer, Eccles. Hist, in biographies (Zürich 1864) p. 11 — 767. 

9. P. Langen, de usu praepositionum Tertullianeo, Münster 1868. 
18 pp. 4. See above 343, 4. J. Schmidt, de latinitate Tert., Erlangen 
1870. 35 pp. 4. 

370. Helenius Acron, the commentator of Terence and 
Horace, perhaps also of Persius, and Pomponius Porphyrion, 
a grammarian and commentator of Horace and Lucan, seem 
to belong to the end of the second century. The scholia of 
Porphyrion are still extant. In the beginning of the third 
century we possess a grammar by Dositheus together with 
exercises in Latin and Greek. Of the writings of the learned 
Sammonicus Serenus the Elder, a great friend of books, no- 
thing has come down to us. In the same way, we know of 
those of Statilius Maximus on Cato Major and on Cicero only 
from quotations. We may add that Festus, the author of 



Ac7-on. Dositheus. 279 

the abridgment of Verrius Flaccus, would also seem to belong 
to this period, unless he be even older. 

1. Helenius Acro's commentaries on Terence's Eunuchus and 
Adelphoe are quoted 13 times by Charisius (from Julius Romanus). 
E. g. p. 210 K.: Terentius in Eunucho (v. 5): nil prius n. f., ubi Hele- 
nium Acronem errasse dicendum est, qui prius sic intellexit etc. Cf. 
lb. p. 201, 3. 216, 9. Helenius Acron commentariis quos A4elpliis 
Terenti non indiligentes attulit, ib. p. 192 cf. p. 200, 16. 219, 5. 126, 
17. 130, 12. 197, 25. 210, 11 also p. 119, 12 sqq.: id Helenius Acron 
sic oportere dici in eadem Terentii fabula (Adelph.) disputavit Verrium- 
que dicit errare etc. . . qui autem cum Helenio faciunt banc aft'erunt 
causam etc. He would appear to have lived (after Gellius, who does 
not mention him, and) before Romanus. For his commentary on 
Horace see above 235, 3. Porphyr, on Hor. S. I 8, 25 (II p. 150 Hth.): 
memini me legere apud Helenium Acronem, Saganam nomine fuisse 
Horatii temporibus etc. This is perhaps from the work de personis 
horatianis. He also seems to have written a commentary on Persius. 
Schol. Pers. II 56: Acron tradit quod etc., and Parrhasius (in Gruteri 
Lampas I p. 735) says: incidi in Probi grammatici commentarios in 
primam Persii satiram. . . in iis ita scriptum legimus: curas (v. 1) 
Acroni proprie dicere videtur etc. Hence 0. Jahn (Persius p. CLIX) 
assigns to (Helenius) Aero those parts of the Scholia of Cornutus which 
exhibit too much information to suit Cornutus and still cannot be 
traced back to Valerius Probus. There are no certain traces of a com- 
mentary on Virgil by Aero; Ribbeck Prolegg. p. 175. Cf. Gräfenhan, 
Hist, of Class. Philol. IV p. 308-313. 

2. The name of Aero is (as early as in a glossary of saec. VIII, 
at the latest X, see Usener Rhein. Mus. XXIII p. 190 sq.) given to a 
collection of Scholia on Horace made between saec. VII and IX. On 
S. I 5, 97 Theoctistus (whom see) a grammarian of saec. VI, is men- 
tioned. The original author of these Scholia appears to have before 
him the genuine Aero (n. 1) and Porphyrio (n. 4) ; but this ground- 
work is quite overlaid with a number of worthless mediaeval obser- 
vations by various authors. 0. Keller, Symb. phil. Bonn. p. 499—502 
thought that he could distinguish two portions, the earlier being of the 
beginning of saec. V, the later of the close of the same century. Cf. 
J. Schlenger in the Progr. of the College at Mayence, 1868, p. 1 sq. 
and the works enumerated above 235, 4. 

3. A St. Gall ms. saec. IX— X of 70 leaves contains on fol. 1—31 
the grammatica Dosithei magistri, with a verbal translation into 
Greek (e. g. ars Tf/i/?? grammatica yQaju^ucaixr] est (ojiu scientia yyojaig), 
which becomes scanty soon after the explanation of the noun and 
finally disappears altogether, perhaps because the scribe became tired 
of such tedious work. Besides the Grammar there are also exercises 
for translation {hqfArjvsviuaia), e. g. (with the date of a. 207) from Hygini 



280 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

genealogia (above 257, 5), Adrian's anot^ciafig (above 341, 5), the piece 
de manumissionibus (above 364, 5). C. Lachmann, Essay on Dositheus, 
Berlin 1837. 4. H. E. Dirksen, on the legal sources of the Mag. Do- 
sitheus, Posthumous Writings II p. 392 sqq. Besides these parts, which 
had already been published, H. Keil has recently edited the first part 
of the grammar (quae est de arte grammatica et de octo partibus ora- 
tionis): Dosithei ars grammatica ex codice Sangallensi, Halle 1869—71. 
70 pp. 4. It is derived from the same sources as Charisius, Diomed, 
Donatrfs and others. By rendering every Latin w^ord in Greek a pecu- 
liar jargon has arisen. Critical contributions by H. Hagen, Lit. Central- 
blatt 1871, p. 1269 sq. See Boucherie, Comptes rendus de I'acad. des 
inscr. 1868, p. 270 sqq., and on him Steup, de Probis p. 41 not. Fol. 
32 — 70 of the ms. contain various astrological and chronological 
treatises. 

4. Pomponius Porphyrie (according to the Munich ms. of the 
Scholia) lived between 140 and 300, probably c. 200—250, and seems 
to have been a native of Africa and adherent of Fronto, though well 
acquainted with Rome and a large part of Italy. lul. Romanus ap. Charis, 
p. 220, 28 K. : ut Porphyrie ex Verrio et Festo etc. Schol. Lucan. I 
214: Porfirion puniceum interpretatus est quasi phoeniceum, . . Cornu- 
tus vero etc. His commentary on Horace exhibits far more judgment 
than Pseudo-Acro (n. 2) and is chiefly devoted to the logical, rhetori- 
cal and grammatical explanation, while he rarely touches on the sub- 
ject-matter. In the Middle Ages this commentary was far less used 
than that of Pseudo-Acro and has, therefore, suffered less from inter- 
polation. 0. Keller, Symb. phil. Bonn. p. 491—499. E. Schweikert 
above 235, 4 extr.) p. 31 — 36. 44. W. Meyer, Contributions towards the 
criticism of Porphyrion's Scholia on Horace, Munich 1870. 45 pp. 

5. Macrob. Ill 16, 6: temporibus Severi principis, qui ostentabat 
duritiam morum (i. e. Septimius Sev.), Sammonicus Serenus, vir 
saeculo suo doctus, cum ad principem suum scriberet, verba Plinii . . 
praemisit etc. Spartian. Geta 5, 5 : Sereni Sammonici libros familiaris- 
simos habuit quos ille ad Antoninum (Geta himself?) scripsit. Erro- 
neous if indeed of Samm., Lyd. de magistr. Ill 32 extr.: xal jccvra filv 
nfQL T(äv noTC(fX(x)y (Rhine and Danube) xard 2:afA(oxop (?) toV q(x)/lic(iov 
tCTOQixoy, og TiQog JtoxkrjTiavov xal Fakiqiov toV yiqovTct nsQi noixCliov 
CtjTtj/uarojy difU/d^t]. Spartian Carac. 4, 4: occisi (a. 212) nonnuUi etiam 
cenantes, inter quos etiam Sammonicus Serenus, cuius Hbri plurimi ad 
doctrinam extant. Macrob. Ill 9, 6: repperi in libro quinto Rerum 
reconditarum Sammonici Sereni utrumque carmen. Sidon. Apoll, ad 
Polem. (before carm. 14) : sine M. Varrone, sine Sereno, non Septimio, 
sed Sammonico, sine Censorino etc. ad Leont. (before carm. 22) : 
lulium Firmicum, Sammonicum Saturninum (?), in libris mathoseos peri- 
tissimos conditores, . . didicisse. Cf. Arnob. adv. g. VI 7. Serv. Ge. I 
30. 102. Capitol. Gordian. 18, 2: Sereno Sammonico, qui patris eius 
amicissimus, sibi autem praeceptor fuit, nimis acceptus et carus, usque 



Serenus Sammonicus. Statilms Maximus. 281 

adeo ut omnes libros Sereni Sammonici patris sui, qui censebantur ad 
sexaginta et duo milia, Gordiano minori moriens iile relinqueret. 

6. Statilius Maximus is never mentioned by Gellius, and thus 
appears to be later. On the other hand Julius Romanus (below 375) 
in Charisius often quotes observations by him concerning adverbs. Cf. 
Charis. p. 194, 11 K. : licet St. M. de singularibus apud Ciceronem quo- 
que positis notat. Cf. ib. p. 196, 4 (cf. Cic. de inv. II 12, 42). 209, 4 
(quod St. M. notat nesciens etc.) 212, 16. 213, 13. 214, 17. 215, 22. 
217, 3 and 8. 218, 28. 219, 24 sq. A similar work by St. M. on Ci- 
cero senex is indicated by the citations ib. p. 202, 11. (206, 9.) 217, 14. 
220, 16. 240, 1 K. The arrangement of these works of St. was pro- 
bably lexical. Gräfenhan, Hist, of Class. Phil. IV p. 234 sq. From some 
good old mss. it appears that St. M. emended the speeches of Cicero; 
see the subscription: Statilius Maximus rursus emendavi ad Tyronem 
et Laetanianum et Domm. et alios veteres. Ill oratio eximia. 0. Jahn, 
Trans, of the Saxon Society of Lit. 1851 p. 329 sq. 

7. On Festus see above 256, 5 sqq. If Porphyrio had already 
quoted him (see n. 4), Festus would appear to belong to the middle of 
the second century. 

8. A certain Aquila (Axvkag) yqa^uuartxog xccl /uovaixog and ff^Ao- 
öo^)og, a/okta koytxcc yfyQcafoig tkqI ovkkoyi^a/uuiy is mentioned by Suid. 
s. V. (I p. 188 Bnh.). 

C. The third century, A. D. 211 — 305. 
The first half, a. 211-253. 

371. This period contains the reign of Caracalla (a. 211 
—217), Macrinus (a. 217), Elagabalus (a. 217—222), Alexan- 
der Severus (222—235), Maximinus (235—238), Gordianus I 
and II (238), Gordianus III (238—244), Philippus Arabs (244 
—249), Decius Traianus (249—251), Gallus (251—253). Only 
the reigns of Caracalla, Alexander and Gordianus III lasted 
some time. During these years the general regress was con- 
tinued, nay it now even began to extend to Jurisprudence. 
In comparison with Papinian, the works of Ulpian and Paulus 
bear rather the character of compilations and revisions of 
extant materials. Censorinus and Julius Komanus were re- 
spectable scholars; likewise Gargilius Martialis. Historical 
composition was represented by the predecessor of the scrip- 
tores historiae augustae, Marius Maximus. But Cassius Dio 
and Herodianus wrote in Greek. Christianity produced Cy- 
prian, and its first poet, Commodianus, who, however, wrote 
in a barbarous prosody. Serenus Samonicus exhibits the in- 



282 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

fluence of the age of the Antonines in his fondness of archaic 
forms. The provinces, to which Caracalla's Constitutio An- 
toniniana of a. 212 had granted equal rights with Italy, con- 
tributed largely to literature, just as they furnished many 
Emperors to tJie throne. 

1. Bassianus Caracalla (or Caracallus), born 4 April 188, Caesar 
(M, Aurelius Antoninus) 196, appointed Augustus by his father Sept. 
Severus 198, his successor Febr. 211, at first with his brother (P. Septi- 
mius) Geta, after whose assassination he reigned alone. He was killed 
8 April 217. Consecrated under the name of Antoninus Magnus. Ulp. 
Dig. I 5, 17: in orbe romano qui sunt ex constitutione imperatoris An- 
tonini (cf. Dio LXXVII 9) cives romani effecti sunt. 

2. Caracalla's praef. praet. and assassin Opilius Macrinus reigned 
with his son Diadumenus during one year and two months. Both were 
assassinated. Capit. Macrin. 14, 4: quod cum Macrinus audisset fecit 
iambos, qui non extant, iucundissimi autem fuisse dicuntur. Cf. ib. 
11, 5: hos versus nescio qui latinos . . in foro posuit. quibus acceptis 
Macrinus his versibus respondisse fertur (two distichs). 

3. Elagabal, originally Varius Avitus Bassianus, the son of Soae- 
mias, whom his grandmother Julia Maesa declared to be a son of Ca- 
racalla, hence called M. Aurelius Antoninus fleliog., assassinated by the 
Praetorian guard March 222. He was succeeded by the son of his 
aunt (Julia) Mammaea: 

4. Alexander Aug. (always so called in legal works), adopted by 
Elagabal, which Alex, however disclaimed afterwards and called him- 
self the son of Antoninus Magnus (n. 1). As Caesar he was called M. 
Aurelius Alexander, as Augustus also Severus. He was born c. 205, 
reigned since 222, and was killed March 235. Lamprid. Alex. 27, 5 
sqq. : facundiae graecae magis quam latinae nee versu invenustus. . . 
vitas principum bonorum versibus scripsit. K. Salzer, the Syrian Em- 
perors Heliog. and Alex. Sev., Heidelberg 1866. Lamprid. Alex. 44, 4 
sq.: rhetoribus, grammaticis, medicis, haruspicibus, mathematicis, 
mechanicis, architectis salaria instituit et auditoria decrevit et disci- 
pulos cum annonis pauperum filios, modo ingenuos, dari iussit (at 
Rome), etiam in provinciis oratoribus forensibus multum detulit, pie- 
risque etiam annonas dedit, quos constitisset gratis agere. 68, 1 : ut 
scias qui viri in eius consilio fuerint: Fabius Sabinus, Sabini insignis 
viri filius, Cato temporis sui; Domitius Ulpianus, iuris peritissimus ; 
Aelius Gordianus, Gordiani imj). filius scientia iuris insignis; lulius 
Paulus, iuris peritissimus: Claudius Venacus, orator amplissimus; Ca- 
tilius Severus, cognatus eius, vir omnium doctissimus ; Aelius Serenia- 
nus, omnium vir sanctissimus ; Quintilius Marcellus, quo meliorem ne 
historiae quidem continent. 



The Emperors. 283 

5. C. lulius Maximinus (litterarum fere rudis, Aur. Vict. Caes. 25) 
and his cognominous son, reigned three years, and were killed a. 238 
by Pupienus. 

6. M. Antonius Gordianus (a. 158-238) and his son (Gord. 
iunior, 193 — 238) reigned only 36 days. The father, vita venerabilis, 
cum Platonc semper, cum Aristotele, cum Tullio, cum Vergilio ceteris- 
que veteribus agens, alium quam merebatur exitum passus est, Capitol. 
Gord. 7, 1. Adulescens cum esset . . poemata scripsit, quae omnia 
extant, et quidem cuncta ilia quae Cicero (above 176, 2). . . scripsit, 
praeterea quemadmodum Vergilius Aeneidos . . ita etiam ille Antoni- 
niados (libros), h. e. Antoninum Pium et Antonium Marcum versibus 
disertissimis libris XXX vitam illorum et bella et publice privatimque 
gesta perscribens. et haec quidem puerulus. . . ubi adolevit . . contro- 
versias declamavit etc. ib. 3, 3 sq. Scripsit et laudes soluta oratione 
omnium Antoniorum qui ante eum fuerunt. ib. 4, 7. His grandson (by 
a daughter, Orelli-Henzen 5529 sq., cf. Capitol. Gord. 4, 2), Gordianus 
III reigned at first together with Clodius Pupienus Maximus and Cae- 
cilius Balbinus, and alone after their speedy downfall. Duxit uxorem 
filiam Misithei (or Timesithei) doctissimi viri, quern causa eloquentiae 
. . praefectum statim fecit, Capitol. Gord. 23, 6. Extat et soceri eius 
ad eum epistula et ipsius Gordiani ad socerum, qua intellegitur eius 
saeculum emendatius ac diligentius socero adiuvante perfectum, ib. 24, 1 
and the letters ib. 24, 2 — 25. 4. Oratio Gordiani ad senatum in praise 
of Timesitheus ib. 27, 4 sqq. But Gordianus M. Philippi (n. 7) praef. 
praet. insidiis periit sexennio imperii (Febr. 244), Victor Caes. 27, 8. 

7. M. lulius Philippus Arabs Thraconites and his son Phihppus 
annos potentiae quinque egere (Victor Caes. 28, 1. 11). A. 248 = 1001 
V. C. the Millennium of Rome was celebrated. 

8. C. Messius Q. Traianus De eius, Sirmiensium vico ortus, and 
his son Etruscus (Caesar), fell in the war with the Goths, a. 251. 

9. Gallus and Hostilianus Augusti; but Host, died soon; then 
Gallus' son, Volusianus, became Caesar. Father and son were supplanted 
and killed by Aemilius Aemilianus, who reigned only three months, 
and all together reigned only two years. Victor Caes. 30 sq. 

372. The literary works of the Jurist Domitius Ulpianus 
from Tyre, praef. praet. under Elagabal and Alexander (Seve- 
rus) and for some time all-powerful under the latter, but assas- 
sinated a. 228, were almost exclusively composed in the reign 
of Caracalla. The most important of his numerous works 
were the 83 books Ad edictum and the 51 books AdSabinum. 
His Regularum liber singularis and Institutionum libri II are 
extant, but only in fragments. His works enjoyed for a long 
time high authority on account of their abundance of mate- 



284 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

rials, combined with pertinent criticism and a clear style. In 
Justinian's Digest the Extracts from his works form a full 
third of the whole work. 

1. Ulp. Dig. L 15, 1 pr. : est in Syria Phoenice splendidissima 
Tyriorum colonia, unde mihi origo est. Spartian. Pescenn. Nig. 7, 4: 
Paulus (below 373) et Ulpianus . . Papiniano in consilio fuerunt ac 
postea, cum unus ad memoriam, alter ad libellos paruisset, statim prae- 
fecti facti sunt. Lamprid. Heliogab. 16, 4: removit et Ulpianum ictum, 
ut bonum virum, et Silvinum rhetorem, quern magistrum Caesaris fece- 
rat. et Silvinus quidem occisus est, Ulpianus vero reservatus. Alexand. 
Sev. 26, 5: Paulum et Ulpianum in magno honore habuit, quos prae- 
fectos ab Heliogabalo alii dicunt factos, alii ab ipso, nam et consilia- 
rius Alexandri et magister scrinii Ulpianus fuisse perhibetur, qui tarnen 
ambo assessores Papiniani fuisse dicuntur. Vict. Caes. 24, 6 : Domitium 
Ulpianum, quern Heliogabalus praetorianis praefecerat, eodem honore 
retinens Pauloque inter exordia patriae reddito, iuris auctoribus, quan- 
tus erga optimos atque aequi studiosos esset edocuit. Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 
51, 4: Ulpianum pro tutore habuit, primum repugnante matre, deinde 
gratias agente, . . atque ideo summus Imperator fuit quod eius consi- 
liis praecipue remp. rexit. 15, 6: negotia et causas prius a scriniorum 
principibus et doctissimis iurisperitis et sibi fidelibus, quorum primus 
tunc Ulpianus fuit, tractari . . praecepit. 31, 2: neque umquam solum 
quemquam nisi praefectum suum vidit, et quidem Ulpianum, ex asses- 
sore semper suo, causa iustitiae singulis. See also ib. 27, 2. 34, 6. 
67, 2. Cod. VIII 38, 4 (of 30 March 222) : secundum responsum Do- 
mitii Ulpiani, praefecti annonae, icti, amici mei. IV 65, 5 (of 1 De- 
cember 222) : ad Domitium Ulpianum, praefectum praet. et parentem 
meum. Dio LXXX 1: Akf'^aud'Qog . . JofxiiCi^ rivl OvkntccvM t^v is 
T(öy ö'oQv(f>oQ(i)y nqoaruoCav xcd id kotnct rrjg c(Q/rjg tiifTQdpf nqayjxaja. 
ib. 2: o Ovkni^avog nokku ^ufv jixiv ovx oo^-cög vno tov 2(iQdc(vc(nakkov 
7iqa/x^ivr(x)v knrjvvoQ&wGf^ toV (^h ^rj <PkcioviC(v6v lov t( Xqijojov unoKifC- 
vag, I'v (ivTOvg diadflirjtcci, , xal ccvTog ov nokkiä varfQoy vno roiv (foQv- 
ifjOQMy tnid-€uivü)v ol vvxrog X((Tsa(fjayrj, xainfQ xcd UQog ro nakaiiov 
ccvadqciiAMv xal TtQog avTou tov ccvioxQtaoqa Trjp Tf ^ut]TfQcc ccvrov xutcc 
if>vy(oy. The principal author of this Dio states to have been a certain 
Epagathos. See more details in Zosim. I 11. Hieronym. ad a. 2242 
=: 228 A. D. : Ulpianus ictus assessor Alexandri insignissimus habetur. 
This is rather the year in which Ulpian died. 

2. Before the death of Severus (a. 211) Ulpian published only his 
liber singularis de excusationibus, of which the later work de officio 
praetoris tutelaris, published under Caracalla, is so to say the second 
edition (Mommsen). The commentary on the Edict, or at least the first 
half of it, was also written under Severus, though not edited until 
afterwards, or, if indeed it was published before, it was subsequently 
revised. The majority of his publications belongs to the time of the 



Ulpian. 285 

sole power of Caracalla (a. 211 — 217) or was finally revised by him in 
this time. Caracalla is in them always mentioned as living (imperator). 
Only the five books de adulteriis would seem to have been written 
under Macrinus (or Elagabal). Fitting, the age of the Writ. p. 34—44, 
with Th. Mommsen, Zeitschr. f. Rechtsgesch. IX p. 101 sq. 113 sq. 
Lamprid. Heliog. 16, 2 is erroneous: Sabinum consularem, ad quem 
libros Ulpianus scripsit, . . iussit occidi. See rather above 276, 1. 

3. The so-called Fragmenta Ulpiani have been preserved in 
a Vatican ms. saec. X and are there styled Tituli ex corpore Ulpiani. 
They belong to his liber singularis Regularum. Both the arrangement 
and execution agree with Gaius. Much is missing at the beginning, 
and much at the end; the middle parts are unskilful excerpts from 
Ulpian's work. Huschke, iurisprud. anteiust.'* p. 467—470. Editio prin- 
ceps by Jo. TiHus, Paris 1549. Editions (chiefly with the Inst., n. 4) 
by Hugo (Götting. 1788. 1811. 1814. 1822. 1834), E. Rocking (Bonn 
1831. 1836. 1845. ed. IV Lips. 1855, with an essay by Th. Mommsen, 
de Ulp. regul. libro sing.), J. Vahlen (Bonn 1856). Also in R. Gneist's 
Instit. syntagma (Lips. 1858) and Huschke's iurisprud. anteiust.^ p. 472 
—521. Heimbach, on Ulp.'s fragments, Leipzig 1834. K. D. A. Röder, 
Critical Attempts on Ulpian's fragments, Gott. 1856. 99 pp. 

4. Of the first book of the Institutions of Ulp. some frag- 
ments were discovered by Endlicher a. 1835 on part of a binding in 
the library at Vienna, originally appertaining to saec. V. Endlicher, de 
inst. Ulp. fragmento Vindob. nuper reperto, Wien 1835. Cf. Th. Momm- 
sen, in Savigny's Zeitschr. f. gesch. Rechts wiss. XV (Berl. 1850) p. 372 
sqq. Huschke, iurisprud. anteiust.^ p. 522—524. Edited (see n. 3) 
e. g. by Huschke 1. 1. p. 525—527. F. P. Bremer, de Dom. Ulp. instit. 
scripsit atque earundem inst. reliquias adiecit, Bonn 1863. 106 pp. Be- 
sides that ms., thirteen passages of the work occur in the Pandect 
(Hommel Paling. HI p. 411 and 413), others in the Collatio legum. See 
the complete collection in P. Krüger's Critical Attempts on Roman 
Law (Berlin 1870) p. 163-172, cf. ibid. p. 140 sqq. 

5. The principal work of Ulp. was Ad edictam libri LXXXIII, i. e. 
81 excerpted in the Pandect and forming its groundwork (Hommel, 
Paling. Ill p. 39—383) and two books Ad edictum aedilium curulium 
(lb. p. 383 — 394), also (in two editions, see Cod. lust, const. Cordi nobis 
§ 3 fin.) Ad Sabinum (cf. n. 2) libri LI (Hommel HI p. 459 -589). Also 
Ad legem luliam et Papiam libri XX; Ad legem luliam de adulteriis 
libri II; Ad legem Aeliam Sentiam libri IV; Protribunalium or de 
omnibus tribunalibus libri X; De appellationibus libri IV; De censibus 
libri VI; Fideicommissorum libri XI; De adulteriis libri V (cf. n. 2); 
De sponsalibus; De officio proconsulis libri X (b. VII contained the 
Rescripts against the Christians and the mathematici, Lactant. inst. V 11. 
CoUat. leg. XV 2; cf. A. F. Rudorff, on the liber de off. procos., Berlin 
1866. 4. Trans, of the Ac); De officio consulis libri III; De officio 
quaestoris libri II (or I); libri singulares de officio consularium, de off. 



286 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

curatoris reip., praefecti vigilum, praefecti urbi, praetoris tutelaris, de 
excusationibus (n. 2). Also Disputationum (publicarum) libri X, Opini- 
onum libri VI, Responsorum libri II, Institutionum libri II (n. 4), Re- 
gularum liber singularis (n. 3), Regulariim libri VII. In general 2462 
passages from Ulpian have been admitted into the Pandect; they form 
the third volume of Hommel's Palingenesia (618 pp.). Merely quoted are 
Ulpian's Pandectarum libri X, and his Notes on Aristo (Dig. XXIX 7, 9), 
Marcellus (ib. XX 1, 27. XXVI 7, 28, 1) and on Papinian's Responsa 
(ib. Ill 5, 31, 2. L 8, 3 pr.). 

6. Cod. IX 41, 11 (Diocletian, a. 290): vir prudentissimus Domitius 
Ulpianus in Publicarum disputationum libris ad perennem scientiae 
memoriam refert. Justinian Cod. VI 25, 9 (a. 531) : tam Ulpiano quam 
Papiniano, viris disertissimis. VI 51, 9: non ineleganter summi ingenii 
vir Ulpianus. Novell. XCVII 6, 1 : Ovknucvop jov aot^unarov. His pupil 
Modestinus calls him o x^ccriarog (Dig. XXVI 6, 2, 5. XXVII 1, 2 fin. 
4, I). On the whole Ulpian was more reproductive than productive, 
and lacked the originality and independence of Papinian; but he knew 
how to deal with and arrange his subject. It is strange that he never 
mentions his contemporary Paulus, who in his turn mentions him in 
only one place (Dig. XIX 1, 43). 

