Book III. of the second part of the prologue (ll. 33-63) to the epilogue · A literary history of Rome in the Silver Age : $b From Tiberius to Hadrian

of Book II.

[414] III. _epil._ 1; IV. _prol._ 1-10.

[415] V. x. 9-10. That Phaedrus here alluded to his own advanced years was the view of Ribbeck, _Gesch. der röm. Dichtung_, iii. p. 27.

[416] _E.g._ II. _prol._ 11. Havet claims that prol. and epil. of Bk. III. were addressed to an unknown Illius at a date not earlier than A.D. 43.

[417] Bücheler, _Rh. Mus._, xxxvii. pp. 333 _sqq._

[418] IV. _epil._ 4: “uir sanctissime”; _prol._ 17-19:

“Mihi parta laus est, quod tu, quod similes tui Vestras in chartas uerba transfertis mea Dignumque longa iudicatis memoria.”

[419] V. x. 9-10:

“Quod fuimus, lauda, si iam damnas quod sumus: Hoc cur, Philete, scripserim, pulchre vides,”

where the reading of P is _fili te_, and of R _filie de_.

[420] L. Müller’s ed. 1877, Introd., pp. xiii.-xxxvii.; Plessis, _op. cit._, pp. 488-491.

[421] Ellis (_op. cit._) gives a useful account of MSS. and early history of the text. Janelli, the editor of the “Perottine” fables in 1811, has been supported by Cardinal Mai, Orelli, Lachmann, L. Müller, Hervieux and Ribbeck in accepting their descent from Phaedrus. Ellis (_op. cit._, pp. 25-28) gives reasons against crediting this, and compares the impression left by these fables to that left by various imitations of Ovid, the _Nux_ or the _Epicedion Drusi_ or the spurious poems among the _Heroides_.

[422] For Müller’s opinion of Dressler’s iambic composition see his ed. of 1877, pp. xxxviii.-xxxix.

[423] I. _prol._ 6.

[424] The account of trees favoured by different deities in III. xvii. is not an example; but in _Fab. Nouae_ (Müller’s ed., No. xiii.), the oak admits to the ash that they were justly cut down because they had ordered the wild olive to supply a man with an axe-handle.

[425] Otto Crusius, _Rh. Mus._, xxxix. p. 603; Ellis, _op. cit._, p. 4; _cf._ Rutherford, _Babrius, Introd._, p. xi.

[426] Aul. Gell., II. xxix.; Hor. _Epist._ I. i. 73 _sqq._ (the sick lion, previously in Lucilius, _vid._ Non. 303); I. vii. 29 (the _uolpecula_ that raided the bin); I. x. 34 (horse securing man’s help against stag); Sat., II. vi. 79 (town mouse and country mouse).

[427] I. _prol._ 1-7:

“Aesopus auctor quam materiam repperit, Hanc ego poliui uersibus senariis. Duplex libelli dos est: quod risum mouet Et quod prudenti uitam consilio monet. Calumniari siquis autem uoluerit, Quod arbores loquantur, non tantum ferae, Fictis iocari nos meminerit fabulis.”

[428] II. _epil._ 1-2:

“Aesopi ingentem (_v.l._ ingenio) statuam posuere Attici Seruomque aeterna collocarunt in basi.”

_Ingenio_ is most likely. This is one of a few cases in which N and V preserve by their reading (“Aesopi ingenio”) the right tradition against the older manuscript P and the record of R. P gives “Aesopo ingentem (_m. pr._ Aesopi ingento)....”

[429] II. _epil._ 8-9:

“Quod si labori fauerit Latium meo, Plures habebit quos opponat Graeciae.”

[430] III. _prol._ 52-55.

[431] IV. vii. 5: “Et in cothurnis prodit Aesopus nouis.”

[432] IV. xxi. (xxii.)

[433] IV. _prol._ 11: “Quas Aesopias non Aesopi nomino.”

[434] Ed. 1877, p. 98.

