Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
University of Toronto
http://www.archive.org/details/teuffelshistoryo02teuf
THE
IMPERIAL PERIOD
oc -'
I 02.00
GO 01
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- L]
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. J4 — 117.
267. The tirst 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 inliuence 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 Italicus
Corellius Rufus (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 jjericulosum servitus fecisset. W. A. Schmidt, Hi-
story of the liberty of thought and belief in th° ftrst century of the
Imperial epoch, Berlin 1847.
General Observations 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 pubhc decla-
mations which had no other purpose but that of exhibitingpersonal
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, iit prius, verum ad honores virtute
perveniiint. 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 praemium 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 sueta 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
above 37, 3. Many instances of these mutual laudations occur in Pliny's
Correspondence, and also in Martial and Statins.
b 6 *J
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 iam proprium placet etc. IX 3,
1 : paene iam quidquid loquimur figura est.
6) Tac. dial. 20: exigitur iam ab orators etiam poeticus color.
Quintil. VIII prooem. 25 : a corruptissimo quoque poetarum figuras ac
translationes mutuamur. Plin. Ep. VII 9, 8: saepe in orationes quoque
non historica modo, sed pro-pe 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 resultont 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 first Centura/. 5
colours (e. g. by Juvenal); some cultivated outward polish,
even at the cost of the contents ^) (e. g. Valerius Flaccus
and Statius) ; 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- Augustan 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 effeminatam et enervem, qualis apud multos, et coti-
die magis, lascivissimis syntonorum modis saltat. V 12, 18: nos habitum
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. Epist. 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, 1: 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 Constantine 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 hterary 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 latinus coronatus in munere patriae
suae (Beneventum). 2603: coronatus inter poetas latinos certamine
sacro lovis Capitoiini. Mommsen I. R. N. 5252. Friedlander 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) Friedlander, 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. Friedlander
1. 1. p. 290 sq. n. 4.
General Ohset^ations on the first Centt^ry. 7
tial, Herennius 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) Kortiim, 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. Kolly, 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. VII
147 sqq. 213 sq. Quintil, X 3, 13: lulius Florus, in eloquentia Gallia-
rum . . princeps. Fronto p. 160 N. : gallicanus quidam declamator.
3) Juv. VII 148 sq.: nutricula causidicorum Africa.
4) Petron. Sat. 1 : rerum tumore et sententiarum vanissimo strepitu
hoc tantum proficiunt iit cum in forum venerint putent se in alium
orbem terrarum delates. On later periods see J. Burckhardt, on C'on-
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,
specimen 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, Komanius 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 Avriter 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 Sabino sestertia ducenta donavit pro
dialogo in quo boleti et ficedulae 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 Priscum 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 LVH 22: .41'kioi' 2((toqv7vov u)g xal ^'nrj Ttycc ig uvtov ovx
hTitrrjd'fHC cc7ioo(Jt'i/>ayr« . . ano tov Kajincokiov xccTfX()t]fxi/tG(y. Suet.
Tib. 61: obiectum est poetae (Mam, Scaurus, see below 271, 2) quod
in tragoedia (entitled Atreus, Dio LVIII 24) Agamemnonem probris
lacessisset (versibus qui in Tiberium flecterentur, Tac. A. VI 29),
Tiberius and Germanicus. 9
obiectum et historico (Cremutiiis Corclus, see below 272, 1) quod Brutum
Cassiiimque ultimos Komanorum dixisset: animadversum statim in auc-
tores scriptaquo 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 com^e 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, Tiib. 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.Schroder,
de eorum scriptorum qui de Tib. . . tradiderunt fide et auctoritate,
Konigsberg 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. XHI 3: Tiberius artem quoque callebat qua verba ex-
10 The First Ceiituiy of tlie 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-
dorus of Gadara, Sen. suas. 3, 7. Suet. Tib. 57. Quintil. Ill 1, 17.
Puristic tendencies. Suet. Tib. 71. Dio LYII 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 defences 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-
lectatus etc. maxime tamen curavit notitiam historiae fabularis, 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. KmaaQ Ti^sQiog) iyQcajjiv
iniyqafAfxcaa xal li/vr^v ()r]TOQtxt]y. The latter may be an error.
4. On Germanicus, 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. 172—209. Peterek, Ger-
manicus, a biographical essay, Trzemesno 1842. 3. A. Zingerle, de
Germanico Caesare Drusi iilio, 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 tulit 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 modo verba coerces.
77: tibi nee docti desunt nee principis artes, Greek and Latin epigrams?
Anal. II p. 159 (146 Jac.) 285 (nr. 2. 3.) Anthol. lat. 708 R. = Anthol.
Pal. IX 387 {'_4dQKcyov KaiaaQog, oi d€ FfQ/uayixov). 709 == Anth. Pal.
VII 542 {^Plaxxov).
6. Under the title Claudii Caesaris Arati Phaenomena (or Aratus
Germanici ad Augustum) and in mss., the earliest of which (see Brey-
sig's ed. p. XHI — XXVI cf. also R. Dahms in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 99 p.
269 — 275) are the Basle ms. saec. VIII (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 4*ttivof^svK
Tibenus and Germanicus. 11
in 725 lines, with three large fragments on the influence of constel-
lations on weather {dtoaf]/us7ci 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. Y 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 sqq. : 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 Germanic! 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 audEpistola critica
12 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
de Germanico Arati interprete, Culm 1861. 4. M. Haupt, Hermes III.
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 xaraaTfQtGfAol
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 addition^ 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 Gerinanicus (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 XIII 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 =z 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.
• . postulate 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: Montaniis, Scaurns, Asiniifs Gallus. 13
exercitatis quidem declamaverit. 28, 17: liabet 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 inVinici (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. IH 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 tamen 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 novissirae
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. II 9, 39. IX 28, 17; cf. X 31, 19.
3. C. Asinius Gallus, 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. VII 4, 8: libri Asini
Galli de comparatione patris et Ciceronis. ib. §. 6: libros Galli . .
quibus ille parent! 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. Qiceronem parum integre atque improprie atque inconsi-
14 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
derate locutum. An epigram by Gallns 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 accusavit condemnavitque
(Suet. Vitell. 2), a. 772 = 19 A. D. He died 784 = 31; see W. Teuffel
in Pauly's Enc. VI 2. p. 2682, Nr. 4. Plin. n. li. XI 187: extat oratio
Vitelli qua Gn. Pisonem eius sceleris (veneficii) coarguit hoc usus argu-
ment© etc.
5. Hieronym. a. Abr. 2062 = Claud. 6 = 46A. D. Domitius Afor
Nemausensis clarus orator habetur, qui postea Nerone regnante ex cibi
redundantia in cena moritur. Cons. suff. 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 divcrsus (better
than Afer). See also Plin. Ep. VIII 18, 5 sqq. Quintil. XI, 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 87, 2). Tac.
dial. 13. 15. Dio LIX 19. Plin. Ep. II 14, 10: narrabat ille (Quintilian):
adsectabar Domitium Afrum; cum apud centumviros diceret graviter et
lente, hoc enim illi actionis genus erat etc. Especially famous were
his (published) speeches pro Voluseno Catulo (Quintil. X 1, 24), pro
Domitilla (ib. VIII 5, 16. IX 2, 20. 3, 66. 4, 31), pro Laelia (ib. IX 4,
31). Meyer, orat. fragm. p. 565 — 570. Other writings Quintil. V 7, 7:
sufficiebant alioqui libri duo a Domitio Afro in banc rem (de testibus)
compositi, quem 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. Ill 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. Cremittius Cordus. 15
lodorns, Sen. contr. II 9, 36. 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), who 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. 28.
U. On Valerius Messalinus see above 262, 6; on Romanius Hispo,
Vinicius, and others, above 263, 10.
272. The expiration of the KepubHc 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 wa. 785 =:: 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 published, 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 Bomanorum
dicta descripsit et facta. Cf. Elschner p. 12 sqq. Biihl, 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. Riihl 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, somniis, institutis antiquisj
repulsis, testamentis, damnatis aut absolutis), and chiefly moral ones
(de fortitudine, moderatione, humanitate, 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 anj^ 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. Kohler, 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 isj likewise mentioned only once (VIII 13, ext. 1.:
quemadmodum Cicero refert libro quern 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 interspersed 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' coUec-
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.
VH), 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 Maxinws. 23
— XXI). The other mss. are of later origin and rarely furnish better
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 (Yen.
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. V. M. specimen,
Hamburg 1844. 4), Halm (Miinchner Gel. Anz. 1854. I. No. 29—31 and
Emendationes Val., Miinchen 1854. 4), J. Vahlen (Rhein. Mus. XI p.
586—594), H. J. Heller (Philologus XXVH p. 343 — 348. XXYHI p. 361
—364), C. Fortsch (Em. Val., L Naumburg 1855. 4. IL 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 «qq. = Posthumous Essays I p. 109 — 132), and especially Kempf s
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: lulius 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. HI 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 coUigenda producit,
Axxva se ostentat sententiis, locis iactat, fundit excessibus. . . recidam
24 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
itaque . . eius redundantia et pleraque transgrediar, nonnulla praeter-
missa conectam. . . et cum integra fere in occulto sint praeter nos duo
profecto nemo epitomata cognoscat. 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 Celle
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 script© compendio complexus 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 Koman 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 therapia. 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 lulius Atticus. Ill 17, 4:
mox lulius Atticus et Cornelius Celsus, aetatis nostrae celeberrimi auc-
tores, patrem atque filium Sasernam secuti etc. IV 8, 1: Celsus et
Atticus, quos in re rustica maxime nostra aetas probavit. Cf. ib. Ill
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 transcripsit). 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 ta
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. n 15, 22. 32. Ill 6, 13 sq. VIII 3, 47. IX 1, 18: Cornelius
26 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
tamen Celsus adicit (to the G/rifjicaa diapoiag and Afl^w?) 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 dlssentio 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): liaec 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: /uciQivQfg
Khkaog etc. Cf. ib. Ill 33 : y.cd GvyyQco^'^v tisqI tovtov (on the recent
war with the Parthians) ^uovt^Qi] Kikaog o (joj^ucaog laxrixog, clnolikovm.
34: w(7Tf ccQiuodtou, (^rjalv o Kikoog, adoxtjrayg avroTg tnfk^sTy. . . o^«i/
ei(f)OQr}Tog ccvToXg o KovQ^oXoiv inl rov N^Qiovog li^avr}. 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.
Cornelius Celsus. The Jifvists. 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 Renzi, 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 scriptos 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 110, 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. Plant. Bacch. 69:
Celsus libros suos cestos vocavit.
8. 0. Jahn, Trans, of the Saxon Society of Lit., 1850, p. 273—282.
H. Paldamus, de Cornelio Celso (Greifswald 1842. 4.) and on it also Fr.
Eitter 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 civilis, 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 auxerunt. . . Masurius Sabinus in equestri ordine fuit et publice
primus respondit, posteaquam hoc coepit beneficium dari; a Tiberio
Caesare hoc tamen 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 Nero; see Gai. II 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 IV 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 {MciGovQiov vofioi). His design seems to have been the
same as that of Q. Mucius (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
II (Gell. V, 6, 13 sq. cf. IV 20, 11. VII 7, 8. Macrob. Ill 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. XXXIII 9, 3 pr.), also an assessorium (ib. XLVII 10, 5, 8: Sabinus
in assessorio cf. II 12, 12: Puteolanus libro primo assessorium). Quotations
from anonymous works of M. Sab. also in Pliny (probably from the
memorialia) n. h. VII 5, 40. X 7, 20. XV 29, 126. 30, 135. XVI 18,75.
44, 236. XXVIII 9. Gellius HI 16, 23. V 19, 11 sqq. X 15, 17 sq. P.
N. Arntzen, de Mas. Sabino. Utrecht 1768 = Oelrichs Thesaur. nov.
III 2. p. 1 sqq. Zimmern, History of Roman private law I I. p. 312
— 315. Rudorff, Hist, of Roman law I p. 168 sq. 237.
2. Pompon. 1. 1. (n. 1) 48: hie etiam Nerva (grandfather to the
later Emperor) Caesari (i. e. Tiberius) familiarissimus fuit. Tac. A. IV
58: prolectio (of Tiberius to Campania) arto comitatu fuit: unus sena-
tor consulatu functus (A. 786 =z 33 A. D.) Cocceius Nerva, continuus
principis, omnis divini humanique iuris sciens . . moriendi consilium
cepit etc. Dio LVIII 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 grammarians of this period are Julius
Modestus who, like his master Hyginus, embraced the real as
Jurists 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 historiam de equo Seiano
tradunt. Macrob. I 4, 7 (cf. 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 tbe 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 variis 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. Schottmiiller, de Plin. libr. gramni. p. 8 sqq.). Against Schottmiiller
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, iirst j)ublished 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. ReilTerscheid's Suetonius ]}. 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 II, (p. 503, 16 Htz.) Nisus et Pa^Dirianus 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. Grafenhan, 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 Julius 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 Castoris
cui summa auctoritas erat in ea arte (botany) nostro aevo , visendo hor-
tuio eius in ^^^ 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
LVn 19. Athen. I p. 7 A., cf. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Encycl. 1 1 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
COipccQivTixf'c). The mention made of Varianus puUus (VI 9) seems to
prove that the work was written after^ Heliogabuius (= 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 etc., Heidelberg 1867. 202 pp.). F.
H. Dierbach, Flora Apiciana, Heidelberg 1831. E. Meyer, History of
Botany II (Konigsberg 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 III 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, 1.
28, 2 (Celsus quoque et Atticus consentiunt). 29, 1. 4. 30, 1 sq. 33, 4.
He is mentioned by Plin}^ in his ind. auct. on book XIV, XV, XVII.
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 XVII.
He may have been the son of that Graecinus to whom Ovid addressed
Amor. II 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. II 21, 5
(vir egregius, quern C. Caesar occidit ob hoc unum quod melior vir
erat quam esse quemquam tyranno ex23edit). 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
Tie 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, August! liberti, fabularum aesopiarum libri. His
patron appears to have been Augustus (divus Aug., Phaedr. Ill 10, 39),
us Tiberius is called Caesar Tiberius II 5, 7. The circumstances of
his life are known to us only from his poems. Ill prol. I : 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
quampuer 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, o 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: II epil. HI 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; III 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. HI 1 and 12. IV epil.
2. For his relation to Aesop see I prol. 1 sq. (Aesopus auctor
Phaedrns. 33
quam materiam repperit banc ego polivi versibus senariis). IV. prol.
11 sqq. (fabulis, quas aesopias, non Aesopi, nomino, quia paucas ille
ostendit, ego plures fero etc.). IV 21. V prol. Though 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, I 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 bo'ok, 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 irnprobi 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. Miiller
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. MiiUer'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 (I 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 Nic. 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.
S14. 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. I860,,
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. Miiller (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, 21. 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^
suft. 776 V. C. .'') — is carmina scenae dabat — . . proba iecerat. XII
28: apud posteros . . carminum gloria praecellit. 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 longe
princeps Pomponius Secundus, quem 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 af
Pomp. Sec.) Plinius (preferred omneis to omnes). He may have treated
of these matters in his letters; ib. p. 125, 23 K. : cetariis Pomponius
Phaedrus. Pomponius Secwndus. 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
indicium (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. II). 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 Juhan 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
public 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 w^as studied with much zeal, but the pre-
vailing uniformity 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 CatulH. Sueton. Calig. 57: in Laureolo mimo . . cruore scena
abundavit. Joseph. Antiq. XIX 1, 13 (p. 104, 13 sq. Bk.) : fiTfxog €la<xyirai
(shortly before Caligula's assassination) y,aS-' oV GravQovica Xriar(Zv ^yfuojy.
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. : Evodog ^Podwg Inonoioq, ysyoy(6g tnt
Ni()(t)vog, o xfav^aCofxfPog fig Qco/ucdxtjr nor'tjfftj/. lovxov td (it^kfa ov
3. H. Lehmanii, Claudius and Nero 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
The Emperor Claudius. 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 plurimuni attendit, qiiantumvis facundus et promptus,
utique si perorandiim in aliquem essel. irato et verba et sententiae
suppetebant. . . leniiis 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 sententia
quemque vel sublevare, equestri quoque ordine ad audiendum 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) doctrinae, 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-
f'ensionem adversus Asini Galli libros (above 271, 3) satis eruditam. 42:
nee minore cura graeca studia secutus est, amorem praestantiamque
linguae occasione omni professus. . . deniqae et graecas scripsit historias,
TvfiqrivvxMv XX, KaQ/^doptaxcou 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 acre publico per
fora ac templa fixo. These are the three letters J for consonant u, 3
(antisigma) to denote bs and ps, and y 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,
tamen consuetude antiqua superavit), would not have had much chance,
even if it had been started by a |^rince 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. Bucheler, de Ti. Claudio Caesare grammatico,
Elberfeld 1856. 54 pp., where the inscriptions are collected. Cf. Rhein.
Mus. XIII 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 = 4'8 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. Comarmond,
Description . . des tables de Claude, Lyon 1847. 4. J. B. Monfalcon,
Monographic 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 consistent, so that
Claudius 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 Agr ippin ae
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's Enc. 1 1, 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
the throne. Cf. Lehmann, Claudius p. 5 sq.
7. Suet. Nero 52: liberales disciplinas omnes fere puer attigit.
sed a philosophia eum mater averti't, 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 superseripta inerant. lb. 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 supplere.
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: iu nuvdrjfxia rtvl d^ia (on the quinquennalia of a.
818 V. C.) . . apiyvix) TQiD'Cxa t^vu havTOv noirjfiKTa, 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 jquoted 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, I sq. J.), cf. 0. Jahn's prolegg. to Pers. p.
LXXVIII— LXXXI. W. Teuffel, Translation of Persius (Stuttg. 1857) p.
44 sq. But in these Troica was probably the \4kojGig ^Iki'ov recited by
Nero on the occasion of the conflagration of Rome (A. D. 64). Dio LXII
18 : T>?V axfvijy Tiju xi&aQOidixrii/ ia/SwV rjafv "Aktoaiv . . ^Ikiov. 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: jia^foxfvdCdo ds log X(d rag tioj/ PoifxaCiav riQc'c'^ftg
(tndoag cvyyQc'txpoiv tv I'n^oiv xal ufqC yf tov nkrj'j^ovg rw^ ^i^kiMv,
tiqIv X(d OTiovy uvtmi^ ovv&nviu, tayJijiaTo.
9. Of a different kind were those poems of Nero's which were in-
tended for recitation to the cithara. Dio LXI 20: txii^uQcodtjas
7f Jtjiv ny(< tj Bax/ag. Neroniana cantica in Suet. Vitell. 11. He took
his subjects from Greek tragedies. Philostrat. Apoll. Tyan. IV 39
tJOojy T(c TOV NtQCtiyog /utXt]. . . inijyf fx^krj id ^ufu i| OQSOifiag, id df
ii, ].4i^Tiyoyr]g, rd d' o7io,9fPovu Xiov rQayiodov/uiyioi/ (cvtm, xal (oddg txa/u-
TiTfy oTioaag NtQiou tlvyi^i ts xal xaxiag toiQSifsi^. 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: togccvtu xal n()6g njj^ ^ovkriv, nqog tov ^fpkxov xccl
v.vTd yowiivTo., dv^yvo). 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. Fronto
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 Pisa.
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, how^ever, but rarely be
Nero. L. Awnaeus 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 ot 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 pio 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 ^fvixfc? o Apviog o JovAiog . . O'lfif^aQt] nuo okiyop . . on
dixtju TiPd iv Tio avrf^Qio) naqovTog (cvtov (Caligula) xakcjg hlnsv.
When a. 41' the youngest daughter (born a. 18) of Germanicus and
sister of Caligula, Julia Livilla, was exiled through the influence of
Messalina, Seneca, being her lover, shared her fate. (Tac. A. XIII 42.
Dio LXl 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 iidus 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: ov yuo ajif^^tjaft/ avrio t>?V ^lovkiav /uot)(fvG(ci, ovdi
^f^kiiayv ix Trjg ifjvytjg iyiv&jo, akkd xul TJj ^AyQt7i7i/'i/r] . . tJikijaiccCfy.
But in this case it is possible that he was seduced by the lady. Cons,
sufi'. 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: (cvtol
(Seneca and Burrus) r^yV liQ/n^ ccTi^ouy Tia^hkct^oi/ xai diMxrjoay tcf^
oGoi/ rjdvyijdrjaai/ a^iCTcc xat dixaiotaia. 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-
j)eratoriae 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 turn
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 testanienta et orbos velut indagine eius
capi, Italiam et provincias immenso fenore hauriri. An instance of
such speculations is given by Dio LXII 2. Cf. ib. LXI 10: y.ccl Iv akkovg
nccvTct Tcl lyayTKOTCiTcc org i<iikoGo(ffi noiuiy ^^iy/^V- ^f<^' ydg ivQuvvf-
dog x(itf]yoQioi' . . ov'y. 'aifiaKcTo lov nakart'ov . . roTg T€ nkovTovafv
tyy.akdiv (? cf. Sen. vit. beat. 17) ovaiur knTaxi^a/ikioyv xal nfvTuy.oaiuiv
fxvQicidojy ixTrjaajo, y.al rag nokvTfkfiag Tcoy akkoiv alnoifxspog nivra-
xoaiovg iQinodag . . *?/#. • . wg aa&kyfiag a? nqaTTOiv yafAov if ini-
(f((P8GTc<Top tyt]/u€ (with Pompeja Paulina, Tac. A. XV 60) xcd /LtsiQaxt'otg
i'^(OQoig i'yaiQf xcd tovto xccl top- Ntq(ora noifJy tdidcc'^f. But in Tac.
A. XIV 53 Seneca says to Nero : tantum honorum 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. Annaeus 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 liis 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 tem-
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 indicia contendo. (126.) turn autem solus
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 dialogi feruntur.
in philosophia parum diligens, egregius tamen vitiorum insectator fuit.
multae in eo claraeque sententiae, multa etiam morum gratia legenda;
sed in eloquendo 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
eo, 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 milieus alio atque
alio amictu indutam referunt. (158.) . . quid ego verborum sordes et
44 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
illuvies, quid verba modulate collocata et effeminate fluentia? Gellius
XII 2, 1 : de Annaeo Seneca partim existimant ut de scriptore minime
utili, cuius libros attingere nullum pretium operae sit, quod oratio eius
vulgaris videatur et protrita, res atque sententiae aut inepto inanique
irapetu 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 vsrorks. 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. p. 315 — 321) and de brevitate vitae
(cf. 13, 8). After the death of Claudius he composed the dnoxokoxvy-
Tioatg ; 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. Volkmanu, on Seneca, a literary sketch, Mager's Revue 1857,
p. 259 — 267. F. Bohm, 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. Dorgens, 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. Annaeus 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 186?. 4. W. Bernhardt, Seneca's views of
the Universe, Wittenberg 1861. 4.
De latinitate Senecae Bohmer (OIs 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 Lucilius,
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 pisciura 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 imma-
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. XIY 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.
4fi 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. Miiller, Critical observations-
on either Seneca, Fleckeisens Jahrb. 93, p. 483 — 503. 0. Matthia, Ob-
servationes criticae in Sen., Berlin 1865. E. Bahrens, lectiones latinae
Bonn 1870) p. 40 46. J. J. Cornelissen, Coniectanea latina, 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. Annaeus Seneca. 41
\i\iere 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, I fin.) Edition of
the letters by J. Schweighauser (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. Koler, Getting. 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 : Aovxiog lovviog rakkioyv o tov SSfysxa ccd€l(f>og
aoifioTiXTov Tt> ajiff^^fy^cno (on the apotheosis of Claudius), avvid^rjxs
jusp yaQ xctt o 2fv4xag GvyyQcc/u/ua anoxokoxvvTMGvv ajro iogtisq
nuft dnoS^avatMGn/ ovofjiKcag. The extant work does not, however, bear
this title, but in the St. Gall ms. : .47ZO0irO-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 {xokoxvyrf]), 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. 830 — 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
Biicheler p. 72 — 76. A separate edition by C. E. Schusler (denuo rec,
Utrecht 1844) and especially by Fr. Biicheler, 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 approa<^hed
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: quem 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
Tiibing. 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 Woltflin'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 III p. XX sq. E. Wolflflin, Philologus
L. Annaevs Seneca. 49
VIII p. 184 — 187. IX p. 680 sqq. K. Schenkl, Contributions etc. (see n.
7 fin.) p. 33—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 362
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 w^ords, 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. Riese 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.,
p.fter 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 Senecam, also Diomedes
III p. 511, 23 K. anapaesticum choricum habemus in Seneca = Med.
301); Phaedra by Priscian. VI 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 confo.unds Statins and Seneca owing to the identity of the titles
(Statins in Thebaide = Sen. Oedip. 1079). A similar error in Sidonius
ApoU. carm. IX 229 — 231 (quorum unus colit 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 philosopher. 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. Miiller, B. Schmidt, J. Kohler and others do not think
these deviations so important as to justify the assumption of different
authorship.
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 thesome 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, dextra, hunc pete uterum capacem,
qui virum et gnatos tulit). The metrical treatment deserves most praise
for folhjwing 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) l)eing 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, Gotti. 1765. 4.) especially F. Jacobs, Supplements to Sulzer IV
p. 343 sqq. F. G. Welker, Rhein. Mus. Suppl. II 3. p. 1447—1456. L.
Miiller in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 89, p. 409—422. R. Peiper, praefationis
in Sen. tragoedias nuper editas supplementum (Breslau 1870. 4.) p.
8 — 27.
L. Annaeiis 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. Miiller 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. Kohler, 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
a^id 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 othsrs, 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. XII).