7. J. Lectins, de vita et scriptis D.U., Geneva 1601 = Otto The- 
saur. I. H. Steger (F. C. Conradi), de D. U., Lips. 1725. 4. Zimmern, 
Rom. private Law, I 1. p. 367 — 374. F.A.Schilling, diss, de U., Breslau 
1824. G. Bruns in Pauly's Enc. VI 2. p. 2697—2700. Rudorff, Hist, of 
Rom. Law L p. 189-192. 

8. In the mss. of the Notitia dignitatum we find also a brief Sur- 
vey of the various degrees of relation (cf. 373, 4) in agreement with 
the terms used by Gains and remarkable for its lucidity, whence 
Buschke (iurispr. anteiust. ^ p. 529) believes it to have been derived 
from a work by Ulpian, either the Regulae or Inst. It is printed in 
Booking's Corp. iur. anteiust. p. 173, and in his edition of ulpian's frag- 
ments ^ p. 183, in Huschke 1. 1. p. 530 sq. 

9. The fragmentum de iure fisci, which is preserved by two 
leaves of the Chapter Library at Verona and was first published together 
with Gains, is by Huschke, iurispr. anteiust. ^ p. 536—538, attributed to 
Ulpian on account of the scribendi elegantia et tota tractandi ratio; 
he declares against the authorship of Paulus, which is accepted by 
Rudorff, Hist, of Law I p. 193 sq. 241 sq., and against assigning it to 
the age of Diocletian (between a. 286 and 326), as C. W. Walch does 
(de aetate fragm. veteris icti de i. f., Jena 1838). It is certain that it 
belongs to the end of the second or the commencement of the third cen- 
tury. See the text in Göschen's edition of Gains (above 357, 5), in 
Booking's edition of Ulpian; also in Huschke's iurisprud. anteiust.'^ p. 
539—545. Edidit P. Krüger, Lips. (Teubner) 1868. 22 pp. 



Ulpian. Paulus. 287 

373. Ulpian was surpassed in fertility by his contemporary 
Julius Paulus, who was likewise under Alexander Severus 
praefectus praetorio and possessed much influence. He seems 
to have survived Ulpian. He enjoyed no less authority, but 
was decidedly inferior to Ulpian in fluency of style and ac- 
curacy of detail. The titles and subjects of their works were 
frequently identical. Paulus wrote numerous monographs on 
certain subjects. The most comprehensive of his works was 
his Ad edictum in 80 books, the one most generally circu- 
lated his Sententiae. We possess an abridgment of the 
latter. The extracts from his works constitute one -sixth of 
Justinian's Digest. 

1. Paulus was, like Papinian, a pupil of Scaevola (above 364, 1) 
and a member of the Imperial consilium (under Septimius Severus). Paul. 
Dig. XXIX 2, 97 : Papinianus putabat, . . dicebam, . . pronuntiavit (im- 
perator). IV 4, 38: vifcta tarn apud praetorem quam apud praefectum 
urbi provocaverat. putabam bene iudicatum, . . Imperator autem motus 
est quod etc. dicebam etc. movit etiam illud imperatorem etc. Cf. ib. 
XLIX 14, 50. Originally a solicitor (Dig. XXXII 78, 6: cum vir ita 
legasset . . ego apud praetorem fideicommissarium petebam . . nee ob- 
tinui), subsequently assessor to the praef. praet. under Papinian; see 
Paul. Dig. XII 1, 40: lecta est . . (above 366, 1) cautio huius modi, 
dicebam etc. Magister scrinii memoriae, exiled under Elagabal, re- 
called by Alexander (Severus) and appointed praef. praet.; see above 
372, 1. 

2. The three books Decretorum and the treatises de iurisdictione 
tutelari (ed. II) and de excusationibus tutelarum had already been 
edited before the death of Severus (a. 211); the sententiarum libri V, 
as it seems, a short time after Severus' death. Under Caracalla he 
wrote the treatises de publicis iudiciis, de libertatibus dandis, ad ora- 
tionem divi Severi, de cognitionibus, perhaps also the two books ad 
legem luliam and the three Fideicommissorum. Under Elagabal (218 
— 222) the books de censibus. The Responsa were not finished until 
the reign of Alexander (222—235). After Caracalla 's death were writ- 
ten the treatises de adulteriis and de iure liberorum, and the commen- 
tary on the Edict was concluded under Elagabal or Alexander. In gene- 
ral Paulus offers few hints for the chronological determination of his 
works, owing to the want of accuracy in his statements. Cf. Fitting, 
On the Age of the Writ. p. 44—50, and Th. Mommsen, Ztschr. f. 
Rechtsgesch. IX p. 106 sq. Ill sq. (n. 53). 114—116. 

3. The Sententiarum ad filium libri V were a sort of juridical 
vademecum, containing the uncontested principles of the most usual 
cases, without statement of reasons and sources, according to the order 



288 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

of the Edict. Their simplicity and brevity recommended them to or- 
dinary readers and gained for them public authority in a time which 
was averse to long controversies. See an edict of Constantine a. 327 
(Cod. Theod. I 4, 2) : Sententiarum libros, plenissima luce et perfectis- 
sima elocutione et iustissima iuris ratione succinctos, in iudiciis prolatos 
valere non dubitatur. Theodosius II and Valentinian III (a. 426) enlarged 
(Cod. Theod. 14, 3): Pauli sententias semper valere praecipimus; cf. 
Consult. 7, 3. In the leges barbarorum these Sent, form the principal 
source of the prevailing right (hence receptae sunt). Being admitted, 
though even more abridged, into the Breviarium Alarici, they have 
come down to us. The Excerpts given there are supplemented by the 
quotations in the fragmenta Vaticana, the Collatio legum, Consultatio 
and especially the Digest. Cf. Huschke, iurispr. anteiust.^ p. 352 — 358. 
The principal editions by Cujacius (1566) and J. A. Schulung (lurisprud. 
vetus anteiust.), L. Arndts (in the Bonn Corpus iuris anteiust. and Bonn 
1833), G. Hänel (Lex Rom. Visigoth., Lips. 1849), Huschke (iurisprud. 
anteiust.'* p. 359—465) and others. The Excerpts in the Pandect are 
collected in Hommel Paling. II. p. 227—268. 

4. Through the index Florentinus and the Pandect and the Fragm. 
Vaticana we know the great extent of Paulus' literary activity : Ad edictum 
libri LXXX and Ad edictum aedilium curulium libri (II?), also an 
abridgment (with Additions) Brevium libri XXIII (or ad edictum de 
brevibus). Quaestionum libri XXVI; Manualium libri III; Sententiarum 
V (n. 3) ; Institutorum II (cf. Huschke, iurisprud. antei.^p. 466); Regularum 
VII. Responsorum libri XXIII: Decretorum III; Decretorum s. impe- 
rialium sententiarum in cognitionibus prolatarum or Factorum libri VI. 
Ad Sabinum libri (XVHr); ad Vitellium libri IV (? cf. Momrasen ad 
Dig. XXXn 78 pr. Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. IX p. 116); Epitomarum 
Alfeni (above 195, 2) libri VIII; Labeonis mß-arüiv libri VIII; ad 
Plautium libri XVIII; ad Neratium libri IV; Notae ad lulianum, Scaevo- 
lam, Papinianum. Ad legem luliam et Papiam libri X; ad legem Aeliara 
Sentiam libri HI; ad legem luliam libri II. De adulteriis libri HI; Fidei- 
commissorum libri III; de officio consulis II; de off. proconsulis II; de 
censibus II; de iure fisci II. Besides these works there were 59 libri 
singulares on all departments of Law, e. g. de legibus, ad legem 
Cinciam, municipalem, Falcidiam, Velleiam, Fusiam Caniniam; de senatus 
consultis: ad S. C. Orfitianum, TertuUianum, Silanianum, Turpilianura, 
Velleianum, Claudianum, Libonianum; ad orationem divi Marci, divi 
Severi; de iure libellorum; ad regulam Catonianam ; de iure singulari; 
de iuris et facti ignorantia ; de varus lectionibus. De officio praefecti 
urbi, praefecti vigilium, praetoris tutelaris, assessorum; de iurisdictione 
tutelari (in two editions), de excusationibus tutelarum; de gradibus et 
affinibus; de dotis repetitione; de donationibus inter virum et uxorem; 
de intercessionibus feminarum; de usuris. De testamentis in several 
monographs. De libertatibus dandis ; de assignatione libertorum; de 
iure patronatus. De actionibus, concurrentibus actionibus, conceptione 
formularum, hypothecaria formula, cognitionibus, liberali causa, Septem- 



Paulus and other Jurist». 289 

viralibus indiciis, appellationibus. De poenis omniuni legum, poenis 
paganorum, militum : de portionibus quae liberis damnatorum conce- 
duntur; de publicis indiciis, extraordinariis criminibus, adulteriis. In 
general, there are 2080 extracts from his works in the Digest: see 
Hommel, Palingenesia II p. 3 — 300. 

5. Modestin. Dig. XXVII 1, 13, 2 (above 364). Gordianns in the 
Cod. V 4, 6 (a. 239), Diocletian ib. IX 22, 11 (a. 287) and Justinian, 
const. Omnem (Dig. prooem.) 5: responsum viri prudentissimi Pauli. 
On account of the authority of his sententiae (n. 3) P. is simply styled 
iuridicus Consult. 7, 3 and by Isid. Orig. V 24. 30. 

6. A. A. Pagenstecher, lul. Paulus, in the Sylloge diss., Brem. 1713. 
E. A. 0. C. Pagenstecher, Paulus iniuria vapulans, Wetzlar 1726. 4. 
(=: Tractat. iur. I. Würzb. 1734). F. C. Conradi, I. P. ab iniuria criti- 
corum vindicatus, Helmst. 1733 {=: Parerg. IV p. 507 sqq.). Zimmern, 
Private Law. I 1. p. 368-171. 374—378. G. Bruns. in Pauly's Enc. V. 
p. 1251 sq. Rudorff, Hist, of Law I. p. 192—195. 

374. Besides these great authorities a number of Jurists 
of the second and third rank lived and wrote in this time, 
the most important being Aelius Marcianus, Aemilius Macer, 
and especially Ulpian's pupil Herennius Modestinus, who 
wrote his work on 'excusationes' in Greek, but all others in 
Latin. 

1. Paul. (Quaest. XII) Dig. XL 13, 4: Licinius Rufinus lulio 
Paulo: . . quaere . . peto itaque plenissime instruas. XXIV1,41: Lici- 
nius Rufinus libro VI Regularum: . . nam et Imp. Antoninus (Caracalla, 
see Mommsen, Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. IX. p. 102, n. 24) constituit etc. 
XLII 1, 34: Licinius Rufinus libro XIII Regularum (ind. Flor, mentions 
only XII books). The thirteen excerpts from this work in the Digest 
collected by Hommel Paling. II. p. 399 sq. Treatises de L. R. by H. 
J. 0. König (Halle 1772. 4.) and C. A. H. Clodius (Lips. 1791. 4.). 

2. Inst. IV 3, 1: sic et Homerus in Odyssea ait, sicut Aelius 
Marcianus in suis Institutionibus refert. Cf. Dig. XXXII 65, 4. Alto- 
gether there were sixteen books, chiefly after Gains, but in family 
law and inheritance following Sabinus and with the addition of the ius 
extraord. (concerning punishments, fiscus and war) ; written after the 
death of Caracalla (divi • Severus et Antoninus). All the other works 
of Marc, were likewise written after Caracalla's death (217), as is he always 
called either divus Antoninus or Ant. Magnus (Magnus Ant.) or divus 
Magnus Ant.; viz. Publicorum iudiciorum libri II (in which also Pa- 
pinianus Respons. XVI is quoted), Regularum libri V, and the libri 
singulares de delatoribus and ad formulam hypothecariam. Of the two 
books de appellationibus it is at least certain that they were written 
after Severus' death. Fitting. Age of the Writ. p. 50—52, with Momm- 

19 



290 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

sen, Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. IX p. 106 sq. 108. 112. We do not find 
any chronological hint in the fragments of the liber sing, ad SC. Tur- 
pilianum and of the Notae ad Papinianum. In the Digest these works 
are employed in 275 places ; see Hommel Paling. I p. 399—436. Re- 
scripts to (this?) Marcianus by Alexander Cod. II 13, 6 and X 58 of 
a. 239. G. Oelrichs, de vita, studiis, honoribus et scriptis Ael. M. icti, 
Utrecht 1754, 4. Zimmern, Rom. Private Law I 1. p. 380 sq. 

3. Aemilius Mac er, the author of always two books Publico- 
rum iudiciorum, Ad legem vicesimae hereditatum, De officio praesidis, 
De appellationibus, De re militari, which are employed in 62 places 
in the Pandect, see Hommel, Paling. I. p. 341—350. The work de app. 
was certainly written under Alexander (Dig. XLIX 13, 1), but the others 
after the death of Severus. Ulpian, Paulus, and Menander pre repea- 
tedly mentioned in them. Fitting, the Age of the Writ. p. 52 sq. A 
devout inscr. in honour of Caracalla by a certain A. Aem. Macer, 15 
Aug. 216. ap. Orelli 930. 

4. Florentinus, the author of Institutionnm libri XII after the 
system of Gaius, also used in the Digest; see Hommel Paling. I. p. 
175 — 178. In it are mentioned divus Pius, Aquilius Gallus and Treba- 
tius. We should not hesitate to attribute him to the time of Alexander 
if it were certain that he were identical with the person mentioned 
in the Cod. Ill 28, 8 a. 223 (Imp. Alexander Aug. Florentino). Treati- 
ses about him and his fragments by A. F. Rivinus (Wittenb. 1752. 4.), 
C. F. Walch (de Flor, icti philosophia, Jena 1754 = Opusc. I. p. 337— 
346), J. Th. Mathews (Lugd. B. 1801. 4.), Th. Schmalz (Königsberg 1801). 

5. lulius Aquila (wrongly called Gallus Aq. in the ind. Flor.), the 
author of two books of Responsa, two passages from which occur in 
the Digest (XXVI 7, 34. 10, 12). Zimmern, Rom. Private Law I 1. p. 
386 sq. 

6. Fiirius Anthianus wrote a commentary on the Edict, of 
which the ind. Flor, mentions five books {(utQog idixrov ßtßkCa nivTf)- 
The three excerpts of the first book in the Digest (II 14, 62. IV 3, 40. 
VI 1, 80) contain no hint to fix his time. P. F. Besier, de F. A. icto. 
Lugd. B. 1803. 

7. Aelius Florianus Herennius Modestinus (according to the 
inscr. full. ap. Kellermann Vig. latere, p. 30 = Rhein. Mus. XXI. p. 
10 sq.). ülp. Dig. XLVII 2, 52, 20: quod et Herennio Modestino, studioso 
meo, de Delmatia consulenti rescripsi. Capitol. Maximin. iun. (born 
217) 1, 5: grammatico latino usus est Philemone, iurisperito Modestino, 
Imp. Gordianus a. 239 (Cod. HI 42, 5): merito tibi anon contemnendae 
auctoritatis icto Modestino responsum est. a. 244 praef. vigilum at 
Rome (Inscr. full. 1. 1.). Cf. Arcad. Charis. Dig. L 4, 18, 26: mixta munera 
. . Herennius Mod. et notando et disputanjo et optima ratione decrevit. 
The works of Mod.: Excusationum libri VI (in Greek); Differentiarum 
IX and Regularum X (Huschke, lurisprud. anteiust.'* p. 546): Pandec- 



Modestinus. Julius Komanus. 291 

tarum XII; Responsorum XIX; Ad Q. Mucium at least XXXI books; 
De poenis VI; libri singulares de enucleatis casibus, heurematicis, diffe- 
rentiis dotis, in officioso testamento, manumissionibus, praescriptionibus, 
ritu nuptiarun, legatis et fideicommissis, testamentis. The 344 excerpts 
from this in the Digest are collected by Hommel Paling. I. p. 453— 
494. None of the fragments can be safely shown to lead beyond the time 
of Caracalla's sole reign. After Caracalla's death he certainly wrote 
the libri differentiarum, Pandectarum, Excusationum; under Alexander 
the liber sing, de enucleatis casibus. In b. I of the Excusationes (Dig. 
XXVI 6, 2, 5) he had quoted Paulus libro IX Responsorum (above 373, 
2), so that the earliest time of their composition would be under 
Alexander. This work is dedicated (jia^aiTrjavg innQOTirjg xat xovQccroQiag) 
to Egnatius Dexter, Dig. XXVII 1, 1. Fitting, the Age of the Writ. p. 
53 — 55., In general see Zimmern, Rom. Private Law lip. 383—386. 

375. In the first ten or twenty years of the third century 
the learned grammarian C.Julius Rom anus, whom Charisius 
employed in his grammar, and Juba, a writer on metres 
who followed Caesius Bassus aud Heliodorus, wrote their works. 
Censor inus, who lived about the same time, was the author of 
several grammatical works. We still possess his treatise de 
die natali, which is dedicated to his wealthy patron Q. Caerellius 
and composed a. 238. It is chiefly derived from Suetonius 
and contains some valuable information on historical and 
chronological details. The treatment is rhetorical. 

1. G. lulius Romanus (Charis. p. 230, 1 K.) is the most learned 
among the grammarians employed by Charisius (disertissimus Artis 
scriptor, ib. p. 232, 7). Charisius takes from him large portions, e. g. 
on analogy (p. 116 — 147) and on adverbs (p. 190 — 224), copying him 
faithfully so as to exscribe even the quotations by Romanus of other parts 
of his work or references to his other writings e. g. de consortio casuum 
(Charis. p. 132, 31), de consortio praepositionum (p 209, 20 sq.), nfQi 
6qd^oyQan>Cag quaestiones (p. 135, 15), de distinctionibus etc. The work 
of Romanus used by Char, was perhaps entitled ' Aifioq^ual^ and the 
separate titles, such as liber de analogia (Charis. p. 56, 4. 114, 1. 116, 
29), liber de advcrbiis (ib. p. 114, 28), were probably only parts of it. 
Charis. p. 230, 1: G. I. R. libro «rfo^^wwv sub titulo de coniunctione; 
p. 238, 16: I. R. libro «ffo^,aw»/ sub titulo de praepositione. We can 
always tell I. R. by his habit of saying Maro instead of Vergilius. 
As I. R. quotes Fronto's correspondence with M. Aurelius (Charis. p. 
223, 26) and Apuleius (ib. p. 240, 28. 248, 5) and also Helenius Aero 
(above 370, 1) and Porphyrie (above 370, 4), he probably belongs to 
the first half of the third century. The principal sources of Rom. 
were Pliny and Flavins Caper, also Asper and Terentius Scaurus. Cf. 
W. Osann, Contrib. II. p. 327—330. H. Keil, grammatici lat. I. p. XLV 



292 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

— XLVin. A. Schottmüller, de Plini libr. gramm. 1. p. 32 sqq. W. 
Christ, Philologus XVIII. p. 121—123. 

2. Mar. Vict. ap. Keil, gramm. VI p. 80, 4 sq.: luba noster atque 
alii Graecorum opinionem secuti referunt etc. ib. p. 94, 6 sqq. luba 
noster, qui inter metricos auctoritatem primae eruditionis obtinuit, 
insistens Heliodori (above 347, 9) vestigiis, qui inter Graecos huiusce 
artis antistes aut primus aut solus est. Servius Aen. V 222: secundum 
lubam artigraphum. His time is fixed by an allusion to a line of An- 
nianus (whom see) in a quotation from Juba ap. Priscian de metr. 
Ter. 8 (II p. 421 ed. Htz). He may therefore be placed at the earliest 
about a. 200. This agrees also with such phrases as intellegi datur. 
H. Keil, quaestiones grammaticae (Leipzig 1860) p. 15 — 22. R. Westphal 
on Greek metres II 2 (1865) p. 146—149 — I 2 (1867) p. 223 sqq. A 
collection of the fragments of Juba by B. ten Brink (lubae Maurusii 
de re metrica scriptoris latini reliquiae, Utrecht 1854), H. Wentzel 
(Symbolae crit. ad hist, script, rei metr. lat. Breslau 1858, p. 18—25), 
and Keil (1. 1. p. 19 sqq.). 

3. A quotation from the fourth book of Juba's Ars ap. Rufin. p. 
385 Gaisf. (on the iambic trimeter). (luba) in octavo ap. Prise. II p. 420, 
25 with Hertz's note. He agrees with the Scholia on Hephaestion and 
the treatises nfQl rrjg ttov no&div ovofxaaiag edited by Keil from an 
Ambrosian ms. Juba had given numerous instances of each metre. The 
work was used by Sacerdos and, as it seems, by Terentianus, also by 
Asmonius; it was abridged by Marius Victorinus. It was also the 
source of Pseudo-Atilius and Diomed, and of the metric observations 
in Endlicher's Analecta p. 521. 

4. Priscian. I 17 (p. 13, 19 sq. Htz.): Censorino, doctissimo artis 
grammaticae. Cf. ib. 16 (p. 13, 9). Cassiod. de art. gramm. 1 mentions 
him together with Polemon, Phocas and Probus. Priscian. XIV 1, 6 
(H p. 27, 23 H.): Censorinus plenissime de his docet in libro quern 
de accentibus scribit. An extensive passage from it ib. 4, 40 sq. (p. 
45—47 H.). Cf. Cassiod. de mus. p. 576. 

5. Cassiod. de mus. p. 573 (cf. ib. p. 577) : Censorinus, qui ad Q. 
Caerellium scripsit de natali eius die. It was composed a. 238; see 18, 
12. 21, 6 (hie annus, cuius velut index et titulus est Ulpii et Pontiani 
consulatus, . . est a Roma condita DCCCCXCI"«). From the dedication 
(c. 1): te, Q. Caerelli, virtutis non minus quam pecuniarum divitem 
ista non capiunt, . . quod sapientium disciplina formatus satis liquide 
comperisti huiusmodi . . esse riäv /u^cmp etc. quare cum dona pretiosa 
neque tibi . . desint nee mihi per rei tenuitatem supersint, quodcum- 
que hoc libri est meis opibus comparatum natalicii titulo tibi misi. in 
quo non, ut plerisque mos est, aut ex ethica parte philosophiae praecept*; 
ad beate vivendum quae tibi scriberem mutuatus sum, aut ex artibu^ 
rhetorum locos laudibus tuis celebrandis persecutus, . . sed ex philologis. 
commentariis quasdam quaestiunculas delegi, quae congestae possint 



» 



Juba. Censorinus. 293 

aliquantum volumen efficere. iam vero cum tuo collatu scirem me plura 
didicisse, . . ego a quo plura in litteris percepi tibi haec exigua reddo 
libamina. c. 15: quare, sanctissime Caerelli, cum istum annum (the 49th) 
. . sine ullo incommode transieris, (you will live to the age of 81). . . 
quem veterum nunc memoria suspicimus prudentia vel temperantia vel 
iustitia vel fortitudine tibi antestare dicimus? . . tu officiis municipa- 
libus functus, honore sacerdotii in principibus tuae civitatis conspicuus, 
ordinis etiam equestris dignitate gradum provincialium supergressus . . 
omnium omnino amorem cum maxima gloria consecutus es. . . de 
eloquentia qnoque sileo, quam omnia provinciarum nostrarum (Spain 
or Gaul?) tribunalia, omnes praesides noverunt, quam denique urbs 
Roma et auditoria sacra mirata sunt. 

6. Censorinus is fond of showing up his erudition and mentions a 
number of Greek writers, many of whom we need not doubt that he 
had never seen. Among Latin writers he mentions Fulvius, Junius 
Gracchanus, Licinius Macer, Fenestella whom he certainly had not read 
and the same may perhaps be said of Varro, though he quotes him 
very frequently. His chief source was Suetonius' Pratum (Reiffersch. 
Suet. p. 434). Cf. Jahn p. IX. Cens. alludes repeatedly to Horace (1, 1 
sqq. = 0. IV 8. 3, 6 =1 0. I 1, 2). In his diction he exhibits quaesita 
sermonis elegantia, quae nobis quidem nimia videtur et afiectata, et 
rhetoricum artificum (Jahn p. X). Perhaps he thought that a simple 
style such as would have suited his subject might not have been adap- 
ted to the day for which he intended his book as a present. The 
birthday is the centre of the whole exposition. He treats first of that 
which precedes a birthday (generation etc.), adds music with rather a 
bold turn (12, 1 : nee vero incredibile est ad nostros natales musicam 
pertinere), deals with the different ages and the different ways of di- 
viding^ time (c. 17 sqq.), and while he is speaking of the parts of day 
and night and their names (24, 6) the mss. suddenly break off. 

7. This treatise has been preserved by the codex Darmstadiensis 
saec. VII and the Vatic, saec. X, which generally agrees with the first 
ms., the text being very corrupt. All the other mss. are of very 
little value. 0. Jahn p. XVI — XXII. On account of the similarity of 
the subject a fragment is appended in the mss., which is however 
even more corrupt, author, time and purpose being unknown, and 
which treats first de naturali institutione, then de caeli positione, de 
stellis fixis et errantibus, de terra, then suddenly passes on to statements 
de geometrica, formis, figuris, postulatis, which are tranrlated from 
Euclid, and then just as unexpectedly de musica (history), de rythmo, 
de musica (theory^, de modulatione, de metris i. e. numeris, de legi- 
timis numeris, de numeris simplicibus. It seems therefore to contain 
parts of an encyclopaedia. 0. Jahn p. XI: hoc fragmentum . . praeter 
multa volgaria atque inepta baud pauca tamen continet aliunde non 
nota, quae satis probant scriptorem (especially in the parts concerning 
music and metres) fontibus antiquioribus usum esse. It agrees in some 



294 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

parts with the Scholia on Germanicus (above 270, 8), a fact possibly 
to be explained from both using one and the same source (Suetonius' 
Prata?). This fragment was first separated by Carrio from the work 
of Censorinus and is printed in most editions of the latter, e. g. by 0. 
Jahn p. 75—100 (see, however, p. X— XIII), by Hultsch p. 55-73. 

8. Editions of Censorinus. Ed. princeps Bonon. 1497 fol. Aldina 
Ven. 1581. Rec. L. Carrion, Lutet. 1583. Lugd. B. 1593. Rec. et ill. 
H. Lindenbrogius, Hamburg 1614. 4. Lugd. B. 1642. Cantabr. 1695. 
Ed. E. Puteanus, Lov. 1628. 4. Ex rec. A. Götz, Alt. 1742. Ex rec. 
Havercampi, Lugd. B. 1743. 1767. Cum adn. J. S. Gruber, Norimberg. 
1805. 1810. The first critical edition: Rec. et emend. 0. Jahn, Berlin 
1845. Rec. Fr. Hultsch, Lips. Teubner 1867. 