[435] IV. _prol._ 7-8:

“Sua cuique cum sit animi cogitatio Colorque proprius.”

[436] II. _prol._ 8-11:

“Equidem omni cura morem seruabo senis; Sed si libuerit aliquid interponere, Dictorum sensus ut delectet uarietas, Bonas in partes, lector, accipias uelim.”

[437] Bücheler, _Rh. Mus._, xxxvii. p. 332.

[438] For these instances, see III. x.; V. vii.; V. v.

[439] IV. vi. 2: “Historia quorum et in tabernis pingitur.”

[440] _Ardalio_, _ardelio_, _ardulio_ are spellings found in glossaries. Nettleship inclined to favour _ardalio_, _Contribns. to Lat. Lexicography_, p. 267.

[441] II. v.

[442] III. _prol._ 33-37:

“Nunc fabularum cur sit inuentum genus Breui docebo. Seruitus obnoxia, Quia quae uolebat non audebat dicere, Adfectus proprios in fabellas transtulit Calumniamque fictis elusit iocis.”

[443] I. xv. 1-2:

“In principatu commutando ciuium Nil praeter domini nomen mutant pauperes.”

[444] I. i. 14-15:

“Haec propter illos scriptast homines fabula, Qui fictis causis innocentes opprimunt.”

[445] I. xvii.

[446] I. ii.

[447] I. vi. 9: “Quidnam futurumst si crearit liberos?”

[448] III. _prol._ 38-43:

“Ego porro illius (_sc._ Aesopi) semita[m?] feci uiam, Et cogitaui plura quam reliquerat, In calamitatem deligens quaedam meam. Quodsi accusator alius Seiano foret, Si testis alius, iudex alius denique, Dignum faterer esse me tantis malis.”

[449] III. _epil._ 29-35.

[450] IV. ii. 1-4:

“Ioculare tibi uidetur, et sane leui, Dum nil habemus maius, calamo ludimus. Sed diligenter intuere has nenias: Quantam sub illis utilitatem reperies!”

[451] I. xv. 2.

[452] I. xxx.

[453] I. ii. 31: “Hoc sustinete, maius ne ueniat, malum.”

[454] III. _prol._ 49-51:

“Neque enim notare singulos mens est mihi, Verum ipsam uitam et mores hominum ostendere. Rem me professum dicet forsan quis grauem.”

[455] IV. x.:

“Peras imposuit Iuppiter nobis duas: Propriis repletam uitiis post tergum dedit, Alienis ante pectus suspendit grauem. Hac re uidere nostra mala non possumus; Alii simul delinquunt, censores sumus.”

_Cf._ Catull., xxii. 21: “Sed non uidemus manticae quod in tergo est.”

[456] IV. xxi. 16-26.

[457] IV. xviii. 9-10:

“Parce gaudere oportet et sensim queri: Totam aeque uitam miscet dolor et gaudium.”

[458] III. ix.: “Vulgare amici nomen, sed rarast fides....”

[459] I. xi., xiv., xxv.; III. i.

[460] I. vii.

[461] IV. xxiv.: “Mons parturibat, gemitus immanes ciens,” etc. _Cf._ Hor., _A.P._ 139.

[462] I. x. 9-10.

[463] S. Reinach, _Orpheus_, Eng. ed., 1909, p. 16.

[464] III. vii. Havet’s theory (_Rev. des études anciennes_, 1921) that this fable represents an actual dialogue in A.D. 16 between Arminius, the Cheruscan warrior, and his Romanized brother Flavus cannot be either proved or disproved.

[465] The most famous line in Phaedrus is probably V. iii. 5:

“Iniuriae qui addideris contumeliam.”

[466] I. iv.; II. iv. Lessing in the one case and Ellis in the other criticized adversely Phaedrus’s accuracy. For similar mistakes, see J. J. Hartman, _op. cit._

[467] I. xix., xxi., xxiii., xxix.