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 difiers 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 antiquos 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. 271—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 = 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. Gronovius
(Lugd. B. 1661. Amsterd. 1682). cum notis variorum by J. C. Schroder
(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. Annaeus Seneca. Historhins 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: On. Lentulus Gaetulicus Tiburi genitum scribit
(of Caligula). . . Gaetulicum refellit Plinius quasi mentitum per adula-
tionem 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. rccnov'
ktxoy Aivjovlov tc< rs ukka fvdoxt/uop ovra xect irjg re^fxavCag dsxa
ijfaw aq'^ccvTct, 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 Fanovkixov or r«t-
tovktxtov or Tativkkfov etc. in the Greek Anthology (II 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, quem 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 Century 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. Biidinger'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. Hiibner (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 and sentences.
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 his rhetores
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. rom. 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
(cl- Curtivs Riff7fb\ 55
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 Brissonius, 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, Freinsheim, 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. Another 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 =z 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,
Berhn 1820. Ph. Buttmann, on the reading of C. R., Berlin 1820. G-
P/inzger, on the age of C. R., in Seebode's Archiv I (1824) p. 91—104.
Fr. Kritz in the Halle Allg. 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. Eussner,
ibid. XXXII p. 157—160.
3. Among his sources Curtius mentions Clitarchus (IX 5, 21, 8, 15.
Cf. Schone, Anal, philol. I 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 VH 8, 11 (utcumque sunt tradita incorrupta perferemus).
IX 1, 34 (equidem plura transscribo quam credo; nam nee adfirmare
sustineo 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) ]>. 323-322. His descriptions of battles manifest small technical
56 The first Centurv of the Imperial Epoch.
knowledge, wlienci^ it appears improbable that the author was idcntioa)
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 (Miitzell p. LXXXVI), Miitzell,
vie translationum quae vocantur apud Curtium usu, Berlin 1842. 4. J.
H. Ernesti, usurpata a Curtio in particulis latinitas, tam 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 Insterburg 1870. 30 pp. 4. II. 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 Wiirz-
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 (Wiirzburg 1868) p*
4—25, and on the criticism of Curtius, in the Trans, of the Philol.
Congress at V^'urzburg (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 Jalin'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. princeps, Venet. c. 1471 fol. luntina 1507 sqq. Aldina 1520.
Editions by Erasmus (1518), Fr. Modius (Colon. 1579), J. Freinsheim
(cum comm. et suppl., Strasburg 1648, 2 vols, and 1670. 4.), H. Snaken-
burg (cum notis var. Delft 1724. 4.), Fr. Schmieder (cum comm.
Gotting. 1803), J. Miitzell (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. Mutzell (Berlin 1843) and C. G. Zumpt
Ciirtuis Rufus. Columella. 57
(Brunswick 1849. 1864). Texts by A. Baumstark (Stuttgart 1829), H. E.
Foss (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 Miitzell., 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. Kohler (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. Grunauer (Frauenfeld 1870. 4.), Th.
Vogel (Fleckeisen's Jahrb. lOl, p. 547-561), A. Eussner (Philol. XXXII
p. 172—178).
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.
I. 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. VII 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 Century 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, I
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 iani temporibus avorum
conquestus est. I 7, 3: ipse nostra memoria veterem consularem (A.
D., 3) virumque opulentissimum L. Volusium (f 56 A. I).) asseverantem
audivi. V I, 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 (•{- 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 item que in Albano . . vites . . habuerimus).
2. His works. XI 1, 31: contra quam observationem multis argu-
mentationibus disseruisse me non infitior in iis libris quos adversus
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
differo in eum librum quem componere in animo est cum agricolationis
totam disciplinam 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. Ill— V (especially V 12) which
in the Florentine (Medic.) ms. bear the heading: Surcularis I, II. III.
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 dedimus
=; 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 ; . , tamen . . nu-
merum quern iam quasi consummaveram voluminum excessi etc. XII
1, I : 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 I, 1 neque infitior ali-
qua me praeteriisse, quamvis inquirentem sedulo quae nostri saeculi
cultores quaeque veteres litterarum monumentis prodiderunt; sed . .
non asseveraveram quae vastitas eius scientiae contineret cuncta me
dicturum, sed plurima. . . (2.) nobis satis abundeque est tam diffus?ie
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 quern nos perfectum esse volumus agricolam . . multum tamen 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 rusticarum rerum pars su-
perest, de cultu hortorum, P. Silvine, deinceps ita ut et tibi et Gallioni
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
Vergilius significaverat (Georg. IV 148) posteris post se memorandas
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 admodum . . 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 II 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 free
from the general superstition of the period, is still not alto-
gether nonsensical and in tolerable style.
1. Plin. n. h. XXIX1,7: multos praetero medicos, celeberrimosque
ex his Cassios, Arruntios, Rubrios. ducena quinquagena HS annua his
mercedes fuere apud principes. Q. Stertinius imputavit principibus
quod sestertiis quingenis annuls 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 III 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 Apulei Celsi
fuit, praeceptoris Valentis et nostri, et nunquam ulli se vivo compositi-
onem eius dedit. 43, 171 : antidotus Apulei Celsi praeceptoris, quam
. . mittebat Centuripas, unde ortus erat. See E. Meyer, Hist, of Botany
Scribonius Largus. 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) . . Herophilus, 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, ut scis,
peregre nee sequitur nos nisi necessarius admodum numerus libellorum.
. . (26) initium a capite faciemus, . . dantes operam ut simpHcia 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 melius 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 arovor
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 Marcellus who have employed
Scrib onius, the latter even merely copying him.
5. Editions, besides the collections of Aldus (1547) and Stephanus
(1567) by J. Rueilius (ap. Wechel, Paris 1529 fol.) and especially J.
62 Tlie first Century of the Imperial Epoch.
Khodius (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 Kiihn 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 (Konigsb. J 855) 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 wliich the original commentary of Asconius was
perhaps used, are more useful.
1. Hieron. on Eus. chron. ad a. Abr. 2092 =r 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 Rffsch.) 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.
' JnUiog^ 'Aa-AMvtog^ Ilai&vavog 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,
filii, 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
Asconms. 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 Scaiiro, 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. Schiitz 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 aere al. Milonis, de rege alexandrino, pro Archia,
Sulla, in Catil. IV, pro Marcello, Ligarib, Deiotaro, Scauro), generally
called Scholia Bobiensia. 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-
N 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 religion, 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. Grafenhan, History of clas-
sical philology IV p. 292—298.
291. 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 ciausam
aperit ecce principum maximus, nee indomitarum modo ante se verum
ignotarum quoque gentium victor propriarum rerum {idem 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. Pliny 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 (III 90, 94) and Cornelius Nepos
(III 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 (157 — 59), and
Britain III 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 librorum mss. fidem edidit notisque criticis instruxit, Berlin 1867),
We may also mention the edition of J. Gronovius (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 lived 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. Tac. 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. Tac. dial. 8: ausim contendere Marcellum Eprium (see n. 3)..
et Crisp um Vibium . . notos non minus esse in extremis partibus
terrarum quam Capuae aut Vercellis, ubi nati dicuntur (cf. Schol. Juv.
IV 81 : Crispus, municeps Viselliensis ; ])ut 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 moribus egregius, alter habitu quoque
corporis contemptus, per multos iam annos potentissimi sunt civitatis
ac donee libuit principc fori, nunc principes in Caesaris (i. e. Vespa-
siani) amicitia agunt geruntque cuncta. Hist. II 10: Vibius Crispus,
pecunia, potentia, ingenio inter claros magis quam inter bonos. . .
Crispum easdem accusationes 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 consulatuni 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 Vitelliiis (Suid. v. Bnikkiog). Quintil. V 13, 48: quod
factum venuste nostris temporibus elusit Vibius Crispus, 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 tamen causis quam publicis melior. XII 10, 11
(iucunditatem Crispi). VIII 5, 17 (pro Spatale Crispus, cf. ib. 19:
Traclialus 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 = 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-
'cellus 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 illi (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 eam) princeps, alio-
qui inter paucos disertus.
6. Tac. Hist. I 90: in rebus urbanis Galerii Trachali (Cons.
821 = 68 with Silius Italicus) 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 tamen 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 published
his speech contra Spatalen (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. Abr. 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 =; Claud. 8 = 48 A. D. : M. Antonius Li-
berals, 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 Italicus 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: Nervae (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 ('assiani (cf. n. 3) partim Proculiani. Dig. XXXVII 14, 17 (decree
of the Divi fratres): Proculum, sane non levem iuris auctorem. Cf.
XVIII 1,1,1 (Sabinus et Cassius, . . Nerva et Proculus . . verier 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
Labeonis (ib. XXXIIl 6, 16), probably identical with his Notae on Labeo
(ib. Ill 5, 10, 1 and XXXV 1, 69: apud Labeoaem Proculus notat, cf-
ib. XVII 2, 65, 5). Altogether 37 excerpts from I"*roculus 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 tempore et Nerva filius
(for the father see aljove 276, 2). fuit et alius Longinus (than the one
mentioned n. 3) ex equestri quidem ordinc, qui postea ad praeturam
usque pervenit. Dig. Ill 1, 1,3; qua aetate (pueritia, which extended to
the 17th year) aut paulo maiore fertur Nerva filius et publice de lure
responsitasse. XLl 2, 47: idque Nerva filius libris De usucapionibus
retulit. He was a Proculian. Of him we should probably understand
Tac. A. XV 72: triumphale decus . . Cocceio Nervae, praetori designate,
. . tribuit (Nero, A. D. 65).
3. Pomponius 1. 1. (n. 1) 51 : huic (i. e. Masurius, above 276, 1)
successit Gaius Cassius Longinus, natus ex filia 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 Tiberii, sed
plurimum in civitate auctoritatis habuit, eo usque donee eum Caesar
(Nero, A. D. 65, see Suet. Ner. 57: Cassio Longino iuris consulto ac
luminibus 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 11 (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. lY 8, 19, 2: Cassias
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. XXXV
1, 54: in commentariis Gaii, XL VI 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. Ati-
licinus Proculo suo salutem. This is followed by a juridical query,
to which Proculus 'respondit'. He is mentioned ib. X 3, 6, 4 (Sabinus
et At. rcsponderunt). XII 4, 7 (Nerva, At. responderunt). XLV 2, 17
(At., Sabinus, Cassius . . aiunt). Inst. lust. II 14 (Atilicino placuisse
Paulus . . refert). Fragm, Vat. 77 (Atilicinum 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 from Ulpian), the author of a work in several books de
stipulationibus (Paul. 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 litteras
non esse Pedius libro XXV ad edictum scribit. In the notae Einsid-
lenses on legal subjects we find also at the end S. P. M., which is
explained Sexti Pedii Medmani (according to Huschke's emendation,
from Medma or Medama in Bruttium). He would appear 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 16, 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.2 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
Kufus, 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 Ladn, 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 Stoic 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: Jfrnttrig i^tkoao(^og, . . ycyovug iy
P(0/ut] tni NhQiovog xcd nqog ctviov avaiqfd^fig Gvp tio MovGoviiO (n. 3).
*y^«fff nokkd <fiik6ao(ia tf xcd Qt]TOQixd. Hieronym. chron. ad a. Abr*
2084 =. Ner. 14: Nero. . Cornutum philosophum, praeceptorem Persii
(see below 297, 2), in exsilium fugat. Dio LXII 29 (Avvmov Koqpovtop
fvdoxt/uovvra tots ys inl naidfC^). He composed philosophical treatises
Tifiog AS^tjt/odcjQoy xcd JtQtaTOTfktjy, nfQi Trjg tiov d-fiov (fyorfw?, 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-
Ti/yag QtjTo^ixdg 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 — reliquit 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. 7l
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 :
Povi^og Movc(x)Viog 6 (^iloGOi^og . . ii^vyadfvd-t]). nam , . Musonius
praeceptis sapientiae fovebat (iuvenes.) XIV 59: doctores sapientiae,
Coeranus graeci, Musonius tusci (from Volsinii) generis. Hist. Ill 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: nayrag avrixa lovg
qikoGOi^ovg o OvfonaGifcvog, nki^v rov MovGoiviov, ix rrjg Po/uijg t^^^akfv
(a. 71). An inscription (Eph. Arch. 3833, 3) : U^^vg ^ Anokkiovog Jrjkfov
ditt {^iov) MovGMyiog "^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 {anofxvrifxovfv fxaia Movaioviov) by Lucius and (Valerius)
Pollio, from which Stobaeus gives ample quotations in his Florilegium.
Cf. E. Rohde, on Lucian's Jovxtog, 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. od J. Venhuizen-Peerlkamp, Harlem 1822. H. Ritter and L. Preller,
hist, philos. graeco-rom. p. 438 sqq. J. J. Babler, 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' 'Ey/ftQidvov
'EniXTijiov. 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 quidem 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 Paetus 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. TeufTel 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 S^aGiag xccl 6 2oqavo<;
(n. 8), xai y^vovg xcd nkovrov r^g rf ov/binaorjg ciQhTrjg ig id 71Q(ot(( ai^r}-
xovTfg, . . dnid^uvov . . ori Toioviot ijGc/.i/. 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
Favonios . . genuit (ib. 22). When sentenced to die, he was maxime
intentus Demetrio, cynicae institutionis doctori (Sen. de benef. VII 8,
2: virum exactae . . sapientiae firmaeque . . constantiae, eloquentiae
vero eius quae res fortissimas deceat etc., exiled under Vespasian, Dio
LXVI 13). cum quo . . de natura animae 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: 70V 2MQavov Ilovnkiog Eypajiog Kfkfo (of Berytos) iftkocfo(^og
xfiTfilJfvdo/uaQTv^rjGfi/. 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 (Soranum Baream Celer 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. He 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 Ilelvidius Priscits. 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 animum 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 soceri in exilium pulsus ut Galbae principatu (^a.
69) rediit Marcellum Eprium (above 292, 3) delatorem Thraseae accu-
sare adgreditur. . . primo minax certamen et egregiis utriusque ora-
tionibus testatum etc. A subsequent attack upon Marcellus was 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 "^Ekovidtog . . Toig
arcji'xoTg doy/nuaii/ IviQcj^i-lg •acu rrjj/ tov Q^aoiov TiaQQtjGiau ov ovv
xui^io fjitfjLov^tvog etc.).
295. In the department of grammar the most eminent
person of this time is M. Valerius P rob us of Berytus, who
undertook the critical revision of the texts of the classical
writers ir^ the manner of the Alexandrine critics. 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. Of 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. Flavius 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 Vatican a).
1. Sueton. gramm. 24 (P. being the last grammarian in Suetonius^
account, directly after Remmius Pala'emon, 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 (Latin) apud grammatistam. . . hos cum dihgentius
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 docuit 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.
(Of. n. 2) nimis pauca et exigua de quibusdam minutis quaestiimculis
edidit (independently of his editions), reliquit autem non mediocrem
silvam observationum sermonis antiqiii. 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 Aerailium aut Scaurum
Berytiumve Probum. Id. profess. 15, 12 (Scaurum Probumque). 20, 7
(grammatice ad Scaurum atque Probum). Macrob. 22, 9 sq. (Valerius
Probus, vir perfectissimus, 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). Grafenhan,
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.
Teufifel, 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 familiares (e. g. Annianus VI 7, 1 sqq.) ; see 1 15, 18.
Ill 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 commentationum 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 pronuntiasse 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. Reiff. p. 137 — 141, and A. Nauck, Lex. Vindob. p. 278 sqq.):
his (21 critical notes) solis in adnotationibus Ennii, Lucilii et histori-
corum usi sunt Vargunteius, Ennius Aeliusque et postremo 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) scrip tura. 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 notis 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 Buschke'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. Buschke 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 Buschke 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.,
quern 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 Ceutury of the Imperial Epoch.
His criticism was expressed chie% 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 be 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. Egnatius, 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.
1 — 68). WoUenberg, 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 Fleckeisen's Jahrb.
87, p. 351 355 and Pruleg. 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. 8teup 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 ib. p. CLVU 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-
haps from Flavius Caper (Steup p. 190 — 200). They relate mostly to
the treatise de inaequalitate consuetudinis (Charis. II p. 212, 1 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 protnlisse etc.). Cf. ib. X 46 p. 535: quod Probus usu Pomponii
(above 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 Keil V p. 165, 17 sqq.: scripsit
ad hunc locum (on the genera of nomina) Probus unum librum. iste
The grammarian Valerius Proht^s. 11
(Donatus) institutoriam artem scripsit, non scripsit perfectis, sed 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 vaticana 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 Catholica (H. Wentzel,
de Probo p. 9 sqq. Steup p. 142—147). We possess also an Appendix
to it (in Endlicher's 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 Ber)^tian, at least
as regards their chief substance, assuming that his posthumous writings
were subsequentl)^ 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 in Keil IV p. 3: quoniam instituta artium sufficieiiter
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 Catholica 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 genera
ortus . . claro. apud volgum rumore erat. . . namque facundiam tu
endis civibus excercebat, largitionem adversum amicos et ignotis quo
que, coini sermoiie 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 Schol
of Valla on Juv. V 109: Piso Calphurnius, ut Probus inquit, antiqua
familia, scenioo 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 year; 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
TQtd-ijfi. and hi^d-riy.. with tqCt. tqo/. 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 Piso. 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. Wolfflin,
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 (Statii 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. Mahly 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. Mahly (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, Reififerscheid p. 394—398. Steup de Probis p.
125 — 130. Jahn maintains, but Reifferscheid denies that commentarium
meant a set of notes on the Satires ; Steup has a mediating view ad-
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 Tmprrial Epoch.
2. Yitn : Aules Persius Flaccus natus est prid. non. decem])r. Fabio
Persico. L. Vitellio coss. (4 Dec. 787 = 34). decessit VIII kal. decembr.
Rubrio Mario, Asinio Gallo coss. (24 Nov. 8l5=r.62). natus in Etruria
Volaterris eques rom. . . decessit autem vitio stomachi anno aetatis
XXVIII. (sepultiis 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 moi'iens 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 amir'itia coepit uti Annaei Cornuti (above 292, 2), ita ut nusquam
;ib eo discederet; inductus (ab eo) aliquatenus in philosophiam est. . .
coluit ut patrem Servilium Nonianum (above 286, 2). . . idem decern
fere annis summe dilectus a Paeto Thrasea (above 294, 7) est, . .
cognatam eius Arriam uxorem habente. . . sero cognovit et Senecam,
sed non ut caperetur eius ingenio. . . fuit morum lenissimorum, 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
rehquit, 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 'odoinoQtxcoi^ 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 f)refixed to it in 14 choliambics. 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
generally distorting them by his additions and exaggerations. Cf. Ca-
saubonus, Persiana Horatii imitatio, e. g. in Diibner's edition of Per-
Fer.siffs. 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 mss. 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-Bomel 1848. 100 pp.
On a Vienna ms. saec. X with glosses and Scholia see A. Gobel, 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 Carlo vingian period (0. Jahn p. CXIIl 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-
tannicus (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. Diibner, Lips. 1833), Konig (Gotting. 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., Ziirich
1833), F. Hauthal (part I Leipzig 1837) and especially 0. Jahn (cum
6
82 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
seholiis 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)
iiy 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 Gruber'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, Miinster
1867. 122 pp.
W. Pierson, on the metaphors of Persius, llhein. Mus. XII p. 88
— 98. B. Erdmann, observationes aliquot grammaticae in Pers. satiras,
Wittenberg 1866. 4. J. Schliiter, Quaestiones Persianae, Miinster 1857.
9. On Sat. 1 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. Lehraann,
Philologus VI p. 431 --445; on IV Hackermann in Jahn's Archiv XVIII
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 mind as Persius and a friend of his
was Seneca's nephew M. Annaeus Lucanus, 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 Reift'erscheid'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 Reifferscheid'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
(Mai-l»urg 1856. 4.). To this we may add the statements of Tacitus and
Fersius and Lucan. 83
Statius' genethliacon Lucani (Silv. II 7). Lncani vita per annos digesta
by C. F. Weber 1. 1. Part. II and III, Marb. 1857 sq. 4.; and De siiprema
Lucani voce, Marb. 1857. 4.
2. Vacca: M. Annaeus Lucanus patrem habuit M. Annaeurn Melani
. . 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. Oaesare Germanico II L. Apronio Caesiano coss. (3 Nov.
792 = 39 A. D.). . . octavum mensem agens Romam translatus est.
. . a praeceptoribus tunc eminentissimis est eruditus (cf. vita Persii:
cognovit per Cornutum etiam Annaeurn Lucanum, aequaevum auditorem
Cornuti. Lucanus mirabatur scripta Flacci etc.). declamavit et graece
et latine cum magna admiratione audientium.
3. Suetonius' vita: prima ingenii experimenta in Neronis laudibus
dedit quinquennali certamine. . . revocatus Athenis a Nerone cohor-
tique amicorum additus atque etiam quaestura honoratus (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. 2U80 — : 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 meraini, confici vero ac i^roponi venalia non tantum operose
et diligenter sed inepte quoque.
4. Vacca: et certamine pentaeterico acto in Pompei theatro 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 causaruiu
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
tabulae XIV (see above 8, I extr.), Epigrammata (? the codd. : appa-
mata and et ippamata); prosa oratione in Octavium Sagittam (Tac. A.
Xlll 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
tamen ut belli civilis (Phars.) videantur accessio. Also adlocutio ad
PoUam (his wife Argentaria Polla) according to Stat. Silv. II 7, 62 sq.
R. Unger, de Liicani carminum reliquiis, Friedland 1860. 4.
5. QuintiK 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. 1382: Lucanus ideo in numero poe-
tarum esse non meruit quia videtur historiam composuisse, non poema.
This agrees almost verbally 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 Jornand. 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 different 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. VII 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. VIII 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.
Luean. 85
IX 1034 sqq.), and his assassination is justified and praised (VII 593 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. VII
446 sqq. 455 sq.) are the results of his despair of a just Providence
(III 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. VIII 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 inch'? are. Against
F. Osann (de Sen. scriptis deperditis spec. III. Giesseti 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: Mg 6 Ilok&f^wp' tv n^junrt] i'^ijy^afojy
Ttjg x«T(( JovyMvov rov P(o/ucc7op i^t^vkioiv avyyQCi(^>tjg ctuftftjyaTo. 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
Bemensia, 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 bello 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. Imm. 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 XII 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. Barmann (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. Aschaffen-
burg 1849. 4.
12. Meusel and Gottfr. Biirger, 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.
299. One of the friends of Persius was the lyrical poet
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 habiiit 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 ardente Vesuvio . . et late ignibus abundante cum
villa sua ustum esse (A. D. 79). Cf. PJin. 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 quem adicere velis is erit Caesius Bassus, quern nuper
vidimus. Pers. 6, 1 — 6: admovit iam bruma foco te, Basse, Sabino?
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 lusisse senes?
Priscian. X 36. p. 527 H. : Bassus in II lyricorum: Calliope ptinceps
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, 10 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 v/ork 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 drafvn 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 (nocQayoDyij) 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
SS 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. = 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, Philologus XI p. 739—744. J. Caesar
in Panly's Enc. I 2. p. 2295. Nr. 10.
4. Sen. nat. quaest. VI 2, 9 : egregie Vagellius meus in illo in-
clito carmine . . inquit. 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, X 1, 89 in treating of epic poets: Serranum (G. Sarpe;
the mss. read farrenum, varrenum etc.) consummari 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
Writers on metre. Petron'ms. 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
changed 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 XYI ; see Biicheler'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 bello 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. Biicheler'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 (Biicheler 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. Scaliger, B.ernensis (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 Biicheler'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. U. 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
Bucheler ibid. p. 726—730.
3. In the extant parts the freedman Elucolpius is introduced as
speaker, describing the adventures he experienced on a journey together
with 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. Friedlander in the
Konigsb. ind. lect. 1860 sq. p. 61 sq.) Puteoli, ch. 116 sqq. at Croton.
The time of the events is laid under Tiberius (Biicheler 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 (Biicheler 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. 14'
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. Teufl'el, Studies and Char. p. 391—393. Biicheler 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
Biicheler, 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, Rhein. Mus. II p. 50—92. 202 sq.
F. Ritter ibid. p. 561 - 569; W Teuffel ibid. IV p. 514 sq. Neque ho-
Petvonius. 91
mines, res, mores, studia, cultus denique omnis humaiius civilisque
qualis describitur, neque genus sermonis arsque metrorum in aliud
atque Neronianum tempus conveniunt. certum igitur et Senecae Pe-
tronium et Lucano fuisse aequalem (Biicheler, 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 habebalurque non ganeo et profligator, . . sed
erudito luxu. ac dicta factaque eius quanto solutiora et, quandam sui
neglegentiam praeferentia tanto gratius in spem simplicitatis accipie-
bantur. proconsul tamen Bithyniae et mox consul vigentem se ac
parem negotiis ostendit. dein revolutus ad vitia sen 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 peculiar 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 XXIII 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-
gentianim 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.
(\. 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, XXIII 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 Biicheler's ed. p. 206 sqq.
The name of Petronius is not attested in the case of the poems nr.
31_40, 50—52 in Biicheler; A. Riese in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 99, p. 281.
7. On the editions of the satirae see Biicheler 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. Biicheleri,
Berol. 1862; the text (with the Priapeia) ib. 1862, and (with Varro's
satires and Seneca's apocol.) 1871.
8. Contributions to the criticisrn 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),
O. Keller (Rhein. Mus. XVI p. 532—551), C. Beck (above n. 2).
9. On Petronius and his work see also W. Teuffel in Pauly's
Enc. V p. 1402—1406. Fr. Biicheler, New Swiss Mus. Ill (Bern 1863)
p. 17 — 31. E. Ludwig, de Petr. sermone plebeio, Lips. 1870. 39 pp.