9. Critical contributions on Censorinus by L. Ulrichs (Eos II p. 
458-460. Rhein. Mus. XXH p. 465—476), F. Hultsch (Eos II p. 623— 
626), F. Lüdecke (Götti. Gel. Anz. 1868, p. 482—486), M. Schanz (spec- 
crit. ad Plat, et Censorinum pertinens, Götti. 1867). 

10. Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 3, 2 sq.: in prima pueritia litteratores 
habuit Valerium Cordum et T. Veturiura et Aurelium Philippum liber- 
tum patris, qui vitam eins postea in litteras misit, grammaticum in 
patria Graecum Nehonem, rhetorem Serapionem, philosophum Stilionem, 
Romae grammaticos Scaurinum Scaurini filium, doctorem celeberrimum, 
rhetores lulium Frontinum et Baebium Macrianum et lulium Granianum, 
cuius hodieque declamatae feruntur. Capitol. Maximin. 27 ,3 — 5: usus est 
magistro Graeco litteratore Fabillo, cuius epigrammata graeca multa et 
extant, . grammatico latino usus est Philemone, iuris perito Modestino 
(above 374, 7), oratore Titiano, filio Titiani senioris (above 360, 10). 
habuit et graecum rhetorem Eugamium sui temporis darum. 

11. M. Damatius Urbanus, summarum artium liberalium litterarum 
studiis utriusque linguae perfecte eruditus, optima facundia praeditus 
etc. An inscription from Sitifis (Africa) a. 231, ap. Henzen 5607 = 
Renier Inscr. de l'Alg. 3338. 

376. The extensive work of Gargilius Martialis treated 
of husbandry including also an account of the medicinal em- 
ployment of rural productions and of veterinary art, after 
Greek and Eoman sources, especially Pliny the Elder, showing a 
great amount of reading and much physiological experience. Con- 
siderable parts of it are extant, chiefly in the fourth book of 
the so-called Plinius Valerianus. It was no doubt the same 
Martialis who wrote on Alexander Severus' mode of life. 

1. Cassiod. inst. div. litt. 28: quodsi huius studii requirantur auc- 
tores, de hortis scripsit pulcerrime Gargilius Martialis, qui et nutri- 
menta olerum et virtutes eorum diligenter exposuit. Serv. Georg. lY 



\ 



Gargilius Martialis. 295 

148 (aliis) : Gargilium Martialem significal. The mention of G. M. occurs 
in Palladius (Mart. 9. 9. haec omnia G. M. asseruit, cf. Martialis ibid 
Ian. 15, 10. 19. Mart. 10, 15. 16. 34. Apr. 3, 5. Mai 6. Tun. 5, 3. Oct! 
12, 5. 7. Dec. 4, 1.). There are also quotations of M, (see n. 5) Quin- 
tilii, extirpated (perhaps a. 181) by Commodus (Lamprid. Comm. 4, 9). 
He appears, therefore, to have lived in the third century; like the 
historian Garg. Mart, (below 377, 6 and 11), and as both possessed 
medical knowledge, they may possibly be identical and would appear 
to have written about a. 240. 

2. A (now lost) Medicean ms. of the script, rer. rust, contained 
(according to the Index given by Victorius) at the end also unus (liber) 
Gargili Martialis. A. 1826 some leaves from the section de pomis were 
discovered in a palimpsest at the library at Naples which agree with 
Palladius and Ps. Plin. IV 42. This fragment ed. by A. A. Scotti, after- 
wards by A. Mai (Class, auct. I 1828. p. 387 sqq.), reprinted Lüneburg 
1832. A few years afterwards, Mai himself discovered in two mss. (said 
to be saec. X and XII) of the Vatican Library a fragment entitled Incipit 
liber tertius de pomis Martialis, and which agrees with the first; edi- 
ted ibid. Ill (1830) p. 418—426, cf. p. 416 sq. VII p. X. But more of 
it had already been published by J. Schott (Argentorati 1533 fol.) in 
the first three books of the supposed Latin Oribasius; see V. Rose, 
Anecd. gr. II p. 110 sqq., cf. n. 4. 

3. Published from a Leyden ms. of Veget. mulomed. Curae boum 
ex corpore Gargilii Martialis by M. Gesner and J. G. Schneider (Scrip- 
tores r. rust. IV 1 p. 168—171, cf. ib. IV 2 p. 73—76). Edited by C. 
Th. Schuch, Bonaueschingen 1857. 47 pp. 8. 

4. In the St. Gall ms. 762 (saec. IX) which contains a Latin 
version of Hippocrates tuqI diaiTt^g b. II, the portions ntQi kd^ai^uiv 
and nfQi omaQrig are, instead of taking them from Hippocr., rather 
borrowed from the work of G. M. (the parts dc oleribus and de pomis). 
In some parts they agree verbally with c. 1—38 (de oleribus) and 39 — 
58 (de pomis) in b. IV of Pseudo-Pliny (Valer.), which appear there- 
fore to be derived from Martialis, the latter text being more extensive 
and faithful (Rose, Anecd. II p. 125 sq.). Edited from the St. Gall 
ms. by Rose II p. 131 — 150 (de virtutibus herbarum). 151 — 156 (Hippo- 
crates de cibis). 157 sq. (Excerpts from Martialis and others, in a Berlin 
ms. saec. XII). Three extensive extracts (in the manner of Ps. Pliny 
IV) at the end of b. II of the St. Gall ms.; see ibid. p. 129. De pruno 
ibid. p. 130. 

5. The chief sources of Mart, appear to have been Dioscorides and 
Galenus ; but also Hippocrates' work nf^l ducirijg had been employed, 
and Aristoteles in Georgicis (Rose, Aristoteles pseudep. p. 273 sq.) and 
others had been quoted, among the Roman writers Celsus, Columella, 
Curtius lustus (ap. Mai p. 496. sqq. 410), Julius Atticus, Julius Fron- 
tinus, G. Plinius (p. 412 Mai; Plinius noster ap. Rose p. 129), Quintilii 
(p. 392. 394. 396. 405. 410. 412. Mai), Sextilius Niger (Rose p. 129). 



296 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

6. E. Meyer, Hist, of Botany II p. 228—236. Val. Rose, Anecdota 
graeca et graecolatina II (Berlin 1870) p. 103 — 160. 

376. Historiography produced in Marius Maximus 
(about a. 165 — 230) a continuer of Suetonius' biographies of 
the Emperors from Nerva down to Elagabal, at considerable 
length, but without attention to truth. The first half of the 
Historia Augusta consists of meagre extracts from his work. 
Besides him, the authors of that collection frequently mention 
jas their source and predecessor Junius Cordus, who wrote on 
the less known Emperors from Clodius Albinus to Maximus 
and Balbinus, taking in even the smallest details; Aemilius 
Parthenianus, Aelius Maurus, Marcellinus, and others. Herodi- 
anus wrote in Greek a History of his time from the death of 
Marcus (Aurelius) to the accession of Gordianus III (a. 180 — 
238), in eight books ; Cassius Dio composed a Roman History 
in eighty books, from the foundation of the City until the year 
229 (= 982 V. C). The labours of Julius Africanus, the 
author of comparative pagan and Christian chronology, were 
even more extensive. 

1. Cassius Dio Cocceianus of Nicaea in Bithynia, about a. 155 — 
230, Cos. (under Macrinus, 221 ?) II under Alexander a. 229. He spent 
ten years in collecting his materials and twelve iu writing his work. 
The years 222—229 were treated only summarily. We possess complete 
the books 37-54, containing a. V. C. 689—744; of the first 34 books 
we have only scanty fragments, larger ones of b. 35 and 36. The later 
parts we know through Constantine's Excerpts, the abridgment of 
Xiphilinus and Zonaras. From a. 180 Dio begins to describe the events 
which took place in his life-time (LXXII 4). Editions by F. W. Sturz 
(Lips. 1824—1843. 9 vols.), Imm. Bekker (Lips. 1849. 2 vols.) and L. 
Dindorf (Lips. Teubner 1863 — 1865, 5 vols.). Treatises De Dionis Cassii 
fontibus et auctoritate by R. Wilmans (Berol. 1835) and Grasshof 
(Bonn 1867). Schwegler, Rom. History I p. 124 sq. 

2. Asinius Quadratus' XüifTfj()ig or Xtkucq^if'-; was a history of 
the Roman Empire during the 1000 years of its existence, in 15 books. 
The same writer composed IlaQd^txd and Vf^fxav^xd ; see Pauly's Encycl. 
I 2 p. 1868 sq., nr. 28. C. Rubel, n. 6. p. 32 sq. 

3. Hieron. vir. ill. 63: lulius Afri canus, cuius quinque de tempo- 
ribus extant volumina, sub imp. M. Aurelio Antonino qui Macrino suc- 
cesserat (i. e. under Elagabal) legationem pro instauratione urbis 
Emmaus suscepit. . . extat eius ad Aristiden epistola, in qua super 
dtatftaifia quae videtur esse in genealogia salvatoris apud Matthaeum et 



Marius Maximu.H and other Historian.'^. 297 

Lucam plenissime disputat. He placed the birth of Christ in the year 
of the world 5500. His xQoyokoyixoy nfviaßißkov was carried down to 
A. D. 218. Idler, Manuel of Chronology H p. 456 sqq. One of his 
successors was Hippolytus of Portus, whose Easter- table for the 
years 222 — 237 on a marble slab (which also enumerates the works of 
Hipp., e. g. XQovtxd) is preserved in the Vatican. Th. Mommsen, on 
the Chronographer of a. 354 (Leipzig 1850) p. 595 sq. 597 sq. 610. 

4. Herodian wrote i^g fxfTu Ma^xoy ßaaikfiag taroQiai, in the 
beginning of which, in opjjosition to most historians, who rr^g ufv 
äktjß^fiug iV Tttig aifijyijfffaiy uikiytoQriaav, ov^ »y^^ö^*« t)'f tnf/Lifki^&rjaay 
tfi^aoftäg T( xal fv(^u)viag, he says of himself: tyio ds lojoQCav ov nccq' 
akkiov dno&t'ittfxivog ayvwarov if xai djuaQTVQoy, vno v^aq^ ds rrj rd^f 
iyifv^ofxiviou f^vrifit], /ufrcc naarjg dxQtßfiag rj&Qoiaa fig avyyQco^n^v, 
an explanation by no means infringed by his continuing: ovx nr^gnii 
Ttjy yv(äoiv xal ro7g vGtf-Qov i^Gfcfhuv Ti()oa(J'oxtjaag i^ymv ^ufycckiou ts xal 
nokkdiy tv okiyü) yfvofxtvMv. It should only be confessed that Dio's 
higher position enabled him more often to discover the truth. Editions 
by F. A. Wolf (Halle 1792). I. Bekker (Berol. 1826. Lips. Teubner 1855). 
E. Volkmann, de H. vita, scriptis fideque, Königsberg 1859. J. A. Pob- 
locki, de H. vita, ingenio, scriptis, Munster 1864. R. Sievers, on the 
historical work of H., Philologus XXVI p. 29—43. 253-271. E. Brocks, 
de IV prioribus h. aug. script, (1869) p. 46 — 69. J. J. Müller in ßüdin- 
ger's Investigations of the Imperial History HI p. 138 sqq. 181—191 
(especially b. II and III). K. Dändliker, the last three books of H., 
ibid. HI p. 203—319. 

5. Orelli-Henzen 5502 (from Rome): L. Mario L. f. Quir. Maximo 
Perpetuo Aureliano cos. (a. 195; II a. 223), sacerdoti feciali, leg. Augg. 
pr. pr. provinciae Syriae Colae (Coelesyria), leg. Aug. pr. pr. provin- 
ciae Germaniae inferioris, item provine. belgicae, duci exercit. mysiaci 
apud Byzantium et apud Lugdunum, leg. leg. I Italic, cur. viae latinae, 
item reip. Faventinorum, allecto inter praetorios, trib. pleb., candidate 
quaestori urbano, trib. laticl. leg. XXII Primig., item III Italicae, IV vir 
viarum curandarum. Cf. ib. 2275. Borghesi, iscrizione ardeatina di M. 
M., Oeuvres V p. 455 — 484. The identity of the historian with this 
great personage is, however, rendered doubtful by the complete igno- 
rance of the first as to Severus' Eastern wars and his general want of 
attention to military events. (J. J. Müller p. 32, cf. 170 — 174). He seems 
to be all the better informed of the events under Macrinus and is, 
therefore, no doubt identical with the praef. urbi of a. 217 Mal^ifiog 
MaQtog in Dio LXXVIIl 14^ and perhaps with the Cons. Maximus of 
a. 207 (and L. Marius Maximus, cos. II a. 223). In the later years of 
Commodus (about 190) he was already grown up and at Rome (Lampr. 
13, 2: versus in eo — the rupture of Comm. — multi scripti sunt, de 
quibus etiam in opere suo Marius Maximus gloriatur), perhaps already 
as Senator (cf. ib. 18, 1 sq.: adclamationes senatus post mortem Com- 
modi . . de Mario Maximo indidi), according to which he might be 



298 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

born e. 165. As he did not carry his work beyond Elagabal (f 222, 
see J. Müller p. 26—28), he appears not to have lived until the death 
of Alexander (a. 235), but to have written in his reign. 

6. Capitol. Clod. Alb. 12, 14: quae qui diligentius scire velit legat 
Marium Maximum de latinis scriptoribus, de graecis scriptoribus Hero- 
dianum, qui ad fidem pleraque dixerunt. Vopisc. Prob. 2, 7: ut imitarer 
. . Marium Maximum, Suetonium Tranquillum, Fabium Marcellinum, 
Gargilium Martialem (above 376) ceterosque qui haec et talia non tam 
diserte quam vere memoriae tradiderunt. Firm. 1,1: Marius Maximus 
Avidium Marci temporibus — libris alienis innexuit (of. Müller p. 28 sq.). 

1, 2: Marius Maximus, homo omnium verbosissimus, qui et mythistori- 
cis se voluminibus implicavit. Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 48, 6: ne que in vita 
eius (Traiani) id Marius Max. ita exposuit etc. 30, 6 : de quo in libris 
suis Marius Max. loquitur, cum Hadriani disserit vitam. Volcat. Avid, 
Cass. 6, 7 : Marius Max. refert in eo libro quem secundum de vita Marci 
Antonini edidit. Cf. ibid. 9, /). Capitol. Pert. 15, 8: epistula quae vitae 
illius (i. e. Pertinax) a M. M. apposita est. Cf. Czwalina I p. 15—19. 
Lamprid. Alex. p. 5, 4: Marius Max. dixit in vita Severi. Spartian. Geta 

2, 1: in vita Severi Marius Max. primo septenario (Müller p. 180 sq.) 
satis Heliogabali. M. M. wound up with the last-named Emperor, 
having commenced with Nerva (Müller p. 23—28). He appears, there- 
fore, to have written twelve vitae, just like Suetonius. The minusculi 
tyranni were mentioned in speaking of the generally recognised Augusti 
Vopisc. Firm. 1, 1 : et Suet. Tranq. Vindicem tacuit . . et Marius Max. 
Ammian. XXVIIl 4, 14 (quidam . . luvenalem et Marium Maximum 
curatiore studio legunt). J. J. Müller, on the historian M. M., in M. 
Büdinger's Investigations on the Imperial History III (1870). C. Rubel, 
de fontibus IV priorum hist. aug. scriptorum I (Bonn 1872) p. 8. 12 — 
18. 22-24. 26-28. 30—32. 37 sq. 40 sq. 44. 48 sq. 49 sq. 53. 57—60. 
62-64. 

7. Capitol. Macrin. 1, 3—5: lunio Cordo Studium fuit eorum 
imperatorum vitas edere quos obscuriores videbat; qui non multum 
profecit. nam et pauca repperit et indigna memoratu, adserens se mi- 
nima quaeque persecuturum, quasi vel de Traiano aut Pio aut Marco 
sciendum sit quotiens processerit, quando cibos variaverit et quando 
vestem mutaverit et quos quando promoverit. quae ille omnia exequendo 
libros mythistoricis replevit. Max. et Balb. 4, 5 : placet aliqua dici de 
moribus atque genere, non eo modo quo Junius Cordus est persecutus 
omnia, sed illo quo Suetonius Tranquillus et Valerius Marcellinus, quamvis 
Curius Fortunatianus, qui omnem banc historiam perscripsit, pauca con- 
tigerit, Cordus vero tam multa ut etiam pleraque et minus honesta 
perscripserit. ib. 4, 2: libris quos lunius Cordus affatim scripsit. Gordian. 
21, 3 sq.: non nobis talia dicenda sunt quae lunius Cordus ridicule ac 
stulte composuit de voluptatibus domesticis ceterisque infimis rebus, 
quae qui velit scire ipsum legat Cordum, qui dicit et quos servos 
habuerit unusquisque principum et quos amicos et quot paenulas quotve 
chlamydes. Maximin. 27, 7: lunius Cordus, harum rerum persecutor. 



MaHus Maximus and other Historians, 299 

Cf. ib. 28, 10. 29, 10. 31, 4. and in other passages. Probably the same 
writer is meant ib. 12, 7: Aelius (or Helius) Cordus dicit banc omnino 
ipsius orationem fuisse. Cf. J. J. Müller (n. 6) p. 92 sq. n. 3. K. Dänd- 
liker, in Biidinger's Investigations III p. 306—314. C. Rubel p. 9 sq. 19 
sq. 26. 38—40. 45 sq. 50—52. 53—55. 61. 

8. Capitol. Maximin. 32, 1 : scribit Aelius Sabinus. 

9. Volcat. Avid. Cass. 5, 1 : de hoc (Av. Cass.) multa . . inveniun- 
tur apud Aemilium Parthenianum, qni adfectatores tyrannidis iam inde 
a veteribus historiae tradidit. Was he the principal source of Volca- 
tius in his life of Avidius Cassius? C. Czwalina I p. 19. C. Rubel p. 34 sq. 

10. Spartian. Sever. 20, 1: legisse me apud Helium Maurum, 
Phlegontis Hadriani libertum, memini Septimium Severum etc. C. Rubel 
p. 55 sq. 

11. Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 58, 6 sq.: scio volgum banc rem . . Trai- 
ani putare ; sed neque in vita eius id Marius Maximus ita exposuit neque 
Fabius Marcellinus (cf. n. 6) neque Aurelius Verus neque Statins (or 
Tatius) Valens, qui omnem eius vitam in litteras miserunt. contra autem 
et Septimius (qui vitam eius non mediocriter executus est ib. 17, 2) et 
Acholius et Encolpius (ib. 17, 1) vitae (of Alexander Sev.) scriptores 
ceterique de hoc (Alex.) talia praedicaverunt. To which we should add 
ib. 37, 9: ne longum sit omnia inserere quae Gargilius (cf. n. 6) eius tem- 
poris (of Alex.) scriptor singillatim persecutus est. See also above 375, 10. 

12. Lamprid. Diadum. 9, 2: Lollius Urbicus in historia temporis 
sui dicit etc. 

13. Capitol. Gordian. 21, 5: lectum apud Volcatium Terentianum, 
qui et ipse historiam sui temporis scripsit, . . Gordianum seniorem Au- 
gusti voltum repraesentasse etc. Gräfenhan, Hist, of Class. Philology p. 
302 sq thinks him (or Vole. Gallicanus) identical with that Volcatius 
who wrote commentaries in orationes Ciceronis (Hieron. apol. c. Rufin. 
I 16). 

14. Lactant. inst. div. I 21 (p. 52 Fri.) : Pescennius Festus in libris 
historiarum per saturam refert Carthaginienses Saturno humanas hostias 
solitos immolare etc. 

15. To the middle of this century we should probably assign the 
map from which the tabula peutingeriana was copied; see vol. 1 p. 78. 

378. Like Minucius Felix and Tertullian, Thascius Cae- 
cilius Cyprianus (c. 200—257), bishop of Carthage, had also 
received a rhetorical education. He does not possess the ori- 
ginality, fertility and liveliness of Tertullian, whom he greatly 
admires, but surpasses him in lucidity and correctness, his 
diction being also more even and pleasing. His frequent ci- 



300 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

tations from Scripture impart to his works a character speci- 
fically Christian, and owing to the absence of all heretic elements 
they long continued to enjoy a high authority. Their contents 
are partly of an apologetic, and partly of a practical and par- 
aenetic character. His letters are of much importance in illu- 
strating the history of the administration of the churches* 
Nova ti anus, who wrote at Rome about the same time, like- 
wise employed Tertullian. 

1. Hieron. vir. ill. 67: Cyprian us Ai'er primum gloriose rheto- 
ricam docuit, exinde suadente presbytero Caecilio, a quo et cognomen- 
turn sortitus est, christianus factus omnem substantiam suam pauperi- 
bus erogavit ac post non multum temporis electus in presbyterum etiam 
episcopus Carthaginiensis constitutus est (a. 248). huius ingenii super- 
fluum est indicem texere, cum sole clariora sint eius opera, passus est 
(by being beheaded) sub Valeriano et Gallieno principibus (a. Abr. 2272 
= 256 A. D. according to Amand., 2273 = 257 according to the other 
mss. of Hieron. chron.), persecutione octava, eodem die quo Romae 
Cornelius (XVIII Kal. Oct.), sed non eodem anno. 68: Pontius, diaconus 
Cypriani, usque ad et diem passionis eius cum ipso exilium sustinens, 
egregium volumen vitae et passionis Cypriani reliquit. He had been 
his companion in his flight in the persecution under Decius (the seventh). 
The vita Cypriani which bears the name of Pontius is at least very 
much interpolated (see it e. g. in HartePs ed. Ill p. XC sqq.). KvnQiaroy 
fxytov aydQcc juakiGra nuutiop ol KaQ/i](J'6vtot aißovTat and celebrate 
an annual festival in remembrance of him, Kvtiqiccvcc, Procop. Vand. I 21. 

2. Cyprian's works: Ad Donatum (de gratia dei); Quod idola dii 
non sint (Hieron. epist. 70, 5. p. 429 sq. Vail. : Cyprianus quod idola 
dii non sunt qua brevitate, qua historiarum omnium scientia, quo cum 
verborum et sensuum splendore perstrinxit! Yet the author has made 
much use of the Octavius and the Apologeticum) ; Testimoniorum ad- 
versus ludaeos libri III; De habitu virginum (according to Tertullian's 
work); De unitate ecclesiae ; De lapsis; De oratione dominica; De mor- 
talitate; Ad Fortunatum de exhortatione martyrii, also from Tertullian; 
Ad Demetrianum (cf. Lactant. inst. V 4); De opere et eleemosynis ; De 
bono patientiae (a copy of Tertull. de pat.); De zelo et livore; and in 
the last place eleven sermons and 83 letters, the latter in two redac- 
tions of the text, suiting the countries where they were used. Interesting 
are also the minutes of the provincial Synod at Carthage a. 256 (de 
haereticis baptizandis) in HartePs ed. I p. 435 — 461. 

3. Lactant. inst. div. V 1 (p. 230 sq. Fri.) : unus igitur (see above 
369, 2) praecipuus et clarus extitit Cyprianus, quoniam et magnam sibi 
gloriam ex artis oratoriae professione quaesierat et admodum multa 
conscripsit in suo genere miranda. erat enim ingenio facili, copioso, 
Buavi et, quae sermonis maxima est virtus, aperto, ut discernere non 



Cyprianus. Novatianns. 301 

queas utrumne ornatior in eloquendo an facilior in explicando an po- 
tentior in persuadendo fuerit. hie tarnen placere ultra verba sacramen- 
tum ignorantibus non potest, quoniam mystica sunt quae locutus est et 
ad id praeparata ut a solis fidelibus audiantur: denique a doctis huius 
saeculi quibus forte scripta eius innotuerunt derideri eolet. audivi ego 
quendam hominem sane disertum qui eum immutata una littera Copre- 
anum vocaret, quasi qui elegans ingenium et melioribus rebus aptum 
ad aniles fabulas contulisset. Hieron. Ep. 58. 10 (p. 326 Vail.): Ter- 
tullianus creber est in sententiis, sed difficilis in loquendo; beatus 
Cyprianus instar fontis purissimi dulcis incedit et placidus. 82, 2 (p. 
523 Vail.) : beatus Cyprianus Tertulliano raagistro utitur, ut eius scripta 
probant. Cf. de vir. ill. 53: vidi ego quendam Paulum Concordiae, quod 
oppidum Italiae et senem qui se beati Cypriani iam grandis aetatis 
notarium, cum ipse admodum esset adolescens, Romae vidisse diceret 
referreque sibi solitum, numquam Cyprianum absque Tertulliani lectione 
unum diem praeterisse ac sibi crebro dicere 'Da magistrum:' Tertul- 
lianum videlicet significans. 

4. Editions of the works of Cyprian (see Hartel III p. LXX sqq.) 
by Des. Erasmus (Basil. 1520 fol. and elsewhere). J. Pamelius (cum adnot.. 
Antverp. 1568 fol. and elsewhere), N. Rigaltius (ill. observ., Paris 1648 
fol. and elsewhere). St. Baluzius (finished by the Maurine monk Pru- 
dentius Maranus, Paris 1726 fol. Ven. 1728. 1758 fol.), Fr. Oberthür 
(Würzburg 1782. 2 vols.), Migne (Patrolog. curs. IV Paris 1844), J. G. 
Krabinger (recogn. et adn. crit. instr., Tubing. 1823. 1859. 2 vols.; which 
contains, however, only the principal treatises). W. Hartel (rec. et 
comm. crit. instruxit, 3 vols. Vienna 1868 — 1871. The treatise de uni- 
tate eccl. ad opt. libr. fid. expr. . . M. F. Hyde. Buckington 1853. 