301. About the conmiencement of Nero's reign, Calpur-
nius 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 diffei* from Calpurnius both in
Petronius. Calpuiftius and Nemesiantts. 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 Angelus 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 Nic. 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, ambo and other shortenings;
in the first, synaloephe is extremely scarce (in 758 lines we find, be-
sides three doubtful instances of synaloephe of que in subsequent
feet, only eight certain instances and these always in the first foot, six
examples of e, and one each of a and um. 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 xaicc tqitou iQoxalov, TQtS^TjfitjufQtjg and
€(f'^ijjui,fxfQi]g, in Nemesianus it is almost limited to the ntvd-rjfxifxtQi^g,
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 sortlet 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
oommencement, 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
1t. 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. 1, 2, 3, and 4, 1 — 12, A copy of the cod.
of Th. Ugoletas (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, annotatione 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,
Getting. 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. Mahly, on Soph. 0. C.
(Basle 1868) p. 101 — 118.
7. The F^insiedeln poems were first published (from a ms. saec.
X) by H. Hagen, Philol. XXVIII 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), BiJcheler, 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
Caipirrn'ms and Nemesiamis. The poem o'n 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
variare canendo. The beginning of the second (quid tacitus, Mystes?)
agrees curiously with that of Calpurn. eel. 4, Biicheler 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 7ifi/,9t3L<t/L(Qf^g, only the combination of jqi't. tqox- with f(^d^. 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 impugnation 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. Miiller).
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, ]. 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 liunc 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 tamen
ferro incubui etc. He held various official appointments in Germany,
lllyria 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 rie ista lectio auctorum mul-
torum et omnis generis voluminum habeat aliquid vagum et instabile.
Seneca exercised a favourable influence upon him (Epist. 84, 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 efifert 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 nee 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
Ovidium suum impingo V He had chiefly written poetry on Sicilian
subjects; ib. HI 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 : exspacto epistulas tuas qui-
bus indices mihi circumitus Siciliae totius quid tibi novi ostenderit.
ib. 5: Aetnam describas in tuo carmine et hunc solemnem omnibus
The poem on Etna. 97
poetis locum attingas. quern quo minus Ovidius tractaret nihil obstitit
quod iam Vergilius (occasionally) impleverat. ne Severum quidem Cor-
nelium uterque deterruit. 7: aut ego te non novi aut Aetna tibi salivam
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. (/? 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 Xl^e siecle, Brussels 1854. 124 pp. (Bulletin p.
258—379); cf. F. W. Schneidewin, Gotti. Gel. Anz. 1855. The interpo-
lated class, saec. XIV sq., is represented by Munro's y (British Museum,
Arundel 133), d (Jacob's Helmstad.), # (Jacob's ms. 3 =i 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 III p. 338 — 341, and J. Mahly, 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-
98 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 latiis 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. Ill 11. L. Miiller
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. 47')) the name of Pin-
darus (Thebanus) occurs for this author; this must be due to some mis-
take ; as L. Miiller, 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.
Dunger, on the Legend of the Trojan war, Dresden 1869, p. 28. 63 sq. 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 man)?^ interpolations
and changes. L. Miiller, 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., Parm. 1492;
but one s. 1. et a. seems to be earlier. Of the later editions we mention
especially Wernsdorf'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 lliadis homericae e rec. et cum notis Th. van Kooten; edidit
. . IL Weytingh, Lugd. Bat. et Amstelod. 1809. L. Miiller, on the
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 Persius 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. Miiller, 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 ofAusonius. 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 III 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
(Hist, 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. II 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 Italicus, Turnus. The most eminent
rhetorician of this time was Juli us Gabinianus, and even Quin-
OF MEOlAir,,
LLcGS
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: co7icurrentes (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.): *V loTg Ov^anaoiavov tov (WToxQaroQog vno/uptjfitcGiy
ov7(o yfyQccnrai. (p. 343, 9:) rolg KcuffccQog vnofxvrjfxaan^ ivavriap 7i€-
noCriGai rrjv y^aifjijy. Cf. c. Apion. I 10: To7g jmv avjoxQcaoQoip (Vesp.
and Titus?) vnofxpriuaai^v. Suet. Vesp. 18: primus e fisco 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 of that age were quite immode-
rate and necessarily appeared as a dangerous element of political
discontent and disorder. Dio LXVI 13 (a. 71): cJ? ov xal allot, nollot
ix T(av OTOJtXMP xalovfxiVMV loyitiv nQoci)(x)^hVTfg, fjfd mv xut //t]/urjT()iog
o xvvvxog, av/vd xal ovx tni'rtjJ'da To7g naqovoi drjjjoaia, tw jrjg (^)ilo-
ooif'iag TiQoo^^tjuaTt xccTa/QM/ufPot, d'lfliyovro . . tnfiofy o Movxiavog
tov Ovsonactavov navrag rovg roiovrovg ix Trjg nolfoig tx^ttlnv. . . xal
navrag avrCxa lovg f^blooot^ovg o Ovfanaat,av6g, nlrjv tov Movaioviov
(above 294, 3), Ix rrjg Poo^utjg I'^i^alfp, jov ds d't] JtjurjTQiov xal tov
OcTiliov xal tg vrjoovg xaTsxlfiafv. xal o /usv OffTiltog, f^i xal . .
nollto nliito xaTO, Trjg fJovaQ/iag xaTidqafJf-v, o^ucog naQa^^tj/ua fXfTfGTtj.
Toi d( JrjfAtjTQto) jur]d" (og vnfCxovn Ixilfvaiv o OvfcnaGtavog If^d^rjvat
oTt OV n€v navta noifig iva os anoxTfivu), tyu) Of xvva vlaxTovvra ov
(^ov(v(t). 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 VIII (1842). p. 383—399. W. Teuffel 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 sue (a. 76 =: 829) Titus imperator Caesar praeclaro
carmine perscripsit.
307. riiny the Elder, C. Plinius Secundus of Upper Italy
(A. D. 28 — 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 was the result of
the most genuine thirst for knowledge.
1. Suet. ed. Reiti'sch. p. 92 sq. : Plinius 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.).
2. PHn. 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 faciam. . . (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.
Pliny 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-
r^orum 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 tarn scru-
pulosa homo occupatus absolverit? magis miraberis 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 hanc (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 . . huic 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 pauciores 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 hanc 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 prope
impulsum (est).
4. Plin. n. h. praef. 28: ego plane meis adici posse multa con-
iiteor, 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 ol 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 11.: 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. Schottmiiller, 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.
0. 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. CI. 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. Ill 28: Hormine
id (the sack of Cremona) ingenium, ut Messala (below 309, 3) tradit,
an potior auctor sit C. Plinius, qui Antonium (Primum) incusat, haud
facile discreverim. Cf. A. XIII 20 (Plinius et Cluvius . . referunt). XV
53 (quod C. Plinius 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 natural is
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
Plinif the Elder. 106
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 niannered 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 infiuence both in its
original sha])e and in various abridgments.
1. Plin. n. h. praef. 1: libros naturalis historiae, novicium Camenis
Quiritium tuorum opus, natos apud me proxima fetura, licentiore epistula
narrare constitui tibi, iucundissime imperator. . . (3.) censorius tu
sexiesque consul (a. 77 = 830). (12.) levioris operae hos tibi dedicavi
libellos. nam nee ingenii sunt capaces . . neque tidmittunt excessus
aut oration^s sermonesve aut casus mirabiles vel eventus varios, iucunda
dictu aut legentibus 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 r^f iyxvickonatdficcg
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 occupati 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, Urlichs
(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. II: Mathematical and physical description of the
106 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
world, ni — VI: Geography. VII: Anthropology and physiology of man.
VIII— XI: Zoology (VIII Mammalia; IX fishes; X birds; XI insects and
beetles; comparative anatomy and physiolog^O- 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). XXVIII— XXXII : Medicinal zoology. XXXIII— 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
mention 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 disputatio 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 hbr. 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.
XL 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 different in the different parts of
his work. His praefatio abounds in strange expressions, 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 dr)'- 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, Wiirzburg 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 Century 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) in 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 =: Chiffletianus
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 =1 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. XIII,
and Leopoldo-Laurentianus (of a. 1433). See the detailed discussions
by D. Detlefsen, Philologus XXVIII p. 284-309, cf. Rhein. Mus. XV
p. 265-288. 366—390. XVIII p. 227—240. 327 sq. A. Fels, de codicum
antiquorum in quibus Plini n. h. ad nostra tempora propagata est fatis,
fide atque auctoritate, Gotting. 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. Mayhoff, 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.). IL (ib. 1851. 4.). L. v. Jan, Miinchner
Gel. Anz. 1852, Nr. 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., Wiirzburg 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 = Sillig vol. VI). Illustr. I. Harduin, Paris 1685,
5 vols. 4. 1723 sqq., 3 vols. fol. (Lips. 1778— 1788, 10 vols. 8.) Rccogn.
cum var. lect. lul. Sillig, 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. Teubnerl854 — 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
Pliny the Elder. Mucianus. 109
1857). Excerpta ex Plin. I. XXXV comm. crit. et exeget, 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 Rufus, 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 offence 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 ambitiose 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 (Plin. n. h. XII 9. XIII 88) and (a. 67) Syria, n. h. IH 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
superstitioiis (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 nulli umquam
sub Nerone periculum facessisset. Cf. ib. 18: Hispaniae praeerat (a. 69)
Cluvius Rufus, 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: OvccTtPioc Tig tmv ovyxkt^Ti'XMv . . rjqiTo Kkovovtov naqs^o-
f.i(vov avT(o, xal rovTov vnari'Xov etc. Suet. Ner. 21 (per Cluvium con-
sularem) and (from him ?) Dio LXIII 14 {Kkovovico '^Pov(fu>, avd^l vna-
KvxoTi, /^t](Tajufpog). His identity with the historian appears from Plut.
0th. 3 : Kkov^wg ds '^Pov(f)og fig ^I^rjQiap (which he governed) (ftjol
xoiAiad^^vca dinkfo/uaTcc 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
rV 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 42: 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,
Cluvius Rufus, Vipstanus Messala, and others. Ill
Vetera tantum et antiqua mirari, nostrorum autem temporum studia
irridere et contemnere? nam hunc tuum sermonem 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 iam 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 tov lovdcdxov nolsfj.ov 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
Rustic us 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, uttranseamus
veteres, Antonii' Juliani de Judaeis require: iam nequitia sua
hanc eos (the Jews) meruisse fortunam. Probably the MecQxog ^Avtiaviog
lovktauog, o r^g ^lovdatccg iniTQOTiog (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 the 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 Quintilian, 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. chron. 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 post 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
lulius Secundus, ceieberrima turn (under Vespasian) ingenia fori nostri,
quos ego in iudiciis . . studiose audiebam, . . quamvis maligne plerique
opinarentur nee Secundo pnimptum 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 meura 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 virtutibus 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 Asiatic! (Africani Nipperdey,
see above 292, 4) vitam componendo spem hominibus fecisti plurium
eiusmodi librorum. Plut. 0th. 9: rovro ^usy dt^yfiro (used to relate)
2fy.ovvd'og o orjrtoQ, tni ruiy tntarokoiy y(vou&vog rov "OfhcDvog. hsQMy
d tjy axovfiy etc.
Historians and Jurists under Vespasian. 113
5. Quinti]. IV, 1, 19: luerunt etiam quidam rerum siiarum iudices,
nam et in libris Observationnm 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. suff. 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 quem 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
modo villous urbi, . . interpres legum sanctissimus, omnia quamquam
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. XII7, 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 F lace us, of whom we
possess ten books of Argonautica, a free imitation of Apol-
lonius of Ehodes, 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 amisi-
mus. It does not appear from these words that he died young. His
introduction was written under Vespasian, probably not long after the
capture 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), plirygios prius indignatus lulos, eripe me
populis . . sancte pater, vcterumque fave veneranda canenti facta virum.
versam proles tua pandet Idumen (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. il). IV 49, 3 sqq.) and as living in poverty
Valeric fi Flaccus. 115
(ib. I 76, 4 sqq. VIII 56) is no doubt a different 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 ApoUonius in Weichert's
work on the life and poem of ApoUonius (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 j^art 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 j). 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. HI). 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 jmcient
116 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
writer but Quintiliiin (n. ]), not even by grammarians. But we find imi-
tations of him in Statins (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 hall 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 Oxf(>rd. 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
if 24. 4. Ed. Th. Ch. Harlcs, Altenb. 1781, 2 Tomi. Cum comm. perp.
ed. J. A. Wagner, Getting. 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. Fortsch (Emen-
dationes Valerianae, part. I Naumburg 1855. 4. II 1864. 4.), F. Eyssen-
hardt (Rhein. Mus. XVII p. 378—392), Koch (ibid. XVIII 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 HI p. 212—215). R. Lohbach (Observ.
critt. in . . Arg., Andernach 1869. 4.), P. Braun (Obs. critt. et exeg.,
Marburg 1869), Br. Hirschwalder (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
Curiat'ws- Materiws. Saleius Bassvs. 117
imperante Nerone (so L. Miiller; see Fleckeisen's Jalirb. 97, p. 417--420,
the mss. in Nerone) improbam et studiorum quoque sacra profanantem
Vatinii (? Gronovius, the mss. vaticinii) potentiam fregi (perhaps by
lashing him in the character of Thersites, as L. Miiller 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. il). 5: natus ad eloquentiam virilem et
oratoriam . . omittit studium. ib. 2: postero die quam Curiatius Ma-
ternus Catonem recitaverat, cum oft'endisse 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, sequenti 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 YII 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 nomiiia, Graeculorum fabuHs
aggregare. The chrpnological order would, therefore, be: the tragedy
against Vatinius, then Medea, Domitius, Cato, Thyestes. It is pro])able
that we should of him understand Dio LXVII 12: MarfQyov Go<fiGTi]y,
on xttTcc TVQCivviDv fljii Ti ((Gxcou (as might be the case in his recitation
of Thyestes), an^y.im/^v (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 Saleium B as sum, 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-
scuntur, 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. VII
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. YIII 10. YII 96, 1, is a different person, to conclude from his per-
sonal circumstances, though he also composed poetry and tragedies; see
Y53: 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 competed in the
poetical contests at Naples (Stat. Silv. Y 3, 112 sqq. 134 sqq.), then
118 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
been professor of eloquence (geniina 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 deorum
Caesar) and was just going to fiere 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 earliest.
4. On Domitian's epic attempts see below 314, 2.
b) Domitian.
Sl4- The superticial interest formerly displayed by
Domitian in literature, disappeared immediately on his accession
to the throne. The Capitoline and Alban 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
Italicus, 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 cliffs. All the greater
was the number of dilettanti who endeavoured to prove their
utter insignificance and harmlessness by writing verses.
1. Flavius Domitianus. born Oct. 24, 51 (804), Emperor after
Sept. 13, 81 (834), 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.VHL
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
pubhce. Tac. Hist. IV 86: Domitianus . . studium litterarum et amorem
Domitian. 119
carminum simulans. They appear chiefly 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 quem 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 joetitis 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 quo que 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 Statins (Silv. Ill 5,
28 sqq.). Cf. Friedlander, Sketches of Roman manners and morals III
p. 323—326.
5. Tac. Agr. 2: legimus, cum Aruleno Rustico (below 324, 2) Paetus
Thrasea, Herennio Senecioni Prisons 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 Elpoch.
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. YIII 14, 7). Helvidius e. g. metu temporum nomen ingens paresque
virtutes secessu tegebat (ib. IX 13, 2).
6. Suet. Dom. 10: occidit Hermogenera Tarsensem propter quasdam
in historia figuras, librariis etiam qui earn 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. =z A.
D. 89: Domitianus mathematicos et philosophos romanos (Yar. 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. = A. D. 93: Flavius
losephus vicesimum librum Antiquitatum h. temp, scribit.
8. On the dilettanti-versifiers of this reign see below 319. See L.
Friedlander, recensio poetarum Statio, Martiali, Plinio iun. contempo-
raneorum, Konigsberg 1870. 4. Sketches of Roman manners and morals
ni p. 351 sqq.
315. Under Domitian wrote C. Silius Italicus (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 pui suits. 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. HI 7 (A. D. 101): modo nuntiatus est Silius Ita-
licus in Xeapolitano suo inedia finivisse vitam. (2.) causa mortis valetudo.
€rat illi natus insanabilis clavus (a corn, cf. the miedical 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 Italicns. 121
remqtie florentem atque etiam consularem (Martial. VIII 66) reliquit.
(3.) laeserat famara suam sub Nerone : credebatur sponte accusasse.
sed in Yitelli amicitia (cf. Tac. Hist. Ill 65) sapienter se et comiter
gesserat, ex proconsulatu Asiae gloriam 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 cfdoxcckog 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. lieredem 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. 1. 1. and XI 49; above 226,
12) eius adire ut templum solebat. (9.) in liac 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 j)ostremus 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 activity 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, Castalidura
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 ol Domitiaii v. 607 sqq. : at tu transcendes,
Germanice, facta tuorum (of father and brother!), iam puer anricomo
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 (HI 163 sqq.) and Kcnukoyog (III 222 sqq.), his Hector's (i. e.
Hannibal's) parting (HI 62 sqq.), his description of the shield (II 395
sqq.), his a^ka XVI 277 sqq.), his ,uax^ naQcmojccfxtog (IV 667 sqq.),
his Proteus (415 sqq.) and his yfxviu (XIII 395 sqq.), also his description
of the gates (III 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. Konigsberg 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 ar rather Bartholomaeus Politianus (de monte Puliciano)
SiJius Italicits. 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 vo.ls. Pcrpet. annot. ill. G. A. Ruperti, Gotting. 1795—98, 2 vols.
Texts by Liinemann (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 Onor. 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 versatile
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 Thebaid 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 Achilleis,
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 tmie 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 Statiaui (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), Statins 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 w^ould entitle us to infer that Statins 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. Ill 1. 1.). The very fact that Statins 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.: (Statins) 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 Statius' 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 meus, 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 Felix (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 might give. See L. Friedlander, Sketches of
Statins. 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 edit 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^
dining 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 work 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. We 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 Josej)!! Iscanus
(Dunger p. 25 sq.) and especially by Konrad of Wiirzburg (c. 1280);
see H. Dunger, 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 jjublished; 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 X 3, 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.
Friedlander, de temporibus Martialis librorum et Silvarum Statii (Ko-
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
(propemptica), their possessions (villae, balnea, 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 bilv. 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. Miiller, Quaest. Statianae, Berlin 1861. 4. On his relation
to Silius see Ritschl, 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 Statii Cassellano (saec. XI), Marburg 1853. 54 pp. 4.
Diibner 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, Konigsberg 1866. 19 pp. 4. F. Deycks on a ms. at
Miinster, Miinster 1865. 4. W. Schmitz, on a fragment of a ms. at
Diisseldorf, Rhein. Mus. XXI p. 438-443.
9. Editions. Ed. princeps 1472. Parmae 1473. Romae 1475.
Venet. (Aid.) 1502. Rec. J. Bernartius, Antverp. 1595. Ed. Fr. Tilio-
broga (Lindenbrog), Paris 1600. 4. Cura Em. Crucei, Paris 1618. 4. Ex
rec. 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. Diibner, Paris 1835 sq. 2 vols. Rec. G. Queck, Lips.
Teubner 1854. 2 vols, (see Imhof, d© condic. p. 43 sq.) Thebais et
Achilleis cum scholiis rec. 0. Miiller, 3 vols (I. Leipzig 1870.)
10. Critical contributions by M. Haupt (Monthly Reports of the
Berlin Academy 1861 p. 1074 sqq.), 0. Miiller (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 ot 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. Com. 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, Ilfeld 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 Statii locis controv. coniectanea, Neustrelitz 1868.
308 pp. E. Grosse, Observatorum in St. Silvis specimen, Berlin 1861,
12. Scholia on the Thebaid, the value of vs^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. Diibner''s pref. p. VIII sqq.
Herm. Schottky, de pretio Lactantiani comm. in St. Th. et (p. 25 — 39)
de nomine, philosophia (mystical and pagan) et aetate (5th century)
commentatoris, Breslau 1846. E. Woltflin, Philologus XXIV p. 156—158.
R. Unger, Electa e Lact. in St. Th. comm., Friedland 1863. 4. M.
Schmidt, on a Scholion on Statins, 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, Wolfenbiittel 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 Rome 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. Martialis. 129
the latest 102, perhaps already 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 hauc 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 Kome (X 103, 7 sqq. 104, 9 sqq. cf. XII
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. Ill 38 and in many other places. As a present we may, however,
consider the small villa which he possessed subsequently to a. 83 (see
II 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 (III 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. II 1. 7 = Mart. VI 28
sq. Vn 21-23; Silv. Ill 3 sq. = Mart. VH 40. IX 11—13. 16. 36; Silv.
IV 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. Friedlander,
Sketches of Roman manners and morals III p. 348 sq. 369 — 404.
3. If history does not admire Doraitian 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 XIII 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,
n, 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, XII) 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. Ill (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 XIII 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 (XII 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
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. Friedlander, de temporibus librorum Martialis Domitiano
imperante editorum, Konigsberg 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; Friedlander 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, 11 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. VII 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. Ill 11. IX 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. IV 63. VII 21, 3. 44 sq. 34, 4: quid Nerone
peius?); he praises Arria (1 13) and Thrasea (I 8, 1. IV 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 saUs haberet et fellis (cf. Mart. VII 25, 3) nee candoris
minus. (2.) prosecutus eram viatico secedentem: dederam hoc amicitiae,
dederam etiam versicuUs 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. VII 99, 5 sqq. VIII 56. X 78, 14 sqq. XI 3. 24. But his narrow
circle of ideas as well 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. LXII— 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.
CXXVII — 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 — LXII. Ed.
princeps s. 1. et a. (Rome c. 1470). 4. Ferrara 1471. 4. Rome 1473.
Cura G. Merulae, Ven. 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. CXXXII
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. Friedlander, de nonnullis locis corruptis in M. epigr., Konigs-
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. Teufifel 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 Statius 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 Eufus 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. XXVH
p. 632 sqq.) The identity of the Stella frequently mentioned by
Martial and Statius 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 Statius (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
VH 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), meus (V 11, 2. 12, 7.
VI 47, 1. IX 55. XII 3, 10). Cf. also Martial IX 89. ApoUin. 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 proximumque Turni nobilibus
legit libellis. Rutil. 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 ofTurnus, 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 I'Instruction 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. Ill 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
lie 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 HI p. 39 sq. A letter
addressed to him and his wife Cottia Plin. Ep. HI 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.
Scaevius Memor. Spurinna. Snlpicia. 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 Yestr. 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, 1 sqq.: 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,
Yen. 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. Schlager
(rec, explic, 1846). A French translation by C. Monnard (Paris and
Frankf. 1820), a Swedish translation by C. A. F. Moller (Malmo 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 trimetro 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 imperat inter,
non trabe {ovx ccno 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 liunc 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. Miiller thinks it
certain that the poem existed in a very old ms. of Bobbio (of. 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.), PoUius
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; of. 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. II 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. 1X43 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).
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 Voconiu's 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 tilium, 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 Quintilianus (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-)nephews and made Consul by him.
He did not publish anything before the later years of his
hfe, 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 Quintilian'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 Quintilian'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 indices 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.
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 Clementem patruelem suum, . .
cuius filios etiam tum parvulos successores palam destinaverat et abolito
priore nomine alterum Vespasianum appellari iusserat, alterum Domi-
tianum) delegaverit curam. Auson. gratiar. act. p. 290 Bip. : Quintilianus
consularia per Clementem 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 contincntissirnus et liliam
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. II 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 XIXo anno duos enixa filios . . decessit. 6: mihi fiJius minor
quintum egressus annum prior alterum 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. rV 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 quoque libro sum confessus,
parum comperi. V 12, 23 : haec et in alio nobis tractata sunt opere etc-
VIII 3, 58 : de hac parte [zaxo^rjkop) 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
XII 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 Flavius 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 (XII) 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. H 2, 15, I. 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 II 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. VIII 3, 64. 66. IX 1,
25. X 1, 105—112. 2, 25. 7, 31. XI I, 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. XII 1, 16 sq. VIII 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 3, 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 Cicero 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), Konigsberg 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.
II 6, 7. 10, 6. 16, 13 sq. XH 10, 76. cf. H 19, 2. VIH 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. Tornebladh, 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 ^7 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 Bamberge/isis 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. XXII p. 38 sq., and in his edition p.
Qidntilian. 143
V — IX. A. Reifferscheid, on Poggio's ms. of Quintilian, Rh. Mus.
XXTTT p. 143 — 146. Enderlein , comm. de Bamberg, cod. Quint.,
Schweinfurt 1S52. 4. J. Stander, 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.
Coil. codd. et perp. comm. illustr. J. M. Gesner, Gotting. 1738. 4. Ad
*odd. 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. Wolff, 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. Kriiger (Leipzig, Teubner
1861), C. Halm (Lips., Teubner 1869).
On criticism and explanation. Raph. Regii ducenta problemata,
Venet. 1482. 4. Quaestiones Quintilianeae by F. Miiller (Halle 1840),
F. Bahlmann (Berlin 1859. 4.), F. Meister (Liegnitz 1860. 4. Breslau
1865. 4. Cf. Halm, Rhein. Mus. XXII p. 39 — 61), R. Tornebladh
/Colmar 1860), J. Stander (Bonn 1865). Dorry, de locis al. Q. emend.,
Torgau 1860. 4. F. Ritschl, Grammatical points in Quintilian, Rhein.
Mus. XXII p. 599—614. J. Stander 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., Wolfenbiittel
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, nev6r 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 VHI 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-
lian© 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. Floras. 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 Tutilius as
a writer on rhetoric, and Princeps as a rhetorician. Among
the orators M. Aquilius Kegulus, a contemptible timeserver,
who composed also literary works, Baebius Massa, Mettius
Carus, and Palfurius Sura, made themselves feared as de la-
tores. As pleaders we may mention Tacitus, Pliny and
Herennius Senecio, and especially Victorius Marcellus, Septimius
Severus from Africa, Flavins Ursus, Vettius Crispinus, Satrius
Eufus, 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 fecitata est: Regulus omnium bipedum nequissimus.
. (15.) est (Regulus) locuples, factiosus, curatur a multis, timetur a
Regulus and others. 145
pluribus. II, 11, 22: est Regulo tarn 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 tarn 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 veniebatt
(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. Teuffel 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 Licinianus (ib. IV 11, 12 sq.) and accused (with Pliny) Baebius
10
146 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
Massa (Plin. Ep. VIl 33, 4 sqq.) Concerning his work on Helvidius
Prisons and his execution by Domitian see below 324, 2.
8. Quintilian's work (above 320, 7) is dedicated to Victorius
Marc ell us, and also Stat. Silv. IV (prooem. Mareelle 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. IV 5) ad S ep timium Severum, iu-
venem . . inter ornatissimos secundi ordinis, tuum quidem etiam condis-
cipulum, sed mihi . . artissime carum. So also Martial V 80 mens Se-
verus and VII 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. 11 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): Ov^aop lijg ^lovkiag atirioafjLivtjg vnatov
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 oalian 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 centumvirali iudicio, cum responderet . . Satrio Rufo,
Victorius Marcellits and other orators. 147
said ironically: 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 HI 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 (1 : quaestionem altissima
ista eruditione dignissimam. 11: scrutare tu causas, potes enim). Dio
LXVIII 15 (a. 107): 7w JIovqu tw AixivIm xcu T«(f»yV dtj^oalay xal uv-
SqiavHa ^cTwxf (Trajan) rflfvii^aavri. 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, 1 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 profiteri; . . 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 facundus or disertus are also given to Pollius
Felix (see 306, 1), Erucius Clarus (Plin. Ep. II 9, 4), Marcus (Valerius ?
Mart. X 73), Sextus (Mart. V 5, 1), Restitutus (Mart. X 87, 2 sqq.),
CaeciHus 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. W^e 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,
148 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
which is important on account of a number of historical
information and documents, and is written in terse and concise,
though refined diction.
1. Life. Tac. Hist. IV 39 (a. 823 — 70): lulius Frontinus praetor
urbanus. He thus appears to have been born a. 41, at the latest. Frontin.
Strat. IV 3, 14: auspiciis Imperatoris CaesarisDomitianiAugustiGermanici
(a title given by way of anticipation) eo bello quod Civilis in Gallia moverat
(a. 823) Lingonum . . civitas . . ad obsequium redacta LXX milia armatorum
tradidit mihi. Tac. Agr. 17: sustinuit molem lulius Frontinus (in Britain,
as successor of Petilius Cerealis, probably 70 — 78 =: 829—831, after
his consulship), vir magnus, quantum licebat, validamque et pugnacem
Silurum gentem armis subegit etc. Cf. E. Hiibner, Rhein. Mus. XII p.
52—56. His participation in the war with the Chatti may be inferred
from Strateg. I 1, 8. 3, 10. II 3, 23. 11, 7. He lived a studious life
in retirement on the shore of Campania, Mart. X 58. Cos. I under
Domitian (before his departure for Britain), II (bis Frontino consule,
Mart. X 48, 20? cf. Philologus XXIX p. 187) under Nerva (Plin. panegyr
61), probably a. 97; III a. 100 conjointly with Trajan. Curator aquarum
a. 97 (aq. 1. 102 extr.). He seems to have died c. a. 103, as Pliay (a.
103 or 104) succeeded him in the dignity of augur (Plin. Ep. IV 8, 3.
Cf. ad Trai. 13). According to Pliny (Ep. IX 19, 1) Frontinus vetuit
omnino monumentum sibi fieri , with the characteristic addition : im-
pensa monumenti supervacua est: memoria nostri durabit si vita me-
ruimus (ib. 6).
2. The gromatic work was written under Domitian (p. 54, 11 sqq. :
praestantissimus postea Domitianus ad hoc beneficium procurrit et uno
edicto totius Italiae metum liberavit, in reference to the subsecivae),
and likewise that on stratagems, perhaps before the beginning of the
war with the Dacians, as he mentions only the Germans (see n. 1). He
always adheres to the official fiction, as if the Emperor had done what
was in reality the work of his generals, just as he subsequently does
with regard to Nerva. Real flattery towards Domitian does not occur
(tantus dux II, 8 is said of his position), and Pliny may therefore
justly say Ep. V 1, 5: duos quos tunc (under Domitian) civitas nostra
spectatissimos habuit, Corellium et Frontinum. Cf. ib. IV 8, 3: lulio
Frontino, principi viro. The work on the aqueducts was written by
Frontinus a. 97, shortly after he had been intrusted with the cura
aquarum. Cf. n. 6. Significant is c. 118: quem reditum . . proximis
temporibus in Domitiani loculos conversum iustitia divi Nervae populo
restituit, nostra sedulitas ad certam regulam redegit. 101 extr.: nobis
circumeuntibus rivos fides nostra et auctoritas a principe data pro lic-
toribus erit. 130 extr. : officii fidem etiam per offensas tueri praesti-
terit. The Expositio et ratio omnium formarum ad Celsum (Works of
the Roman Gromatici II p. 91 — 108) which is in bad mss. attributed
to Frontinus, belongs rather to Balbus, according to the Arcerianus;
see below 339. 3.
Frontinus. 149
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, I p. 9—58), which treat de agrorum
qualitate, de controversiis (in general), do limitibus, de controversiis
aquarum. On the critical condition of this work see Lachmann 1. 1. II
p. 101—131.
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 II 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.) : ind df tnl lov ^sov narQog gov NfQovccg
7ic(()(( 4>qovjij/ixi T(o iniGij/uip vncijtxM tv 4>0Qiuiatg TjfXfQug jivilg dvtTQi>ipa,
d'o^av cc7ifP€yxccu(pM nf^t Trjv iv lolg nokffxoig ifxnfiqCav, . . fVQoy ovx
M^atiopa anovdrjv h)(OPTa fig ji^v nuQcl ro7,g EkXtjot TfxS-fMQfjfx^yrjp /ua^tjon/
(than for the Roman). Of him we should also understand Aelian. de ordin.
mst. 1 : TifQi Tijg x«{h' OuriQov KtxTvarjg tPfTv/o/usy avyyQ(«i>fvai 2tq(cto-
xkfl Tf X(d 4>Q0PT(x)yi, Tip xc(,9^ %u(ig vncntxco di^d^r' if there indeed
4>Qoviivtp 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 clarum 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 arQarijyrjfxccTtxMv 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 intej-polationsmay 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. I 5, 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
w^as to be according to the subject-matter i. e. de disciplina, de effectu
disciplinae, de continentia, de iustitia, . . de variis 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. Schone, 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. Biicheler p.
Vn— 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
Frontinifs. 151
contains an account of the purpose and plan of the work. Cum . .
me seu naturahs sollicitudo seu fides sedula non ad diligentiam modo
verum ad amorem quoque commissae rei instigent, sitque nunc mihi
ab Nerva Augusto . . aquarum iniunctum officium, . , primum ac po-
tissimum existimo, sicut in ceteris negotiis institueram, nosse quod
suscepi. (2.) . . quapropter 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
compares 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 by J. Polenus, Patav. 1722. 4. His notae are
also given in the edition of G. C. Adler, Altona 1792. Rec, iilustr. et
germanice redd, (with the notes of Heinrich and Schultz) A. Dederich,
Wesel 1841. XXXV and 318 pp. Rec. Fr. Biicheler, Lips. (Teubner)
1858. XIV and 54 pp. Cf. H, Sauppe, Gotti. G. A. 1859, p. 990—997.
7. A complete edition of Frontinus by R. Keuchen (Amstelod 1661).
Texts 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, Nr. 105
—107. 134-136, p. 834—855. 1077—1094.
323. To the time of Domitian belongs also the juridical
writer Aufidius 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 Asper, the ingenious and erudite
commentator of Terence, Sallust and Virgil; also Claranus
and Martial's friend ApoUinaris.
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 Priscus 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 (quern Claranus, quern
Scaurus et Asper, quern sibi conferret Varro) mentions Aemilius
152 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
As per; of. Augustin. de util. ered. 17 (Asper, Cornutus, Donatus). He
iwas later than Cornutus (above 294, 2), as he opposed and contested
his opinions (Schol. Veron. on Aer. Ill 691); and as he had not been
ncluded bySueton. 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.
Rutin, de metr. Ter. p. 2705 P. ; Aspri in Vergilium et Sallustium com-
mentaries Hieron. apol. c. Rutin. 1 16 (IV 1. p. 367 Bened.). The com-
mentary on Sallust is frequently mentioned by Charisius; see especially
II 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). Grafenhan, 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 Gadibus improbus magister
ib. I 41, 12.
Grammarians 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 Kusticus 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. Statins 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 eum
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 'Povomov rov UQovkt]u6u
(CTifXTfii^fy OTv t(^ikoGO(ffi (cf. abovc 321, 3) xal oit tov GqaOfav Uqov
(ovo^iaCf, x«i EQivvvov ^^vsiicoua on Tf ovd'^fxiuv HQX^^ *^ uoIXm /?«w
juKm lafxifCav t^TtjXfi, xul on rov IIqCgxov toV ^iop ow^yqaipfv. 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. P'or 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. Heliodoriis 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, seu 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 PauUi
proconsulis . . crimine falsi damnatus in metallum; see Plin. ad Trai.
58-60.
8. Martial. IX 77: quod optimum sit 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, buthad 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 poetry
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 unimpaired vivacity.
1. M. Cocceius Nerva, son and grandson to jurists (above 276, 2.
293, 2), Cos. I with Vespasian a. 71 =z 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 Tibullus,
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.
Ne7i'a and Trajan. 155
2. M. Ulpius Traianus from Italica, born 18th Sept. 53 r=: 806
(Dierauer p. 9 sq. n.), Cos. 91 =: 844, adopted by Nerva end of October
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. Volker, de imp. . . Traiani vita, I Elberfeld 1859. 4. J.
Dierauer, Contributions towards a critical history of Trajan, in M. Bii-
dinger's Investigations on points of the Imperial History I (1868) p. 1
—186. C. Peter, Hist, of Rome HI 2 p. 144—168. Dio LXVIII 7:
aaidfiag axQt^ovg, oarj ip koyotg, ov ^nfTfO/s. to yt fxfv iQyov cwr^g
xai i^niarciTo xai inotei. Victor Epit. 13, 7 sq.: magis simpliciora in-
genia aut eruditissimos, quamvis ipse parcae esset scientiae moderateque
eloquens, diligebat. Julian. Caes. p. 22 sq. : xain^Q dvvccf.ifvog kiyfiv
— V7i6 QaH-vfxiag innQSTiftv yccQ floj^d rd nokkd tw 2ov^(c (Licinius
Sura) yQ<x(fi€ii^ v71€(j avrov — (f)S-€yyo/Lifrog fxakkov r) kiyiov tnfdff'xi^vfp
avTolg etc. Plin. paneg. 47: quem honorem dicendi magistris, quam
dignationem sapientiae doctoribus habes ! ut sub te spiritum et sangui-
nem et patriam 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 (Friedlander 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 commondavit. See above the quo-
tation from Julian. Trajan's replies to Pliny's inquiries (see below 335,
6 and 9) are brief and concise, but always pertinently 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 years, cum profiteretur odium 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. HI 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. totf) mense aprili nuUus fere dies quo non recitaret aiiquis.
156 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
in vat me quod vigent stuclia, . . tametsi ad audiendum pigre coitur, which
is then fufther developed. Cf. ib. Ill 18, 4: numquam aut valde
vacat Romae aut oommodum 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 iuvet 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 L'gisse malunt quam ageie et qui audiunt
finire quam iudicare. Tac. dial. 19: apud iudices 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 Romanes studiis Nerva 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
alimentariae) 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 dell' 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
Trajan. Juvenal. 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)mus 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 (Aemilius) 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 tenuem 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. Teutt'el, 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 Century 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. XLin (1845) p. 103—116; TransL of Juv. p. 148—153. B. Borghesi,
intorno all' eta di Giovenale, Rom 1847 =z 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 (Konigsberg 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. Friedlander, Sketches of Roman manners and Morals III p. 4l2 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)
I
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 shadow^s
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 diiferat, 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, lOO^Aen.
XII 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. — M. VI 23;
6, 492 sqq. == M. H 66).
7. We possess two classes of Scholia on the Satires of Juvenal.
The first goes in its greater part back to the endof 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, Gotting. 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. Gobel in the Reports of the Meetings of the
Vienna Academy XXIX (1859) p. 73 sqq. On the Montpellier ms. see
also F. Rtihl, 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 ot emendavi The grammarians
who quote passages from Juvenal generally follow the readings of this
second class. C. Fr. Hermann, de codicibus luvenalis recte existimandis
(Gotting. 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. Hackermann, 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 oi Juv.,
Philologus XII p. 658-695. XVI 412—449. XVII 481—491; commen-
tatio in luv. satiras, Greifswald 1867. 4.
9. The editions of Juvenal are enumerated in Ruperti's ed. I p.
CLXIV— CCLIII. We will mention: Ed. princeps, Venet. 1475. 4. 1470
and Rome c. 1470 (fol.) Cum comment. D. Calderini (Venet. 1475. 4.
1495 fob), G. Vallae (Venet. 1486. fob), Cald., Vallae, MancinelH
(Venet. 1492. fob), with Merulae (Venet. 1498. fob). 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
O. Jahn, Berol. 1851.
Texts by A. Hackermann (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, Niirnberg 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
Juvenal and contemporary Poets. 161
1834) I. p. 241 sqq. II. p. 101—174. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc. IV.
(1845) p. 535 — 539. Volker, 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. 11. p. 167—205), Corn. MuUer
(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.
Hackermann (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., Walddiiren 1853), A. Gobel (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,
L- 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 tarn 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 C apito , . . proc(urator) (of Domitian) ab
epistulis et a patrimonio, iterum ab epistulis divi Nervae . . . ab
11
162 The First Century of the Imperial EpocL
epistul(is) tertio imp(eratoris) Nervae Caesar (is) Traiani Aug(usti) Gcr-
(manici), Orelli 801. Clarissimi cuiusque vitam egregiis carminibus
(epigrams) exornat, Plin. Ep. I 17, 3, cf. VIII 12, 4 sq. : scribit exitus
inhistrium virorum , . quasi fuiiebribus 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. cf. IX 33, 1. 11. I 3
(Caninio Rufo) , 1 (quid agit Comum, tuae meaeque deliciae?)
and 3 sqq. Eight hexametrical lines from a Bellum parthicum 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 suos 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 xcciaCTsqi^afnav eruditam sane
. . materiam. scripta elegis erat fluentibus et teneris et enodibus,
sublimibus etiam etc.
6. Plin. Ej). 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. Pomponius M. f. Bassulusinan inscription of Aeclanum
ap. Mommsen I. R. N. 1137 =; Henzen 5605 = Biicheler, Greifswald
List of Lectures 1870, p. 12: ne more pecoris otio transfungerer,
Menandri paucas vorti scitas fabulas, et ipsus etiam sedulo fmxi novas.
id quale qualest 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 (Biicheler). 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 repubhc, 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. 11 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
abbre\dation 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 scribi 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 Rome.
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 Cornell 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
I
Tacitus. 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
lulius Secundus (above 310, 3 sq.), . . quos ego in iudiciis non utrosque
modo studiose audiebara 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 circumspicias praeceptores
quos sollicitare 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 PHn. Ep. II 1, 6: laudatus
est (Verginius Kufus) 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, af/ut/(og. 11, 9: quod ego et Tacitus iniuncta ad-
vocatione diligenter et fortiter functi essemus.
6. His political career. Hist. I I: 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.)
usque intentius affui sacerdotio quindecimvirali praeditus ac tunc praetor.
— Of Agricola, who 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 extoUere 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. HI 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 prisons 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
numinum 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
difficult 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. XH
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 brilliant 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 alitor 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. Ill 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 bis moral con-
victions m'Tst frequently coincide with those of the Stoa.
10. Works on the political and religious views of Tac. Silvern p.
128 sqq. C. Hoffmeister, the Moral Views of Tac. p. 13 sqq. 78 sqq. C.
Zell, Vacation-writings III 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. Staudlin, on the philo-
sophy and mode of thought of Tac, in Conz's Contributions 1786. p.
144 sqq. and in Staudlin'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 mimdi moderatione e mente Taciti, Fulda 1830. F. H. A.
Haage, Tac. ab impietatis crimine vindicatus, ad Hist. I 3. Liineburg
1840. 4. F. A. Scharpff, on the political and religious views of Tac,
Rottvveil 1843. 4. Kahlert, Taciti sententiae de diis et deorum regimine,
Breslau 1844, Neustadt 1847. 4. Fabian, quid Tac. de numine divine
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. XIII 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 maximeque 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. Botticher
ex. Tac. p. XIX— 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 Miitzell'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, Konigsberg 1865. Th. Mommsen,
Corn. Tac. and Cluvius Rufus, Hermes IV p. 295—325. Nisscn, 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 Siivern p.
126—134. Hoffmeister, the Moral Views of T., p. 114 sq. 117—121.
Nipperdey p. XII — XIV. Comp. e. g. A. Ill 18: raihi, 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 indicium
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. Siivern 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: baud 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.
II 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 ficiis 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. II 3. 38. Ill 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. Ill 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. Ill 65 : exequi sententias (votes of the Senate) hand institui
nisi insignes per honestum aut notabili dedecore, quod praecipuum
munus annalium reor ne virtutes sileantur utque pravis dictis factisque
ex posteritate et infamia metus sit. Cf. XIII 31 (cum ex dignitate po-
pu-li 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 awaj^ 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 M
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. Wolfflin, Philol. XXVI p. 130—132. A. Drager, on the Syntax
and Style of Tac. p. 184-106.
16. W. Botticher 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. Wolfflin, Philol. XXV p. 92—108. 133 sq. Other works
on the style and diction of Tac. are: Lundblad (Lund 1789. 4.), J. Gr.
Buhle (Brunswick 1817), Giinther 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 dvo7v dicta, Niirnberg 1826.
4. and in the Excursuses of his edition of Agricola. N. Bach before
the second vol. of his edition. W. Botticher, lexicon Taciteum, Berlin
1830. L. Doderlein, in his ed. II 1847. p. XXII— L VIII. 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. Gobel, de poetico Tacitei stili colore, Berlin 1859. 39 pp. 8. P.
Joachim, nonnulla de elocutione Taciti, I. Gorlitz 1862. 4. A. Gerber^
de particularum quadam in sermone Taciti proprietate, Kaschau 1863.
4.; and De particula an, Pesth 1865. 4. U. Zernial, selecta quaedara ca-
pita ex genetivi usu Taciteo, Gottingen 1864. 96 pp. 8. and Nonnulla
de elocutione T., Burg 1868. 4. F. Hiittemann, de usu subiunctivi re-
lativi et absoluti apud Taciturn, Miinster 1864. Ph. Spitta, de Tac. in
componendis enuntiatis ratione, I. Gottingen 1866. 160 pp. 8. E. Wofflin.
on a grecism in Tac. hitherto unobserved (tamquam and quasi = w?),
Philologus XXIV p. 115 — 123. M. Morgenroth, de condicionalium sen-
tentiarum apud Tac. formatione, Salzungen 1868. P. Czensny, de infi-
nitive Tac. I. Breslau 1868. A. Greef, de praepositionum usu ap. Tac.
I. Getting. 1869. A. A. Drager, 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, Miinchen 1812. 4. ■=. Collected Lectures (Frank-
fort 1851) p. 1 sqq. Siivern, 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, Wiirzburg 1868. W.
Botticher, Prolegomena to his Lexicon Taciteum (Berlin 1830) p. I — CII.
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, Etude sur Tacite, Paris 1864. Daunou
in the Biographic universelle XLIV p. 165 sqq. Naudet in Hofer's Nou-
velle biographic generale XLIH. W. Teuffel in Pauly's Enc VI 2. p.
1568—1578 and: On Sallust and Tacitus (Tiibi. 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.), Quintilian (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 dialog! 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. Diipre's proof of the
Tacitean origin of the Dialogue). F. A. Eckstein, Prolegg. p. 62 sqq. H.
C. A. Eichstadt de dialogo qui inscribitur de orr., Jena 1839. 4. W. Teuffel
Tacitus. 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 Secundas and Vipstanus Messala) is c. 17 laid in sextam (a. 75
= 818; L. Urlichs 'Festgruss' Wiirzburg 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 ftrst (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 wh}^ 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. Drager, 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
11 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 made with 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. VIII— 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 Imperial Epoch.
5. Separate editions. Cum, varr. notis ed. E. Benzel, Upsala 1706.
Rec. et illustr. C. A. Heumann, Getting. l7l9. Ed. etill. 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, Zurich 1830; cum
nova collatione cod. Perizonian. (Leidensis) Ziirich 1846. 4. Ed. illustr.
W. Botticher, 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. Miinchen 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., Breslaul819. 8. 1833. 4.
F. A. Eckstein, Prolegomena in Tac. qui v. f. dial., Halle 1835. 4.
A. Goring, diss, de dial. d. o. praestantia, Liibeck 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., Miinster 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 Botticher'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
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 Agiicola 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. Hiibner,
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. Wolfflin, 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. Hiibner
(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 = J 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. Kammerer, 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 Corneli T. de v. et
m. I. A. In some passages the marginal notes of r (M in Wex) may
be taken into consideration; Schenkl, Journal for Austrian Gymn. XII
p. 421—437. J. Miiller, 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. Schliiter, Duisburg 1808. C. F. Renner
and J. C. Fmcke, Gotti. 1802; a second edition by A. Schlegel, Got-
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. U. J. H. Becker, Hamburg
1826. Ed. F. G. V. Hertel, Lips. 1827. Ed. et ann. ill. P. Hoiman-
Peerlkamp, Leyden 1827; ed. II 1864. Text, translation and notes by
G. L. Walch, Berlin 1828. With notes and excursuses by C. L. Roth,
Niirnberg 1833. Recogn. F. Ritter, Bonn 1836, Brevi ann. expl. F.
Diibner, 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. Drager, 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 Briiggemann (Diisseldorf 1824), Eichstadt
(Jena 1830), E. Foss (Altenburg 1837. 4.), Fr. Brandes (Rostock 1838. 4.),
Gernhard (Weimar 1838. 4.), Heimburg (Jena 1839), Wex (Contributions,
crit. 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. Miiller (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. Schomann (Greifswald
1859. 4.), G. Liep (Kreuznach 1861. 4.), C. Nipperdey (Rhein. Mus
XVni p. 350-365. XIX p. 97-113), Fr. Ritter, (ibid. XX p. 518—532),
J. Classen (Symb. criticae, P. Ill, Hamburg 1866. 4.), S. Pfaff (Exegetical
and crit. Observations on Agr. 1 and 36, Erlangen 1867. 4.), L. Urlichs
Tacitus. Ill
(Festgruss, Wiirzbiirg 1868, p. 6— 8), K. Meiser (Blatter 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 Niebiihr, Minor Historical and Philological
Writings I p. 331 (with N. Bach, Schulztg. 1831, II p. 851 sq.). Wolt-
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. Hiibner, 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.,
Tiibingen, 1871. 38 pp. 4. (Gymn.-Progr.).
331. 3. Germania, an ethnographic monograph, occa-
sioned by 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 : Cornell 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. Kopke, on the
criticism of the sources of the Germania, in his Germanic Investigations
(Berhn 1859) 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 pi). 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
Cinibrians (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 desifi^ns 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 tresited 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, Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 1868, p. 650.
3. The Gerinania 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 clescribere, and to which
the Agricola had already contributed. But the execution is indeed
characteristic of Tac. Just as 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.
J. 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, Miitzell, Journ, for Gymn. I. (1847)
p. 86 sqq. On the pleonasms of thifj 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\ationes in T. Germ., Helmstadt 1827. 1828. 1834. 4. Wol fiin
Philologus XXVI p. 122 cf. n. 1 nnd 330, 2), and many passages remind
us of the other works cf Tacitus, especially of his Agricola (Agr. 11
extr. 1= Germ. 28; hand perinde, Agr. 10 = Germ. 34; in universum
aestirtiiinti Agr. 11 =1 Germ. 6; patiens frugum, Agr. 12, cf. Germ. 5)-
Hexameters occur Germ. 18. 32. 39; an iambic dimeter c. 27.
.'. 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. Massmnnn, Berl. Jahrbb. 1841, Nr. 87 sqq. R. Tagmann, de
codicibus mss. atque editionibus vett. Tac. Germ. I. Breslau 1846; de
Tac (icnn. apparatii critico, Breslau 1847. Except in Rudolf of Fulda,
I
Tacitus. 179
tlie work does not appear to have been used in the Middle Ages;
G. Waitz, Investiga,tions on German History X (Gott. 1870) p. 602.
6. Editions. Cum notis Willichii, Glareani, Melanchthonis, Frkf.
a. 0. 1551. Cum comm. Chr. Coleri, Hannov. 1602. E rec. 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. II. cur. Ph. Hess, Lips. 1824. Cum varr.
lectt. ed. G. G. Bredow, Helmst. 1808. 1816. Ed. illustr. R. Belham
(with Agr.) ed. II. Cambridge 1813. Rec. Fr. Passow. Breslau 1817.
With notes by Ammon and Baumlein, Tiib. 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. Giinther, 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 reliquo 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 1836. 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 Doderlein , 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, Berhn 1855. Ed. Schrant, Leiden 1866. XLI and 334 pp.
Edited and explained by Th. Fink, I. Tac.'s life, the text, and principal
apparatus, Gottingen 1857. 250 pp. Ex Hauptii rec, recogn. et perpetua
adnot. illustr. F. Kritz, Berlin 1860. 1865. 1869. Explained by C.