5. H. Dodwell, dissert. Cyprianicae, 1684. 4. R. Ceillier, hist, 
gener. des auteurs s. et eccl. IH (Paris 1732) p. 1—224. P. G. Lumper, 
hist, theolog. crit. XI. (August. 1790) p. 58 sqq. F. V^. Rettberg, Th. 
C. Cypr. Götti. 1831. On the share, which Cypr. possibly had in the 
collection of the notae tironianae see W. Schmitz in the symb. philol. 
Bonn. p. 540-543 

6. Hieronym. vir. ill. 70: Novatianus Romanae urbis presbyter 
adversus Cornelium (a. 250) cathedram sacerdotalem conatus invadere 
Novatianorum quod graece dicitur Kcc&ctQiäv dogma constituit, nolens 
apostatas recipere paenitentes. huius auctor Novatus Cypriani presby- 
ter fuit (cf. Hier, on Euseb. chron. 2269 = 253 A. D.: Novatus presby- 
ter Cypriani Rom am veniens Novatianum et ceteros confessores sibi 
sociat, eo quod Cornelius paenitentes apostatas recepisset). scripsit 
autem De pascha. De sabbato, De circumcisione, De sacerdote, De ora- 
tione, De cibis iudaicis, De instantia, De Attalo, multaque alia, et De 
trinitate grande volumen, quasi innofiijy operis Tertulliani faciens, quod 
plerique nescientes Cypriani existimant. Hieron. Ep. 10, 3 (p. 24 Vail.) 
asks for epistolas Novatiani, ut dum schismatici hominis venena cognos- 
cimus libentius sancti martyris Cypriani bibamus antidotum. Cf. also 



302 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Cyprian. Epist. 60. Euseb. hist. eccl. VI 43. R. Ceillier (cf. n. 5) III p. 
290 — 296. The treatises de trinitate and De cibis iud. epistola are ex- 
tant and appended to many editions of Tertullian and Cyprian (e. g. 
by Oberthür). They have been separately edited by Ed. Welchmann 
(Oxon. 1724) and Jackson (London 1728). In Migne's Patrologiae cursus 
III (1844) p. 885—970. Cf. ib. p. 861—884. 

379. There was in this time do want of men who could 
manage metrical composition, but they did not succeed in at- 
taining the harmonious agreement of form and matter. E. g. 
Alfius Avitus wrote an account of Roman History in iambic 
dimeters and Marianus composed Lupercalia in the same metre. 
Septimius Serenus in his Opuscula (ruralia) imitated many 
Greek metres with much skill and elegance. The extant di- 
dactic poem of Q. Serenus Sammonicus, De medicina praecepta, 
in 1115 hexameters, deals in a rhetorical manner with a sub- 
ject not well suited to poetry, but the technical and proso- 
diacal details agree with the best models. Gordianus the Elder, 
who wrote an Antoninias, was a fertile versifier. 

1. Terentianus 2446 — 2451 of the iambic dimeter: plerumque nee 
carmen modo sed et volumen explicat, ut pridem Avitus Alfiuslibros 
poeta plusculos, usus dimetro perpeti, conscribit Excellentium. Three 
dimeters from the first book of Alphius Avitus Excellentium in part of 
the mss. of Priscian. IV 29 (p. 134, 3 Htz.) ; sex dimeters of the second 
ib. VIII 71 (p. 426 sq.), cf. p. 409 and II p. 233 (spatiando) ; two ib. 
Xn 23 (I p. 591). Hence they have passed into the collections (Anthol. 
lat.) of Burmann and of Meyer. Wernsdorf poetae lat. rain. p. XXXI — 
XXXIII. L. Müller de re metr. p. 102 sq. and in his ed. of Rutil. Nam. 
p. 51 sq. 

2. Five iambic dimeters from Marianus Lupercaliorum poeta ap. 
Philargyr. (and Serv.) on Verg. Eel. 1, 20. Cf. L. Müller de re metr. 
p. 103, and in his ed. of Rutil. Nam. p. 53. 

3. Terentian. 1891—1900: dulcia Septimius qui scripsit opuscula 
nuper ancipitem tali cantavit carmine lanum etc. 1973 — 1982: nemo 
tamen culpet si sumo exempla novella; nam et melius nostri servarunt 
metra minores. Septimius, docuit quo ruris opuscula libro, hoc genera 
adsidue cecinit. . . sic hephthemimeres servavit carmine utroque. 1991: 
ultima quae metro fuit hoc inventa Sereni. 2627 — 2630: hoc de Sep- 
timii potes iunctis noscere versibus. Specimens of skilful metrical for- 
mations of Serenus are given by Diomed p. 511. 513 (cf. Martian. Cap. 
V 518). 514. 517. 518 K., others by Nonius (e. g. p. 539 M.: Serenus 
opusculo lib. I; p. 210 Ser. opusculis, but p. 214 Ser. Ruralibus), Ser- 
vius and others; the fragments collected by Wernsdorf poetae lat. 



Septimius Serenus. Serenus JSammonicus. 303 

min. II p. 279-291, and L. Müller in his ed. of Rutil. Nam. p. 44—51. 
What Terentian. 1998 designates as docta Phalisca, is by Mar. Vict. 
p. 2578 erroneously attributed to Septimius Severus (see L. Müller Rh. 
Mus. XXV p. 338—342). Sept. Ser. renovated the kind set in vogue 
(349, 3) by Annianus; cf. Serv. de cent. metr. p. 465 K. (T. IV): docta 
falisca, Serene, reparas. He is probably meant by Sidon. Ap. carm. IX 
260 (Stella et Septimius Petroniusque), cf. ad Polem. (above 370, 5), 
and Hieronym. ep. 53 (p. 279 Vail.) : Catullus et Serenus. On Sept- 
Ser. cf. Wernsdorf 1. 1. p. 247—253. C. Lachmann's Terentianus p. XII 
— XV. L. Müller metr. p. 97 : et numerorum elegantia et sensuum pro- 
prietate excelluit. quare abstrusa quaedam et contorta imitationi ve- 
terum et imbecillitati saeculi facile condonabuntur. Cf. Rh. Mus. XXV 
p. 343 sq. The trifling tone occasionally conspicuous in his composi- 
tions resulted from the artificial character of his metres. 

4. Lamprid. Alex. 30, 2: latina cum legeret non alia magis legebat 
quam de officiis Ciceronis et de rep., nonnumquam et oratores (or ora- 
tiones) et poetas, in quis Serenum Sammonicum, quern ipse nove- 
rat et dilexerat, et Horatium. Cf. Capitol. Gord. (iun.) 18, 2 (above 
370, 5). As the father (370, 5) is never mentioned as the author of any 
poetical composition, and as Alexander was only seven years old and 
not yet at Rome, when he was called, the passage of Lamprid. and 
consequently the didactic poem should be referred to the son. He 
would then appear to have died before Alexander, i. e. before 235. 
His father would in all probability have made the poem more learned. 
All the statements contained in it can be traced in Pliny, besides whom 
the author employed only Dioscorides tkqI vktjg tca^rArjg and nfql 
(v7ioqCgt(x)v (fccQ/naxMy. He does not show any individual knowledge 
of the subject-matter, but is very superstitious, in recommending such 
remedies as a paper inscribed with Abracadabra (944 — 949), urina canis 
(1104) etc. He mentions Ennius, Titinius, (the writer of togatae), Horace 
(533: quodque satis melius verbis dicemus Horati), Livy (728 sq.: 
tertia namque Titi simul et centesima Livi charta docet etc.). The 
phraseology is derived from Virgil, Horace and in parts also from Lu- 
cretius. At the commencement the poet invokes Phoebus for salutiferum 
quod pangimus . . carmen (4) ; cf. v. 397 sq. : dis ista requirat, at nos 
pauperibus praecepta feramus amica. Similar are v. 523 — 526. He 
begins with remedies for ailections of the head (celsa de corporis arce, 
3), and concludes (if indeed the poem be complete) with remedies for 
warts. In the earlier editions the poem is divided into 65 chapters. 
The poet follows very strict laws with regard to synaloepha and caesura 
which he violates but rarely in favour of technical expressions; but 
941 sqq. : mortiferum magis est quod Graecis i^^unQnaloy volgatur ver- 
bis; hoc nostra dicere lingua non potuere ulli, puto, nee voluere pa- 
rentes. The whole work is rather the trifling production of a young 
man well-versed in metrical composition than a serious work. 

5. Manuscripts : Turicensis saec. IX or X (F. A. Reuss, lect. Sam- 
mon. part. I. Würzburg 1836. 4.), a Paderborn ms. saec. XIII, Breslau 



304 The Third (Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

ms. (Ch. G. Grüner, variae lectt. in Q. S. S. ex cod. vratisl. deoerptae, 
Jena 1782. 4.), and a Leipzig ms. Editio princeps s. 1. et a. (Milan before 
1484). Other editions by G. Humelberg of Ravensburg (Tigur. 1540. 4. 
1581. 4.), R. Keuchen (Amstelod. 1662. 1706), J. Ch. G. Ackermann 
(Lips. 1786). Frequently together with Celsus and in such collections 
as Burmann's poetae lat. min. II p. 185 sqq., W. E. Weber's corpus 
poetar. lat. p. 1174—1188, cf. p. LXI— LXIII. 

6. J. B. Morgagni epistolae duae in Serenum Sam. e. g. in his 
Opusc. miscell. (Naples 17B3. 4.) I p. 191—226. Thierfelder, Q. S. S. 
didactic poem on medical art, in Küchenmeister's Zeitschr. f. Medicin 
V 2 (1866). Choulant, Bibliography of early medical art, (Leipz. 1841) 
p. 210-212. E. Meyer, Hist, of Botany II p. 209—217. 

7. D. Caelius Balbinus, Cos. II a. 213, chosen Emperor by 
the Senate after the death of Gordianus the Elder together with Maxi- 
mus Pupienus, but soon afterwards killed with him by the Praetorian 
guard (a. 238) ; see Pauly's Encycl. I 2. p. 2243 sq, n. 4. Capitol. Max. 
et Balb. 7, 5: eloquentia clarus, poeta inter sui temporis poetas prae- 
cipuus. Cf. ib. 2, 7: vitae, quam a prima aetate in studiis semper ac 
litteris tenuit. 

8. Capitol. Maximin. 27, 6: Toxotius . . senator, qui perit post 
praeturam, cuius etiam poemata extant. 

9. On the metrical compositions of Macrinus, Albinus, and Gor- 
dianus (Antoninias) see above 365, 6. 371, 2. 6. 

10. Albinus from whose Rerum romanarum primo Priscian. VII 2 
(p. 304 H.) quotes three hexameters, in which cui is twice used with 
an iambic prosody, belongs to this time at the earliest. Cf. L. Müller, 
metr. p. 270 with 247, 6 extr. above. 

380. A peculiar figure is CommodiaDus of Gaza, by 
whom we possess two poems, filled with a Christian zeal very 
ardent, though not quite correct in a dogmatical point of 
view, and in hexameters which in defiance of metre and pro- 
sody merely follow the ear and the accentuation of every day 
pronunciation. The earlier poem, the Instructiones composed 
about a. 238, is besides this barbarism also composed in the 
form of an acrostich. In the carmen apologeticum, composed 
a. 249, the author has deserted that crotchet and exhibits a 
greater abundance of words. 

1. Gennadiu,s de scriptor. eccl. 15: Commodianus dum inter 
saeculares litteras etiam nostras legit occasionem accepit fidei. factus 
itaque christianus . . scripsit mediocri sermone quasi versu librum ad- 
versus paganos. et quia parum nostrarum attigerat litterarum magis 
illorum destruere potuit dogmata quam nostra firmare. Instr. 80 bears 



Sereniis tiammoniciis. Commodianus. 306 

the heading Nomen Gazaei (from Gaza in Palestine Syria) and reading 
the initials backwards forms the words Commodianus mendicus Christi. 
Praef. 4 sqq.: ego similiter erravi tempore multo, fana prosequendo, 
parentibus insciis ipsis abstuli me tandem inde, legendo de lege. . . 
ob ea perdoctus ignaros instruo verum. Apolog. 3 sq.: errabam igna 
PUS spatians, spe captus inani, dam furor aetatis primae me portabat 
in auras. (11 sqq.) aggressusque fui traditor in codice legis, quid ibi 
rescirem. statim mihi lampada lulsit, . . et ideo tales hortor ab errore 
recedant. In both poems we have the same Patripassianism and Chiliasm. 
Instr. 40, 10: ipse deus vita est, pependit ipse pro nobis; cf. apolog. 
763 sq.: unus est in coelo deus coeli, terrae marisque, quam Moises 
docuit ligno pendere pro nobis. Instr. 80, 6 sqq.: hoc placuit Christo, 
i-esurgere mortuos imo . . sex milibus annis completis, mundo finito; 
cf. apol. 783 sq.: sex milibus annis pervenient ista repletis; . . tunc 
homo resurget etc. The peculiarities of diction and metre are the 
same in either poem, only the carmen apol. exhibiting some progress 
by having correct hexameters among the accentuated lines in more in- 
stances, eight being right among the first 100 (v. 15, 17, 24, 44 sq., 49, 
89, 97). In the Instr. (acr. 41 sq.) only one Antichrist (Belial) is mentioned, 
but in the carmen two (Nero and the man of the East, every 372 years). 
A. Ebert p. 414—419. Leimbach p. 23—27. 

2. The Instructiones consist of eighty poems of various extent, 
according to the subject treated in an acrostichic manner, e. g. prae- 
fatio ; de fulmine ipsius lovis; de septizonio etstellis; Apollo sortilegus 
falsus ; Hercules ; de Ammudate et deo magno ; repugnantibus adversus 
legem Christi dei vivi ; item gentilibus ignaris, qui iudaeidiant fanatici ; 
de populo absconso sancto omnipotentis Christi dei vivi etc. The first 
half (acr. 1 — 45) is chiefly devoted to the heathens, acr. 37 — 40 to the 
Jews, 41 — 45 to the end of the world and to resurrection; 46 — 80 to 
the Christians, catechumeni and ecclesiastics. The author's acquaintance 
with earlier apologetic writings (above 368 sq.) is evident. The con- 
straint which he imposes upon himself by the strange acrostichic com- 
position of his poems, is amply compensated by his helter-skelter pro- 
sody. On the time of composition cf. 6, 2 sq. : cur annis docentis (after 
the death of Christ) fuistis infantes? Dodwell, diss, de Commodiani 
aetate, in his annales Quintil. (Oxon. 1698) and in the edition of 
Schurzfleisch. A. Ebert p. 417. Editions by N. Kigaltius (Tulli Leuc. 
1650. 4.), H. L. Schurzfleisch (Vitemberg 1704. 4.), in Migne's Patro^ 
logiae cursus III (Paris 1844) p. 202—262, and in Fr. Oehler's Minuc. 
Felix. 

3. The carmen apologeticum adversus ludaeos et gentes was from 
a cod. at Middle-Hill saec. VIII edited by J. B. Pitra, spicilegium Sole«- 
mense I . (Paris 1852) p. 21—49. Cf. p. 537—543 and p. XVI— XXV. 
There are altogether 1054 lines, the last thirty being fragmentary and 
illegible in the ms. At the end: explicit tractatus sancti episcopi Com- 
modiani (Archives des missions IV 3. p. 97). A chronological hint 
occurs V. 798 sqq. : sed quidam haec, aiunt, quando haec (end of the 

20 



306 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

world) Ventura putamus ? (800) multa quidem signa fient tantae termini 
pesti, sed erit initium septima persecutio nostra (according to August, 
civ. d. XVIII 52 the one by Decius). ecce ianua pulsatur et cogitur 
esse (?) quae cito traiciet Gothis inrumpentibus amnem (the Danube, 
a. 250) rex Apolion erit cum ipsis, nomine dirus. (806) pergit ad Ro- 
mam cum raulta milia gentis decretoque dei captivat ex parte subactos. 
(878 sqq.) haec Nero turn faciet, . . ut urbs et populus ille cum ipso 
tradatur, toUatur imperium quod fuit inique repletum, quod per tributa 
mala diu maceraverat omnes. Considering the approaching end of the 
world, all infidels are exhorted to be converted while it is still time. 
A. Ebert, Commodian's carmen apologeticum, in the Trans, of the 
Saxon Society of Lit., (philol.-hist. CI.) 1868. p. 387—420. C. Leimbach, 
on C.'s carm. ap., Schmalkalden 1871. 28 pp. 4. 

4. The hexameters of Comm. have always six arses, but are re- 
gardless of hiatus and prosody, nay in many instances the pronuncia- 
tion supposed in them violates the rules of Latin accentuation (e. g. 
tollatur, immites as dactyls). Owing to the arbitrary practice adopted 
in them (at least L. Müller's statements de re metr. p. 448 cannot well 
be accepted as principles) the lines of Comm. are much more difficult 
to read than correct verse, all the more as their difficulty is increased 
by such strange (perhaps plebeian) forms as the sing, milia and the 
plur. nuntia and peculiar constructions. He alludes to Terence, Cicero, 
and Virgil, and borrows from the latter. 

5. The same combination of an acrostichic arrangement with bar- 
baric prosody and metre as in the Instr. of Comm. (n. 2) appears also 
in the Inscription of L. Praecilius Fortunatus of Cirta ap. Renier, Inscr. 
d'Alg. 2074. 

2. The second half, A. D. 253 — 305. 

o81. The commencement of this time inaugurates an un- 
fortunate epoch for Italy and the Koman Empire. The coun- 
tries themselves were ravaged by fearful plagues and epide- 
mics, and sorely pressed by enemies from without, in the 
West by the Franks, in the North by the Alemanni, in the 
North-East by the Goths, and in the East by Sapor. Another 
misfortune was the reign of the weak Gallienus (a. 218 — 268) 
who first ruled conjointly with his father Valerianus (a. 253 — 
260), and after the latter had been taken prisoner by the Per- 
sians was sole Emperor (a. 260—268) — an Emperor whose 
weakness encouraged many provincial commanders to declare 
themselves independent, the result being a general confusion 
and dissolution. In rapid succession we have now a number 
of Emperors of Thracian and Illyrian origin, who were raised 
to the throne by their mihtary valour, some of them also 



i 



General Observation»-. 307 

excellent in other respects e. g. Claudius (a. 268—270), Au- 
relianus (a. 270—275), Probus (a. 276—282). But none of 
them reigned long enough; most of them were both raised 
and assassinated by the armies. At last a powerful organizing 
genius arose in Diocletian (a. 245 — 313, Emperor 284 — 
305), the son of a slave in Dalmatia. But just as he was 
the last Emperor who celebrated a triumph and w^as conse- 
crated, so it is with him that the old time, the old Roman 
character and Empire end. While until then Eastern influences 
had penetrated all departments of life. Northern influences 
commenced now be perceptible. In external appearance, it 
is true, all conformed to the Latin language, both the 
Syrian Commodianus and the Bithynian Lactantius writing 
in it, and in the following time Ammianus of Antiochia, Clau- 
dianus of Alexandria and Priscian of Caesarea. But both 
form and contents suffered in this process. The educated aimed 
at a merely imitative correctness, e. g. Nemesianus and after- 
wards Terentianus Maurus; but the multitude were more 
and more infected by barbarism, and the language as such 
grew poor and ran riot. The general oppression did not 
allow anything great to develop itself, whether good or bad. 
The time before Diocletian is poorest of all. Jurisprudence 
which had until then kept above water, suddenly became si- 
lent, probably because the codification of the Edict admitted 
of no proper after -growth. The state of erudition is repre- 
sented by the stolid epitomizer Solinus. Historical compo- 
sition dragged on in the most miserable manner. Grammar 
is represented by such a tiro as Nonius. Eloquence appeared 
only in bombastic flattery towards the rulers; the panegyric 
orators commenced in this time, beginning with Gaul. 

1. New views (especially in the estimation of Diocletian) were 
disclosed by J. Burckhardt, the time of Constantine the Great, Basle 
1853. 512 pp. He was succeded by Th. Bernhardt, Hist, of Rome 
from Valerian until Diocletian's death (253 — 313). I. The political 
history of the Roman Empire from Valerian to the accession of Dio- 
cletian (253—284), Berlin 1867. 318 pp. Th. Preuss, The Emperor 
Diocletian and his time, Berlin 1869. 182 pp. 

2. Trebell. Poll. Gallien. 11, 6—9: fuit Gallienus . . oratione, 
poemate atque omnibus artibus clarus. huius illud est epithalamion 
quod inter centum poetas praecipuum fuit. nam cum fratrum suorum 
filios iungeret et omnes poetae graeci latinique epithalamia dixissent, 



308 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

idque per dies plurimos, ille . . ita dixisse fertur etc. (Anth. lat. 711 
R.) longum est eius versus orationesque conectere, quibus sue tempore 
tam inter poetas quam inter rhetores emicuit. sed aliud in imperatore 
quaeritur, aliud in oratore vel poeta flagitatur. G. Thomas, on the 
Epithalamium of Gall., Reports of the Meetings of the Munich Academy 
1863, II p. 41 sq. In general see Th. Bernhardt I p. 51 sqq. 

3. Vopisc. Car. 11: Numerianus, Cari filius (the younger brother 
of Carinus) . . eloquentia praepoUens (cf. 7, 1 : adulescentem cum lectis- 
simum tum etiam disertissimum), adeo ut publice declamaverit feran- 
turque illius scripta nobilia, declamationi tamen magis quam tulliano 
adcommodatiora stilo. versu autem talis fuisse praedicatur ut omnes 
poetas sui temporis vicerit. nam et cum Olympio Nemesiano contendit 
. . et Aurelium ApoUinarem iamborum scriptorem, qui patris eius gesta 
in litteras rettulit, isdem quae recitaverat editis veluti radio solis ob- 
texit. huius oratio fertur ad senatum missa tantum habuisse eloquentiae 
ut illi statua . . quasi rhetori decerneretur, . . cui subscriptum esti 
Numeriano Caesari, oratori temporibus suis potentissimo. He and Ca- 
rinus were Caesars, with his father Carus, from Narbo in Gaul; after Ca- 
rus' death Augustus for a very short time, but he was soon killed by his 
father-in-law Arrius Aper, Sept. 284. See Th. Bernhardt I p. 245—263. 

4. The corruption of the language (vulgar metre and vulgar Latin) 
increased from this time forth and left its traces in the inscriptions 
(of popular origin and such parts as Africa) ; a glaring instance of this 
is the inscr. of Praecilius (above 380, 5). Cf. W. Fröhner, Philol. XIII 
p. 170 sqq. XVI p. 719. Especially the cases became hopelessly con- 
fused, e. g. iilias fecerunt (Renier 863), ob meritis (ib. 1769), cum Al- 
binium coniugem (ib. 2275), per lulio Casto fratre. 

5. The provincial orators and writers strongly feel the difficulties 
with which they have to contend. Panegyr. Constantin. (VIII) 1, 2: 
neque ignoro quanto inferiora sint ingenia nostra romanis, siquidem 
latino et diserte loqui illis ingeneratum est, nobis elaboratum, et si 
quid forte commode dicimus ex illo fonte et capite facundiae imitatio 
nostra derivat. Pacat. in Theodos. 1,3: hue accedit auditor senatus, 
cui difficile sit . . pro ingenita atque hereditaria orandi facultate non 
esse fastidio rudem hunc et incultum transalpini sermonis horrorem. 

6. Christianity now spread also among the educated. Arnob. II 6: 
tarn magnis ingeniis praediti oratores, grammatici, rhetores, consult! 
iuris ac medici, philosophiae etiam secreta rimantes magisteria haec 
expetunt, spretis quibus paulo ante fidebant. A philosopher who wrote 
against Christianity at Nicomedia, and hence probably in Greek, is 
mentioned by Lactant. inst. V 2. 

a. The time before Diocletian, a. 253 — 284. 

382. In the time of Carus and his sons, M. Aurelius Olym- 
piiis Nemesianus of Carthage wrote his didactic poem on 



General Observations. Nemesianvs. 309 

the chase (Cynegetica), the first 425 lines of which have come 
down to us. They attest much fluency and command of words, 
all technical details being the same as in the four eclogues 
usually appended to those of Calpurnius, but belonging to 
Nemesianus. 

1. Vopisc. Car. 11, 2: (Numerianus) cum Olympic Nemesiano con- 
tendit, qui \4kuvTixa, KvptjyfTixci et Navn/.d scripsit inque (?) omnibus 
coionis illustratus emicuit. See above 381, 8. In the only one of these 
didactic poems which we ^possess the author first shows why he dis- 
dained mj'thological subjects, which had been so much treated by 
others: uos saltus viridesque plagas camposque patentes scrutamur (40 
sqq.) etc. talique placet dare lintea curae, dum non magna ratis, vi- 
cinis sueta moveri littoribus, . . nunc primum dat vela notis portusque 
fideles linquit (58 sqq.) He promises (63 sqq.) the sons of Carinus a 
work on their deeds: mox vestros meliore lyra memorare triumphos 
accingar, divi fortissima pignora Cari, atque canam nostrum geminis 
sub finibus orbis (in North and East) litus et edomitas fraterno numine 
gentes etc. haec vobis nostrae libabunt carmina Musae cum primum 
vultus sacros . . contigerit vidisse mihi etc. It appears that the poem 
was written away from Rome and after the death of Cams, a. 284. 
The designation of the Spaniards by gens ampla iacet trans ardua Calpes 
culmina (251 sq.) would seem to suggest that the author wrote in Africa, 
and indeed in the ms. of Th. Ugoletus (above 301, 1) N. is styled poeta 
carthaginiensis. Of the 425 hexameters extant, 102 belong to the in- 
troduction; after which the poet speaks of tlie preparations of the 
chase, especially of the hounds. There are some isolated archaisms, like 
mage (317), and frequent reminiscences, chiefly from Virgil. On the 
four eclogues of N. and their relation to his Cynegetica see above 
301, 1 and 3—5. 

2. In the time of archbishop Hincmar of Rheims the work was 
used as a text-book in Schools (puer scholarius in libro qui inscribitur 
Kynegeticon Carthaginiensis Aurelii didici). In the mss. and editions 
it is generally appended to the similar work of Gratius; see above 
248, 1. In Wernsdorf's poetae latt. min. I p. 90 — 120, in Weber's cor- 
pus poett. latt. p. 1189 — 1191. Critical contributions by M. Haupt, de 
carm. buc. (Lips. 1854. 4.) p. 35—37. 

3. There are two fragments of a poem on the trapping of birds, 
in 28 hexameters: see Wernsdorf's poett. latt. min. I p. 128—131 and 
Anth. lat. 883 sq. li. But the origin of this work is quite apocryphal 
and though the archaism contemplaverit (v. 3) is not foreign to N., he 
could not have used gulae as a spondee (v. 28), nor would he so fre- 
quently have used synaloepha with a long vowel (v. 5, 6, 14, 27). These 
lines are probably a production of modern times. 

4. The beginning of the Pontica of an unknown author, consisting 
of 22 well-made hexameters in elegant diction, has accidentally got 



310 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

into the mss. of Solinus; see Mommsen Solin. p. XXXIX— XLI. Werns- 
dorf poet. latt. min. I p. 153—157. 161—163. Cf. J. Klein, Rhein. Mus. 
XXII p. 627 sq. Anthol. lat. 720 R. 

5. The contents of a prayer to Oceanus for a fortunate voyage 
(in 28 hexameters) by a pagan author are similar, Wernsdorf IV p. 314 
—318, cf. p. 51. Anth. lat. 718 R. 

6. The j)oem in praise of Hercules which is found in some mss. 
of Claudian, but was attributed to Nemesianus by Wernsdorf (I p. 275 
— 282), though on unsatisfactory grounds, might well belong to this 
time on account of the elegance of its rhythms. L. Müller de re metr. p. 57. 

383. The history of this time was written by a number 
of authors, whose task might have been facilitated by the 
brevity of the single reigns, if the majority had not lacked 
real independence of thought. We hear of them only through 
the scriptores historiae augustae who availed themselves of 
them. Dexippus, a Greek author, was more important than 
all these writers. 

1. Vopisc. Aurelian. 12, 4: in ea re, quam fidei causa inserendam 
credidi ex libris Acholii, qui magister admissionum Valeriani prin- 
cipis (a. 253 — 260) fuit, libro Actorum eius nono. Lamprid. Alex. 64, 5: 
qui . . histoiicos eius temporis legant et maxime Acholium, qui et 
itinera huius principis scripsit. Cf. ib. 14, 6. 48, 7 (above 377, 11). 

2. Trebell. Valerian. 8, 2: ut Caelestinus dicit. 

3. Trebell. Gallien. 18, 6: quae qui volet scire legat Palfurium Su- 
ram, qui ephemeridas eius vitae composuit. 

4. Trebell. XXX tyr. 6, 5 : satis credimus luli Atheriani partem 
libri cuiusdam ponere, in quo de Victorino sic loquitur. This is followed 
by a very candid judgment. Macrob. Ill 8, 2: apud Calvum Aterianus 
(libri : aetherianus) adfirmat legendum etc. He is no doubt the Hateria- 
nus who is mentioned as a commentator of Virgil (Ribbeck, Prolegg. 
Verg. p. 177 sq.) in the Veronese Scholia (on Aen. VII 337. IX 360. 
390. 397. X 242). Gräfenhan, Hist, of class. Philol. IV p. 303 sq. 

5. Trebell. XXX tyr. 12, 3: verba Ballistae, quantum Maeonius 
Astyanax, qui consilio interfuit, adserit, haec fuerunt. 

6. Trebell. XXX tyr. 15, 8 of Zenobia: mulier, ut Cornelius Ca- 
pitolinus adserit, speciosissima. 

7. Trebell. XXX tyr. 25, 2: illibato patrimonio, quod quidem ad 
suos posteros misit, ut Dagellius (?) Fuscus dicit. 

8. Trebell. Claud. 5, 3 sq. : et hunc (Aureolus) tamen quidam histo- 
rici laudare conati sunt, et ridicule quidem. nam Gallus Antipater, 
ancilla bonorum et historicorum dehonestamentum, principium de Au- 
reolo habuit: venimus ad imperatorem nominis sui. 



Historians before Diocletian. 311 

9. Vopisc. Tacit. 11, 7: si quis omnia de hoc viro cupit scire 
legal Suetonium Optatianum, qui eius vitam adfatim scripsit. 

10. Vopisc. Firm. 6, 2: ea quae de illo (Firmus) Aurelius Festivus, 
libertus Aureliani, singillatim rettulit (merely res leves) si vis cognoscere 
eundem oportet legas. 

11. Vopisc. Aurelian. 1, 6 sq.: ephemeridas illius viri (i. e. Aure- 
lianus) scriptas habemus, etiam bella charactere historico digesta. . . 
quae omnia ex libris linteis, in quibus ipse cotidiana sua scribi prae- 
ceperat, . . condisces. 

12. Vopisc. Firm. etc. 10, 4: M. Salvidienus banc ipsius (Saturnini) 
orationum vere fuisse dicit, et fuit re vera non parum litteratus. nam 
et in Africa rhetoricae operam dederat et Romae frequentaverat per- 
gulas magistrales. 

13. Vopisc. Car. 4, 3: Fabius Ceryllianus, qui tempora Cari, Carini 
et Numeriani solertissime persecutus est. 

14. Vopisc, Car. 17, 7: de eius luxuria . . quicumque ostiatim cupit 
noscere legat etiam Fulvium Asprianum usque ad taedium gestorum 
eius universa dicentem. 

15. Vopisc. Firm. etc. 14, 4: ut Onesimus dicit, scriptor vitae 
Probi. Cf. ib. 13, 1. Car. 4, 2 (0., qui diligentissime vitam Probi scrip- 
sit). 7, 3. 16, 1. 17, 6. 

16. P. Herennius Dexippus defeated the Goths a. 269. He was 
QrjtM(i xal ffvyyQdffvg (C. Inscr. gr. 380). We possess information as 
to his four books t(oj/ /ufja \4kf^avd'Qov, his comprehensive XQovtxtj IgtoqCu 
from the beginning until a. 268 and his ^xw,9-tx«. Cf. Westermann in 
Pauly's Encycl. II p. 987. L. Dindorf, hist. gr. min. I (Lips. Teubner 
1870) p. 165—200. 

384. In about the same time lived the rhetorician Aquila 
Komanus to whom we owe a meagre and hasty little book 
De figuris sententiarum et elocutionis, to which JuliuG Rufi- 
nianus subsequently added a similar work as supplement. 

1. Jul. Ruf. begins: hactenus Aquila Romanus ex Alexandro Nu- 
menio, exinde ab eo praeteritas, aliis quidem i3roditas (figuras) sub- 
texuimus. Aquila dedicates his work to an anonymous person, whom 
he thus addresses at the beginning: rhetoricos petis longioris morae ac 
diligentiae quam pro angustiis temporis, quod me profecto urget, ideo- 
que postea plenum hoc tibi munus reddemus. in praesenti autem no- 
mina ipsarum figurarum cum (Latin) exemplis percurrisse sufficiat. 17: 
hae fere sunt ab elegantissimis elcctae figurae sententiarum. quibus si, 
ut adulescens acerrimo ingenio, utebaris . . ex imitatione lectionis tul- 
lianae, . . nihil mirum est. The work is extant in its complete form, 
but is greatly inferior to that of Rutilius Lupus (above 265). The 



312 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

diction is harsh, careless and frequently at variance with the rules of 
good Latinity. 

2. The work is in the editions commonly appended to Rutilius 
Lupus, e. g. by Ruhnken (Lugd. B. 1768) p. 139—194. In C. Halm's 
rhetores lat. min. (Lips. 1863) p. 22—37. Critical contributions by J. 
G. Fröhlich (in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 89, p. 208—211) and J. Simon (Phi- 
lologus XXVIII p. 628—647). Wensch, de Aquila Romano, Wittenberg 
1861. 4. (?). 

3. On Saturninus see 383, 12. 

385. The grammarian C. Julius Solinus composed his 
Collectanea rerum memorabilium in the first ten or twenty 
years of this period. His work contains chiefly extracts from 
a manual of geography made after Pliny's nat. historia; in 
all historical statements the author has availed himself of 
chronicles written in the classical period. The individual ad- 
ditions of the author are quite worthless, his diction is pre- 
tentious and void of taste, the style long-winded. But this 
work still suited the taste of the succeeding age. It was 
revised in the sixth century and then received the new title 
of Polyhistor. 

1. Aldhelm (f 709) quotes (p. 323) lulius Solinus in collectanea 
rerum memorabilium; the monk Dicuil (a. 825) lulius Solinus in col- 
lectaneis. In the Heidelberg ms. the work bears the title: lulius So- 
linus Advento sal(utem) ; in Paris. 6831 : lulii Solini collectio rerum me- 
morabilium; in other mss. saec. X (e. g. Monac. 6384) the subscription: 
expl. fel. G. luh Solini grammatici. Servius (Georg. II 215) and Isidor 
(de rer. nat. 40, 1) call the author merely Solinus: so also Priscian 
with the addition in collectaneis (X 50), in memorabilibus (II 61. V 15. 
VI 15. XVIII 213), and (erroneously) in admirabiiibus (VI 44), once 
(I 28) in collectaneis vel polyhistore, the last two words being probably 
the addition of a late interpolator (Mommsen p. LXII). 

2. Mommsen p. VI: cum Solini liber saeculo V iam pervulgatus 
fuerit (see below n. 5), a feliciore autem litterarum latinarum aevo tam 
rerum eius exilitas quam sermonis infantia abhorroat, hoc restat quae- 
rendum, utrum saeculo III probabilius adscribatur an quarto. Mommsen 
decides for the first assumption (the time of Valerianus and Gallienus), 
because Sol. knows Constantinople only by the name of Byzantium and 
on account of the absence of any trace of the division of the Empire 
into provinces by Diocletian and Constantine ; nor does the author ever 
allude to Christianity. Cf. ib. p. VII sq. 

3. From Solinus' dedication to Adventus (1). Cum et auriura de- 
mentia et optimarum artium studiis praestare te ceteris sentiam . . re- 



SoUnns. 313 

putavi examen opusculi istius tibi potissimum dare. . . (2) liber est ad 
compendium praeparatus quantumque ratio passa est ita moderate re- 
pressus ut nee prodiga sit in eo copia nee damnosa concinnitas. cui 
. . velut fermentum cognitionis magis inesse quam bratteas eloquentiae 
deprehendes. (3) exquisitis enim aliquot voluminibus studuisse jne im- 
pendio fateor ut et a notioribus referrem pedem et remotis largius im- 
morarer. locorum commemoratio plurimum tenet, in quam partem 
ferme inclinatior est universa materies. . . (4) inseruimus et pleraque 
differenter congruentia, ut . . saltem varietas ipsa legentium fastidio 
mederetur. . . (5) nonnulla etiam digna memoratu, quae praetermittere 
incuriosum videbatur quorumque auctoritas . . de scriptoribus manat 
receptissimis. quid enim proprium nostrum esse possit, cum nihil omi- 
serit antiquitatis diligentia quod intactum ad hoc usque aevi permane- 
ret? . . opiniones universas eligere maluimus potius quam innovare. 
(6) . . des velim infantiae meae veniam. constantia veritatis penes eos 
est quos secuti sumus. The author's attention is chiefly devoted to 
curiosities of any kind {TiaQccdo'^a). He starts with Rome, passes on to 
Italy, the islands, Greece with the northern countries, including Thrace, 
and the islands: Pontus, Scythia, Germany, Gaul, Britain, Spain; the 
North of Africa and Egypt: Asia (Arabia, Syria, Asia Minor, Assyria, 
India, Parthia). He winds up with the Gorgades and Hesperides, the 
whole amounting to 56 chapters (see n. 6). 

4. Three fourths of Solinus' subject-matter are borrowed from 
Pliny whose diction is rhetorically dressed up by him, with the ad- 
dition of numerous mistakes (Mommsen p. IX). Yet from some ad- 
ditions which Solinus cannot have made independently, especially of 
sources not mentioned by Pliny, or of the praenomina or of the period, 
it appears that he cannot have used Pliny direct (ib. p. XIX sq.). The 
additions from Mela were likewise found in the source of Sol., the 
chorographia pliniana (above 308, 7). On the chronological additions 
see above 286, 4. Cf. Mommsen, Sol. p. 249—254. 

5. Solinus' work was already copied by Theodosius II (a. 402 — 450), 
according to tlie subscription in the first class of the mss. : lulius So- 
linus (de memorabilibus) explicit feliciter. studio et diligentia domni 
Theodosii invictissimi principis. 0. Jahn, Trans, of the Saxon Soc. of 
Lit. 1851, p. 342 sq. It was used by St. Augustin (de civ. dei) and 
Capella (with Pliny), byPriscian (especially in his translation of Diony- 
sius Periegeta), Servius (see n. 1) and Isidor (de nat. rer. and origg.). 
Capella and Isidor have frequently mistaken the sense of Solinus 
(Mommsen p. IX sq.>. The numerous mss. attest the diligent use of 
the work in the Middle Ages (n. 6). Mommsen p. XXX- XXXII p. 255 
— 259. An abridgment in hexameters was made in the tenth century, 
under the title of Theodericus (e. g. in a Brussels ms. saec. XII), also 
called Petrus Diaconus (saec. XII) ; see Mommsen p. XCII sq. Latapie, 
mem. sur I'abrege poetique du Polyh. Sol. par Thierry (Theodericus), 
attribue jusqu'ici ä Pierre Diacre (Petr. Diac), Bull, de Pacademie de 
Bruxelles XVI p. 79—101 ; cf. Roulez ib. p. 143 sq. 



3i4 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

6. The manuscripts of Solinus are divided into three classes, 
all of which are derived from an archetypus which was itself corrupt 
(Mommsen p. XXXII— XXXIV), but differ in their headings (ibid. p. 
XXXVII and p. 239—246) and the divisions of chapters (ib. p. XXXVUI 
sq.). The first class (especially Heidelberg and Paris 6813. 6833) 
saec. XI sqq. is derived from a ms. (at the latest saec. VIII) in which 
the last leaf but one had been lost. The few interpolations in this 
class are nearly all from Isidor (Mommsen p. 238 and p. XLI — XLIV). 
The second class is principally represented by a Leyden ms. saec. IX. It 
is in some respects better than the first class, but contains numerous 
additions (p. XLIV — LII). The third class contains partly variations 
of the diction, partly amplifications of the contents (p. 234 — 237 M.) 
from Pliny and other sources, which are due to a general revision 
(perhaps by Scotch monks who had settled on the Lake of Constance, 
saec. VI), with a new preface (p. 233 M.), the title also being changed 
to the unsuitable one of Polyhistor, the appearance, however, being 
kept up of the authorship of Solinus (Mommsen p. LVIII—LXVI). This 
class is most accurately represented by the Angelomontanus saec. X 
(A). The St. Gall ms. (S) saec. X is a combination of the first and 
third classes, the Paris. 6810 (P) of the second and third : see Momm- 
sen p. LII-LX and his Elenchus p. LXXIX-XCIII. 

7. Editions (ed. princeps Venet. 1473 sq.) by J. Gamers (Vienna 
1520 sq.), El. Vinetus (Pictav. 1554. 4.), M. Delrio (Antv. 1572. Lugd. 
1646) and others. The chief work is: Claudii Salmasii Exercitationes 
in Sol. Polyh., Paris 1629 and (cur. S. Pitisco) Utrecht 1869. 2 vols 
fol. Lips. 1777. 8. An excellent edition by Th. Mommsen (recogno- 
vit), Berol. 1864. XCIV and 287 pp. Cf. Fr. Lüdecke, Gott. Gel. Anz. 
1865, p. 1089—1109. 

8. On the 22 hexameters found in the mss. of Solinus see above 



386. Towards the end of this time Nonius Marcellus 
seems to have composed his extant lexical work (Compendiosa 
doctrina per litteras). It is a mechanical compilation in a 
merely casual arrangement (c. 2 — 4 are alphabetical), in 
which Gellius has been much used. In spite of the glaring- 
want of solid information, criticism and accuracy, the work is 
still invaluable to us, as better works have been lost, and as 
it contains numerous quotations of earlier Roman literature. 

1. Nonius Marcellus is in the headings styled peripateticus tubur- 
ticensis, which certainly proves him to have been a native of Africa; 
see Gerlach and Roth p. IV— VIII. The grammaticus pertenuis meriti 
Marcellus, to whom amissam primum Narbo dedit patriam (Auson. prof. 
Burdig. 18), appears to be a different person. The latest writers men- 



Solinus. NoniifS Marcellus. 315 

tioned by N. are Apuleius (s. v, abstemius) and (Septimius) Serenus 
(above 379, 3). The exceptional attention paid to the latter appears 
to be due to personal relations or at least to indicate proximity of 
time. Nonius is partly quoted, partly copied silently (M. Hertz, Philol. 
XI p, 593—596, cf. on Priscian. XV 13 p. 70) by Priscian. p. 35, 21 
(teste Nonio Marcello de doctorum indagine = c. 12). 269, 24 (quod 
ponit N. M. de doct. ind.). 499, 20 H. (Nonius Marcellus de mutatis 
coniugationibus = c. 10). The title (in the Guelferbytanus and other 
mss.) de compendiosa doctrina per litteras ad filium is applicable only 
to three out of Nonius' nineteen chapters; but those three are the most 
extensive (p. 49 — 285 out of 383 in Gerlach and Roth's edition). 

2. Contents and division, o. 1: de proprietate sermonum. 2: de 
honestis et nove veterum dictis, per litteras. 3: de indiscretis generi- 
bus, per litteras. 4: de varia significatione sermonum (per litteras). 
5: de differentiis verborum. 6: de inpropriis. 7: de contrariis generi- 
bus verborum. 8: de mutata declinatione. 9: de generibus et casibus. 
10: de mutatis coniugationibus. 11: de indiscretis adverbiis. 12: de 
doctorum indagine. 13: de genere navigiorum (only 17 articles). 14: 
de genere vestimentorum. 15: de genere vasorum vel poculorum. 16: 
de (genere vel) colore vestimentorum (13 articles). 17: de genere ci- 
borum vel pomorum (16 articles). 18: de genere armorum. 19: de 
propinquitate (9 brief articles, without quotations, but the end: de qui- 
bus exempla multa sunt in antiquis auctoribus et maxime in Afranio 
et iuris vetustissimis scriptoribus). The last seven chapters (p. 364 
— 383 ed. G. etK.) appear therefore to be arranged in agreement with 
the subject-matter, but are far from complete. 

3. The work is so mechanically put together that in recent times 
Nonius' proceeding in his compilation has been successfully pointed 
out and his rude tissue cut up into its component shreds. In pur- 
suance of a hint by F. W. Schneidewin (Gott. gel. Anz. 1843 p. 697 
sq.), M. Hertz (in Fleck.'s Jahrb. 85, 1862, p. 706— 726. 779—799) showed 
how Gellius had been used by Nonius; his observations were then 
carried further by A. Riese, Symb. phil. Bonn. p. 483—487, A. Schott- 
müiler, ibid. p. 809—832 (on the first chapter of N. M.) and P. Schmidt, 
de Nonii Marcelli auctoribus grammaticis (Lips. 1868) 155 pp. with a 
table of contents. It is now proved that N. followed the same plan 
in almost all his chapters. Fixed series of quotations recur always in 
the same order, whence it follows that he entered them into this book 
in regular order from his sources. He generally begins with Plautus, 
limiting himself to 18 of the fabulae Varronianae; then come illustra- 
tions from Lucretius, Attius, Pomponius, Lucilius (p. 1—20), Pacuvius, 
Cic. de rep., Varro (22 saturae), Sallust, Afranius; Cic. de off., Hortons., 
de sen. and de rep. ; Virgil, Terence, Cic. Verrinae, iLucilius (b. 20 — 26), 
a list of verbs, chiefly in the dramatists, adverbs, then the philosophi- 
cal writings of Cicero already mentioned; then illustrations from Plaut. 
Amphitruo, Asin. and Aulul. ; then again from Varro (18 saturae) his 



316 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

Excerpts from Gellius; again from 5 saturae of Varro; Cic. de fin.; 
Öisenna; Cic. or., de or., Acad, and Tusc; lastly from Varro de vita 
pop. rom., de re rust, and from Cato. Deviations from this order are 
comparatively scarce and may no doubt be explained from mere 
casualties. 

4. Nonius is very careful not to mention his real sources, and 
the name of Gellius, whom he copies so very frequently, is never found 
in his pages. His principal authorities were secondary and late, such 
as commentaries on writers, encyclopaedias, dictionaries and grammars, 
though these were no doubt based upon earlier works, e. g. on Yerrius 
Flaccus. There are many points of resemblance between Nonius and 
Charisius, but merely because the sources of the latter belonged to 
the same class of grammatical tradition, or because the authorities 
followed by Nonius had also employed Caper, Pliny or Probus. Nonius 
used his sources in a very superficial manner, without reading them 
carefully. All the scholars who have had to do with him speak of him 
in very contemptuous expressions. Bücheier e. g. (Rhein. Mus. XIII 
p. 596) says : cum Nonio qui comparari posset levitate et stupiditate 
neque antiquitas neque nostra aetas ullum grammaticum tulit. So also 
L. Müller (metr. p. 25 sqq.), Schottmüller (Symb. p. 810), P. Schmidt 
(p. 38: homo inter omnes hebetissimus; p. 92: splendida inscitia ac 
stupor iste paene incredibilis cuius documentis liber Nonianus scatet). 
It has actually happened to Nonius to take M. Tullius and Cicero for 
tw^o different authors (Schmidt p. 92). 

5. On the manuscripts of Nonius see Gerlach in his edition p. 
XXIV — XXVIII. Ed. princeps by Pomponius Laetus, Rom. 1470. Venet. 
1476. Ed. Pius, Mediol. 1500 and Paris 1511. Aldina Ven. 1513. 1527. 
Basil. (Froben) 1526. Ed. Hadr. lunius, Antv. 1565. Jos. Mercier, Paris 
1583 and especially 1614; reprinted Lips. 1825. Ad fidem veterum codd. 
ediderunt et appar. crit. indicesque adiec. F. D. Gerlach et C. L. Roth. 
Basil. 1842 (c. 1 and 4 by G., the rest by R.). Collatis V codd. saec. 
IX et X ed. L. Quicherat, Paris 1871. XXXII and 678 pp. A critical 
edition by L. Müller is advertised (Lips., Teubner). 

6. J. Vahlen, analectorum Nonianorum libri II Lips. 1859. 40 pp. 
L. Müller, de re metr. p. 29—39 and in Fleckeisen's Jahrbb. 95, p. 490 
—496. 97, p. 422—434. For others see n. 3. 

b) The time of Di o cletian, a. 284 — 305. 

387. The most important art continued to be Elo- 
quence. Its chief home was now in Gaul, where Massilia, 
Narbo, Tolosa, Burdigala, Augustodunum, Remi (Durocortorum) 
and Treviri had rhetoricians of their own, whose lectures were 
much favoured by the vivacity and linguistic versatility of the 
population. A diction was formed here which differed from 



The Panegyric Orators. 317 

the dry tortuosity of the Africans by its smoothness and cor- 
rectness, and surpassed it in store of words, though it was in- 
ferior to it in thought. The subject and tone of Eloquence 
were dependent on the state of political affairs. In agreement 
with the Eastern and despotic ceremonies introduced by Dio- 
cletian which removed the person of the Emperor from 
ordinary intercourse, but also from the swords of the soldiers, 
Eloquence was now devoted to the praise of the Emperors, 
their superhuman virtues and performances. This was the time 
of the Panegyrici, who started with the example furnished 
by Pliny the younger, but in their diction imitated Cicero. 
The earliest two speeches of this kind were delivered by ano- 
nymous orators at the Court of Treves in praise of Diocle- 
tian's colleague, Maximianus Herculius, in the years 289 and 
291. We possess other four by the rhetorician Eumenius 
of Autun (born c. 250), an imitator of Cicero's rotundity and 
fullness of phrase. They were delivered in the years 296 and 
297, 310 and 311. In the first he pleads for the restoration 
of the Schools in his native town, in the last he returns 
thanks in its name. The other two are panegyrics on the 
Caesar Constantius Chlorus and his son, the Emperor Con- 
stantine. 

1. The collections of the panegyrici vet eres generally contain 
also the earliest example of this kind, the 'panegyricus' of Pliny (above 
335, 12). They then extend from Diocletian to Theodosius; see below 
396. 410. 419. Tnere are numerous manuscripts of them, but 
none of them older than saec. XV, and all derived from the same 
archetype, probably the same as John Aurispa discovered at Mayence 
a. 1433; see H. Keil, praef. in Plin. p. 38 sq. and loa. Aurispae epistula 
(Halle 1870. 4) p. IV and VIII. Relatively speaking, the best mss. are 
the vetus Bertiniensis, vetus Puteani and Vaticanus 3461 ; see H. Rühl 
(n. 3) p. 7—18. In these mss. Pliny's panegyric is commonly followed 
by Latini Pacati Drepani panegyricus Theodosio Aug. dictus; Claudi 
Mamertini pro consulatu suo gratiarum actio luliano Aug. ; Nazari pa- 
negyricus Constantino Aug. dictus; then by the shorter panegyrics on 
Maximian and Diocletian and his successors. The editions (n. 2) gene- 
rally adopt the chronological arrangement. 

2. - Editions of the panegyrici by Jo. Cuspinianus (Vienn. 1513. 4), 
B. Rhenanus (Basil. 1520. 4.), P. Navius (Venet. 1576), J. Livineius (Ant- 
verp. 1599), C. Rittershusius (cum notis J. Gruteri et Acidalii, Francof. 
1607), Chr. Cellarius (rec. et adn. illustr., Hal. 1703), J. de la Bunae (in 
us. Delph., Venet. 1728. 4.), Chr. G. Schwarz (Altorf 1739—1748. 4.), 



318 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

L. Patarol (notis ac nummis illustr., Venet. 1743. 4.), Wolfg. Jäger (ex 
cod. ms., Nürnberg 1779. 2 vols.), H. J. Arntzen (cum notis et animadv., 
Utrecht 1790-1795, 2 vols. 4.), Valpy (London 1838). 

3. J. G. Walch, parerga acad. (Lips. 1721) p. 849 sqq. C. G. Heyne, 
censura XII panegyricorum veterum, in his Opuscula acad. YI p. 80 
— 118. J. Burckhardt, the time of Constantine, p. 62—66. H. Rühl, 
de XII panegyricis latinis propaedeumata, Greifswald 1868. Fr. Eyssen- 
hardt, lectiones panegyricae, Berlin 1867. 4. (Fr. Werder'sches Gymn.) 

4. The earliest two speeches, on Maximian, are usually attributed 
to an elder Mamertinus, though without any ms. authority. The difference 
of their rhetorical treatment and linguistic peculiarities almost proves 
that they are not by the same author. Cf. n. 6. 

5. The first was delivered on the birth-day of Home (21 April) 
before the commencement of the expedition against Carausius (c. 12), 
a. 289, away from Home (13, 4. 14, 1. 4.) in the North (12, 5), in a 
town situated on a navigable river (12, 6), no doubt in Maximian's resi- 
dence at Treves. The orator doubts whether his hero had ever heard 
of the passage of Scipio the Elder to Africa (c. 8). 