Tiicking, Paderborn 1867. Explained by L. Curtze, Leipzig 1868. 424 p,
(on c. 1—10). With notes by B. Hiippe, Miinster 1868. By H. Schweizer-
Sidler, Halle 1871.
7. Critical commentations by J. C. Orelli (Ziirich 1819. 4.), Ph.
Hess (Helmstadt 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, Miinster 1855), C. Nipperdey
(Rhein. Mus. XVIII 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 (Conioctanea, in the Symbola pliilol. Bonn. p. 623 — 628),
A. Planck (Heilbronn 1867. 4.). K. Meiser (Eichstiitt 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. Volkel, 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. Riidiger, 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. Riihs, 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. Goller, 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.,
Miinster 1846. 4. Greverus, Observations on T. Germ., Oldenburg 1850.
E. Keferstein, Views on the Celts etc. Ill 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. Miinster 1852. MiillenhofF,
Corrupt (German) Names in Tac, Journal for German Antiquities IX
p. 223 — 261. B. Hiippe, 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 Zurich 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
(Gottingen 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 scribendo de G. libro secutus esse
videatur, Deutsch-Crone 1860. 4. Kiinssberg, Excursions into German
antiquity (Berlin 1861) and against him Boot, Verslagen der holland.
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. Gobel,
Tacitus. 181
ibid. I. p. 516 — 525. A. Riese, on the original intention of the Germ-
of Tacitus, ibid. II p. 193 — 203. Fr. Miinsclier, 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. 1 43) agrees with the
technical meaning of the word historiae, see above 32, 1. Wolfflin,
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 off 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. VH 10. 19. The work was employed by
Sulpicius Severus; see below 435, 2.
3. Pliny's Letters (a. 106 or 107) VI 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 Silvern, Trans, of the Berlin Academy 1822 sq.
p. 07—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 hot 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
Dioue 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 IV p. 298—316)
Cluvius Rufus. But quite recently 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 stjde 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 Mo-
dicean ms.
6. Editions of the Historiae by Th. Kiessling (Lips. 1840) and C.
Heraeus (explained for School-use, I Teubner 1864. 1871. II 1870). Cf.
E. Wcilfflin, Philol. XXVH p. 113 sqq.
Tacitus. 183
7. Cojitributions to the Historiae by A, Bookli (H. I 52. Berol.
1830. 4.), F. Jacob (on Tac. Hist. V 2—5, Liibeck 1840. 4.), L. Doder-
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. H Frankfort 1863. 4. HI Hamburg 1866. 4.), F. Ritter
(Philol. XXI p. 601—653), J. Miiller (I. Innsbruck 1865. II 1869), E.
Wolfflin (Philol. XXVH p. 117—144), Borghesi (Oeuvres V p. 287-328:
Annotazioni agli Ann. ed alle Storie di Tac).
8. Volcker, 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.
Miiller, 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. =: 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, 1 Rostock 1870.
10 pp. 4.
333. 5. Annales or rather ab excessu divi Augusti, in
sixteen books, containing the history of the Julian Dynasty
after Augustus' death (Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero) or
the years 14—68 (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 Cahgula, 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 Llder, a fine Aufidii Bassi.
Though Tac. himself repeatedly (A. IV 32, cf. Ill 65. XIH 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. 1 2 speaks of Cornelius anna-
lium scriptor, though he means a passnge in Agricola). But precisely
because the books ab excessu d. Auguati 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. II 61. The boundaries
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 his 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 Hbris) 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 difference 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-
Tacitus. 1 85
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 Hersfeld 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. Wolfflin, 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 (Ziirich 1859), A.
Drager (School-edition, Ijeipzig, 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, Liibeck 1837—1842. 4.), 0. Miiller
(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., Miinchen 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. Biidinger'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.
1 — 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.
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 seposui. A. Ill 24: cetera illius aetatis (the Augustan) memo-
rabo si effeciis 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. Miiller (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: Bibliographic 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. fol.), 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. Doderlein (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, Zurich 1846. 2 vols. Ed. II, vol. I, 1859), J. Stock (ed.
illustr. Dublin 1862. 2 vols.).
Texts by Imm. Bekker (Berol. 1825), Liinemann (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 ^ipperdey (Berol. 1871 sqq.)
Tacitus. Pliny the younger. 187
4. H. WolflFel, Emendationes in Cornelii Taciti libros, Niirnberg
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. XXI. 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. Thoraae, Observationes cri-
ticae in Corn. Taciturn, Bonn 1866. 52 pp. 8. E. Wolfflin, 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
Caecilius 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 112 sq.). As Phny had frequently
pleaded in lawsuits belore 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. Thcie 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 inscription concerns the thermae which he bequeathed to
Comum in his will (T. F. I.), but which was somehow or other carried
to Milan (Orelh - Henzen 1172, cf. Ill p. 124). He is there styled C.
Plinius L. f. Ouf. Caecilius Secundus, Cos., Augur, Legatus pro pr. pro-
vinciae Ponti et Bithyniae consulari potestate, e[x SC. 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
Fl(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 lOO 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. Piini . . vita ordine chro-
nologic© 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 HI p. 31-114
(139). H. F. Stobbe, on the chronology of the letters of Pliny, Philol.
XXX p. 347 — 393 (containing the actions against Priscus 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.
Pliny the younger. 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 magnas 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 quem 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. IX 26, 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. VI 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 poetice 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 liendecasyllabi. 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 variis me studiorum generibus, nulli satis con-
fisus, experior.
5. Plin. Ep. 1 1, 1: frequenter hortatus es ut epistulas, si quas
paulo curatius scripsissem, colligerem 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 Statins, 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, III a. 101 sq., IV a. 104 sq., V was
published 106, VI a. 106 sq., VII a. 107? VIII 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 II 6. VI 17. VII 26. VIII 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 of 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.
Pliny the younger. 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 occasione ultra modum laudet (VII 28, 1), perhaps silently hoping
an equal return. Owing to his mild and tender heart he deej)ly 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. ID: 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. B. Lehmus, on the character of Pliny the younger, Soest
1776. J. A. Schafer, (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. i
Wensch, lexici pliniani spec. I. II. Wittenberg 1837. 1839. 4. H.
Holstein, de PL min. elocutione, Naumburg 1862. 36 pp. 4.; disp. altera,
Magdeburg (Lips. Teubner) 1869. 26 pp. 4. Cf. E. Klussmann, Pliilol.
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 epistuiare ,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 I6th 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
Mithout 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. VIII 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. AVith a commentary by M. Doring, 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 Panegyricus 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 Symmachus
(Mediol. 1815), more accurately by H. Keii, de schedis Ambrosianis re-
scriptis paneg. PI., Halle 1869. 16 pp. 4. The other consists of mss
t
Pliny the younger 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. Diibner, Paris 1843.
Critical contributions by J. C. Held, Observationes in PI. 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 Florus 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. 18. V 21
(, 1: litterae tuae . . te recitaturum statim ut venissem pollicebantur).
Vn 7. 15. IX 38.
13
194 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
2. Plin. Ep. II 13, 4: Voconius 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), Cornelius 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 II, 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 disertum et gravera, 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
Orators: Annius Florus 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. Bahrens (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 tarn 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. Miiller, 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 tamen 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. PHn. Ep. VII 31, 5: Claudius Pollio quam fideliter amicos
colat multorum supremis iudiciis, in his Anni Bassi, gravissimi civis^
credere potes, cuius memoriam tarn grata praedicatione prorogat . .
196 The First Century of the Imperial Epoch.
lit Hbrum de vita eiiis (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 v^^orks 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 preparation 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 ProcuUans
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 we 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 JuUanus. 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 =r
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: divus 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
JuHsts: Juventms Celsus 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 Roman Law I p. 181 sq. K. Viertel, de vitis ictorum (1868) p. 26 — 30.
2. P. luventius Celsus T. Aufidius 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.
XXVni 5, 59. XXXm lO, 7. XLVn 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. Ill 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. H. 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 Prisons (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 publico 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-
tomatorum, 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 {y.ai (faai TlQoy.ovllog
th aua y.ccl NsQc'criog) 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 L 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, quem singulariter et miror et diligo.
nihil est enim illo gravius, sanctius, doctius etc. (2.) quam peritus ille
et privati iuris et publici; quantum rerum, 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 quem quam ex istis
qui sapientiae studium habitu corporis praeferunt huic viro comparabis.
. . in toga negotiisque versatur, multos advocatione, plures consilio
iuvat. From the succeedingf 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. fur 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-
Jurists'. Aristo, Minicws and others. 199
quando dubitasse. He must, therefore, have been an older contempo-
rary of Aristo. Mommsen: Varronem Lucullum (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. Hiibner, Monthly Reports of the Berl. Ac. 1860, p. 232
sq. F. Kammerer, de Minicio Natali ieto 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.) proj)Oses Heraclidis with more pro-
bability,
8. Ulpian. Dig. V 3, 11: Arrianus libro II de interdictis. XLIII
3, 1, 4: beliissime 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. I 2. II II 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 from 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: Vivianus 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: qiiidam referunt . . apud Vivianum Sabini et Cassii et Proeuli
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 (Konigsb. 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 Plant.: 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
Caper. 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. Kib-
beck, proll. ad Verg. p. 167 — 169.
2. Gellius XVIII 9, 4: Velio Longo, non homini indocto, fidem
esse habendam, qui in commentario quod fecisset de usu antiquae
Jurists and Grammarians. Velhis Longus and Flavins Caper. 201
lectionis scripserit etc. Charis. p. 175, 14 K.: Velius Longus in II Aenei-
dos (i. e. in 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 raagister Augusti Caesaris, elaboravit vehementissime et de epistu-
lis Ciceronis coUegit 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. Cajjer . . 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 Pro bis 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. II 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, prol!. 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 VI (VII) 2, 1 sq.: turpe erratum offendimus in illis cele-
bratissimis commentariis lectionum antiquarum Caeselli Vindicis,
hominis hercle pleraque baud indiligentis. (2.) quod erratum multos
fugit, quamquam multa in Caesellio reprehendendo etiam per calumnias
rimarentur (especially his younger contemporaries Terentius Scaurus
and Sulj^icius 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 Stromateus 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. Kitsch), 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 Grafenhan, 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. Rutin,
de metr. p. 2713 P. J. Kretzschmer, dc 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
ifan'&QC(TioQ, dno rov (laiv&G&uL 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 /oqtoi') 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 dici
etc. . . (4.) sculnam autem scriptum esse in logistorico Varronis . .
jdem Lavinius in eodem libro admonet. The Laevinus mentioned by
Macrob. HI 8, 3 is not identical with this Lavinius for the simple
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, who 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. B alb us 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 wTiter
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) cf. 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 (Getting. 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. Mommsen ibid. II, p. 146—150. 151
— 157. It is a manual of geometry for landsurveyors, mostly derived
from Euclid 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 inbtrument (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: Balbus 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, Gotting. 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 sej)arate edition
by J. C. Schwarz, Coburg 1711. 4.
7. Under Trajan was written the TaxTi,xij fhsoiqCa which bears the
name of Aelianus. Cf. Kochly and Riistow, 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 hfe, and the affectation of it became the fashion ;
there were plenty of grammarians and professors 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, Poraponius 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 Koman 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 agnoscitiir.
208 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch.
which is TertiilHan, then Commodianus, were influenced by
eastern culture and attempted to keep aloof from ancient cul-
ture; they even returned to the indiff'erence of the earliest
Eomans concerning formal polish. 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 tlie 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.
34L P. Aelius Hadrian us (a. 76 — 138) was a peculiar
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 sufl'ered 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
**) Apoll. Sid. ep. VIII 11: urhium cives africr.narum, quibus ut
est reofio sic mens ardentior.
The Emperor Adrian. 209
his time, Konigsberg 1851. 282 pp. C. Peter, Hist, of Rome III 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 ; arithmeticae, geometriae, picturae peritissimus.
iam psallendi et cantandi scientiam prae se ferebat; . . idem armorum
peritissimus... idem severus, laetus; comis, gravis: lascivus, cunctator;
tenax, liberalis; 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 Antitaachum
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 \4f^Qua'6g . . (fvofi (fdokoyog tv sxarfQcc rp
ykioffffr], '/.ai, riva y-al n^l,d xcd Iv i^'nf-ai noiijfxcaa nuvrod'ana xaraXfkoi-
Tifv. (fikoTtiuicc Tf yccQ dTiki^ffTCj) i/Qtiro XKi xciTfc rovTO xcct rakkci navTcc
xal rn ^Quxviara tnni^dfvfi^ 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.):
-di^QKcyov Tov ^aoikfiag jufk^rai ducif/OQot, slg to /ufiQioy tou koyov
dvr}yu^vai x«l ovx dtjdflg. 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. tisqI j^ujomv p. 170 A. He gave grapimatical 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(^Qucvov anoifccaftg xcd iJit^ffTokai. D. Adriani sententiae et epi-
stolae ed. Goldast, Genf 1601; in Schulting'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 H p. 285 = II p. 260 Jacobs;
Hendecasyllabics in an inscription of Thespiae, ^Ei^t]/u. «^/. 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 Roman 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 meus and scholasticus, concerning the purchase
of an agellus). Ill 8 (Suet, asks ut tribunatum, quem a'^eratio 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 sue
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 cubic uli
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.: T^ayiCvKkog o SSovijriOPiog, xQVf*^'
Ttcas (cf. Plin. Ep. I 18) y^ufi/uajixug QOJfialog, ^yqaifjf nf^l Twy na^
212 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch.
EkkrjGi navdiiov ^i^kia a (see n. 4), nsql 7(oy ttccqcc Poauaioig S^fojQtuip
xcd aytovoiv ^i^lCa /?' (S. T. in libro ludicrae historiae primo, Gell. IX
7, 3; cf. n. 4), ufQi tov xaicl PcDuaiovg tvtavTov ^i^kioy a (see n. 3),
TtfQl T(oy iu To7g ^t^kcotg arj^doiv a (Reifferscheid p. 419 sq.), nfQi Trjg
KixfQiouog TtokiTfiag cc, avTik^y^t ds roll Ji&vfXM. tisqI ovofxatayr xvQitar,
xcd idfctg iad-^juccTCJU xcd vnodrj^uciTiop xal roHy cikkcav olg Jig ccfxi^i^vvvrca
(Suetonius in libro de genere vestium, Serv. Aen. VII 612, cf. n. 3),
71€qI dvai^rjjucav kf^fiov rjTot, ^kciG(fjrjfiL(ov xcd nod-fv kxaarv} (Extracts
from it in Greek in E. Miller, Melanges p. 413—426: 2ovriiivov TQoyxvkov
71(qI etc. cf. ib. p. 389 — 394), tk^I P(x)fj.t]g xal laiv Iv avr^ vofiifAwv
xal rid-iav ^t^kuc /9 (see n. 3), avyy^vixov, KataaQcov i/i' — nsqii^fi ds
fiCovg xaicc diccdo/ccg c<vT(oy ano lovkt'ov fiog Jojufjt avov — ^t^kia rj ,
Giifxfxcc (? cf. Reifferscheid p. 370) "^Pm.uccicoi/ avdqwv (de illustribus viris).
Besides this TQccyxvkkog tp tw tisqI iuto^uayy noQvoiv (l^yd. de magistr.
Ill 64), 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 C(>urt
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 variis (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 = nfql
"PMfxrig 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 7i(()i ovofxaKav xvQtoiv 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' = ti^qI tmv Iv '^Puifxrj vofjiCfA.(aj/ xcd
^d-Mv. The eighth book explained Roman chronology, the feriae, dies
fasti etc. and may thus have been identical with the work 71€qI tov x.
^P. Ivvcivrov. 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.
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 Reifferscheid 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 Die
and Jerome made use of (Reifferscheid p. 469 — 472). The ludicra
historia (Reifferscheid p. 461 — 465) contained perhaps four books: nsqi
Tiov ncio' "Ekkijat 7iaL&i(av xtd ayMvtav ^t^kCa § und nfQl jioy naQcc
"PM^aioig naidiaip xal d^fiOQiutv 5t/3At« ^'. 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 tkqI dvan>iq^u(ov k&'^fojp 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 . . familiare 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, Konigsberg (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 Reifferjcheid p. 363— 425 (de poetis p. 370-405).
H. Dorgens, on Suetonius' work de viris ill., Leipzig s. a. (1857). Suet.
de gramm. et rhett. libelli . . rec. et adn. crit. instr. F. Osann, Giessen
Suetoniifs. 215
1854. H. Dorgens, Suetonius' Viri iilustres 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. 1880. 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. Stephanus (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, Ziirich 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., Konigsberg 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 annorum DCC libri duo, was composed by
Florus, 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 anno mm 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 Vin p. 211, 2 Bonn : xu,9iog o oo(^uirarog <Pk(OQog vjiffjytjjud-
jiafv iK Tioy Ji^^Cov GvyyQ(cfxijicc7oiv.lj\\y\sohe:n copied verbatim, especially
jn rhetorical phrases, but he is not the sole source of the abridgment;
see U. Kohler, 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-
Suetonius. Florus. 217
versam magnitudinem eius ostendero. He intended non tarn narrare
bella romana quam romanum imperium laudare (Augustin. civ. dei III
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. Koliler 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. XL VI 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
(133). The author follows the division according to the various ages (see
above 265, 3), i. e. infantia, adolescentia, inventus, 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-
bricum et asturic<um, 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,
Pragl819) placed Florus under Augustus and considered all contradictory
passages to be spurious; see against him Meinert, Wiener Jahrb. XXVIII
(1824) p. 169 — 201. Gossrau, de Flori qua vixerit aetate, Quedlinburg
1837. 4. (under Trajan).
4. 0. Jahn p. XL VII: totus sermo declamatorem arguit et cuiusvis
generis artiticiis, figuris, sententiis male acuminatis ita refertus est ut
pauper scriptoris ingenium et indicium 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. Wolfflin, 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 of its brevity and rhetoric. Jahn p. XL VIII sq. Especially Jor-
danes employed it much (ib. p. VI sq.), and at a later time Malalas
(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), CI. 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. Kohler (Observ. criticae in Jul
FL, Gotting. 1865. 42 pp.), J. Freudenberg (Rhein. Mus. XXIL p. 25— 30),
J. P. Binsfeld (Quaest. Florianae crit., Diisseldorf 1869. 11 p. 4.). E.
Bahrens (lectiones latt., Bonn 1870, p. 5 — 19), H. Sauppe (de arte cri-
tica in Flori Bellis recte facienda, Gott. 1870. 19 pp. 4.), H. Miiller
(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.
CI. 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,
Flortts 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 Martialis 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: fxvrifxovfvfi (Clem. Alex.) . . Ka(i6Kxvov (og
4. On Phlegon sec. 341, 3. His chief work were the 14 books of
^Okvjuntadfg, quibus olympiades CCXXIX summatim continentur (Euseb.
chron I 41). Cf. A. Westermann in Paulj^'s Real-Enc. V. p. 1540 sq.
345. Of the Jurists of this time the most influential is
the Sabinian Salvius Julianus, 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. 12, 2 fin.: lavoleno Prisco (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 Hadria.no 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. Jidioxsp 18:
' A&Qiavog . . otf t« naQti rdHv TiQcctrojQCJu xar' hogixaaxov vofxod^ijovfx^va
hv ^pKYfi Tivi Gvvrjyf ^i^kiu), toy xqartojov 'lovkiapoy nqogjovTo naqaka^oiv.
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): luliaui, 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
followed 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, Konigsb. 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
I. 1 p. 132, n. 16.
4. Heinneccius, de Salvio luliano, Ictorum sua aetate coryphaeo,
Halle 1732. 4 = 0pp. H. 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 XXXII 94: lulianus . . putavit) and as Trajan is designated as
Jurists: Juliamfs, Pomponius, and others. 221
divus (XLIX 14, 42), he seems to have survived Juhan. 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. XLVIII
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. XLVIII 5, 6, 2. XLVIII
6, 6) soceri sui procos(uiis) in Achaia, trib. pleb., fetiali, legato divi
Hadriani Athenis . . , praetori urbano, leg. divi Hadriani ad rationes
civitatium Syriae putandas, legato eiusdem in Cilicia, Consuli (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 LXXVIII""™ annum aetatis duxi.
As he styles Antoninus divus in the same book (Dig. 112, 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. Mucins, Ser. Sulpicius, Trebatius, Alfenus^
Labeo.
8. On the relation between Juhan and Pomponius. Pomp, uses
Juhan'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 Plant.: 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 VH 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. H 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 divi 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. Rocking
(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, Wiirzburg 1710 {=z 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. Khetoricians 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,
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 cura et memoria multa fuit. ad hoc scripta omnia
antiquiora tarn curiose spectabat et aut virtutes pensitabat aut vitia
rimabatur ut iudicium esse factum adamussim diceres. ib. 8: ad hune
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, familiares eius, 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 familiares eius
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 inpervulgatis commentariis scripta offendimus.
Minuc. Fel. Oct. 33, 4 : si Bomanis magis gaudes, ut transeamus veteres,
Antonii luliani de ludaeis require : iam scles nequitia sua hanc 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 noki^oiva (n. 6) -Acd 4>c(^coQ7uoy (n. 5) xal 2xo7i(kuKv6p iu
didaaxdkoig eavtov ijy€ xal ^fxovud'M t(o 'JtS^rjvaiM iqjohtjafp, . . tovs
d€ xqtnxovg i(av koyiou Sfayivfi t€ t(o KvidiM xal MovvaiCia iia ix
TQakksioy Gvvfyivno xal TavQ(o tw TvQiio (below 348, 2) inl ralg
Jlkajiavoq 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 {nvQQ(OP€ioi tqotioi and ' Anofxrijfxovsv^aTa) and
224 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch.
of a Ilca'ro&umq taioQuc, acquainted also with Roman literature and
opposed to the antiquarian party (Gellius I 10, cf. VIII 2. XVIII 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) Lollianus nQovarf] tov 'Ad^rivriai &qovov
(of Sophists,) uQcoTog, see Philostr. v. soph. 123 with Kayser p. 261 sq.
8. Dio LXIX 3: top <l*ciov(ji)^n'or ror VcikaTt]}' top t^ Jiot^vGiov
TOV MiXriGiof rovg oo(fiajag 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 libro III we
are obliged by the connexion of the text to understand of the auto-
biography of M. Aemililius Scaurus (above 131, 10). Rufin. 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
Terentins Scaurns and other (n'mnmarians. 225
impariter iunctis, ubi Q. Terentius Scaurus in commentariis in artera
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. Grafenhan (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 (Up. 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 urgenti 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 quem 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 (D: Vellius) Celer respon-
dens Hadriano imperatori per epistulam de hoc (the quantity of am-
bitus) interroganti . . ostendit etc. He is perhaps identical with KtkfQ
Tf^voyQaiiog, ^(«tikiy.MV jusr tntffTokdiy nQoarctTt]?, Jiovvaiio ds lov tje
fAdQaxt'ov /Qovov dia(fOQog ap. Philostr. vit. soph. I 22. Comp. n. 9.
4. Gellins 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 aoifiai&ia 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 Centur)' of the Imperial Epoch.
9. Dio LXIX 3: Jtoyuaiog (above 346, 8) 7i()6g tou avrov (Adrian)
Miov HktodioQoi'. rou r«V tniOTokdg aihov d\(iyayov7cc, (■Imlfv ksyfTcxi'
oTi K((iO((Q )^{)rjU(XT(i fi^y ooi xal Tif^tjV dovyat J'vuccrat, QtjroQa Ji ffs
Tioir}0(u ov (^vvcaai. Cf. n. 3. He was all the more important as gram-
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 Heliodorus, 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 =:: ll9 A. D.: Plutarchus
Chaeroneus et Sextus et Agathobulus et Oenomaus philosoplii insignes
habentur. Ad 2142 = Hadr. 10 == 126 A. D.: Quadratiis 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. Hieronym, 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. XVn 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 1826), 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-
raeloveen) = Venet. 1757. 4. Lausanne 1774. Also in the collected
Caelius Aiirelianus. Annianus. 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. Kiihn, de C. A. inter methodicos medicos
haud ignobili, Lips. 1816. 4. r=z. 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
quarters 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 the Berlin Academy, 1867, p. 526—548. A. Kliig-
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 eunique 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
quern 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. Miiller, Kh. Mus. XXV p. 337 — 344 and in his edition
of Rutil. Nam. p. 34—44.
4. Gellius XIX 7, 1 : in agro Vaticano lulius P a u I u s 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. Mfffoju^dtjg (II p. 791 sq. Bernh.): KQijg, kvQtxog, yfyovMg
ini TMJ^ A&Qvtcvov /Qoi/oty, ccuflfvd^fQog avTov rj iy To7g fxakiarcc rfj/'kog.
yQa<f'St ovv fig AvTi.voo%^ tnavvov . . xal cckka d'ia<f)OQa fAikr}. 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 Cretensis citharicorum carminura
(in Greek) musicus poeta agnoscitur. We possess his hymn on
Nemesis.
a
3. The time of the Antoninea,
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. Miiller, On the Hist, of the Emperor A. P., in M.
Biidinger's Investigations on Roman Imperial Hist. II (1868) p. 289
—321.
Antonintwi Pius. Fronto. 22V
2. Capitolin. Anton. Pi. 2, 1 : fuit . . eloquentiae nitidae, littera-
turae praecipuae. 11, 3: rhetoribus et philosophis per omnes provincias
et honores et salaria detulit. Cf. Modestin. Dig. XXVII 1, 6 from an
inKfioktj -dviMvCvov tov Evaf^ovg : ttl ufp ikctJTOvg nokfig d'vvavtcti,
nivjf IccJQovg tijfkftg ^'^€tv xccl T^dg ooi^^ardg xal y^afx/uccTi'Xovg jovg
laovg (the larger ones seven physicians and four professors, the greatest
ten physicians and five ^j^To^eg and yQccu^caixoi). (§. 7.) Tif^i d's ttay
(^ikoooi^MV tj uvjT} ducTiK^t,g TOV Hiov ovTio kiyfi. i^tkoaoifnov &8 ovx
tio,)[x^ri ixQtx^^uog dut to anaviovg ilvut rovg ^nkoaoi^ovviag. 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 lI(QH]yt]<jig ivjg "^Ekkccdog 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. IV 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. Schonfeld, lb. I 1, p. 783—787.