6. The sec ond (Genethliacus) was delivered on Maximian's birth- 
day (2, 1), with which that of his colleague Diocletian was joined? 
certainly before Constantine and Galerius were appointed Caesares 
(1 March 293; see Preuss, Diocl. p. 172 sq.). Navalia tropaea (on Ca- 
rausius) are still in view (19, 5); yet this point is lightly passed over 
so that some time would appear to have gone by since this misfortune. 
This speech was likewise delivered away from Rome (12, 1. 19, 5) and 
beyond the Alps (9, 3 sqq.). The author had once before delivered a 
speech in honour of Maximian: see 1, 1 sqq.: ut expectationem sermo- 
nis eius quem tuis quinquennalibus (Nov. 289) praeparaveram hac na- 
talis praedicatione comp ens em et dicendi munus, quod tunc voti pro- 
missione susceperam, nunc . . repraesentem. voveram autem . . ut me 
dignatione qua pridem audieras rursus audires. . . gaudeo igitur . . 
dilatam esse illam cupiditatem meam. neque enim orationis eius quam 
composueram facio iacturam, sed eam reservo . . decennalibus tuis. 
5, 1 : sed de rebus bellicis victoriisque vestris . . et multi ßumma elo- 
quentia praediti saepe dixerunt et ego pridem, cum mihi auditionis 
tuae divina dignatio eam copiam tribuit, quantum potui praedicavi. 
This time he says that he confines himself to the Emperor's pietas 
(c. 6—12) and felicitas (c. 13 — 18). The latter theme had already been 
treated by the former rhetorician (n. 5), only more briefly (9 sq. 11, 1. 
7. 13, 1 sqq.), not only the res bellicae. The present speaker expects 
more historical knowledge of the Emperor. He is also fond of detailed 
description (10—12) and bolder rhetorical figures (c. 15), He quotes 
(14, 2) the line lovis omnia plena by the poeta romanus (Vergil. Eel. Ill 
60) and styles Ennius (16, 3) ille romani carminis primus auctor. This 
speaker differs from the first (n. 5) in his use of the particles si quidem 
and quasi, also at enim (7, 5) and nihilominus. 



The Panegyric Orators. 319 

7. Eumen. pro rest, schol. 1, 1: certum habeo . . plerosque mirari 
quod ego, qui ab ineunte adolescentia usque in hunc diem numquam 
isto in loco dixerim et quantulumcumque illud est quod . . videor con- 
secutus exercere privatim quam in foro iactare maluerim, nunc demum, 
sero quodam tirocinio, ad insolitum mihi tribunal adspirem. 3, 1 : re- 
lictis docendi praecipiendique rationibus. 6, 2: (Constantium) mirari 
satis nequeo, qui . . me filio potius meo ad pristina mea studia aditum 
molientem ipsum iusserit disciplinas artis oratoriae retractare et hoc 
mihi munus iniunxerit. 11, 2 sq.: salarium me liberalissimi principes . . 
in sexcenis milibus nummura accipere iusserunt, . . ut trecena ilia 
sestertia quae sacrae memoriae magister acceperam . . geminarent. 
hoc ego salarium . . cupio ad restitutionem huius operis . . destinare. 
13, 1 : litteras quibus misi tanti principes instituendam iuventutem com- 
mendare dignati sunt, in which (14, 3) e. g. : auditorio huic . . te po- 
tissimum praeficere debuimus, cuius eloquentiam et gravitatem morum 
ex actus nostri habemus administration e compertam. hortamur igitur 
. . ut professionem oratoriam repetas etc. 17, 3 : illic avum meum 
quondam docuisse audio, hominem Athenis ortum, Romae diu celebrem, 
mox in ista urbe (Autun) . . detentum. cuius locum, in quo, ut referunt, 
maior octogenario docuit etc. Panegyr. Constantino Aug. 23, 1 sq. : 
tibi . . commendo liberos meos, praecipueque ilium iam summa fisci 
patrocinia tractantem (he would thus appear to have been advocatus 
fisci). . . praeter illos quinque quos genui etiam illos quasi meos nu- 
mero quos provexi ad tutelam fori, ad officia palatii. We do not know 
in what year Eum. died. 

8. The speech pro restaurandis scholis (of Augustodunum), was 
delivered a. 296 (see c. 21) before the praeses provinciae (Gall. Lugd. I), 
and chiefly contains the declaration that Eum. intended his salary for 
it (n. 7). We possess by him also: 2) panegyricus on the Caesar Con- 
stantius, delivered at Treves, at the close of 296; cf. 4, 4: habenda 
est ratio temporis, Caesare stante dum loquimur. The orator does not, 
however, keep this intention. 5, 3: aliis haec (the deed of Diocle- 
tian, Maximian and Galerius) . . celebrabo temporibus, . . ipsis qui 
gessere praesentibus. Maximian is fjtill in Mauretania (5, 2), and Con- 
stantine has not yet gained his Lingonica victoria (paneg. Constantin. 
6, 3). The author has again given up his chair and returned to Court; 
see 1,2 sqq.: quo in genere orationis quanta esset cura . . sensi etiam 
cum in quotidiana ilia instituendae iuventutis exercitatione versarer. 
. . sed cum ex veteri illo curriculo me . . post indultam a pietate vestra 
quietem (pension?) studium ruris abduxerit etc. He alludes to a speech 
in honour of Maximian 1, 5; to his former charge at Court 2, 1 ; to 
the restoration of his native town of Augustodunum 20, 2. — 3) Pane- 
gyricus Constantino Aug. dictus at Treves (22, 4 sq. cf. 13, 2), on 
the dies natalis of the town (22, 4), a short time after the executian 
of Maximian at Massilia (20, 3), n. 310. Again he declares his intention 
to be brief (1, 3. 7, 1). He says of himself that he is in the media 
aetas (1, 1). The adulation displayed in this speech is very strong, 



320 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

e. g. 10 — 12. 21, 4. 22, 1. At the close of the speech Constantine is 
invited to visit Augustoduniim (22, 3 and 7). — 4) Gratiarum actio 
Constantino Aug. in the name of Augustodunum, his patria, whose ap- 
pellation had been changed to Flavia, for the remission of taxes and 
other benefits Constantine had bestowed upon the town during his 
recent sojourn there (a. 310 or 311). The end seems to be incomplete. 
It was delivered at Treves (2, 1). For the time see 13, 2: quinquen- 
nalia tua nobis, etiam perfecta, celebranda sunt. There is no trace of 
Christianity in all these speeches, but on the contrary polytheism is 
displayed rather ostentatiously. On the criticism of the text see Haupt, 
Hermes IV p. 151 sq. 

9. Burckhardt, Constantine p. 66 : Eumenius surpasses the other 
panegyric orators not only in tact and talent, but is even quite a re- 
spectable patriot, who did not flatter for his personal advantage. Cf. 
n. 7. Tacitus (Agr. 12) is employed in panegyric. Const. 9, 3. 

10. Symmach. ep. VI 34 wants a Callus rhetor for the education 
of his son at Rome. Cf. ib. IX 88: gallicanae facundiae haustus re- 
quiro, non quod his septem montibus eloquentia latiaris excessit, sed 
quia praecepta rhetoricae pectori meo senex olim Garumnae alumnus 
immulsit. 

388. Of the six scrip tores historiae augustae three 
wrote still under Diocletian, viz. Aelius Spartianus, Vulcatius 
Gallicanus, and Trebellius Pollio. There is no doubt that the 
lives of Adrian, Helius Verus, Septimius Severus, Pescennius 
Niger are by Spartianus, and it is very probable that he 
also wrote the biographies of Pius, Marcus, Verus, Albinus 
and Macrinus. Vulcatius Gallicanus is the author of the 
biography of Avidius Cassius. Trebellius Pollio wrote the 
(incomplete) account of the Valeriani, Gallieni, the thirty ty- 
rants (so called by him), and of Claudius. The whole collection 
embraces the Emperors from Adrian to Numerianus (a. 117 
— 284), only those of 244—253 not having come down to us 
in a separate treatment. The time and the author of this 
collection are not known to us. In several cases it is doubt- 
ful to whom the authorship belongs. All these writers are 
void of talent and ability; but their intentions are honest and 
they are our sole historical source. 

1. All mss. of the scr. hist. aug. are derived from the same source, 
as all have suffered by the same gap, in which the biographies of the 
Emperors posterior to Gordian. Ill and the beginning of the vita Va- 
lerianorum were lost. The mss. of authority are the Bambergensis 
saec. IX and the Palatinus (at Rome) saec. X or XI. Vatic. 1899 saec. 



Scriptores historiae augustae. 321 

XrV is copied from a ms. very much resembling the latter ms. All 
the other mss. are of saec. XV and without value. Cf. the preface 
in H. Peter's edition. The collection bears in the mss. the title: vitae 
diversorum principum et tyrannorum a divo Hadriano usque ad Nume- 
rianum a diversis compositae. The order of the vitae in the mss. is a 
mixture of a chronological and a literary arrangement; see Brocks 
p. 43 sq. 

2. Ed. princ. of the scriptores hist. aug. by Bon. Accursius, Mediol. 
1475 fol. Aldina, Venet. 1516. 1519. Editions by D. Erasmus (Basil. 
1518 fol. and often), J. B. Egnatius (Paris 1544), J. Gruter (Hanov. 
1611 fol.). Is. Casaubonus (Paris 1603. 4. 1620 fol. with the notae of CI. 
Salmasius). A variorum edition Lugd. Bat. 1671. 2 vols. Cum notis 
U. Obrechti, Strassburg 1677. Cum praef. J. L. E. Püttmanni, Lips. 
1774. Henr. Jordan et Fr. Eyssenhardt recensuerunt, Berol. 1864, 2 vols. 
Recens. Herm. Peter, Lips. Teubner 1865, 2 vols. 

3. H. Dodwell, praelectiones Camdenianae (Oxon. 1692) p. 32 — 151. 
G. Mascov, de usu et praestantia hist. aug. in iure civili (1731) in his 
Opusc, Lips. 1776. C. G. Heyne, censura sex scriptorum hist, aug., 
Opuscula acad. VI p. 52 — 78. H. E. Dirksen, the script, h. aug. Sug- 
gestions concerning the criticism of the text and its interpretation, 
Leipzig 1842. 271 pp. G. Bernhardy, de script, h. a. prooemia duo, 
Halle 1847. 4. Fr. Richter, on the scr. h. a., Rhein. Mus. VII (1850). 
p. 16 — 51. Krause, de fontibus et auctoritate scriptorum h. a., Neu- 
stettin 1857. 24 pp. 4. H. Peter, historia critica scriptorum h. a.. 
Lips. 1860. 40 pp. E. Plew, de diversitate auctorum h. a., Königsberg 
1869. E. Brocks, de IV prioribus h. a. scriptoribus, Königsberg 1869. 
69 pp. C. Czwalina, de epistularum actorumque quae a scriptoribus h. 
a. proferuntur fide atque auctoritate, part. I. Bonn 1870. 45 pp. C. 
Rubel, de fontibus IV priorum h. a. scriptorum, Bonn 1871. 64 pp. 
J. J. Müller, in Bü dinger's Investigations on the Imperial History HI 
p. 33 — 116. C. Paucker, de latinitate scriptorum h. a. meletemata, 
Dorpat 1870. 214 pp. 

Critical contributions by A. Becker (Observationes criticae in etc.? 
Breslau 1838), H. Peter (Exercitationes criticae in, Posen 1863. 4.)' 
0. Hirschfeld (Hermes III p. 230—232), M. Haupt (Hermes I p. 45. 
Ill p. 217—220. IV p. 152 sqq.), J. Oberdick (Journal f. Austrian Gymn. 
'1865, p. 737—745. 1868, p. 340—343). J. J. CorneUssen (Coniectanea 
at., Daventr. 1870. 4.), J. Gohsch (Schweidnitz 1870. 4. and in Fleck- 
eisen's Jahrb. 103, p. 646—648), E. Bährens (ib. p. 649—664). 

4. The following vitae are dedicated to Diocletian: 1) Helius 
Caesar, with the title : Diocletiano Aug. Aelius Spartianus suus sal. In 
animo mihi est, Diocletiane Aug., tot principum maxime. 2) Marcus 
(19, 3 : ut vobis ipsis, sacratissime imp. Diocletiane, et semper visum 
est et videtur). 3) Verus (11, 4: praeter vestram clementiam, Diocle- 
tiane Aug.). 4) Avid. Cass. 3, 3 (proposui enim, Diocletiane Aug.). 5) 
Septim. Sever. 20, 4: reputanti mihi, Diocl. Aug. 6) Pescenn. Nig. 9, 1: 

21 



322 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

haec sunt, Diocletiane maxime Augustorum etc. 7) Macrin. 15, 4 (sere- 
nitati tuae, Diocl. Aug., detulimus, quia te cupidum veterum imperato- 
rum esse perspeximus). Of these vitae that of Avidius Cassius certainly 
belongs to Vulcatius Gallicanus, to whom it is attributed in the mss. 
with the addition (V. C.) v. cl. which does not recur in any other plaee. 
The other six are divided between Spartianus and Capitolinus (nr. 1. 
5. 6 Spartianus, 2. 3. 7 to Capitolinus, the latter, however, without 
any statements of an individual character and contrary to probabihty, as 
Capitolinus (below 397) no doubt wrote under Constantine, and, as it 
seems, after the victory over Licinius, (a. 323). The second and third 
biography (which is referred to Hel. 2, 9: de huius familia plenius in 
vita . . filii huiusce . . disseremus; cf. Ver. 1, 6 sqq. with Fr. Richter 
p. 39 extr.) agree in all particulars (cf. Brocks p. 23 sqq.), while the 
seventh agrees with the sixth. Both exhibit the same fondness of citing 
letters and passages of Virgil (which appears also in Helius) 'and refer 
to the same sources (Pesc. Nig. 9, 1: haec . . didicimus ex pluribus 
libris. Macrin. 1, 1 : nos ex diversis historicis eruta in lucem pro- 
feremus, and 15, 4: quae de plurimis collecta etc.) It is, therefore, 
probable that all are by Spartianus. On the other hand, in the life 
of Clodius Albinus that of Pescennius (Alb. 1, 4: sortem illam qua . . 
in Pescennii vita diximus = Pesc. 8, 1 sq.) and of Severus (Alb. 12, 14: 
quae quidem omnia in vita eius posita sunt =: Sever. 9 — 12) by the 
same author are quoted, so that also Albinus would seem to be by 
Spartianus; and in the Helius (which is no doubt by Spartianus) the 
author explains a statement he had made in his vita Hadriani (Hel. 
5, 5: de quo genere cibi aliter refert Marius Maximus, non pentaphar- 
macum sed tetrapharmacum appellans, ut et nos ipsi in eius vita per- 
secuti sumus, :z:r Hadr. 21, 4: unice amavit tetrapharmacum). Pius again, 
which is in the mss. attributed to Capitolinus (the addition of ad Diocl. 
Aug. being due to interpolation, as in the case of Did. lul.) quite agrees 
with the lives of Adrian, Marcus and Severus (Brocks p. 23 sqq.) and 
therefore seems to be by the same author. In the mss. Spartianus is 
also credited with the lives of Didius lulianus, Caracalla, and Geta, the 
latter probably by an error, as it is dedicated to Constantine, and 
hence Spartianus does not appear to be the author of the life of Cara- 
calla which is closely connected with the other biography (Carac. 11,1: 
occidendi Getae multa prodigia extiterunt, ut in vita eius exponemus 
=^ Get. 3, 3 sqq.; Get. 1, 1: quaestionem . . cur etiam Geta Ant. a me 
tradatur). No trustworthy argument against this is implied by the 
impersonal reference to Severus in Car. 1, 2. The manner of Did. lul. 
(except the stemma at the beginning) has little in cominpn with the 
manner of Spartianus. This intricate question has recently been ex- 
cellently investigated by C. Brocks, though he does not pay sufficient atten- 
tion to the various references (cf. Fr. Richter p. 39—42) and dwells 
too much on the general aspect of arrangement and diction which may 
be the result of the source adopted in each instance. To judge of 
Spartianus with a certain degree of safety, we should start with the 
biography of Helius. 



Scriptores historiae augustae. 323 

5. Spartian. Hel. 1, 1: in animo mihi est . . non solum eos qui 
principum locum . . retentarunt, ut usque ad divum Hadrianum feci, 
sed illos etiam qui vel Caesarum nomine appellati sunt nee principes 
aut Augusti fuerunt, vel quolibet alio genere aut in famam aut in spem 
principatus venerunt, cognitioni numinis tui sternere. 7, 5: de quo id- 
circo non tacui quia mihi propositum fuit omnes qui post Caesarem 
dictatorem, h. e. divum lulium, vel Caesares vel Augusti vel principes 
appellati sunt quique in adoptionem venerunt vel imperatorum filii aut 
parentes Caesarum nomine consecrati sunt singulis libris exponere, 
meae satisfaciens conscientiae, etsi multis nulla sit necessitas talia re- 
quirendi. Hence his intention appears to have been to write a com- 
plete history of the Emperors in the form of biographies. We do not 
know whether this intention was actually carried out; at all events, we 
possess only parts of his work. His principal source was Marius Maxi- 
mus (above 377, 5 sq.). A chronological hint Hel. 2, 2: nostris tempo- 
ribus a vestra dementia Maximianus atque Constantius Caesares dicti 
sunt (a. 292). 

6. Vulcat. Gall. Avid. Cass. 3, 3: proposui, Diocletiane Aug., 
omnes qui imperatorum nomen sive iusta ex causa sive iniusta habuerunt 
in litteras mittere, ut omnes purpuratos Augustos cognosceres. His 
plan was, therefore, somewhat more limited than that of Spartianus 
(n. 4). Only his Avidius Cassius was admitted into the extant collection 
— a biography remarkable for an extensive use of the correspondence 
(also the answers). Cf. E. E. Hudemann, Philologus VU p. 585—588. 
IX p. 189 sqq. 

7. Vopisc. Aurelian. 2, 1: quoniam sermo nobis de Trebellio 
Pollione, qui a duobus Philippis usque ad divum Claudium et eius 
fratrem Quintillum imperatores tam claros quam obscuros memoriae 
prodidit, . . fuit, adserente Tiberiano quod Pollio raulta incuriose, multa 
breviter prodidisset. The commencement of Pollio's portion and his 
dedication are lost. He is the inventor of the incorrect notion of the 
XXX tyranni. Pollio XXX tyr. 1, 1 sq.: scriptis iam pluribus libris, non 
historico nee diserto, sed pedestri adloquio . . in unum eos (the XXX) 
libellum contuli, . . maxime cum vel in Valeriani vel in Gallieni vita 
pleraque de his dicta . . constet. 33, 8: libellum non tam diserte quam 
fideliter scriptum, neque ego eloquentiam mihi videor pollicitus esse, 
sed rem, qui hos libellos quos de vita principum edidi non scribo, sed 
dicto, et dicto cum ea festinatione . . ut respirandi non habeam facul- 
tatem. 11, 6 sq.: ut fidelitas historica servaretur, quam ego prae ceteris 
custodiendam putavi, qui quod ad eloquentiam pertinet nihil euro, rem 
enim vobis proposui deferre, non verba. Claud. 11, 5: vera dici fides 
cogit, simul ut sciant ii qui adulatores nos aestimari cupiunt id quod 
historia dici postulat [nos] non tacere. ib. 3, 1 : in gratiam me quispiam 
putet Constantii Caesaris loqui, sed testis est et tua conscientia et vita 
mea me nihil umquam cogitasse, dixisse, fecisse gratiosum. 10, 7: ut 
sit omnibus darum Constantium divini generis virum . . esse, . . salvis 
Diocletiano et Maximiano Augg. et eius fratre Galerio. He appears to 



324 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

have written in the life-time of Chlorus (f 25 July 306), but after the 
completion of Diocletian's Thermae (a. 2318 = 304 according to Hieron. 
chr.); see XXX tyr. 21, 7: in his locis fuerunt in quibus thermae Dio- 
cletianae sunt exaedificatae, tarn aeterni nominis quam sacrati. His 
grandfather had lived under Aurelian and had been a friend of Tetri- 
cus (XXX tyr. 25, 3). Valerian. 8, 5: quoniam vereor ne modum volu- 
minis transeam, . . ad aliud volumen transeam. . . semper enim me 
vobis dedidi . . et famae. Gallien. 14, 2 : Claudius, ut suo dicemus 
loco, vir optimus. XXX tyr. 31, 5 sqq.: haec sunt quae de XXX tyr an - 
nis dicenda videbantur. . . nunc ad Claudium principem redeo. de 
quo speciale mihi volumen . . videtur edendum. Claud. 1, 1 : veutum 
est ad principem Claudium, qui nobis intuitu Constant! Caesaris cum 
cura in litteras digerendus est. XXX tyr. 31, 10: nemo in templo Pacis 
dicturus est me feminas inter tyrannos, . . ut ipsi de me solent cum 
risu et ioco iactitare, posuisse. Richter (Rhein. Mus. VII) p. 20 — 23. 
H. Peter, hist. crlt. p. 9 sq. H. Cannegieter, Treb. P. neglegentia casti- 
gata, in his Liber sing, de mut. nom. rom. rat. (Utrecht 1758. 4.) 
p. 177 sqq. 

8. Vopisc. Aurelian. 44, 2: Herennianus teste Asclepiodoto saepe 
■dicebat Diocletianum frequenter dixisse, and 44, 3: Asclepiodotus . . 
perhibet. 

9. Vopisc. Car. 18, 5: quorum (i. e. Diocletian and his three col- 
leagues) vitam singulis libris Claudius Eusthenius, qui Diocletiano ab 
epistulis fuit, scripsit. 

10. On lanoiKog IfftoQixog mentioned by Lyd. magg. Ill 32 see 
above 370, 5. 

11. About the close of this century the earliest Latin translation 
of the romance of Pseudo-Callisthenes on Alexander the Great (n. 200) 
was composed under the title Res gestae Alexandri Macedonis trans- 
ratae ex Aesopo Graeco, Julius Valerius being given as the name 
of the author. It is made use of in the Itinerar. Alex, (of a. 340 — 345). 
Cf. C. Kluge, de it. Alex. p. 34—45. On the diction of Jul. Val. (who 
e. g. frequently uses quod instead of the ace. c. inf.), see ibid. p. 46 
— 49. 51 — 54. The work was first edited, from a codex Ambrosianus, 
by A. Mai together with the Itin. Alex. (Mediol. 1817. 4.) and (com- 
pleted) in his Classici auctt. e codd. vaticanis VII p. 61 sqq. Cf. Spi- 
cileg. rom. VIII p. 513 sqq. J. Zacher, Pseudo-Callisthenes, Halle 1867. 
There is also extant an abridgment of this translation (saec. V), edited 
by J. Zacher, lulii Valerii epitome, Halle 1867. XIV and 64 pp. 

12. Among the historical documents of the time of Diocletian we 
should also mention the list of the Roman provinces in a. 297, dis- 
covered at Verona and edited by Mommsen, Trans, of the Berlin Acad., 
1862, p. 489—531. Cf. Revue archeol. XIH (1866) p. 377 sqq. XIV p. 
369 sqq. XV p. 1 sqq. In the end of a. 301 we possess Diocletian's 
edictum de pretiis; Th. Mommsen, Diocletian's Edict etc. Leipzig 1851. 
H. W. Waddington, edit de Diocletien etc. public avec de nouveaux 



Scrlptores historiae augustae. Codex Gregorianus. 325 

fragments et un commentaire, Paris 1864. Cf. K. Keil, Rhein. Mus. XIX 
p. 610—614. 

389. By the division of the Empire and the Imperial 
power the possibility had arisen of conflicting decisions of 
legal questions, whonce a general uncertainty of law might 
easily result. Owing to this a want was felt under Diocletian 
to collect the existing laws, so far as they rested on Imperial 
rescripts. Hence a collection of the constitutions made by 
the Emperors from Adrian until Diocletian was made by a 
Jurist of the name of Gregorianus, the codex Gregorianus. 
This was, in the fourth century, supplemented by the similar 
collection of Hermogenianus, which embraced the years 
291 — 365 in three different editions. Both these collections 
survive only in those portions which were inserted in Justi- 
nian's Codex. 

1. The best edition of the fragments of the codex Greg, and 
Hermog. is by G. Hänel in the Bonn Corpus iuris anteiust. (Bonn. 
1837. 4.) : Codi eis Gregoriani et codicis Hermog. fragmenta ad XXXVI 
librorum mss. . . fidem recogn. et annot. crit. instruxit. Chr. Fr. Pohl, 
diss, de codd. Greg, atque Herrn., Lips. 1774. 4. Zimmern, Hist, of 
Roman Private Law I 1. p. 157 — 164. H. F. Jacobson, diss. crit. de 
codd. G. et H., Königsberg 1826. Hänel's praefationes. Rudorff, Hist. 
of Roman Law 1. p. 274—277. Huschke, on the cod. Gr. and H., Journ. 
f. Hist, of Law VI (1867) p. 279—331. 

2. The title of codex Gregorianus is probably an abridgment of 
the original title which probably was : Gregoriani codex constitutionum 
principalium. The earliest constitution that can be dated is of a. 196, 
but as the cod. lust, which was based on it contains also a const, of 
Adrian, it is probable that Greg, began with him. The latest consti- 
tution in Greg, is of a. 295, in which year it is probable that the col- 
lection was published. Diocletian and Maximian are called in it do- 
mini nostri (Collat. I 10. Huschke p. 280—286. It seems likely that 
Diocletian encouraged the work, just as this is certain in the case of 
the scriptores hist. aug. (see 388) who Hkewise commence with Adrian. 
A predecessor of Greg, was Papirius lustus, above 364, 7, and Julian's 
redaction of the Praetorian Edict (above 345, 2) was an analogous work. 
Being a collection of the imperial ius generale, the cod. Gr. embraced 
constitutions of all kinds, excluding what was antiquated. The arrange- 
ment was probably that of the Edict which was also followed in all 
main points in the cod. lust. The work probably contained sixteen 
books, like the cod. Theodos., which is also arranged ad similitudinem 
Gregoriani atque Hermogeniani codicis (cod. Theod. I 1, 5). The last 
three books seem to have contained the criminal law. The documents 



326 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

themselves with inscriptions and subscriptions were inserted, a few 
being also derived from the works of Jurists, as there are undated 
constitutions in the cod. Just. Huschke, p. 294^303. 314—321. 

3. The codex Her möge ni anus is always mentioned after the 
Greg., only titles, not books, being quoted if it. It appears therefore 
to have been a supplement of the Greg. Only Rescripts are quoted 
from the Hermog., the earliest of a. 291. From Dig. IV 4, 17 it ap- 
pears that the collection was later than Constantine's edict of a. 331, 
enjoining that there should be no further appeal from the praef. praet. 
But Consult. 9, 1 — 7 attributes to it five more by Valentinian and Valens 
of a. 364 sq. The last edition would thus appear to have been published 
about 365, cf. Sedul. pasch. op. praef. (p. 149 Arev.) : cognoscant Hermo- 
genianum, doctissimum iuris latorem, tres editiones su ioperis confecisse. 
They appear to have differed chiefly in the addition of subsequent Re- 
scripts. Huschke p. 291—294. 

4. Index florent. mentions among the sources of Justinian's Digest 
in the last place "EQ/uoyfPtayov inno/Licöu ßißkia I'l {(/ovoi gti/. ak-), 
an abridgment of the ius, made about a. 339; see J. Gothofredus pro- 
legg. ad cod. Theod. p. CCX. The Excerpts from it are collected by 
Hommel Paling. I p. 185 — 194. J. Finestres, comm. in Herrn, icti iuris 
epitomarum libros VI, Cervar. 1757. 4. 2 vols. H. E. Dirksen, on H.'s 
libri iuris epit., Posthumous Writings II p. 482 sqq. 