351. The chief 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 IS ew- Year; see ep. ad Caes.
V, 32 cf. 30 sq. uud p. 94 Naber. Cirtensis noster, Minuc. Fel. Oct. 9;
230 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch.
cf. Fronto p. 242: Af^vg tiov At^viov, 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. pL, Praetori, municipes Calamensium patrono. He refuses
to become the patron of Cirta ep. p. 200 sq. Consul 143 = 896 Y. 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
nummum Antonini aut Commodi aut Pii), but does not appear to have
lived until the death of L. Verus (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 educated in the
house of his grandfather Fronto, the other died in Germany at the
age of three years. Cf. Fr. p. 137: in paucissimis mensibus et uxorem
carissimam et nepotem trimulum amisi; p. 236: uxorem amisi, nepotem
in Gerraania amisi, . . Decimanum (a friend) nostrum amisi (after the
commencement of 162; cf. p. 94: incolumitate fihae, 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 fiagitio 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
adeptus sum numquam improbis rationibus concupivi. . . studia doctrinae
rei familiari meae praetuli (cf. p. 135, 2: nostrae res baud 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 benefi.cia quae-
cumque possem prompte impertienda. . Cf. M. Aurel. epist. Ill 17: a
I
Fronto. 231
Marco Cornelio meo, 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. lu the amiable letter concerning his grandson p. 181 sq.
the tenderhearted grandpapa shows even a tinge of humour.
4. Fronto p. 244: tJqmv tot8 ufy Ad^rjvodoTov tov aoi^ov, rorf ds
Jioi'voiov (above 346, 8) tov Q^roQog. 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 farailiares meos scripsi. As Cirtensis, he may have studied
there. I)io LXIX 18 (a. 136): KoQt^rjkiog ^Qot/riop, o tcc tiqmtcc tlov t6t(
''PiOfjuiioyv if dry.atg n&Qoiiavog. 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.
p. Ill cxtr. = 138, 3 cf. p. 42 sq.), pro Demonstrato Petiliano (ep.
p. Ill =: 137), in Pelopem (Sidon. epist. YIII 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 Yerus. Capitolin. Antonin. phil.
2, 4 sq. : oratoribus usus est graecis Aninio Macro, Cauinio 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: latiuas 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 Yerum latinis litteris erudivit. Orelli 1176 from Pisaurum:
M. Cornell 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 him, 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 raihi videre . . laboris taedio defessus elo-
quentiae studium reliquisse, ad philosophiam devertisse, ubi nullum
prooemium cum cura excolendum, nulla narratio breviter et dilucide
. . collocanda, nullae 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, quern
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 eavr.
I 11), JO iTHOTtjcai of,u V) Tv^avvi>'jit} (iaaxaytn xal noixtlta xai vnox(itatg
xal oTt iog inlnav ol xakovjUfyot ovtoi na^' rnxly fvncci^idat aoroqyoTfool
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-
cmus has in Fronto a somewhat contemptuous meaning; cf. p. 23. 25,
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 procul 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. HI 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.; adAntoninum quinto, ib. p. 223, 27 sq.), but of which scar-
Fronto. 283
ccly two have come down to us. Further: (p. 113 — 138 N.) ad Verum
Imp, Aurelium Caesarem two books, in which we notice 11 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 bello 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
laudes 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 iQojttxog (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 differentiis 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 io 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. 111=: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 slxoue 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 Century of the Imperial Epoch.
in pedantic erudition, to judge by the specimens mentioned by Gellius
II 26. XIII 29. XIX 8. 10. 13. None of his treatises seem to bear an
earlier date than a. 1 60.
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. Mahly (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, Niirnbeig 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 rhetoricians and grammarians. 235
them (Fronto p. 60 sq.). At last, however, they appear to have agreed
for good. Fronto fj. Ill ad 138: fieri amicissimum, tarn hercule quam
est Herodes summus nunc mens, quamquam extet oratio (against him).
See on this Ti. Claudius Atticus Herodes of Marathon (a 101 — 177.)
Philostr. vit. soph. II 1 and K. Keil in Pauly's Enc. I 2. p. 2096—2104.
H. Kammel in Jahn's Jahrbb. 102, p. 1-24. See below 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 B'ronto and
in which he offers him a present 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 6 Jak-
duiyog. 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 I860; A. F. Rudorff, 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 Verus 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 firmiores 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 vestibule palatii fabulantes Fronto Cornelius
236 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch.
et Festus Postumius (below 360, 1) et Apollinaris 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 Apollinaris
Sulpicius iactatorem quempiam Sallustianae lectionis inrisit inlusitque.
XIII 20, 1 : cum in domus Tiberianae bybliotheca sederemus . . prolatus
forte liber est etc. turn quaeri coeptum est etc. XIX 10, I sqq. :
memini me quondam et Celsinum lulium Numidam (cf. ib. 7, 2) ad
Frontonem Cornelium, pedes tunc graviter aegrum, ire et visere. . .
otfendimus 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 ApoUinarem,
virum praestanti litterarum scientia, . . 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: Apollinaris, 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 Rffsch. (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. 653. 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. Grafenhan, 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
G-rammarians and Philosophers. 237
18, 2 and 3 (vir eruditus) cf. VII 6, 12. He is probably Sex. Enicius, 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 LXVIII 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, ut fabulas litteratas haberet.
8. In the same time (according to Mommsen and Biicheler) we should
place the Auruncan Fusius Philocalus, magister ludi litterari, summa
quom castitate in discipulos suos, idemque testamenta scripsitcum fide
in an inscription Hermes I p. 148 =: Biicheler, 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 us 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 1, 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 Kusticus 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 (^vloaoi^ovvng 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: (ftdaaxcilovg *7/' ^^^'' *^ ^ftkoaoffrccc: koyojp rou rf Povarixor
rov lovviov y.al jTrokhnmov tov Ntxourjd'fa, rove: ZrjvuiVfiovg koyovg
jufkfToiyTag. Hieronym. ad a. Abr: 2165 = 149 A. D.: Apollonius 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 sc.vt. I 6 sqq.) mentions among those who influenced his
philosophical studies the following: Jioyvijjog, Anolluiviog, 2f^Tog,
^Akk^avd'oog o nkaTajpixog, KarovXog. Fronto 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 savT. I 7: naQtl Povorixov . . to ^U1] ixTQanrjvai, dg C^koy ffotfKJttxoy
. . xat, TO tcnoajrjvai^ QriroQixrjg xai noitjTixrjg xav affiftokoyiccg . . xcct to
(iXQi^iog avccyLyvMGxft^v . . xal to tPTV/flv To7g 'EnixrtjTfiotg vtiojup*]-
ixaaiv, (ov oixo,9(y /ufTsdioxfy. Themist. or. XIII. XVII. Orelli 1190 (L.
lunius Rusticus philosophus stoicvis). He is perhaps identical with Q.
lun. Rust., Consul (under Antoninus Pius) with Q. Flavins Tertullus
(Gruter p. 131, 3). See above 314, 6.
4. The Stoic Claudius Maximus (n. 2) is probably that Ma|t//o?
whom M. Aurelius fig savr. I 15 {nuQaxktjaig Mct'^lfxov to xqaxflv lavrov)
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 (scit 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: (J'^i'/usTg fifv Xaqal xal Jtjjui^TQtog 6 nkccTM-
pixog xal fi Ttf TOiovTog, navra ft^rj^ufqa, ifS^vrixora nakat.
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 'Ak&'iai/dQog (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 Kome 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 iifty 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 who 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 consihi 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 lureti now lost; then in the
editions of Florus by Duker and others. Separately by C. H. Tzschucke
(cum notis, Lips. 1793), F. A. Beck (with a comm., Leipzig 1826); by
E. Wolfflin (Lips. Teubner 1854), from Salmasius' copy of the codex.
3. C. E. Gliiser, on the age of Amp., Rh. Mus. II (1843) p. 145 sq.
E. Wolfflin, de L. Amp. libro mem. quaestiones criticae et historicae^
Gotting. 1854. 50 pp. F. Biicheler, Rhein. Mus. XIII p. 179 sqq. H.
240 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch.
Jacob, quaestiones Amp., Cleve 1860. 4. (p. 18 — 25). Critical contri-
butions by L. Urlichs (Rhein. Mus. XVII p. 632—637), M. Zink (Eos II
p. 317—328), A. Eussner (Spec, crit., Wurzburg 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.
II 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 Flac-
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 (Botticher; 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, Solinus p. XXVIII. The Bonn editors (Biicheler 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.
Granius Licinianus. Jwistis. 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
(Niirnberg 1858. 4.), D. Comparetti (Rhein. Mus. XIII p. 457 sqq.), C.
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 Eoman 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 : niulta 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. Ulpian. 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 disciplina 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 African! 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. Kammerer, 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 II p. 499—502). Dig. XXVIII 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. XXXIII 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. II 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. Venuleius Satu minus 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 paganorum, which the ind. Flor. attri-
butes to Venul. Sat., but Dig. XL VIII 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. XVII
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
by 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 very 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, Maecianus, Ulpius Marcellns. 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. XXXVII 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. XIV 2, 9). Besides this
iibri 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 uUo 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. Booking (Bonn 1831 and in the
Corpus iur. anteiust. p. 183 sqq.), Th. Mommsen (Trans, of the Saxon
Society of literature HI. 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 proximo 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. Pannon. 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 Iibri
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 Iibri 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 oif. 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. Gal. 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 TQioag,
BriQVTog, JofiQa/'^oy. But all these arguments are not sufficient to con-
tradict other clear traces of the composition of the Inst, at Rome ; see
Huschke, 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-
Gaius. 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 jJrovincial 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 Dernburg 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-
firmat exemplo = Inst. Ill l4l), 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 Dern-
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 ipsos
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 feciraus.
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 ji
that G. had written Ex 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 (of 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 %j
Hadrianus, Imp. Antoninus, princeps Antoninus being mentioned in
them, but never divus Antoninus or divus Pius or even Verus. Fitting, '\y
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 17, 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 n. 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 personas pertinet (b. I) vel ad res (b. II law of
matters aud hereditary law by will ; b. Ill 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). Ill 38 (sup. comm. trad. =: II 119. 148 sq.). The
designation of commentarii {vnofxnqfxara as differing from cvyyQay,fAccra)
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 (II 218)
Sextus Pomponius ; Dernburg p. 102 sq. n. 6. The work was written
at Rome, of. 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 Goschen together
with Hollweg deciphered the text and published the first edition, Berol.
1820. It was revised by Bluhme, Berol. 1824: ed. Ill (rec. Lachmann)
Berol. 1842. A comparative collation of the Inst, of Gains and of
Justinian by Klenze and Bocking, Berl. 1829. 4. Comp. the Collatio of
W, van Swinderen (Annal. acad. Groning 1821) and F. Potter v. Loon
(Groning. 1823). Editions of Gaius by E. Bocking (Bonn 1841. ed. V. Lips-
1865). Codicis Veronensisapographum .. scripsit. . etpublicavitE. Bocking,
Lips. 1866. Also in R. Gneist's Institutionum syntagma (Lips. 1858) and Ph.
E. Huschke's iurisprudentia anteiustiniana (ed. II 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-
Gains. 247
tempts p. 104 sqq.), Puclita (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. Poschmann
(Studies in G. I. Leipzig 1854. II 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. Hoven
(tentamina crit., Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. VII p. 257 — 259), W. Studemund
(on the antiquarian gains from the new collation of G., Trans, of the
Wiirzburg 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 et 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, probaljly
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 bj^ 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 Quaestiones
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 trom 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
belong to this period, a strophie 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. liistinus Faustinus, M. . . , the author of an acrostichic poem
on Antoninus Pius in the Anthol. lat. of Meyer 1 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 Apoilinaris see above
353, 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 =z 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 amet 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 flam 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 Bii.) 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.
Yen. The poem bears much resemblance to some lines of Annius Florus
(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 Pervigilium
esse statuamus (Biicheler 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. Miiller 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 hne
(perhaps burden) mentioned by some writers on metre: tolle thyrsos,
aera pulsa, iam Lyaeus advenit.
Pervigilinm Veneris. Vespa. 249
7. Editions of the Perv. V. by J. Lipsius (Elect. I 5. 1580), P.
Pithoeus (Errones Venerii 1587), J. Doiisa (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., Getting. 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, Gobel, 0. Muller (see n. 8) and elsewhere; pristino nitori
restitutum (by F. Lindemann), Lips. 1852: adnotabat et emendabat Fr.
Biicheler, Lips. Teubner 1859. 63 pp. 16. In Al. Riese's Anthol. lat.
I p. 144—148.
8. Treatises De Pervigilio Veneris by H. Paldamus (Greifswald 1830.
4.), G. H. Heidtmann (Greifsw. 1842), Th. Bergk (commentatio de etc.
Halle 1859), 01. Jacobi (Lund 1867. 4.), 0. Miiller, de Annio Floro (Ber-
lin 1855) p. 18 sqq. F. C, Gobel, de ephymniorum rationibus (Gotting.
1858) p. 56—61.
9. Critical contributions by J. Frei (Rhein. Mus. X p. 195—213),
F. Biicheler (ibid. XV p. 446-451), L. Miiller (Fleckeisen's Jahrbb. 83,
p. 639-651), J. Mahly (Philologus XXIII p. 356— 361), K. Schenkl (Journal
of Austrian Gymn. XVIII 1867. p. 233—243), Bahrens (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 ^'nctivoi, and i/joyot. 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 ofiusv.
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
Veras, 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. -34 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 i-ationum animo hauserim.
I
M. Aurelins. 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 €ig avrov in Greek, written a. 169 — 176, aphorisms and reflexions,
good purposes manifesting very noble intentions. That he lacked
dQi/uvTr]g, 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 elementis et de animis et de honesto
et iusto, nee sentit pro republica. Capitol. Ant. phil. 8, 3: dabat se
Marcus totum philosoghiae, amorem civium adfectans.
4. Digest. XXVII 1, 6, 8 : o S^fwrarog narrjQ juov (probably M. Au-
relius, not Pius, whose order was more limited, see above 350, 2) tkxqsX-
^(x)v fvd-vg inl Ttjy (^Q/^^ &iajayfxari> rag vTiKQ/ovffag it^fzccg xal CKTflficcg
i^s^cciMfffp, yqaxjjcig (fjikoffo(f>ovg, qtjroQag, yQccu^cnixovg, tccTQOvg c(T(kf7g
&lvav yv^uvaCiaQ)(i(av etc. zal fArjts XQiJ^fty /ut]Tf nQSG^fvfiv /urjrs €ig
arQciTff'ccv xatakfyfa&ccv axovjag 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. lip. 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 imperium ita civiliter se ambo
egerunt ut . . eos Marullus, 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 =: Biicheler Greifsw. Ind. lect. 1879 p. 18. Ephemeris epigr.
I (Rome and Berlin 1872) p. 55—57.
9. On Apollonios o dvaxokog of Alexandria see Westermann, 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.
"ftt
252 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 (teQcoTcnot jSnaikfTg 'AviMvlvog xal OvrJQog)
the rhetorician Polyaenos, a Maxf&Mv dvrjQ, dedicated his eight books
of J^TouTt^yixcc, mostly from Greek sources, some of them now lost. Re-
censuit, auctiores edidit, indicil)us instruxitE. Wolfflin, 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, yiyrjd-f df (fQf'ya Jijtm. 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 arnica 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, xainfQ xal vno tov Ma^xov tv
Tolg navv iifxrjd^fig xcti rrj rrjg V^y/^yf ^^Q^^fl ^«t t^ raJv koyioy nccQaaxfvfj
ov&fvog TiOf xcid-^ havTov dfVTfQog yfvofxfvog, 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. Teuflfel in Pauly's Encycl. I 2 p. 2130 sq.
nr. 20 and 33.
I
i
Victorinua and the other pupils of Fronto. 253
3. Fronto p. 191 Volumnio Quadrato : legam, fili, libenter oratio-
iiem 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 familiarem. 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 meus Montanus, tum 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 chorograx^hia Phoenieem . . superavere), cf.
ib. XI 051 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),
accoi'ding 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 Vergilio 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 quem 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 hmited 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, . . ApoUinaris 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 yearfj also G. preferred
in doubtful cases to apply to S. A.; cf. XI 15, 8. XII 13, 1 (cum Romae
a consulibus index extra ordinem datus pronuntiare . . iussus essem,
Sulpicium Ap. . . percontatus sum). XIII 20, 1 (ego et Ap. S. et quidam
alii mihi aut illi familiares). 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, 1 : quo
primum tempore a praetoribus lectus in indices sum (for indicia pri-
vata) libros . . de officio 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 index
extra ordinem datus . . essem. J. Steup, de Prob. p. VII, cf. p. 77
(vix ante a. p. Chr. 120 videtur natus esse). L. Friedlander 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 (XVIH 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 quern antea in excerpendo feceramus. nam proinde ut librum
quemque 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-
pera 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. Riihl, 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) scrip tae sunt, a quo
tempore ad liunc 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
repeatedl}'^ 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 Fretuni . .
Plauti. It seems, therefore, that the collection of his materials took
up some time. Cf. Th. Vogel I p. 7 — 9. L. Friedlander, de A. G.
vitae temporibus, Konigsberg 1869. 7 pp. 4.; Roman manners and mo-
rals HI 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 stujjid 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 imj)ortance 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 Mercklin p. 641 sqq. Kretzschmer p. 13 sqq.
7. Vir elegantissimi eloquii et multae ac facundae scienliae G. is
called by Augustin, de civ. dei IX 4. Nonius Marcellus and most of
A. Gellius. 25T
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, Getting. 1824. Ex recensione M. Hertz, Lips. (Teubner)
1853. 2 vols.
10. Gellii quae ad ius pertinent by J. v. Gloden (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, Ilafniae 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 II. Breslau 1868 sq. 4.), Th. Mommsen (ad Gell. IV 1. 4. in the Sym-
bolae Bethmanno HoUw. oblatae, 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. Augustin. 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 . . vietum 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. Gaume, Paris 1838): si hoc quod de lona scriptum est Apu-
leius Madaurensis vel AjDollonius 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
Apuleitis. 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
contradiction em 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 decs didici. 63 : morem habeo quoquo cam 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. Apol. 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, Konigsberg 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 [Qcc^dog, 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 tam 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 iQcjTixog (Lyd. magg. Ill 64), Hermago-
ras (according to the fragments quoted by Priscian possibly a novel
like the Metamorph.) ; Epitoma historiarum (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. PaJlad. R. R. I 35, 9. Geopon. I
14. XHI 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. II 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 antholop-y 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 ^lovxiog. 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 Platonis, 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. Kriiger, Berol. 1864. Cf. H. Sauppe, Gotting. 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 diflfer 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 different 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. Kriiger, 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. Miiller, 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. y. 239 sq.) see Augustin. civ. d. XVIII
17 sq. where (c. 18): et nos cum essemus in Italia audiebamus talia
de quadam regione iilarum 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 subje<'t
is quite the same as in Lucian's Jovxiog ^' Ouog, 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 1. 1. p. 451 sq. Besides the termination, Ap. has no
doubt added manv details ot his own invention, and above all the un-
Apuleius. 263
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. Rec. Fr. Eyssenhardt, Berlin 1869.
Fabula de Psyche et Cupidine rec. I. C. Orelli, Zurich 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 adiunctum 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 HI. The first book treats of the
life of Plato and his philosophy of nature ; the second, addressed to
Faustinus filius, deals v^^ith his ethics. The third, de philosophia rationali
sive nfQi (Qfxrjy^iccg, 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 mss. 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. PL, 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). Holscher, on the books of Ap. de mundo, Herford 1846. 4. In
the Prooemium: quarc nos [Aristotelem prudentissimum et doctissimum
philosophorum 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 tt^qI x6(T/uov
to be the chief source. The opinion of A. Stahr (Aristotle among the
Romans p. 164 sqq.) and Barthelemy St. Hilaire (in his Transl. of Arist.'s
264 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch.
Meteorolog., Paris 1863, p. 325 — 355), that the work ti^qI 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. ttsqi xoa/Ltov, 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 Lactautius (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— LIV.
])) 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. Miiller, 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 povv^er of conviction attaches to the arguments on
which Val, Rose (Anecdota graeca I, Berlin 1864, p, 61 — 102; text p.
1U3 — 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, Kriiger and Eyssenhardt),
saec. XI. All the others are derived from it, even Laur, XXIX 2 (ff 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: Cervidius Scaevola and others. 265
9. Editions. Ed. princeps 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. Floridus, 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 w^e 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 1, 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 quaestioiium
publice tractatarum; libri IV Regularum (cf. n. 4). The Excerpts from
these works (in 307 places) in Hommel's Palingenesia II. 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: ovTiog xccl KsQ^tdiog Jxai/iokag
xcii Ilavkog xal Jojulnog Ovkniavog, ot xoQV(imoi tojv rojutxcHy, yqa-
(fovGir. 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. Piittmann, Lips. 1795). J. L. Conradi, de vita
et scriptis Q. C. Sc, Lips. 1754 sq. 4. (= Opusc. I). Zimmern, Hist.
of Roman private Law lip. 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 '^EQf^rjyfv/ucna (below 370, 5) Dositheus
gives under the heading ovyyQct/u^uanot^ rojiixov ^uakiara ttsqI ikfvSs-
Q(i)(Xf(op = 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 Gaius 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.^ p. 343 — 350.
6. On Claudius Saturninus 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.
fescripserunt, and must, therefore, belong to a. 161—169; the fragment
Jurists under M. Aurelws. Septimius Severus. 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, lip. 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: TaQQOvrrjytoy ds IlarfQvov toV tk? iniffTokccg
avTov rag karivag dia /st^og i^^opia) 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 H Dig. XLIX 16, 7. L 6, 6 cf. 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. =: 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 Severus,
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 Tertullian. 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, inpurior Nerone, Lamprid. 19, 2. Habuit litterato-
rem Onesicratem, latinum Capellam Antistium; orator ei Ateius Sanctum
fuit, ib. 1, 6.
268 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch.
2. Lamprid. Comm. 3, 4: appellatus est a mimis quasi constupra- m
tus, eosdemque . . subito deportavit. 13, 2: versus in eo (eum) multi
scripti sunt, de quibus . . Marius Maximus 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. Teuffel 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 Leptis in 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. postea studiorum
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 medie 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
latine loquens. Dio LXXVI 16: naidfiag tnfd^v^uft juakkop ^' In^Tvyxavf
xcu did lovTO 7iokvyv(i)f.nov jAcckkov rj nokvkoyog r^v.
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:
kiyiyi yaQ (on Albinus' death), ov/ oaa o HfovrJQog I'yQccipfp, akk' oaa
(ikrjd^iag tyfysro. 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, mens quidam propinquus ex eodem
poeta inter cetera stiii sui otia Pinacem Cebetis explicuit. A cento of
this kind, Medea, the metre of which is rather careless, ife (without the
name of Hos. G.) preserved in the cod. Salmas., in Riese's anthol. lat.
17 (I p. 49—66).
366. A friend of 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. : Papinianura araicissimum fuisse, im-
peratori Severo et, ut aliqui loquuntur, adfinem etiam per secundam
uxorem (lulia, of Syria) memoriae traditur, et huic praecipue utrumque
filium (Geta and Caracalla) a Severo 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.: quern 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 jjraetorio,
icti cautio huius modi. Dio LXXVI 10 (a. 204): avToy (a highwayman)
o Ilaniviavog o inaQ^og autjQdo etc. Cf. ib. 14 (A. 208): nccQiatrjyci aot
naniviavog o tnaQ/og. He succeeded Plautianus in the praefectura
(Herod. Ill 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 oix&iovg rovg /usu antjkka'^fj/ [C^iVSicalla,
after his accession to the throne), coy xal nctniviavog o b'naQ^og tjv,
Tovg ds Xal ccnixifiyfy. ib. 4: ig dvo fxvQiadag naQa^^tj/ua anfxrsiyfy,
. . ix ds rdiv kTiK^ayMv avdQoiv cckkovg Tf xal T(V Ilantrtayop. xal no
yh tov iLanvvtavov (^lOvfvGauTv tmTifirjafv on a^ivrj avrov xai ov g<ff#*
dis^QtjaaTo. 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.
. . filium 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. cS, 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: acutissimi ingenii vir etmerito ante alios excellens Pap.
VII 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. XVIII 1, 72. XXII 1,
1, 2) were annulled by Constantine a. 321 (Cod. Theod. I 4, 1 : qui dum
ingenii laudem sectantur non tarn 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 obtine bant 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. XLni 10: ix Tov aarvvofxixov fxovo^t^Xov tov naniviavov. 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 II. 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
Papinian and other Jurists, 271
an axiom, e. g. non videntur rem amittere quibus propria non fuit;
donari videtur quod nullo iure 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. Rudorfif, Hist, of Law I. 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
iure 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 attentioa 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 Gains. The 99 passages from these writings inserted
in the Digest are collected by Hommel, Palingen 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 Responsa (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-
tura 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 Ulpian'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. Miral)elli 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 Quaestionum 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 eccle<'iastic 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 '^Pm^xccCmv vofxovg
^xQi^ojy.oTK ccyd^a) and as he often shows his legal knowledge in his
theological works (e. g. apolog. 1 — 6. 28 — 44. 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 TertuUiano, Hildeshcim 1743. 4. J. A. Pagenstecher, de iurispru-
dentia Tertulliani, Harderov. 1768. 4. Zimmern, Private Law II. p.