390. The grammarian and writer on metre, Marius Plotius 
(Claudius) Sacerdos, by whom we have an Ars grammatica 
in three books (the third treating of metre and containing 
many illustrations from Greek), probably wrote in the reign 
of the Emperor Diocletian. 

1. Grammat. lat. ed. Putsch p. 2623 {=■ Scriptores rei metr. ed. 
Gaisford p. 242): Marius Plotius Sacerdos composui Romae docens 
de metris. Cum de institutis artis grammaticae primo libro me 
tractavisse comperisset vir cl. Uranius nee ei displicuisset, vel quod 
non absurde compositum vel quod ad eius filium v. cl. mihi contuber- 
nalem et aetate paene studiisque mihi coniunctum Gaianum scriptus 
esset, compulit ut etiam de nominum verborumque ratione nee non 
de structurarum compositionibus exprimendis breviter laborarem. cuius 
praestantissimi viri iussionibus lib ens arbitror libro secundo nos expli- 
cabiliter oboedisse. nunc in hoc sive tertio sive novissimo Artium 
libro . . vobis viris amplissimis, nobilitatis splendore praedito Maximo 
et omni laude praedicabili Simplicio, quorum et ad quos seria nonnisi 
de litteris exercentur, quoniam . . me posse de metris etiam tractare 
iudicastis, (de his) breviter esse componendum decrevi. Books I and II 
(grammar) were first edited from a Vienna ms. saec. (VII — ) VIII by 
Endlicher and Eichenfeld, Analecta gramm. (Vindob. 1837) p. 1—74. 
Conf. p. I — V. The first two quaternios as well as the fifth are lost. 



Saeerdos. Terentianus Mavnts. 327 

4» 

The first book terminates (p. 46) : hucusque Artium grammaticarum feci- 
mus iiistituta. de catholicis vero nominum atque verborum latius ex- 
ponemus. Subscriptio: M. Claudi Sacerdotis Artium grammaticarum 
(lib. I expl.) feliciter. p. 74: M. Claudi Sac. Art. gramm. lib. II expl. 
fel. The contents of the second book are nearlj' the same as the Ca- 
tholica of Probus (above 295, 8), a fact explained by F. Osann (Contri- 
butions II p. 299 sqq.) on the supposition that Sac. despoiled Probus, 
while H. Wentzel (Symb. crit. p. 28 sqq., cf. p. 40 — 43) assumed that 
Probus had derived his work from Sacerdos, and Steup (de Probis 
p. 149—166, cf. Rhein. Mus. XXVI p. 318 sqq.) considered Sacerdos as 
the real author of the work and both writings (Cath. Probi, and the 
second book of Sacerdos) only as two copies of one and the same 
work. See above 295, 8 a. As (Cath. p. 9 sq.) Saxon Saxonis and 
Franco Franconis are quoted as instances, the work cannot have been 
composed before Diocletian. The Gaianus to whom the first book of 
Sacerdos is dedicated is therefore probably the same to whom Rescripts 
of Diocletian and Maximian are addressed Cod. lust. Ill 32, 11. V46, 3. 
VI 42, 26. VIII 28, 18. The agreement of the contents with the state- 
ments of Plotius Sac. and the great similarity of the two names render 
it probable that Plotius Sacerdos and Claudius Sac. are one and the 
same person (Endlicher, Wentzel, Steup). Diomed (p. 317 K.) was not 
aware of this predecessor. Wentzel p. 67. W. Christ, Philol. XVIII 
p. 130 sq. 178 sq. Steup p. 165 sq. not 44. 

2. The third book of Sacerdos de metris has been known for a 
considerable time (ap. Putsche p. 2623, Gaisford p. 242 sqq.). luba is 
already quoted in it (p. 301 G.). It is dedicated to a certain Maximus 
(Rescripts to Maximus of a. 294—305 in the Cod. lust. VI 9, 5. IX 22, 
18. 41, 15. X 31, 11) and Simplicius (see n. 1). De graecis nobilibus 
metris lectis a me et ex his quidquid singulis fuerit optimum decerpto 
composui, p. 297 G. Westphal, allgem. Metr. p. 50 sq. 

391. Terentianus from Mauritania, a writer on metre, 
probably belongs to the close of the third century. In pur- 
suance of Caesius Bassus and the manual of his countryman 
Juba, he wrote in his later years a metrical manual de litte- 
ris, syllabis, metris, addressed to his son Bassinus and his son- 
in-law Novatus. It consists of three parts, the last of which 
we do not possess complete. Though the work is not origi- 
nal as regards the subject-matter, it is still highly creditable 
to the author's skill in managing the most different metres. 

1. . Mar. Victor, p. 2529 P. : Terentianus, non paenitendus inter 
ceteros artis metricae auctor. Terentian. 1969 sqq. (after quoting an 
example from Pomponius Secundus) : non equidem possum tot priscos 
nosse poetas ut veterum exemplis valeam quae tracto probare; Maurus 
item quantos potui cognoscere Graios? . . nemo tamen culpet si sumo 



328 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

« 
exempla novella, after which he quotes Septimius Severus (above 379, 3), 
just as in another passage he refers to Alfius Avitus (above 379, 1). 
These facts prove that the age of Ter. has no doubt been rightly fixed 
by Lachmann (p. XI), see L. Müller de re metr. p. 55. 99. Westphal, 
allg. Metr. p. 44, 71, though G. Studer doubts it, Rhein. Mus. II p. 63 
—66. Gräfenhan (Hist, of class. Phil. IV p. 99. 134 sq.) still follows 
the former way of identifying this writer with Terentianus qui nunc 
niliacam regit Syenen, Martial. I 86, 6 sq., and places him under Nerva 
and Trajan. 

2. Terent. preface (stichic Glyconeans) 51 sqq. : sic nostrum senium 
quoque . . angustam studii viam et callem tenuem terit. (59 sq.) quid 
sit littera, quid duae, iunctae quid sibi syllabae. This is explained in 
the first part, in Sotadeans : v. 85 — 278 (sat duco meas hactenus occu- 
passenugas). Then (v. 342—1281) de syllabis (versus heroici) in trochaic 
tetrameters and dactylic hexameters, after a preface (279—341) which 
is, however, rather an epilogue. It begins: syllabas . . disputatas at- 
tuli versibus, sane modorum quo sonora laevitas addita stili levaret 
sicciores taedium. haec prius, Bassine fill et tu gener Novate mi, per- 
polite qua potestis crebriore limula. 319 sqq.: morosa intentio tam le- 
gentis debet esse quam fuit nobis quoque, qui . . forsitan nee lecta 
multis e latebris scalpsimus, ardui laudem expetentes, non favorem ex 
obviis. 348 sq. : hoc opus, de syllabis quod recepi nunc loquendum. 
In the first half the author repeats and enlarges upon the contents of 
the opusculum de litteris (in Sotadean metre). The discussion of syl- 
labic prosody does not begin before 997. The second epilogue 1282 
— 1299: forsitan hunc aliquis verbosum dicere librum non dubitat etc. 
(1291 sq. :) haec ego cum scripsi bis quinis mensibus aeger pendebam 
etc. (1296 sqq. :) sic varios tam longa dies renovando dolores duxit ad 
hoc tempus semper sine fine minando. cum potui tarnen obrepens in- 
cepta peregi, quo vitae dubius vel sic vixisse viderer. The third part 
treats de metris (v. 1300 — 2981), special attention being paid to (Ca- 
tullus and) Horace (from v. 2914 the metres of the Epodes are treated 
exclusively); whence the heading in the ed. princeps 'de metris Horatii' 
might perhaps be genuine. The introduction treats again briefly de 
syllabis, litteris, then (1335 sq.) de pedibus. Metrical system, properly 
so-called, begins v. 1580, is well arranged and contains imitations of 
the metres treated of. This part is without preface and conclusion, 
and there are also some repetitions of preceding lines (1306 — 1312 = 
357 sq. 360 — 364) and other traces of the lack of final polish (Lach- 
mann p. IX). Terentianus de litteris {=^ v. 183) is quoted by Priscian. 
XIII 15 (H p. 10 H.); Terentianus de syllabis (== v. 238) id. VII 22 
(p. 305 H.). 

3. The most important of the three parts (or books) is the third, 
on metres, in spite of many mistakes and errors (e. g. 1797), being 
the reproduction of some earlier work, which had also contained Greek 
illustrations (cf. 2128). This original was in all probability the work 
of Caesius Bassus (above 299, 1 — 3), whose order was, however, changed 



Terentianus. Maurus. Ai'nohius. 329 

by Ter. in more than one place. R. Westphal, allg. Metr. (1865) p. 56 
—72. 127—130. — On Greek metres ^ I p. 138—153. H. Keil, gram- 
mat, lat. VI p. 251 sq. 

4. After the loss of all complete mss., the text of Ter, rests on 
the editio princeps (Mediolani 1497. 4.), which bears the title: Teren- 
tianus de litteris syllabis et metris Horatii. Later editions Paris. 1510. 
1531. 4. Venet. 1533. 4. In Putsche's grammatici lat. p. 2383 sqq. 
"With a lengthy commentary by L. Santen (ed. D. J. van Leiinep), 
Utrecht 1825. 4. Recensuit C. Lachmannus, Berol. 1836. In Gaisford's 
Hephaestion (Oxon. 1855) I p. 215—315; annotationes 11 p. 349—642. 

392. The rhetorician Am obi us at Sirca in Numidia 
wrote, still under Diocletian, about a. 295, his seven books 
adversus nationes in defence of his conversion to Christianit3^ 
This apology has a chiefly polemical character and exhibits 
little comprehension of the purport of Christianity. The 
author impugns polytheism with rhetorical exaggeration, is 
fond of strong expressions and uses quite a motley diction. 

1. Hieronym. chron. ad a. Abr. 2343 =:: 329 = 1082 V. C. (pro- 
bably the year in which Arnobius died): Arnobius rhetor in Africa 
clarus habetur, qui cum Siccae ad declamandum iuvenes erudiret et 
adhuc ethnicus ad credulitatem (i. e. to Christianity) somniis compel- 
leretur, neque ab episcopo impetraret fidem quam semper impugnave- 
rat, elucubravit adversum pristinam religionem luculentissimos libros 
et tandem, veluti quibusdam obsidibus pietatis (datis), foedus impetra- 
vit. De vir. illustr. 79: Arnobius sub Diocletiano principe Siccae apud 
Africam florentissime rhetoricam docuit scripsitque adversum gentes 
quae vulgo extant volumina. Epist. 70, 5 (ad Magnum) : septem libros 
adv. gentes Arnobius edidit. ibid. 58 (ad Paulin.), 10 (p. 326 Vail.) : 
Arnobius inaequalis et nimius et absqae operis sui partitione confusus. 
That the work was composed about a. 295 = 1048 V. C. appears from 
I 13: trecenti sunt anni ferme, minus vel plus aliquid, ex quo coepi- 
mus esse christian! et terrarum in orbe censeri, and II 71 : aetatis 
cuius urbs Roma in annalibus indicatur? annos ducit quinquaginta et 
mille, aut non multum ab his minus. A vague indication of past per- 
secutions of the Christians occurs IV 36: nostra scripta cur ignibus 
meruerunt dari, cur immaniter conventicula dirui ? 

2. Arnob. I 1: quoniam comperi nonnullos . . dicere, postquam 
esse in mundo Christiana gens coepit terrarum orbem perisse, . . statui 
pro captu ac mediocritate sermonis contraire invidiae et calumniosas 
dissolvere criminationes. This is done in b. I, which winds up with 
the justification of the beginnings of Christianity. There we read c. 62: 
Christus interemptus est non ipse, (sed) homo quern induerat et 
secum ipse portabat. The second book contains a comparison of the 
doctrines of the philosophers and of Christianity and a psychology 



330 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

which has a Gnostic colouring. B. Ill — V attack heathen mythology, 
VI and VII the worship of temples and images, sacrifices and spectacles. 
Arn. does not mention his sources, though he has made considerable 
use of his predecessors, among the Greeks especially of the /r()oT()#7mxoV 
of Clemens Alex. He gets many of his materials from the Epicureans 
(e. g. from Lucretius, cf. E. Klussmann, Philol. XXVI p. 362—366), 
rationalists (like the Euhemerus of Ennius), and antiquarians like Varro. 
Owing to the great amount of materials accumulated Arnobius possesses 
also some antiquarian value. 

3. Arnobius knows nothing of the Old Testament, and very little 
of the New (Oehler p. XIII— XVIII). The divinity of Christ is by him 
merely based upon his miracles, which he explains I 48 in such a 
manner as to leave it doubtful whether he had actually read the gospel. 
He is not a proof of his assertion (I 58) : numquam Veritas sectata est 
fucum, nee quod exploratum et certum est circumduci se patitur ora- 
tionis per ambitum longiorem: rather his loose views concerning bar- 
barisms and solecisms (I 59) apply to him. He is fond of accumulating 
rhetorical figures, e. g. II 39 — 42 he has one anaphora and rhetorical 
question after the other (idcirco deus animas misit ut etc.). He likes 
to join synonymous expressions. 

4. The text of Arnobius rests solely on a Parisinus saec. IX (see 
above 368, 5), in which the work is entitled Adversus nationes. Ed. 
princeps by F. Sabaeus, Rom. 1543 fol. Editions by Gelenius (Basil. 
1546. 1560), Canterus (Antv. 1582), Ursinus (Rom. 1583), Elmenhorst 
(Hanov. 1603. Hamb. 1610), Stewechius (Antv. 1604), Salmasius (Lugd. 
B. 1651), in Gallandi bibl. patr. IV p. 133— 224, and by Oberthür (Würz- 
burg 1783). Ed. J. C. Orelli, Lips. 1816. Ex nova cod. Paris. coUatione 
rec, perpet. comm. instr. G. F. Hildebrand, Halle 1844. In Migne's 
cursus compl. V (Paris 1844), text p. 718—1288; various treatises ib. 
p. 551—714. 1291—1372. Rec. ill. Fr. Oehler (in Gersdorf's bibl. patr. 
XII), Lips. 1846. 

5. On Arnobius cf. R. Ceillier, hist, gener. des auteurs sacres 
etc. HI p. 373—387. Th. Hug in Pauly's Encycl. I 2. p. 1747—1750. 
J. Meursius, criticus Arnobianus, Lugd. B. 1598. J. C. Bulenger, 
eclogae ad Arnob., Tolos. 1623. Le Nourry, Apparat, ad bibl. patr. II 
p. 257-570. 

6. E. Klussmann, emendationes Arnobianae, Lips. 1863. 4; Philo- 
logus XXVI p. 623—641. Th. Hug, Contributions to the criticism of 
the Latin prose -writers (Basle 1864), p. 21—31. M. Zink, Journal for 
the Bavarian Gymn., VII p. 295—312. 

393. Arnobius' pupil in eloquence, Lactantius Firmi- 
anus, professor of rhetoric at Nicomedia and subsequently 
in the West tutor of the prince Crispus, surpasses all other 
Christian writers by the purity and elegance of his diction 



Arnobws. Lactantius. 331 

which is formed on the best models. His conversion to Christi- 
anity had not impaired his gratitude to the sources from 
which he had previously derived intellectual nourishment. A 
later time thought his orthodoxy less correct than his style. 
The more important ones of his numerous works in prose and 
verse have come down to us: his seven books Institutionum 
divinarum, a popular and apologetic manual of Christian doc- 
trine considered as the highest truth — a work of which we 
also possess an abridgment; De opificio dei, a popular anthro- 
pology from the Christian point of view; De ira dei, a similar 
work on the doctrine of God. More fanatical than the usual 
manner of Lactantius, but not at all unlike his style is the 
work handed down under the name of Caecilius on the end 
of all persecutors of the Christian religion from Nero down 
to Galerius and Maximinus Daza, a work of importance for 
historical studies. 

1, Hieronym. de vir. ill. 80: Firmianus, qui et Lactantius, Ar- 
nobii discipulus, sub Diocletiano principe accitus cum Flavio gramma- 
tico, cuius De medicinalibus vsrsu compositi extant libri (cf. contra 
lovin. II p. 332 Vail.: Marcellum Sidetem et nostrum Flavium hexa- 
metris versibus disserentes ; Plin. Val. de re med. Ill 14), Nicomediae 
rhetoricam docuit et penuria discipulorum, ob graecam videlicet civi- 
tatem, ad scribendum se contulit. . . hie extrema senectute magister 
Caesaris Crispi, filii Constantini, in Gallia fuit, qui postea (a. 326) a 
patre interfectus est. Chron. ad a. 2333 =; 319 A.D.: Crispum Lactan- 
tius latin's litteris erudivit, vir omnium suo tempore eloquentissimus, 
sed adeo in hac vita pauper ut plerumque etiam necessaiiis indiguerit. 
Epist. 70, 5 (ad Magnum) : septem libros adversus gentes Arnobius 
edidit totidemque discipulus eius Lactantius, qui De ira quoque et Opi- 
ficio dei duo volumina condidit; quos si legere volueris dialogorum 
Ciceronis in eis tTHTOjj,riv reperies. 58, 10 (adPaulin.): Lactantius quasi 
quidam fluvius eloquentiae tuUianae utinam tarn nostra affirmare po- 
tuisset quam facile aliena destruxit! Lactant. inst. V 2: ego cum in 
Bithynia oratorias litteras accitus docerem. I 1: professio . . ilia ora- 
toria in qua diu versati non ad virtutem, sed plane ad argutam mali- 
tiam iuvenes erudiebamus. . . multum tamen nobis exercitatio ilia 
fictarum litium contulit ut nunc maiore copia et facultate dicendi cau- 
sam veritatis peroremus. HI 13: equidem tametsi operam dederim ut 
. . dicendi assequerer facultatem propter studium docendi tamen elo- 
quens numqam fui, quippe qui forum ne attigerim quidem. Lactantius 
would seem to be of Italian descent, as he is used to contrast the 
Romans as nostri (inst. I 5. p. 11, 2 Fri.) with the Graeci (ib. p. 2, 17). 

2. Hieron. vir. ill. 80: habemus eius Symposium, quod adolescen- 
tulus scripsit, '^OdomoQiy.oy de Africa usque Nicomediam, hexametris 



332 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

scriptum versibus, et aliuii^ librum qui inscribitur Grammaticus, et 
pulcherrimum De ira dei et Institutionum divinarum adversum gentes 
libros VII et "EnnofArjv eiusdem operis in libro uno acephale et Ad 
Asclepiadem libros II; De persecutione librum unum; Ad Probum Epi- 
stolarum libros IV; Ad Severum (cf. vir. ill. Ill) epistolarum libros 11; 
Ad Demetrianum auditorem suum epistolarum libros 11 ; Ad eundem de 
opificio dei vel formatione hominis librum unum. To the Grammaticus 
we should probably refer Victorin. de carm. her. 5 (p. 1957 P.): nostra 
quoque memoria Lactantius de metris pentameter, inquit, et tetrameter. 
The letters ad Probum were probably written before his conversion 
and dealt chiefly with questions of scholarship, while those ad Deme- 
trianum turned on Christian subjects. Hieron. epist. 84, 7 (ad Pam- 
mach. et Oe.) : Lactantius in libris suis et maxime in epistolis ad De- 
metrianum Spiritus sancti omnino negat substantiam et errore iudaico 
dicit eum vel ad patrem referri vel ad filium; and comm. in ep. ad 
Gal. 4, 6: multi per imperitiam scripturarum, quod et Firmianus in 
octavo (? Vail. : altero) ad Demetrianum epistolarum libro facit, asserunt 
spiritum s. saepe patrem, saepe filium nominari etc. Damasus to 
Hieronymus (Hier. opp. ed. Vail. lip. 159): fateor tibi, eos quos mihi 
iampridem Lactantii dederas libros ideo non libenter lego quia et plu- 
rimae epistolae eius usque ad mille spatia versuum tenduntur et raro 
de nostro dogmate disputant; quo fit ut et legenti fastidium generet 
longitudo et si qua brevia sunt scholasticis magis sint apta quam nobis 
de metris et regionum situ et philosophis disputantia. Rufin. de metr. 
p. 2712 P.: Firmianus ad Probum dc metris comoediarum sic dicit etc. 
Hieron. comm. in ep. ad Gal. (Opp. ed. Vail. VH 1 p. 426) : Lactantii 
nostri quae in tertio ad Probum volumine de hac gente (Galate) opi- 
natus sit verba ponemus. F. Osann, Contributions II p. 365 — 367. 
Lactantius does not seem to have carried out his intention of writing 
a special work against the Jews (inst. VII 1 extr. : sed erit nobis contra 
ludaeos separata materia, in qua illos erroris et sceleris revincemus). 

3. De opifici dei. Dedication (not before a. 304): quam mi- 
nime sim quietus, etiam in summis necessitatibus (cf. n. 1), ex hoc 
libello poteris existimare, quem ad te rudibus paene verbis, . . Deme- 
triane, perscripsi, ut et quotidianum studium meum nosceres et non 
deessem tibi, praeceptor etiam nunc, sed honestioris rei meliorisque 
doctrinae (than formerly in the study of rhetoric). . . profiteor nulla 
me necessitate vel rei vel temporis impediri quominus aliquid excudam 
quo philosophi nostrae sectae quam tuemur instructiores doctioresque 
in posterum fiant. . . tentabo . . corporis et animi . . rationem expli- 
care. The somatic part is also treated elaboretely, after Aristotle and 
the Stoics, teleologically and theologically. Virgil and Lucretius are 
repeatedly quoted, the latter impugned. The conclusion (c. 20) : haec 
ad te, Demetriane, interim paucis et obscurius fortasse . . peroravi, . . 
plura et meliora laturus si nobis indulgentia caelitus venerit. tunc ego 
te ad verae philosophiae doctrinam et planius et verius cohortabor. 
statui enim quam multa potero litteris tradere quae ad vitae beatae 



Lactantius. 333 

statum spectent, et quidem contra philosophos. . . incredibilis enim 
vis eloquentiae etc. This is doubtless an allusion to his institutiones 
which were perhaps originally dedicated to his pupil Demetrianus; cf. 
n. 4. An edition of the work cum notis Des. Erasmi (Basil. 1529. Paris. 
1529), WiUichii (1542). 

4. Lact. Instit. I 1 (p. 4, 4 Fr.): veritatis, cui asserendae atque 
illustrandae septem volumina destinavimus. . . quae licet possit sine 
eloquentia defendi, . . tarnen claritate ac nitore sermonis (cf. V 2: or- 
nate copioseque) illustranda . . est, ut potentius in animos influat (p. 2 
n. M.). si quidam prudentes . . institutiones civilis iuris compositas 
ediderunt, . . quanto melius nos . . divinas institutiones litteris 
persequemur. Cf. de ira 2: horum imperitiam iam coarguimus in se- 
cundo divinarum institutionura libro. . . quos ex parte iam refutavi- 
mus in quarto supra dicti operis libro. 11 : docuimus in nostris insti- 
tutionibus. 17: quibus in sexto libro institutionum satis respondimus. 
The first book bears in the mss. the title De falsa religione, b. 11: de 
origine erroris; III: de falsa sapientia; IV: de vera sapientia; V: de 
iustitia; VI: de vero cultu; VII: de vita beata. He purposes to prove 
the Christian religion to be cum solam religionem tum etiam et solam 
et veram sapientiam (V 4 extr.); he considers it as revealed Veritas 
and iustitia. His predecessors Minucius Felix, Tertullian and Cyprian 
(e. g. V 1) are mentioned and used. He frequently refers to classical 
writers, especially Cicero and Virgil, Lucretius and Ovid (Met. and 
Fasti) also Ennius, Plautus, Terence, Lucilius, Horace, Persius, Varro, 
Sallust, Seneca and others. In part of the mss. we find I 1 an exten- 
sive address to Constantinus Imperator maximus, V 1 after the first 
words at least Constantine Imperator maxime. If these words are by 
Lactantius they must be a later addition in a copy Lactantius presented 
to the Emperor. The work itself was doubtless written before the 
official victory of Christianity (cf. e. g. V 23). 

5. Besides the Institutiones we also possess an abridgment of 
them. It begins: quamquam divinarum institutionum libri quos iam 
pridem ad illustrandam veritatem religionemque conscripsimus ita le- 
gentium animos instruant ut nee prolixitas pariat fastidium nee oneret 
ubertas, tarnen horum tibi epitomen fieri, Pentadi frater, desideras. . . 
faciam quod postulas, etsi difficile videtur ea quae septem maximis 
Toluminibus explicata sunt in unum conferre. The first complete 
edition by C. M. Pfaff (Paris 1712), then J. Davis (Cantabrig. 1718). 

6. Hieronym. comm. in ep. ad Ephes. 4, 26 (0pp. VII 1. p. 628 
Vail.): Firmianus noster De ira dei docto pariter et eloquenti sermone 
conscripsit. The Avork is chiefly directed against the Epicureans. Cf. 
c. 22: haec habui quae de ira dei dicerem. Donate carissime, ut scires 
quemadmodum refelleres eos qui deum faciunt immobilem, restat ut 
more Ciceronis utamur epilogo ad perorandum. . . illorum persuasio- 
nem revincamus qui sine ira deum esse credentes dissolvunt omnem 
religionem. As his source he alleges doctrinam dei (c. 1), without 
ever proving it to be so; on the contrary, all his arguments rest on 



334 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

his own and foreign reflexion. That the work was composed after the 
inst. appears from c. 2, 11 and 17 (see n. 4). 