365-367. Rudorff, 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 Felice. 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 =: 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 Tertullianus 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 fate
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
de 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 pulchrimi spectaculum deo cum christianus . . libertatem suara
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 supercilia 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
respocts, 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.
Minucius 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. Q. Lindner (Langen-
salza 1760; ed. II 1773), C. de Muralt (praef. est J. C. Orelli, Ziirich
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
inntr. C. Halm (Corp. script, eccl. lat. II), Vienna 1867.
7. J. D. van Hoven, de aetate, dignitate et patria Min. Fel., Camp.
1762. 4. (also in Lindner's ed. of 1773). H. Meier, comm. de Min. Fel.,
Zurich 1824. C. Roren, Minuciana, i. e. Annotatt. critt. ad etc. prae-
missa commentatione de ipsius scriptoris aetate, Bedburgl859. 26 pp. 4.
J. B. Kayser in Th. Wiedemann's Austrian 'Quartalschrift' for Rom.
cathol. theol. I 4. 1862. A. Ebert, TertuUian's relation to Min. Felix,
Leipzig 1868 (Trans, of the Saxon Society of Lit. V p. 321 — 386).
Critical contributions by E. Bahrens, 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 proconsulari. hie acris et vehe-
mentis ingenii sub Severo principe et Antonino Caracalla maxime
floruit multaque scrip sit 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 fem. 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 came et anima: de spe fidelium ; detrinitate; 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
miniis 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 H, De testimonio animae, De cultu feminarum II, De
patientia, De paenitentia, De oratione, De baptismo. Ad uxorem H,
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 resurrectlone 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.
Nosselt, de vera aetate ac doctrina scriptorum Tert. in his Opusc. ad
hist. eccl. HI p. 1 sqq. == Tertull. ed. Oehler HI p. 540—619. G. Uhl-
Tertidlian. 277
horn, fundamenta chronologiae Tertullianeae, Getting. 1852. Kellner,
on the chronology of Tert. 1 (de pallio and his year of conversionp93)
Tiib. theolog. Quartalschr. LII (1870) p. 547-566. II ibid. LEI (1871)
p. 585—609.
3. The sect of the Montanists arose in Phrygia and their
doctrine rests on a onesided exaggeration of Christian religious feeHng,
which manifested itself in ecstatic visions and chiliastic dreams of the
approaching end of the world {owTiUia) 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 \drgins, chas-
tity etc.). x^nalogous 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 (Tiib-
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' dnokoytcc. 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. IH
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.
ni (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 XIH (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 Centun- of the Imperial Epoch.
no doubt merely because they had once been copied or bound together
with Tert.'s works. Comp. L. Miiller, Rhein. Mus. XXII p. 329—
344. 464.
7. The editions of the works of Tert. are enumerated by Schone-
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. Oberthiir, Wiirzburg 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. Allix, N. de Nourrj (diss, in apolog., ad nat., ad
Scap.), J. L. Mosheim (see n. 4.), G. Zentner, J. A. Nosselt (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 delineation of Tert.) R. Ceillier, hist, gener.
des auteurs s. et eccl. II (1730) p. 374 — 529. Eccles. hist, works, e. g.
by F. Bohringer, Eccles. Hist, in biographies (Ziirich 1864) p. 11—767.
9. P. Langen, de usu praepositionum Tertullianeo, Miinster 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 schoha 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
i
Acron. 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.
ib. p. 201, 3. 216, 9. Helenius Acron commentariis quos Adelphis
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 Scho'.ia 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. Grafenhan,
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. 2^,yb i&^i/rj grammatica /^«/i,M«T*x>y est f-oiiv SGiQuim ynoai^g)^
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 {(Qfjrjufvuara), e. g. (with the date of a. 207) from Hygini
280 The Second Century of the Imperial Epoch.
genealogia (above 257, 5), Adrian's ccnoi^aofig (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,
Donatus and others. By rendering every Latin word 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 Porphyrio (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 Porphyrio 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. HI 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. HI 32 extr. : xal lavra ^sv
Tif-qi Toiv 7ioTa/u(oy (Rhine and Danube) xard 2afiioxop (?) rop Qoj^uatop
laroQixop, og nqog Jioxkrjrifcpop xal VakiQiop top y^QOPra tisqI noixik(x)P
Ct}Ti]^uc'(T(i)p difkfx&t]. Spartian Carac. 4, 4: occisi (a. 212) nonnulli etiam
cenantes, inter quos etiam Sanimonicus Serenus, cuius libri 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) :
luliuni Firmicum, Sammonicum Saturninum (?), in libris matheseos 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. Statilws 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. Grafenhan, 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), F'estus would appear to belong to the middle of
the second century.
8. A certain Aquila {Axvkag) yQa^u/uaTrxog xal /^ovatxog and (fji,ko-
coqjog, a)(okici koyixd ysyQc((fjojg tisqI GvlkoyLOfxiov 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), Deciiis 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 Romanus were re-
spectable scholars; likewise Gargilius Martialis. Historical
composition was represented by the predecessor of the scrip-
tores historiae augustae, Marius Maximus. But Cassius Die
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 the 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 uiider the name of Antoninus Magnus. Ulp.
Dig. 15, 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. lb.
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 lulia 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 (lulia) 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 imp. filius scientia iuris insignis; lulius
Paulus, iuris peritissimus; Claudius Venacus, orator amplisfaimus; 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 Platone semper, cum Aristotele, cum Tullio, cum Vergilio ceteris-
que veteribus agens, alium quam merebatur exitum passus est, Cajjitol.
Gord. 7, 1. Adulescens cum esset . . poemata scripsit, quae omnia
extant, et quidem cuncta ilia quae Cicero (above 176, 2). . . scripsit,
praeterea queraadmodum 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 w^ith Clodius Pupienus Maximus and Cae-
cilius Balbinus, and alone after their speedy downfall. Duxit uxorem
filiam Misithei (or Timesithei) doctissimi viri, quem 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. ratio Gordiani ad senatum in praise
of Timesitheus ib. 27, 4 sqq. But Gordianu* 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 Philippus
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 Decius, 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 AemiHus 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 Ad Sabinum.
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, quem 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 tamen
ambo assessores Papiniani fuisse dicuntur. Vict. Caes. 24, 6: Domitium
Ulpianum, quem Heliogabalus praetorianis praefecerat, eodem honore
retinens Pauloque inter exordia patriae reddito, iuris auctoribus, quan-
tus erga optimos atque aequi studiosos asset 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 quidera 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 i De-
cember 222) : ad Domitium Ulpianum, praefectum praet. et parentem
meum. Dio LXXX 1: ^Al^lavdqog . . Jo/untot r^vt Ovkniavia rrjv ts
Tcoy doQv'fOQMy TiQoaraaffcv xcd ret komct r^g «(>/^? tnfTQfipf- nqay^uara.
ib. 2: o Ovkmavog nokkd fx(v riov ovx oQdiog vno tov Ha^d'avanakkov
7iQa)(d'^vroiv intjyojQdioaf, lov ds di] <t>kaovvav6v tov if XQrJGTOv anoxTfi-
vag, IV avTovg diad'f^tjTctt , xal avrog ov nokkM vajs^ov vno r(Zv doqv-
<fOQ(i)v tni,&futvo)V Of, vvxTog xaj&Giictyrj, xccinsQ xal n^og ro 7iakan,ov
((vaO^a/Liiov xat nqog ccvtov tov avToxQaroQa Trjv Tf fxriTiQa ccvtov xaTct-
(^)vyo)v. 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
I
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 quern
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. Tilius, Paris 1549. Editions (chiefly with the Inst., n. 4)
by Hugo (Gotting. 1788. 1811. 1814. 1822. 1834), E. Bocking (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 Buschke's iurisprud. anteiust.^ p. 472
—521. Heimbach, on Ulp.'s fragments, Leipzig 1834. K. D. A. Roder,
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. Rechtswiss. 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. Kriiger'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. IH p. 39 — 383) and two books Ad edictum aedilium curulium
(ib. 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 HI; 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 iirbi, 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 singiilaris (n. 3), Regularum 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 : Ovkntavov toV Go<f>(ojarov. His pupil
Modestinus calls him o xQuiKjrog (Dig. XXVI 6, 2, 5. XXVII 1, 2 fin.
4, 1). On the whole Ulpian was more reproductive than productive,
and lacked the originality and independence ofPapinian; 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. Lectius, de vita et scriptis D. U., Geneva 1601 = Otto The-
saur. I. H. Stager (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 Gaius and remarkable for its lucidity, whence
Huschke (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 Gaius, 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 Goschen's edition of Gaius (above 357, 5), in
Booking's edition of Ulpian; also in Huschke's iurisprud. anteiust.'^ p.
539-545. Edidit P.Kriiger, Lips. (Teubner) 1868. 22 pp.
Ulpian. Pauliis. 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: victa tam apud praetorem quam apud praefectura
urbi provocaverat. putabam bene iudicatum, . . imperator autem motus
est quod etc. dicebam etc. movit etiam illud imperatorera 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. Buschke, iurispr. anteiust.^ p. 352 — 358.
The principal editions by Cujacius (1566) and J. A. Schulting (lurisprud.
vetus anteiust.), L. Arndts (in the Bonn Corpus iuris anteiust. and Bonn
1833), G. Hanel (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 11 (cf. Buschke, iurisprud. antei.^p. 466); Regularum
VII. Responsorum libri XXIII; Decretorum IB; Decretorum s. impe-
rialium sententiarum in cognitionibus prolatarum or Factorum libri VI.
Ad Sabinum libri (XVII?); ad Vitellium libri IV (? cf. Mommsen ad
Dig. XXXII 78 pr. Ztschr. f. Rechtsgesch. IX p. 116); Epitomarum
Alfeni (above 195, 2) libri VIII; Labeonis n^&aviou libri VIII; ad
Plautium libri XVIII; ad Neratium libri IV; Notae ad lulianum, Scaevo-
1am, Papinianum. Ad legem luliam et Papiam libri X; ad legem Aeliam
Sentiam libri IB; ad legem luliam libri II. De adulteriis libri IB; Fidei-
commissorum libri IB; 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, Tertullianum, Silanianum, Turpilianum,
Velleianum, Claudianum, Libonianum ; ad orationem divi Marci, divi
Severi ; de iure libellorum ; ad regulam Catonianam ; de iure singulari ;
de iuris et facti ignorantia ; de variis lectionibus. De officio praefecti
urbi, praefecti vigilium, praetoris tutelaris, assessorum ; de iurisdictione
tutelar! (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 Jurists. 28©
viralibus indiciis, appellationibus, De poenis omnium 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. Wiirzb. 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 Modes tinus, 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. XXIV 1,41: 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. 11. p. 399 sq. Treatises de L. R. by H.
J. 0. Konig (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
'^90
The Third Century of the ImperiaJ 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. 11 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 Macer, 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 Hommelj 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 are 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 Gains, 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 =r Opusc. I. p. 337 —
346), J. Th. Mathews (kugd. B. 1801. 4.), Th. Schmalz (Konigsberg 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. Furius Anthianus wrote a commentary on the Edict, of
which the ind. Flor. mentions five books {jufQog tdixrov ^t^kCa nivrf)-
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.). Ulp. 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. Ill 42, 5): merito tibi anon contemnendae
auctoritatis icto Modestino respoasum est. a. 244 praef. vigilum at
Rome (Inscr. full. 1. 1.). Cf. Arcad. Charis. Dig. L 4, 18, 26: mixta munera
. . Herenniu.s Mod. et notando et disputando et optima ratione decrevit.
The works of Mod.: Excusationum libri VI (in Greek); Differentiarum
IX and Regularum X (Huschke. lurisprud. anteiust.^ p. 546); Pandec-
l
Modestinus. Julius Romanus. 2591
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 nuptiarum, 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 (jKiQatrriaig inn^on^g xai xovQaioQiag)
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 Komanus, whom Charisius
employed in his grammar, and Juba, a writer on metres
who followed Caesius Bassus aud Heliodorus, wrote their works.
Censorinus, 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.), tkqI
Qq^oyQci^iiag quaestiones (p. 135, 15), de distinctionibus etc. The work
of Romanus used by Char, was perhaps entitled ' At^o^fxai,, and the
separate titles, such as liber de analogia (Charis. p. 56, 4. 114, 1. 116,
29), liber de adverbiis (ib. p. 114, 28), were probably only parts of it.
Charis. p. 230, 1: G. I. R. libro ai^o^fx^v sub titulo de coniunctione ;
p. 238, 16: I. R. libro dt^oQfxviv 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 Porphyrio (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. 1. p. XLV
292 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch.
— XLVin. A. Schottm Tiller, de Plini libr. gramm. I. 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 = 12 (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 tisqI rrjg nor nodcoy ovofxaaCccg 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 liquido
comperisti huiusmodi . . esse toiv fiiffwy 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 praecepta
ad beate vivendum quae tibi scriberem mutuatus sum, aut ex artibus
rhetorum locos laudibus tuis celebrandis persecutus, . . sed ex philologis
commentariis quasdam quaestiunculas delegi, quae congestae possint
I
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 uUo incommodo transieris, (you will live to the age of 81). . .
quem veterum nunc memoria suspiciraus 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 = 0. I 1, 2). In his diction he exhibits quaesita
sermonis elegantia, quae nobis quidem nimia videtur et affectata, 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 (j>eneration 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 rausica (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 haud pauca tamen continet aliunde non
Bota, quae satis probant scriptorem (especially in the parts concerning
music and metres) fontibus antiquioribus usum esse. It agrees in some
2^ 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. Gotz, 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. XXII p. 465—476), F. Hultsch (Eos II p. 623—
626), F. Liidecke (Gotti. Gel. Anz. 1868, p. 482—486), M. Schanz (spec-
crit. ad Plat, et Censorinum pertinens, Gotti. 1867).
10. Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 3, 2 sq.: in prima pueritia litteratores
habuit Valerium Cordum et T. Veturium et Aurelium Philippum liber-
*um patris, qui vitam eius 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 clarum.
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 r=
Renier Inscr. de I'Alg. 3338.
376. The extensive work ofGargilius Martialis treated
of husbandry including also an account of the medicinal em-
ployment of rural productions and of veterinary art, after
Greek and Roman 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. TV
Gargilius Martialis. 2^5
148 (alii s) : Gargilium Martialem significat. 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. 1 1828. p. 387 sqq.), reprinted Liineburg
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, Donaueschingen 1857. 47 pp. 8.
4. In the St. Gall ms. 762 (saec. IX) which contains a Latin
version of Hippocrates nfQi diaiTtjg b. II, the portions nfQl ka/ocvtav
and nfQt onw^rig are, instead of taking them from Hippocr., rather
borrowed from the work of G. M. (the parts de oleribus and de pomis).
In some parts they agree verbally with c. I — 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 n^ql (fuiirrjg 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 IT 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
as 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 HI (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' XtkifjtjQig or X*>L*«()/e«, was a historj' of
the Roman Empire during the 1000 years of its existence, in 15 books.
The same writer composed IlaQd^ixd and r^Qfuayixd ; see Pauly's Encycl.
I 2 p. 1868 sq., nr. 28. C. Riibel, n. 6. p. 32 sq.
3. Hieron. vir. ill. 63: lulius Africanus, cuius quinque de tempo-
ribus extant volumina, sub imp. M. Aurelio Antonino qui Macrino suc-
cesserat (i. e. under Elagabal) legation em pro instauratione urbie
Emmaus suscepit. . . extat eius ad Aristiden epistola, in qua super
cf»rt«f wv/'a quae videtur esse in genealogia salvatoris apud Matthaeum et
Marius Maxvmus and other Historians. 297
Lucam plenissime disputat. He placed the birth of Christ in the year
of the world 5500. His ^Qot/okoytxoy nfvm^i^kov 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, Xqovixcc) is preserved in the Vatican, Th. Mommsen, on
the Chronographer of a. 354 (Leipzig 1850) p. 595 sq. 597 sq. 610.
4. Herodian wrote rijg fisid Mkqxov ^aaddag iGroQiaif in the
beginning of which, in opposition to most historians, who trig /ufy
dkijS-ftug iy Tttlg ai^rjytjasGiy loktyuiQrjaay, ov'/ tjxtotcc ds in^fXfktjS-riaay
ifQaa((i)g t( xcci fv<i(ouiag, he says of himself: iyoj ds taroQiay ov naQ'
akktoy anodf^a^xfyog ayycoGToy rf xal afxuqrvqoyj vno yf-aqa df tfj rtoy
iytfv^ofZfycay fiytj/urj, judcc naarjg ccxQt^siag rjd^qoiaa fig 6vyyQaif>T)y,
an explanation by no means infringed by his continuing: ovx nrfgnrj
T^y yyojciy xal roTg vctf^oy ^ato^at nQoodoxrjaag t^ymy fxeyakmy Tf xal
7fokk(oy iy okiyo) ytyofiiyioy. 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, Konigsberg 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. Miiller in Biidin-
ger's Investigations of the Imperial- Histoi-y HI p. 138 sqq. 181 — 191
(especially b. H and HI). K. Dandliker, the last three books of H.,
ibid. Ill 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 pro vine, belgicae, duci exercit. mysiaci
apud Byzantium et apud Lugdunum, leg. leg. I Italic, cur. viae latinae,
item reip. Faventinorum, allecto inter praetorios, trib. pleb., candidato
quaesiori 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. Miiller 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 Ma^t/uog
MccQiog in Dio LXXVIII 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 pest mortem Com-
modi . . de Mario Maximo indidi), according to which he might be
298 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch.
horn c. 165. As he did not carry his work beyond Elagabal (f 222,
see J. Miiller 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 (cf. Miiller p. 28 sq.).
1, 2: Marius Maximus, homo omnium verbosissimus, qui et mythistori-
cis se voluminibus implicavit. Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 48, 6: neque 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: epistiila 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 (Miiller p. 180 sq.)
satis Heliogabali. M. M. wound up with the last-named Emperor,
having commenced with Nerva (Miiller 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. Miiller, on the historian M. M., in M.
Biidinger's Investigations on the Imperial History III (1870). C. Riibel,
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 meraoratu, 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
chlaraydes. Maximin. 27, 7: lunius Cordus, harum rerum persecutor.
Marius Maxinnus 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 omnina.;
ipsius orationem fuisse. Cf. J. J. Miiller (n, 6) p. 92 sq. n. 3. K. Dand-
liker, in Biidinger's Investigations III p. 306—314. C. Riibel 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. Riibel p. 34 sq.
10. Spartian. Sever. 20, 1: legisse me apud Helium Maurum,
Phlegontis Hadriani libertum, memini Septimium Severum etc. C. Riibel
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 raiserunt. contra auten^
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-
gust! voitum repraesentasse etc. Grafenhan, 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 Afer 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, diaconns
Cjrpriani, 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 Hartel's ed. Ill p. XC sqq.). KvnQKtvoy
aytov ap&Qci /uakiata navrtap ot Ka^^rjifovi/Ot Ge^oyTcct and celebrate
an annual festival in remembrance of him, KvnQiccya, 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 IH; 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 Hartel's 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. Novatianus. 301
queas utrumnc ornatior in eloquendo an facilior in explicando an po-
tentior in persuadendo fuerit. hie tamen 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 solet. 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-
tuUianus creber est in sententiis, sed diflficilis in loquendo; beatus
Cyprianus instar fontis purissimi dulcis incedit et placidus. 82, 2 (p.
523 Vail.): beatus Cyprianus Tertulliano magistro 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 111 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. Oberthiir
(Wiirzburg 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. Ill (Paris 1732) p. 1—224. P. G. Lumper,
hist, theolog. crit. XI. (August. 1790) p. 58 sqq. F. W. Rettberg, Th.
C. Cypr. Gotti. 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 KaS-ccQcHy 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 Romam 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 tnno/uijp 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 Oberthiir). They have been separately edited by Ed. Welchmann
(Oxon. 1724) and Jackson (London 1728). In Migne's Patrologiae cursus
in (1844) p. 885—970. Cf. ib. p. 861—884.
379. There was in this time no 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 Alfius libros
poeta plusculos, usus dimetro perpeti, conscribit Excellentium. Three
dimeters from the first book of Alphius Avitus Excellentium in part of
the msB. 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. min. p. XXXI —
XXXni. L. Miiller 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. Miiller de re metr.
p. 103, and in his ed. of Rutil. Nam. p. 53.
3. Terentian. 1891 — 1900: dulcia S ep timius 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 genere
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 poStae lat.
Septimius Serenus. Serenus Sammonicus. 303
min. n p. 279—291, and L. Miiller 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. Miiller 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. G. Lachmann's Terentianus p. XII
— XV. L. Miiller 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 tisqI vktjg laxQix^g and nfQi
(vnoQiffTojf (faQ/u((X(oy. 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 aifections 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 ^utxQnaXov volgatur ver-
bis; hoc nostra dicere lingua non potuere uUi, 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. Rcuss, lect. Sam-
raon. part. 1. Wiirzburg 1836. 4.), a Paderborn ms. saec. XIII, Breelau
304 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch.
ms. (Ch. G. Gruner, variae lectt. in Q. S. S. ex cod. vratisl. decerptae,
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 1763. 4.) I p. 191—226. Thierfelder, Q. S. S.
didactic poem on medical art, in Kiichenmeister's Zeitschr. f. Medicin
V 2 (1866). Choulant, Bibliography of early medical art, (Leipz. 184h
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. Miiller,
metr. p. 270 with 247, 6 extr. above.
380. A peculiar figure is Commodianus 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. Gennadius 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 Sammonicus. Commodianus. 305
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 abstiili me tandem inde, legendo de lege. . .
ob ea perdoctus ignaros instruo verum. Apolog. 3 sq. : errabam igna
rus 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 fulsit, . . 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,
resurgere 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 et stellis ; 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 (TuUi 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 Soles-
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. XYIII 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 multa milia gentis decretoque dei captivat ex parte subactos.
(878 sqq.) haec Nero tum faciet, . . ut urbs et populus ille cum ipso
tradatur, tollatur 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. Miiller'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.
S81. The commencement of this time inaugurates an un-
fortunate epoch for Italy and the Roman 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 military valour, some of them also
General Obser'vations. 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 was 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 phirimos, ille . . ita dixisse fertur etc. (Anth. lat. 711
R.) longum est eius versus orationesque conectere, quibus suo 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 praepollens (cf. 7, 1 : adulescentem cum lectis-
simum tum etiam disertissimum), adeo ut publice declamaverit feran-
turque illius scripta nobilia, declamationi tamen magis quam tuliiano
adcommodatiora stilo. versu autem talis fuisse praedicatur ut omnes
poetas sui temporis vicerit. nam et cum Olympio Nemesiano contendit
. . et Aurelium Aj^ollinarem 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 est:
Numeriano Caesari, oratori temporibus suis potentissimo. He and Ca-
rinus were Caesars, with his father Carus, from Narbo in Gaul; after Ca-
ms' death Augustus for a very short time, but he was soon killed by his
father-in-law Arrius x\per, 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 ,garts as Africa) ; a glaring instance of this
is the inscr. of Praecilius (above 380, 5). Cf. W. Frohner, Philol. XIII
p. 170 sqq. XVI p. 719. Especially the cases became hopelessly con-
fused, e. g. lilias fecerunt (Renier 863), ob meritis (ib. 1769), uum 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
latine 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,
£ui 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:
tam magnis ingeniis praediti oratores, grammatici, rhetores, consulti
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 beforeDiocletian, a. 253 — 284.
382. In the time of Carus and his sons, M. Aurelius Olym-
pius Nemesianus of Carthage wrote his didactic poem on
General Observations. Nemesianus. 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 NemesiaDo con-
tendit, qui ^Jtkifvnxcc , KvrtjysTtxd et Navrtxct scrip sit 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 mythological subjects, which had been so much treated by
others: nos 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 Carus, 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 the 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 Wernsdorfs 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 Wernsdorfs poett. latt. min. I p. 128—131 and
Anth. lat. 883 sq. R. 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 poem 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. Miiller 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
ail 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: aettierianus) 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). Grafenhan, 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 honorum 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
legat 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
otijioq xccl Gvyy^cafjfvg (C. Inscr. gr. 380). We possess information as
to his four books twv /lktu \4Xi'^av&^ov, his comprehensive XQopixi] toroQia
from the beginning until a. 268 and his JxvS^txa. Cf. Westermann in
Pauly's Encych 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
Romanus to whom we owe a meagre and hasty Kttle book
De figuris sententiarum et elocutionis, to which Julius 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 proditas (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 electae 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
S12 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. Frohlich (in Fleckeisen's Jahrb. 89, p. 208—211) and J. Simon (Phi-
lologus XX^TIII 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. luli 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 coUectaneis (X 50), in memorabilibus (II 61. V 15.
VI 15. XVIII 213), and (erroneously) in admirabilibus (VI 44), once
(I 28) in coUectaneis 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 abhorreat, hoc restat quae-
rendum, utrum saeculo III probabihus 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-
Solimts. 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 raagis inesse quam bratteas eloquentiae
deprehendes. (3) exquisitis enim aliquot voluminibus studuisse me 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? . . oi^iniones 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 {nccQado'^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. Of. Mommsen, Sol. p. 249—254.
5. Solinus' work was already copied by Theodosius II (a. 402 — 450),
according to the 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), by Priscian (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 a Pierre Diacre (Petr. Diac), Bull, de Tacademie de
Bruxelles XVI p. 79—101: of. Boulez ib. p. 143 sq.
3l4 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. XXXVHI
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. Of. Fr. Liidecke, Gott. Gel. Anz.
1865, p. 1089—1109.
8. On the 22 hexameters found in the mss. of Solinus see above
382, 4.
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-
Solinns. Nonius Marcellvs. 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, of. 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, c. 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 diiferentiis 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 vestimentonim (13 articles). 17: de genere ci-
borum vel pomorum (16 articles). 18: de genere armorum. 19: de
propinquitate (9 brief articles, w^ithout 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. et K.) appear therefore to be arranged in agreement w^ith
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-
miiller, 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., Hortens.,
de sen. and de rep. ; Virgil, Terence, Cic. Verrinae, Lucilius (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.;
Sisenna: 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 Verrius
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. Biicheler e. g. (Rhein. Mus. XIH
p. 596) says : cum Nonio qui comparari posset levitate et stupiditate
neque antiquitas neque nostra aetas ullum grammaticum tulit. So also
L. Miiller (metr. p. 25 sqq.), Schottmiiller (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. Tulhus and Cicero for
two 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. XXXH and 678 pp. A critical
edition by L. Miiller is advertised (Lips., Teubner).
6. J. Vahlen, analectorum Nonianorum libri II Lips. 1859. 40 pp.
L. Muller, 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 Massiha,
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
i
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 veteres 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. There 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. Riihl
(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 (Basi), 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. Jager (ex
cod. ms., Niirnberg 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. VI p. 80
— 118. J. Burckhardt, the time of Cohstantine, p. 62—66. H. Riihl,
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 Rome (21 April)
before the commencement of the expedition against Carausius (c. 12),
a. 289, away from Rome (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 second (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 compensem 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 cam reservo . . decennalibus tuis.
5, 1 : sed de rebus bellicis victoriisque vestris . . et multi summa elo-
quentia praediti saepe dixerunt et ego pridem, cum mihi auditionis
tuae divina dignatio cam 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 quantulumcunique illud est quod . . videor con-
secutus exercere privatim quara 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 nummum 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 administratione 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 August© dunum), 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-
s tanti us, 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 rjtill 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 execution
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 Augustodunum (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 Gallus 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 scriptores 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 XL Vatic. 1899 saec.
Scriptores historiae augustae. 321
XrV is copied from a ms. very much resembling tlie 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. Piittmanni, 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., Konigsberg
1869. E. Brocks, de IV prioribus h. a. scriptoribus, Konigsberg 1869.
69 pp. C. Czwalina, de epistularum actorumque quae a scriptoribus h.
a. proferuntur fide atque auctoritate, part. I. Bonn 1870. 45 pp. C.
Riibel, de fontibus IV priorum h. a. scriptorum, Bonn 1871. 64 pp.
J. J. Miiller, in Bii dinger's Investigations on the Imperial History III
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.
11865, p. 737—745. 1868, p. 340—343). J. J. Cornehssen (Coniectanea
at., Daventr. 1870. 4.), J. Golisch (Schweidnitz 1870. 4. and in Fleck-
eisen's Jahrb. 103, p 646—648), E. Bahrens (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. G) 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-
ram 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 probability, 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 Marias Maximus, non pentaphar-
macum sed tetrapharmacum appellans, ut et nos ipsi in eius vita per-
secuti sumus, --^ 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 common 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 w^rite 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 iitteras 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 VH 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 multa 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, 6sq. : 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 clarum 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 : ventum
est ad principem Claudium, qui nobis intuitu Constanti 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, po Suisse. Richter (Rhein. Mus. VII) p. 20 — 23.
H. Peter, hist. crit. 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 2afjKt)}c6g tdjoQvTcog 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 VIl 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. XIII (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
Scriptores 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. Hanel in the Bonn Corpus iuris anteiust. (Bonn.
1837. 4.) : Codicis Gregoriani et codicis Hermog. fragmenta ad XXXVI
librorum mss. . . fidem recogn. et annot. crit. instruxit. Chr. Fr. Pohl,
diss, de codd. Greg, atque Herm., Lips. 1774. 4. Zimmern, Hist, of
Roman Private Law II. p. 157 — 164. H. F. Jacobson, diss. crit. de
codd. G. et H., Konigsberg 1826. Hand'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 likewise 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. Buschke, p. 294—303. 314 — 321.
3. The codex Hermogenianus 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. ^91. 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. Buschke p. 291—294.
4. Index florent. mentions among the sources of Justinian^s Digest
in the last place EqfxoyfViavov Innofxdiv ^i^kCa t^ {f/ovffi gtCx- g^-),
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 Herm. 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 libens 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.
Sacerdos. Terentianus Maiirus. 327
The first book terminates (p. 46) : hucusque Artium grammaticarum feci-
mus instituta. 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 nearly 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., of. 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 Reiscripts
of Diocletian and Maximian are addressed Cod. lust. Ill 82, 11. V46, 3.
VI 42, 26. Vm 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. Miiller de re metr. p. 55. 99. Westphal,
allg. Metr. p. 44, 71, though G. Studer doubts it, Rhein. Mus. II p. 63
—66. Grafenhan (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-
passe nugas). 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 fili 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 tamen 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. Arnohius. 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 Lennep),
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 Arnobius at Sirca in Numidia
wrote, still under Diocletian, about a. 295, his seven books
adversus nationes in defence of his conversion to Christianity.
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 absque 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, . . statu!
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 quem 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 ir^oT()f7mxo?
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 Oberthiir (Wiirz-
burg 1783). Ed. J. C. Orelli, Lips. 1816. Ex nova cod. Paris, collatione
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. m 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
Arnohius. 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 versu 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
rbetoricam 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 latinis litteris erudivit, vir omnium suo tempore eloquentissimus,
sed adeo in hac vita pauper ut plerumque etiam necessariis 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 Imrofjiriv reperies, 58, 10 (adPaulin.): Lactantius quasi
quidam fluvius eloquentiae tuUianae utinam tam 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. Ill 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, '^OdotnoQixou de Africa usque Nicomediam, hexametris
332 The Third Century of the Imperial Epoch.
scriptum versibus, et aliuiu librum qui inscribitur Grammaticus, et
pulcherrimum De ira dei et Institutionum divinarum adversum gentes
libros VII et ^EnnofXTjv eiusdem operis in libro uno acephale et Ad
Asclepiadem libros 11; De persecutione librum unum; Ad Probum Epi-
stolarum libros IV; Ad Severum (cf. vir. ill. Ill) epistolarum libros II;
Ad Demetrianum auditorem suum epistolarum libros II; 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 rare
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. VII 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 opificio 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). . . profiteer 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 philofcophiae 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
Tis 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), Willichii (1542).
4. Lact. Instit. I 1 (p. 4, 4 Fr.): veritatis, cui asserendae atque
illustrand'ae septem volumina destinavimus. . . quae licet possit sine
eloquentia defendi, . . tamen 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: horura 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. II: de
origine erroris; III: de falsa sapientia; FV: de vera sa?pientia; 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, TertuUian 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 Constantino 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, tamen horum tibi epitomen fieri, Pentadi frater, desideras. . .
faciam quod postulas, etsi difficile videtur ea quae septem maximis
voluminibus 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 work 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-
mediae 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 decem,
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 Caelius) 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 tamen 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 advanced 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 Biidinger'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. Diibner, 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 editioub by A. Martini (Liineburg 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 100
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. XIV 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. Biine-
mann, Lips. 1739. Ed. J. B. Le Brun et N. Lenglet du Fresnoy, Paris
1748. 2 vols. 4. Ed. Oberthiir, Wiirzb. 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. Ill 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 iudicia,
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. min. 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.
Keposianvs and other Poets. 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 Jike 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 briUiancy. 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 Soc. of Lit. 1850, p. 69
—72. 212 sq. A. de Broglie, Peglise et I'empire romain au IV^ 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
(Cless 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. ]. 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 conieceram, carere omnino non poteram. itaque
. . lecturus Tullium ieiunabam. post noctium crebras vigilias . . Plau-
tus sumebatur in manus. si quando . . 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, religiosos.
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. IE 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. 2378::=: 362: luliano ad idolorum
cultum converse blanda persecutio fuit, 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 I. 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: raTg diakfifatKcji/ffrauTiuov, ccg avrog
otxfi<;( (^>(i)vrj yQccif-'ag anokikomfp. Ill 33: KMvGTavrlvog . . (og ccvrog o
^KGi'kfvg iy jolg fccvrov ksyfi ov/yQccju/uaatj/. . . nokvg (op Iv Tfj nai-
dfvGfi, koyiav. 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 Constantino'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 1860. 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 physician*? 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 on the marriage of Constantine with Fausta,
the daughter of Maximian, a. 307, delivered at Treves by an anonymous
Gallic rhetorician, nr. V in Jager'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
Confitantine 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 Jager's edition), delivered at
Treves at the beginning of a. 313, after Constantine'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 Nazarius. But the different
peculiarities of these compositions do not favour this identification.
One and the same person is styled VIII Pompeianus, IX Ruricius. In
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), 1 (0pp. I p. 818 Vail.):
maiores tui Patera atqne 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 templo 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 Narbonensis 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. Scalige''
lect. auson. I 10. See below 410, 3.
9. Hieronym. ad a. 2352 = 336 A. D. : Tib eri anus 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, cont. in Muncker's mythogr.
lat. p. 154 (ut T. in libro de Socrate memorat). Fulgent, expos, serm.
s. V. sudum (p. 183 Mck.): Tiberianus: aureos subducit ignes sudus ora
Lucifer. Versus Platonis ad quendam Tiberianum de graeco in latinum
translati, from Vindob. 143 saec. XIII published in Haupt's edition of
Ovid's Halieut. p. 65 sq. (cf. p. XXVI in Riese's Anth. lat. 490) cf. ib.
II p. 4, not. 5). Quicherat, Bibl. de I'ecole des chartes IV p. 267 sqq.
They are thirty-two correct hexameters, an invocation of the omnipo-
tens who is addressed v. 21 sq. in a pantheistic manner : tu genus
omne deum, tu rerum causa vigorque, tu natura omnis, deus innume-
rabilis unus. Cf. M. Zink, Fulgentius p. 69 sq.
10. Rhetores latt. min. ed. Halm p. 371 : C. lulii Victoris ars rhe-
torica Hermagorae, Ciceronis, Quintiliani, Aquili, Marcomanni, Titiani
(so Mai and Bergk; the cod. has Taciani). In Marcomannus a Ger-
man name appears for the first time in Roman literature.
Rhetoricians. Vopiscus and Lampridivs. 343
11. Hieron. chron. ad a. 2361 = 345 A. D.: Titian us, vir elo-
quens, praefecturam praet. apud Gallias administrat. He is probably
the Cos. a. 337 Ti. Fabius Titianus; see A. Haakh in Pauly's Enc. VI 2.
p. 2007, nr. 9. Probably a different person was the Titianus magister
who as tutor of an Emperor received compluria ornamenta, and at last
municipalem scholam apud Visontionem Lugdunumque variando non
aetate quidem, sed vilitate consenuit, Auson. grat. act. p. 290 Bip.
12. Exuperius of Burdigala, a rhetorician at Tolosa and at Narbo,
the tutor of the princes Delmatius and Hannibalianus, who became
Caesars a. 335 and obtained for him honorem praesidis Hispanumque
tribunal, Auson. prof. Burdig. 17.
397. At the beginning of this century the historical de-
sign left unfinished by Trebellius Pollio was carried out by
Flavins Vopiscus of Syracuse. He is the reputed author
of the biographies of Aurehanus, Tacitus and Florianus, the
four Usurpers, Firmus, Saturninus, Proculus and Bonosus, of
Probus, Cams and his sons. The biographies of Elagabal
and Alexander, which bear the name of Aelius Lampridius,
and those of the two Maximins, the three Gordianus, and of
Maximus and Balbus, which are ascribed to lulius Capito-
linus, are dedicated to Constantino. While the former are
merely Excerpts from Marius Maximus, those later biographies
(beginning with Severus) appear to be compilations from a
plurality of sources.
1. On the scrip tores historiae augustae in general see above
388, 1 sqq.
2. Vopisc. Aurelian. 1 : Hilaribus . . impletis . . vehiculo suo me
. . praef. urbis (a. 303, see Richter, Rh. Mus. VII p. 18 sq.) . . lunius
Tiberianus accepit. Upon his request Vopiscus wrote the life cf.
Aurelianus : parui Tiberiani praeceptis, accepi libros graecos, . . ex
quibus ea . . in unum libellum contuli (after Diocletian's abdication, cf.
44, 2 sq., when Constantino was Emperor, 44, 5.) The diction is garru-
lous, and there is much material not put to any definite use. At a later
time vita Taciti atque Floriani (Tac. 16, 5). nunc nobis adgrediendus
est Probus. . . haec ego in aliorum vita de Probo credidi praelibanda,
ne . . Probo indicto deperirem (ib. 16, 6 sq.) Then the vita Probi.
Prob. 1, 5: non patiar ego ille a quo dudum solus Aurelianus est ex-
peditus, . . Tacito Florianoque iam scriptis non me ad Probi facta con-
scendere, si vita suppetet omnes qui supersunt usque ad Maximianum
Diocletianumque dicturus. neque ego nunc facultatem eloquentiamque
polliceor, sed res gestas. 2, 7 : mihi quidem id animi fuit ut non Sal-
lustios . . atque omnes disertissimos imitarer viros in vita principum
et temporibus disserendis, sed Marium Maximum . . ceterosque qui
344 The Fourth Century of the Imperial Epoch.
haec et talia non tam diserte quam vers memoriae tradiderunt. 24, 6
sqq. haec sunt quae de Probo cognovimus. . . nunc in alio libro . .
de Firmo et Saturnino et Bonoso et Proculo (the quadriga tyrannorum)
dicemus. . . post inde . . Carum incipiemus propagare cum liberis
Bonos, 15, 10: supersunt mihi Carus, Carinus et Numerianus. nam
Diocletianus et qui sequuntur stilo maiore dicendi sunt. Car. 18, 3:
post quos Diocletianuni et Maximianum principes dii dederunt, iungen-
tes talibus viris Galerium atque Constantium. Their lives, he says,
were already written by Claudius Eusthenius (above 388, 9). quod id-
circo dixi ne quis a me rem tantam requireret. The life of Probus is
dedicated to a certain Celsinus, the quadriga tyrann. to Bassus (see
below 398, 2). Firm. 2, 1 : scis, mi Basse, quanta nobis contentio pro-
xime fuerit cum amatore historiarum M. Fonteio, . . contra ego mecum-
que Rufus Celsus et Ceionius lulianus et Fabius Sosianus contenderent
etc. Other contemporaries are the Cons. Furius Placidus (Aurel. 15, 4)
and lunius Messala (Car. 20, 4). Vopiscus' grandfather (Stat. 9, 4. Bon.
15, 4. Car. 13, 3. 14, 1) and father (Aurel. 43, 2) held high positions.
Vopiscus himself lived at Rome and was an adherent of the pagan reli-
gion, whose superstitions he shared (Aurel. 21, 4; but mendacia haru-
spicum, Tac. 15, 4). He also believed in the miracles of Apollonius of
Tyana and promises (Aurel. 24, 9), si vita suppetit, . . breviter saltem
tanta viri facta in litteras mittam. Vopiscus likes to display his know-
ledge on any opportunity. He availed himself of documents. Whenever
his sources differ, his principle is in medio relinquere, e. g. Aurel. 16,
2 sq. Prob. 3, 3. Car. 4, 1 sqq. Cf. F. Richter, Rhein. Mus. VII p.
17—20. H. Peter, hist. crit. p. 10—13.
3. Clod. Albin. (according to BP lulii Capitolini) 4, 2 : quae familia
hodie quoque, Constantine maxime, nobilissima est. Maximini II (ac-
cording to BP likewise lul. Cap.) 1, 1: ne fastidiosum esset clementiae
tuae. Const, max., singulos quosque principes . . per libros singulos
legere, adhibui moderationem. See also Gordiani HI (lul. Cap. only in
the ed. princ.) 1, 1: fuerat quidem consilium, venerabilis Auguste, ut
singulos quosque imperatores . . libris singulis ad tuam clementiam
destinarem. . . sed inprobum visum est etc. Cf. ib. 34, 6 : quae omnia,
Constantine maxime, idcirco sum persecutus ne quid tuae cognitioni
deesset. Geta (after ed. pr. by Spartian, cf. n, 4) 1, 1 : scio, Constan-
tine Aug., et multos et clementiam tuam quaestionem posse movere
cur etiam Geta Antoninus a me tradatur. Heliogab. according to BF
Aeli Lampridii) 2, 4: Antoninorum nomen, quod tu, Constantine sacra-
tissime, ita veneraris ut etc. 34, 1 : mirum fortasse cuipiam videatur,
Constantine venerabilis, quod etc. c. 35 (cf. n. 4). Alexand. (Aeli Lam-
pridii according to BP) 65, 1 : soles quaerere, Constantine maxime,
quid sit quod etc.
4. Lampridius is in the mss. credited with Elagabal and Alexan-
der, and also with Commodus and Diadumenus. The life of the latter
is promised at the close of Elagabal. The general agreement in all
peculiarities of diction renders it probable that Pertinax and Geta are
1 i
Vopiscu.s, Liampridius and Capitolivms. 345
by the same author (E. Brocks p. 32 — 39). Heliog. 35 : cuius vitam me
invitum et retractantem ex Graecis Latinisque collectam scribere ac
tibi oiferre voluisti, cum iam aliorum ante tulerimus. scribere autem
ordiar qui post sequentur. quorum Alexander optimus et cum cura
dicendus est, . . Aurelianus praecipuus et , . auctor tui generis Clau-
dius, de quo vereor ad clementiam tuam scribens vera dicere, ne
malevolis adulator videar esse. . . his iungendi sunt Diocletianus . . et
Maximianus . . ceterique ad pietatem tuam. te vero, Auguste venera-
bilis, multis paginis isdemque disertioribus illi prosequentur quibus id
felicior natura detulerit. his addendi sunt Licinius, Severus atque
Maxentius, quorum omnium ius in dicionem tuam venit (a. 323), sed
ita ut nihil eorum virtuti derogetur. non enim ego id faciam quod
plerique scriptores solent, ut de is detraham qui victi sunt. In other '
passages also Lampridius manifests moral and patriotic feeling; see
Heliog. 1, 1 sq. 34, 1 sq. Alex. 1, 2. His further intentions were pro-
bably not carried out entirely (Alex. 64, 2: Aurelianum et deinceps. de
quibus, si vita suppeditaverit, ea quae comperta fuerint publicabimus) ;
at all events the later vitae are not extant.
5. The mss. ascribe to Capitolinus the vita of the Maximini
and in the ed. princ. he is credited with the following lives of the
Gordiani, Maximus, and Balbinus. Diction and general treatment are
the same in all three (Brocks p. 1 — 14): self- conceited attacks upon
his predecessors (espec. Cordus), the writer's interest in literature, the
employment of Greek sources, the aim at rhetorical colouring (chiefly
by using anaphora). Actual differences between the life of the Maxi-
mini and the other two vitae (B. Schulz, Berl. Journal for Gymn. XIX,
1865, p. 932 — 937) may be explained from the use of different sources.
On the author's relation to Herodianus see Brocks p. 46 — 69. Brocks
(p. 14 — 21) ascribes to Capitolinus also the vitae Clodii Albini, Opilii Ma-
crini and Alexandri, though he admits that they non plane eodem tumido
stilo conscriptae as those of the Maximini etc. On these lives and others
bearing the name of Capitolinus see above 388, 4. To characterize
Cap. cf. Gordian. 21, 3 sq. : haec de Gordiano iun. digna memoratus
comperimus; non enim nobis talia dicenda sunt quae lunius Cordus
ridicule ac stulte composuit (above 377, 7). . . quorum etiam scientia
milli rei prodest, si quidem ea debeant in historia poni ab historio-
graphis quae aut fugienda sint aut sequenda. Max. et Balb. 4, 5: pla-
cet aliqua dici de moribus atque genere, non eo modo quo lunius Cor-
dus est persecutus omnia, sed illo quo Suetonius Tranquillus et Valerius
Marcellinus. Maximin. 29, 6 (cf. 28, 10): ne quid praetermissum esse
videatur; 33, 4: ne quis me hoc nescisse crederet.
6. Capitol. Max. II 1, 2 : servavi hunc ordinem quern pietas tua
(Constantine) etiam ab Tatio Cyrillo clariss. viro, qui graeca in latinum
vertit, servari voluit.
7. On the Memoirs of Constantine and his historians see 396, 1. 3;
on the chronicles of a. 334 see below 407.
346 The Fourth Century of the Imperial Epoch.
398. Under Constantine poetical form was employed by
Optatianus and luvencus. Publilius Porfirius Optatianus
obtained by his nonsensical poem in praise of Constantine
his recall from exile and the favour of the Emperor. The
Spanish presbyter C. Vettius Aquilius luvencus composed
versions of the history of the old and the new Testament in
epic metre and in the phraseology of the Roman epic poets,
especially Virgil, though in a prosody frequently vacillating.
1. Hieron. ad a. Abr. 2345 — Const. 23 — 329 A. D. : Porfirius
misso ad Constantinum insigni volumine exilio liberatur. This volumen
is extant together with Constantino's letter in praise of it, and the
thanks of Optatianus for the favourable reception. From Constantino's
letter we extract the following passage : si tantum pondus et gravitas
spectarentur in carmine, et graeCa post chium maeoniumque vatem et
latina post rusticum mantuanum eloquentia siluisset, . . frater carissime
. . gratum mihi est studiorum tuorum facilitatem in illud exisse ut in
pangendis versibus, dum antiqua servaret, etiam nova nova lyra con-
deret. vix hoc custoditum pluribus fuit, qui modis quibusdam arctis
innexi litterarum, distinctionibus versuum — qui ita medium corpus
propositi occulte permeant ut oculorum sensus interstincta colorum pig-
menta delectent — hoc tenuere propositum ut etc. . . gratum igitur
hoc mihi dicationis tuae munus fuit. exercitatio mentis et naturae fa-
cilitas comprobata est. Optatianus then returns thanks to Domino Con-
stantino maximo, pio, invicto et venerabili, semper augusto for having
read carmen quod artioribus Musarum ligaveram vinculis. If Optatianus
were the prefect of Rome a. 329 and 333, who bore the same name,
the date of his recall from exile as given by St. Jerome would be
incorrect.
2. J. Burckhardt, Const, p. 314 sq. : 'The pinnacle of all these li-
terary trifles — some of which were however exceedingly difficult —
was reached by Publilius Optatianus Porfirius. He had been exiled for
some reason or other and now endeavoured to regain Constantino's
good graces by some desperate saltos in poetry — and behold; he suc-
ceeded. The work consists of 26 pieces, most of them in 20 to 40 hexa-
meters, each amounting to the same number of letters so as to give
each poem the aspect of a square. A number of letters which when
marked by red colour constitute some new figure (e. g. the monogram
XP), form again new sentences. The martyrdom suffered by the reader
lets us guess at that of the poet. . . At the end are four hexameters,
the words of which can be mixed up in eighteen different manners, in
each of which some kind of sense and metre results.' Cf. L. Miiller
de re metr. p. 466 — 470. Such sentences ' as arise from the rubricated
letters are: Publilius Optatianus Porfirio haec lusi; omne genus metri
tibi pangens, optime Basse; orbem totum pacavit trucidatis tyrannis;
sit victoria comes Aug. et natis eius ; Constantine maxime imperator et
Optatianus. Juvencus. 347
invicte . . omnia magnus. Part of them also form such acrostichs as:
omnipotens genitor, tuque o divisio mixta, filius atque pater et sanctus
spiritus unum, faveas votis. For each piece the author has added a
peculiar instruction how to use it. In the first poem Thalia appears
in mourning: cum dederit clemens veniam natumque laremque reddi-
derit, comptis ibis et ipsa comis.
3. Editions in P. Pithoei poemata vett., Paris 1590. Lugd. 1596.
Publ. Opt. Porf. panegyricus dictus Constantino Aug. ex codice mpto
PauUi Velseri, Augsburg 1595, fol. and in Marci Velseri opera (Niirn-
berg 1682 fol.) as addition without special paging. Three specimens,
the poems representing an ara pythia, a syrinx and an organon, with
introduction and notes, in Wernsdorf, poetae latt. min. II p. 365 — 413.
F. Liceti encyclop. ad Syringam Porphyrii, Padua 1635. 4. The versus
anacyclici also in the cod. Salmasianus (Riese's anthol. lat. I p. 92 sq.).
With others in Meyer's anth. lat. nr. 236 — 240. Migne's Patrolog. XIX
p. 391 sqq. Publ. Opt. Porf. carmina rec. et praefatus est Luc. Miiller,
Lips. (Bibl. Teubner.) 1870.
4. Hieron. ad a. Abr. 2345 = Const. 23 =: 329 A. D. : luvencus
presbyter natione Hispanus evangelia heroicis versibus explicat. Cf:
Epist. 70, 5 (I p. 430 Vail.) a,nd De vir. ill. 84 : luvencus, nobilissimi
generis Hispanus presbyter, quattuor evangelia hexametris versibus paene
ad verbum transferens quattuor libros composuit et nonnulla eodem
metro ad sacramentorum ordinem pertinentia. floruit sub Constantino
principe. Cf. hist. ev. IV 808 sq.
5. The works of luvenr-us. 1) Historia evangelica in four books,
chiefly after St. Matthew. The Gospels are employed in a Latin trans-
lation. 2) Historia veteris testamenti. A cod. Lorschensis scti Lazarii
contained according to a catalogue saec. XI: Cypriani (rather luvenci)
metrum super Heptateuchum, libros regum, Esther, ludith et Maccha-
baeorum. For a long time only about 350 hexameters on the Genesis
were known, which Martenius (Collect, vett. script. 1724; Gallandi Bibl.
patr. IV p. 587 sqq.) increased by about 1200, from a very old ms. (it
is said saec. VII) codex Corbeiensis (=; Sangermanensis 841 at Paris).
At the end (of luvenci Historia. Genesis) : Incipit Exodus, which part is
however wanting. Further 
TVNews
OpenLibrary