7. The work de mortibus perse cutorum (of the end of a. 313 
or the beginning of a. 314, Ebert p. 123 sq.) has been preserved in 
only one ms., bibl. Colbert. 1297, and was first published from it (Paris 
1679) by Steph. Baluze (Miscell. II p. 1 sqq. 347 sqq.) The title is: 
Lucii Cecilii ad Donatum confessorem de m. p. It begins : audivit do- 
minus orationes tuas. Donate carissime. . . ecce . . ecclesia rursum 
exurgit. . . excitavit enim deus principes qui tyrannorum nefaria et 
cruenta imperia resciderunt etc. c. 35: hoc edictum proponitur Nico- 
raediae prid. Kal. Maias (a. 311). tunc apertis carceribus. Donate ca- 
rissime, . . liberatus es, cum tibi career sex annis pro domicilio fuerit. 
48: Nicomediam ingressus . . die id. lun. (a. 313) . . litteras proponi 
iussit. . . sic ab eversa ecclesia usque ad restitutam fuerunt anni decern, 
menses plus minus quattuor. The accurate acquaintance with all the 
events at Nicomedia, the dedication to Donatus (cf. n. 6), the great 
similarity of diction and the frequent quotations of Virgil (also Horace) 
render it almost certain that the work is actually the one entitled de 
persecutione by St. Jerome (n. 2), and that L. Caecilius (or Oaelius) is 
justly given by some mss. among the names of Lactantius. The con- 
cise style of this work as compared with the profuseness of the Inst, 
is easily explained from the difference of subject, and the passionate 
tone may be due to the consciousness of having at last overcome all 
dangers and to long repressed anger. There is, however, a passage 
inst. V 23: quidquid adversum nos mali principes moliuntur fieri ipse 
(deus) permittit. et tarnen iniustissimi persecutores . . non se putent 
impune laturos. . . veniet, veniet rabiosis ac voracibus lupis merces 
sua, qui iustas et simplices animas nullis facinoribus admissis excrucia- 
verunt. The doubts advauced by N. Le Nourry, 0. F. Fritzsche (ed. 
p. VIII — X) and others do not appear well-founded, though the latter 
justly says that the author non historicum, sed suae partis patronum 
egit. J. Burckhardt, Const, p. 46. 327—329. 337, n. 2. 338 sq. 349 
(n. 1). 355, n. 1. 356. 366. 368 n. 0. Rothfuchs, qua historiae fide 
Lactantius usus sit in libro de m. pers., Marburg 1862. 42 pp. 4. 
Hunziker, in Büdinger's Investigations on Imperial Hist. I p. 117 sqq., 
and especially A. Ebert, on the author of the work de m. p., in the 
Trans, of the Saxon Soc. of Lit. 1870, p. 115—138. A separate edition 
by F. Dübner, Paris 1863. 

8. The name of Lactantius is also given to the poem on Phoe- 
nix (170 lines in distichs). It is rhetorical and in the usual mytholo- 
gical phraseology. The last ten lines differ from the rest in tone and 
technical details, and perhaps the original conclusion may be lost. 
The poem is found in many editions of Lactantius, in Wernsdorf s 
poetae lat. min. Ill p. 298—322 (cf. p. 283—297), in Weber's corp. poett. 
latt. p. 1416 sq., and especially in Al. Riese's Anthol. lat. nr. 731. Se- 
parate editions by A. Martini (Lüneburg 1825) and H. Leyser (Qued- 
linburg 1839). Move questionable is the authorship of the carmen de 



Lactantius. 335 

passione domini (80 hexameters). The 55 distichs de resurrectione do- 
mini are the production of the bishop Venantius Fortunatus, the J 00 
aenigmata belong to Symphosius (below 442). 

9. Lactantius expresses his admiration of Cicero in many passages, 
e. g. de opif. 1 (vir ingenii singularis) and 20 (eloquentiae ipsius uni- 
cum exemplar), inst. I 15 (non tantum perfectus orator sed etiam philo- 
sophus). Ill 13 (romanae linguae summus orator . . vir eloquentissimus). 
VII 1 (eximius orator). He even calls Ovid poeta non insuavis (de ira 
20). The doctrine had not yet been pronounced that all the virtues 
of the Heathens were only disguised vices. Even Lactantius' positive 
doctrine, though honestly Christian and very zealous, does not show 
the slightest trace of dogmatic casuistry and obstinacy. Such assertions 
as inst. V 3: non idcirco a nobis deum creditum Christum quia mira- 
bilia fecit, sed quia vidimus in eo facta esse omnia .quae nobis annun- 
tiata sunt vaticinio prophetarum, necessarily appeared very unsatisfactory 
to later persecutors of heretics. Such early writers as St. Jerome (see 
n. 1 sq.) and Sidonius (Ep. IX 3 : instruit ut Hieronymus, destruit ut 
Lactantius, adstruit ut Augustinus) dwell on this as the weak part of 
Lactantius. Cf. F. W. Ammon, Lact. opin. de relig. in syst, redig.. Er- 
langen 1820. Overlach, the Theology of Lact., Schwerin 1858. 40 pp. 4. 
Dorpat Journal of Theol. IV. His Latinity was all the more admired. 
J. A. Krebs, de stilo Lact., Halle 1706. 4. M, N. Kortholt, de Cicerone 
christiano Lactantio, Giessen 1711. 4. 

10. The mss. of Lactantius (except mort. pers.) are numerous but 
mostly of saec. XJV and XV, and not yet employed in a methodical 
manner. Even more numerous are the editions of his works. We 
may mention the following: Ed. princeps Rom. 1465 fol. Cum comm. X. 
Betulei, Basil. 1563 fol. Studio M. Thomasii, Antv. 1570. Cum comm. 
op. S. Gullaei, Lugd. B. 1660. Rec. J. G. Walchius, Lips. 1715. Cum 
notis ed. C. A. Heumann, Gotting. 1736. Rec. et notis ill. J. L. Büne- 
mann, Lips. 1739. Ed. J. B. Le Brun et N. Lenglet du Fresnoy, Paris 
1748. 2 vols. 4. Ed. Oberthür, Würzb. 1783. 2 vols. In Gallandi's 
Bibl. patr. IV p. 229 sqq. Bipontina 1786. 2 vols. Ed. 0. F. Fritzsche, 
Lips. 1842. 1844 (Gersdorfs bibl. patr. X 1. 2). In Migne's Curs, compl. 
Tom. VI and VII (Paris 1844). 

11. R. Ceillier, hist, gener. des auteurs s. et eccl. HI p. 387 — 434. 
Le Nourry, Apparatus ad bibl. patr. II diss. Ill p. 571 sqq. Walch's 
Diatribe in his edition. J. G. Geret, de Lact, eiusque theologia indicia, 
Wittenberg 1722. 4. P. Bertold, Prolegomena to Lact., Metten 1861. 
38 pp. 4. 

394. To the time preceding the official victory of the 
Christian religion we should probably assign a number of 
metrical compositions which turn on subjects of heathen my- 
thology with a certain enjoyment and in which the traditional 
forms of composition are generally employed with correctness, 



336 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

and frequently with artificiality» Among these the small epic 
by Reposianus on the loves of Mars and Venus, the votive 
inscription of T. Caesius Taurinus, the distichs of Pentadius 
deserve special mention, and on account of their subjects we 
may also name the speech of Achilles on hearing the trumpet 
of Diomed, Dido's epistle to Aeneas, and similar imitations 
of originals of the classical period. 

1. On the poems of Lactantius see above 393, 2; on those ascribed 
to him 393, 8. On the Pervigilium Veneris above 358, 5 sqq.; on 
Vespae indicium above 358, 10. Metrical Sentences (Cato) see 24, 2. 

2. The 182 hexameters by Reposianus de concubitu Martis et 
Veneris (Wernsdorf, poett. latt. m<in. IV p. 319 — 345; in the Latin 
anthologies, last of all in Riese's Anth. I p. 170 — 176). Along with 
a half - sentimental description of the beauty of nature (of a wood, v. 
33 — 50), the author exhibits a wanton Imagination and somewhat frivo- 
lous maxims (140 sqq. 178 sqq.) The caesura and synaloephe are ac- 
cording to rule, but we notice tuo as a monosyllable 93, gratiosa as 
paeon III (or perhaps as palimbacch.) 126. Wernsdorf IV p. 52 sq. 
Burckhardt, Const, p. 169 sq. 

3. By a certain Modestinus we have an epigram in 11 hexameters 
on Amor asleep, with the synaloephe myrti inter aud the hiatus Dido 
et, Evadne igne; lastly edited by Riese, anthol. lat. I p. 183. Cf. p. X. 

4. T. Caesius Taurinus dedicates the portrait of his father T. Cae- 
sius Primus who was a fruiterer or curator annonae, to Fortuna quae 
tarpeio coleris vicina Tonanti in 23 hexameters. Wernsdorf IV p. 309 
—313. Meyer, Anthol. lat. 622 (cf. I p. 174). 

5. The cod. Salmasianus contains six poems in distichs by Pen- 
tadius (cf. above 393, 5), in Riese's Anth. lat. 234 sq. 265. 266—268. 
(I p. 162—164. 181 sq.). The first three which are somewhat larger 
(de fortuna, de adventu veris, on Narcissus) are all echoici; see above 
32, 9 [Add.] ; the other three are Epigrams. 

6. By an unknown author and rather a rhetorical exercise is the 
letter of Dido to Aeneas before killing herself, in 150 hexameters, five 
of which are an introduction) which terminates: cui grata voluptas esse 
potest, modicum dignetur amare poetam), in Wernsdorf IV p. 439 — 461, 
cf. p. 55 sq., and lastly ap. Riese anth. I p. 94—99. The subject is 
taken from Virgil, but the execution follows the manner of Ovid. 
Many rhetorical figures, sentences etc. are employed, the author twice 
repeats something very like a burden: v. 42 — 82 after every fourth line 
sua taedia solus fallere nescit amor, nine times, and v. 100 — 116, cui 
digna rependes si mihi dura paras? four times. He delights in allitera- 
tion. The form of the poem is correct, except 132, where quod is 
used long. The author's confession of faith 121 sq.: esse deos natura 
docet, non esse timendos rerum facta probant. 



Keposiamffi mjd other Poet.<. 337 

7. The loquacious speech of Achilles in parthenone, cum tubam 
Diomedis audisset (89 hexameters), is likewise a rhetorical production 
(suasoria), not without prosodiacal and metrical faults (v. 12, 47, 60, 
70, 71, 72, 80). It would be too much honour to assign this poem to 
the third century. Wernsdorf IV p. 425—438 cf. p. 54 sq. Riese an- 
thol. I p. 136-139. 

D. The fourth Century after Christ. 

395. The character ot the fourth Century was decided 
by two circumstances, the official victory of Christianity and 
the translation of the Imperial residence to Constantinople. 
Even under Diocletian, Rome had ceased to be the residence 
of the Emperor; when Constantine built a new residence to 
suit the new state of affairs, Rome was left to itself and thus 
retained its pagan and antique character somewhat longer. The 
victory of the Christian religion perpetuated the rupture with 
the ancient world, but at the same time contributed to save 
its culture, as the victorious barbarians would have mercilessly 
destroyed the civilisation of the West, if not restrained by 
Christianity. When polytheism ceased to be the religion of 
the State, Christianity did not at once step into its place; 
for though the adherents of the Christian religion were fa- 
voured, polytheism was at first merely kept down in its ex- 
crescences, and subsequently prohibited in all manifestations of 
life; but in all points of importance equality and toleration 
reigned until the end of the fourth century. The adherents 
of the old religion became now the minority and clung all 
the more passionately to its forms, though quite in vain, as 
polytheism had long since been decaying, the external circum- 
stances merely accelerating its expiration and surrounding it 
with the halo of martyrdom. Christianity was, however, also 
imperilled by its victory. Some deviations and extremes with- 
in its own pale, which had remained unnoticed during the 
time of common persecution, became now the cause of great 
discordance and mutual dilaceration. A simple confession of 
faith was not enough now: a prescribed dogmatic form of it 
was required, and even then faith began to congeal up in ortho- 
doxy and outward conformity to the Church. The naive treat- 
ment of ancient culture, which we find in Minucius Felix and 
even in Lactantius, gave way to intentional estrangement, and 
not until paganism was completely extirpated, was this con- 

22 



338 The Fourth Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

trast smoothed over. In literature the Christian religion had 
now the epoch of its greatest brilliancy; the great fathers of 
the Church, Ambrosius, Hieronymus and partly also Augustinus 
belong to this century. But paganism also boasted of a 
writer like Symmachus. On the whole this period did not lack 
life, but originality. Like a senile age, it lived on the remi- 
niscences of the past. Rhetoric still maintained its ascendancy 
and exhibited many names, but few of some brilUancy. It 
now began to influence Jurisprudence which consequently lost 
its former fixity and firmness of terminology. In grammar, 
the old tracks were followed and earlier writers copied (Cha- 
risius, Diomed). Historical composition produced only epito- 
mizers like AureUus Victor, Eutropius, and Sex. Rufus; a 
higher flight was attempted only by Ammianus Marcellinus, a 
worthy man. Poetry was treated as a supplement of prose- 
style and was therefore strongly imbued with a scholastic taste 
and a fondness for producing all kinds of artificial inventions, 
such as centos etc.; the numerous Christian poets, the most 
eminent of whom was Prudentius, did not succeed in combi- 
ning the ancient form with the new subjects, though some of 
them, e. g. Damasus and Ambrosius, preferred rhymed poetry. 

1. The principal work is J. Burckhardt, The time of Constantine 
the Great (Basle 1853), especially p. 157 sqq. 248 sqq. 346 sqq. 487 sqq. 
See also Th. Mommsen, Trans, of the Saxon Sog. of Lit. 1850, p. 69 
— 72. 212 sq. A. de Broglie, I'eglise et I'empire romain au IVe siecle; 
I: Regne de Constantin, 2 vols. Paris 1856; II: Constance et Julien, 
1859, 2 vols. H. Richter, the West Roman Empire especially under the 
Emperors Gratian, Valentinian II and Maximus (a. 375 — 388), Berlin 
1865. p. 540 sqq. 

2. After the death of his father Constantius Chlorus (25 July 306), 
Constantine made himself ruler, was recognised as second Caesar by 
Galerius, and after having gradually put aside Severus, Galerius, Maxi- 
minus Daza, Maxentius and Licinius, became sole ruler of the Roman 
Empire a. 323; he died on Whitsuntide 337. His sons Constantine II, 
Constantius and Constans (Caesars since 317, 323, 333) a. 337 — 361. 
The son of Julius Constantius (Constantine I's brother), Julianus (born 
331. t 27 June 363; see W. Teuffel in Pauly's Encycl. IV p. 401—413. 
415—417) was Emperor 361—363; his successor Jovianus (see W. Teuf- 
fel 1. 1. p. 245—248) July 363 — Febr. 364. After his death the Empire 
was divided between the brothers Valentinian I (born 321, Emperor of 
the West a. 364—375), and Valens (born 326; ruled the East 364-378; 
see C. Cless in Pauly's Encycl. VI 2 p. 2289—2307). The first was 
succeeded by his son Gratianus (born 359) 375-383 (Cless 1. 1. p., 2307 



General Observations. 339 

—2314), then by his brother (born 371) Valentinian 11 a. 383—392 
(Class p. 2314 sq.). In the East Valens was succeeded by Gratianus, 
the Emperor of the West, who however transferred (a. 379) the rule 
of the East to the Spaniard Theodosius I (born 346). He ruled both 
parts of the Empire after the death of Valentinian II (a. 392 — 395), see 
Cless 1. 1. p. 1824 — 1837. After his death a new division took place 
between his weak sons Arcadius (born 377. f 423), who received the 
East, and Honorius (born 384, f 423), who obtained the West, at first 
under the guidance of Stilicho the Vandal. 

3. The tottering of everything and the increasing torrents of 
hords of barbarians caused, even among the adherents of the victorious 
religion, the feeling that the days of the Empire were numbered. Hie- 
ronym. Ep. 60 (ad Heliod.), 16: horret animus temporum nostrorum 
ruinas persequi. . . romanus orbis ruit, et tamen cervix nostra erecta 
non flectitur. On the relation of classical culture and the Christian 
religion cf. ib. 22: (ad Eustoch.), 29 sq.: quid facit cum psalterio Ho- 
ratius ? cum evangeliis Maro ? cum apostolo Cicero ? cum ante annos 
plurimos , . lerosolymam pergerem bybliotheca, quam mihi Romae 
summo studio ac labore conleceram, carere omnino non poteram. itaque 
. . lecturus Tullium ieiunabam. post noctium crebras vigilias . . Plau- 
tus sumebatur in manus. si qiiando . . prophetas legere coepissem, 
sermo horrebat incultus. Then he says that he had a vision, as if he 
were dragged into Court, chastised and heard a voice : Ciceronianus 
es, non Christianus. 

4. The extant toleration is characterized by such combinations as 
in Firmic. math. VIII 24: sacerdotes, prophetas, aruspices, religiöses. 
It is a rhetorical exaggeration when Mamertinus (grat. act. 23, 5) says 
that under the Christian Emperors nobody dared to look up to heaven 
for fear of being suspected of worshipping the Sun (28, 5; see below 
377, 5. 382, 4. Anthol. gr. Ill p. 148 1. J. Anth. lat. 389 R.). On the 
other hand Julian's reign was for the Christians rather a temptation 
than persecution. Cf. Hieronym. ad^a. 23 78 = 362: luliano ad idolorum 
cultum converso blanda persecutio luit, inliciens magis quam impellens 
ad sacrificandum. in qua multi ex nostris voluntate propria corruerunt. 
One of the notions and expressions suiting both religions was divinitas 
which occurs, therefore, in the two Firmicus and in Mamertinus (grat. 
act. 7, 2 and 28, 4: pro sancta divinitas! cf. ib. 15, 2. 32, 1) and Con- 
stantine's instinctu divinitatis (Orelli 1075). Symmach. ep. II 53 (festa 
divinitatis). VIII 13. 71 sq. IX 12. X 78. So still Sidon. Ap. ep. 
Ill 1. IV 6. 

5. Statements of Symmachus. Epist. Ill 11 : trahit nos usus tem- 
poris in argutias plausibilis sermonis. . . spectator veteris monetae 
solus supersum, ceteros delenimenta aurium capiunt. . . te autem non 
paeniteat scriptorum meorum ferre novitatem. 

396. Constantine appreciated literature and himself wrote 
Memoirs, of which, however, only scanty traces survive. It is 



340 The Fourth Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

certain that he considered literature merely as a means for 
the purposes of his power, whence he was pleased with public 
panegyric speeches. Four such have come down to us, two 
of which are by the rhetorician Eumenius, and one by Na- 
zarius. With regard to the other rhetoricians we know of 
two also as writers on rhetoric, Marcomannus and Titianus, 
both being the sources of C. Julius Victor. 

1. Lydus de magistr. II 30: Ta7g dialilfCi Kuivatavrivov, ccg avrog 
oixfia ifjioytj yoaxjjag anokikom&v. Ill 33: KiovGravtyvog . . (og ctviog o 
ßccGi'kfvg ir rolg sccvtov kiyn avyyQd/u/Liaffiy. . . nokvg wV tv t^ nai- 
dfvaet loyiav. Constantine used to preach sermons before his Court 
and other hearers, Euseb. vita Const. IV 29—33. Burckhardt, Con- 
stantine p. 400 sq. Victor Epit. 41, 14: nutrire artes bonas, praecipue 
studia litterarum; legere ipse, scribere, meditari. Eutrop. X 7: civili- 
bus artibus et studiis liberalibus deditus. Optatianus to Const. : eius 
imperatoris qui inter belli pacisque virtutes . . etiam Musis tibi fami- 
liaribus adeo vacas ut . . huius etiam studii in te micet splendor egre- 
gius. A specimen of Constantine's appreciation of art below 398, 1. 
The Edicts which bear his name are in the bombastic style which had 
become usual in such compositions, i. e. in agreement with the super- 
human position of the speaker he affects the tone of heavenly revelations. 
M. Voigt, Three epigraphic Constitutions of Constantine the Great, 
Leipzig I860. Of his son Constantius Vict. Caess. 42, 22 says: littera- 
rum ad elegantiam prudens atque orandi genere leni iucundoque, but 
after his death in the Epit. 42, 18 : facundiae cupidus ; quam cum as- 
sequi tarditate ingenii non posset aliis invidebat. 

2. Laws of Constantine of a. 321, 326, 333 (Cod. Theodos. XIII 3) 
confirm the Professors and physicians appointed by the state and their 
families in the exemption chiefly from the decurionship and military 
service. He himself writes to Optatian: saeculo meo scribentes dicen- 
tesque non aliter benignus auditus quam lenis aura prosequitur, deni- 
que etiam studiis meritum a me testimonium non negatur. Cf. Victor 
1. 1. (n. 1). 

3. The history of Constantine may be chiefly derived from Euse- 
bius' vita Constantini (an insincere servile work; Burckhardt, Const, 
p. 346 sq. 374 sq. 389 sq. 398 sq. 418), and the fragments of Praxago- 
ras, Bemarchios, Eunapios, all of whom wrote in Greek. 

4. On Eumenius' two speeches before Constantine see above 387, 8. 
(nr. 3 and 4). 

5. A festive speech (»n the marriage of Constantine with Fausta, 
the daughter of Maximian, a. 307, delivered at Treves by an anonymous 
Gallic rhetorician, nr. V in Jäger's edition. The father-in-law's re- 
newed longing for power is explained in a prosopopoeia (address by 
Roma: c. 11: quousque hoc, Maximiane, patiar etc.) in the style of 



Constantine the Great and the Panegyrics concerning him. 341 

Cicero. In an anachronism Agrippa is 13, 4 called Augustus' son-in- 
law in the battle of Actium. Of misfortune he says 9, 1 : quae non 
illis (dis) volentibus, sed aut aliorsum adspicientibus aut fatali rerum 
cursu urgente videntur accidere. Cf. 12, 3 of Sol: deus ille cuius dona 
sunt quod vivimus et videmus. Burckhardt, Constantine p. 353 sq. 

6. Panegyric on Constantine (VIII in Jäger's edition), delivered at 
Treves at the beginning of a. 313, after Constantino's return from his 
Italian expedition, by a provincial speaker (1, 2) who semper res a 
numine tuo gestas praedicare solitus est (1, 1). The expedition is simply 
related, the facts themselves speaking loud enough. At a later time 
it would perhaps not have been observed (or in a different form) that 
Constantine undertook it contra haruspicum monita (2, 4). On the re- 
lation of this speech to the next (IX) see n. 7. Cicero is called sum- 
mus orator (19, 5), Virgil magnus poeta (12, 3). There are allusions to 
Virgilian (quantae molis 24, 2) and Horatian (distentus 24, 2, cf. Hor. 
S. II 5, 40) expressions. Bolder phrases are excused (ut sic dixe- 
rim 1, 5). 

7, Hieronym. chron. ad a. Abr. 2340 = 324 p. Chr.. Nazarius 
rhetor insignis habetur. Cf. ad a. 2352 =: 336: Nazarii rhetoris filia 
(according to Pontacus: Eunomia) in eloquentia patri coaequatur. Auson, 
prof. Burdig. 14, 9: (gloria fandi) Nazario et claro quondam delata 
Paterae (n. 8) egregie multos excoluit iuvenes. His name is prefixed 
to a panegyric on Constantine of a. 321. It is the fifteenth year of 
Constantine's reign (2, 2) and beatissimorum Caesarum quinquennia 
prima (1, 1. 2, 3. 38, 2). The Caesar Crispus has already distinguished 
himself in war (c. 36 sq.) and Constantinus Caesar can already write 
(37, 5). The Emperor himself is absent (3, 1), but yet is always ad- 
dressed. The capture of Rome (a. 312) pridie (pridem?) prolixius mihi 
dicta sunt (30, 2). This is done in the preceding speech (see n. 6), 
which has for this reason been ascribed to T^azarius. But the different 
peculiarities of these compositions do not favour this identification. 
One and the same person is styled VIII Pompeianus, IX Ruricius. la 
VIII historical statements (especially from Roman history) are frequent, 
but rare in IX. The religious views in VIII are vaguely deistic (13,2. 

26, 1), but in IX there is more Christian colouring (especially 7, 3, cf. 
also c. 14). Naz.'s fondness for forming substantives (ratio cinator, auxi- 
liator, discriminatrix, concitatrix, incitatrix, ornatrix, interpolatrix; mo- 
litio, depulsio, deiectio, adeptio, insultatio, exsultatio), for comparatival 
expressions (benignius quam securius etc. 2, 6. 1, 3. 3, 4. 25, 3. 26, 1. 

27, 4. 28, 5 and elsewhere) and poetical phrases (securus sui, aevi im- 
maturus, immodicus animi; dies conditur; praecipitante die, relaxaverat 
acies; caeci eventus, cruda hieme etc.) is not shared by VIII; the post- 
position of quippe occurs in VIII only in one passage (9, 5) borrowed from I 
(5, 3) but is frequent in IX (1, 2. 3, 6. 8, 2. 9, 4. 32, 8); while sed enim 
(vero) does not occur in IX, but in VIII (8, 1. 20, 4); so also et qui- 
dem, alioquin, the Inf. in an exclamation (2, 2). VIII attests a certain 



342 The Fourth Century of the Imperial Epoch. 

preference of a dactylic close of sentences (e. g. c. 3, 5 and 10), while 
IX prefers bacchic, ionic and trochaic terminations (e. g. c. 12). 

8. Hieronym. ad a. 2352 — 336 A. D.: Patera rhetor Romae glo- 
riosissime docet. Epist. 120 (ad Hedybiam), ] (0pp. I p. 818 Vail.): 
maiores tul Patera atque Delphidius, quorum alter antequam ego nasce- 
rer rhetoricam Romae docuit, alter me iam adolescentulo omnes Gal- 
lias prosa versuque suo illustravit ingenio. Auson. prof. Burdig. 4 is 
dedicated to him with the title : Attius Patera pater, rhetor, in which 
e. g. Patera, fandi nobilis (2), . . iuvenisque te vidi senem (4), doctor 
potentum rhetorum (6). tu Baiocassis stirpe Druidarum satus . . Beleni 
sacratum ducis e temple genus (7, 9). fratri patrique nomen a Phoebo 
datum (Phoebicius, see ib. 10, 17 sq.) natoque de Delphis tuo (13 sq.). 
The son, Attius Tiro Delphidius, is celebrated ib. 5, where we read 
e. g. : facunde, docte, lingua et ingenio celer, iocis amoene Delphidi 
at an early age poeta nobilis. puer celebrasti lovem. mox inde . . epos 
ligasti metricum. He was then famous as an orator (cf. Ammian. XVIII 
1, 4 a. 359 : Numerium Narbönensis paulo ante rectorem accusatum ut 
furem . . Delphidius orator acerrimus vehementer impugnans etc.) and 
was carried by his ambition into a political career which, however, 
nearly destroyed him. mox inde rhetor, nee docendi pertinax, . . medio 
. . aevi raptus es. His widow Euchrotia and daughter Procula joined 
Priscillianus; see Sulpic. Sev. chron. II 48, 2 sq. 51, 3. J, Scaligei" 
lect. auson. I 10. See below 410, 3. 

9. Hieronym. ad a. 2352 = 336 A. D. : Tiberianus vir disertus 
praefectus praetorio Gallias regit. He is probably the same who was 
326 comes per Africam (Cod. Theod. XII 5, 1), 332 comes Hispaniarum 
(Cod. lust. VI 1, 6) and 336 vicarius Hispaniarum (Cod. Theod. Ill 5, 6). 
Another is mentioned below 397, 2. cf. 388, 7. A hexameter by a 
certain Tiberianus is mentioned by Serv, Aen. VI 136; cf. ib. 532: Ti- 
berianus inducit epistolam vento allatam ab antipodibus, quae habet: 
Superi inferis salutem. Tiberianus in Prometheo ait, in Fulgent, myth. 
Ill 7 (p. 120 M.) cf. I 26 (p. 62). Vergil,