[468] _E.g._ II. _epil._ 10-14; III. ix. 4; IV. _prol._ 15; IV. vii.; IV. xxii.

[469] _E.g._ II. _prol._ 12; IV. _epil._ 7. III. x. closes with explanation that the story has been fully told because his brevity has offended some.

[470] II. _epil._ 1-9.

[471] III. _prol._ 32; IV. _epil._ 5-6:

“Particulo, chartis nomen uicturum meis, Latinis dum manebit pretium litteris.”

[472] IV. xxiii. and xxvi.

[473] III. _prol._ 17: “Ego, quem Pierio mater enixast iugo,” etc.

[474] III. xii.

[475] Sen., _Cons. ad Polyb._, viii. 3 ... “fabellas quoque et Aesopeos logos, intemtatum Romanis ingeniis opus.” Most scholars take this to imply either an ignorance or an ignoring of Phaedrus on Seneca’s part. But Seneca was writing to a Greek freedman, and remembering that Phaedrus was Greek too, he compliments his correspondent by remarking that fable-writing was a sort of literary work which _Romans_ had not tried. I have argued in _C.R._, XXIX. (1915), pp. 252-253, that there is no need to implicate Seneca in a wilful falsehood.

[476] _Inst. Or._, I. ix. 2.

[477] Mart., III. xx. 5. This is Friedländer’s suggestion _ad loc._ Teuffel, _Gesch. d. röm. Lit._, § 284, 3, dismisses it summarily as against probability (“ohne Wahrscheinlichkeit”). But Plessis, _La poés. lat._, p. 487, agrees with Friedländer. Ellis (_op. cit._, p. 8) takes Martial to mean the fabulist, and _improbi_ to allude to fables such as I. xxix.; III. i.; III. iii.; IV. xv. (xvi.); IV. xviii. (xix.). Thiele, in _Philologus_, LXX., 1911, pp. 539-548, proposes to read in Martial “an aemulatur improbi _logos_ Phaedri,” taking _logos_ = _apologos_ (_cf._ Sen., _Cons. ad. Polyb._, viii. 3) and _improbi_ = “audacious” applied to political allusions in the fables.

[478] The process of abridgement, mutilation and transformation of Phaedrus took place between the time when Avianus must have read the fables in verse-form (_i.e._ with intervals marked between lines), and the ninth or tenth century, when the _Pithoeanus_ has them without any mark to distinguish them from prose. Ellis (_op. cit._, pp. 9-10) argues that the abridgement “may have been executed in the 5th or 6th cent., and that the gradually declining knowledge of ancient language and metre, which the unsettled state of Europe produced, caused the iambics of Phaedrus to be written in prose. As prose they were probably read by the Carlovingian scholars.”

[479] “Ex libris bonae memoriae Ademari grammatici” is part of a note in the MS., which was written in the Abbey of St. Martial de Limoges.

[480] The influence of Phaedrus, and especially the strong influence of the Romulus collection, upon the MS. of Ademar, are discussed in _Der illustrierte lateinische Aesop_, Thiele, 1905; _cf._ Zander, _De generibus et libris paraphrasium Phaedrianarum_, 1897; _Phaedrus Solutus_, 1921.

[481] IV. vii.

[482] IV. vii. 21-22. Cato is, of course, the type of the austere literary judge, _e.g._ in the Petronian epigram, 132:

“Quid me constricta spectatis fronte, Catones?”

[483] _E.g._ I. xiii. 12: “Tum demum ingemuit corui deceptus stupor”;

II. v. 23: “Tum sic iocata est tanti maiestas ducis”;

III. v. 9: “Sed spes fefellit inpudentem audaciam”;

_cf._ the personification in I. xxvii. 6:

“Poenas ut sanctae Religioni penderet”;

and in IV. xi. 4:

“Repente uocem sancta misit Religio.”

[484] _E.g._ I. xxiv. 8: “quis maior esset,” where “uter” would be correct (_cf._ Lucan, I. 126, “quis iustius induit arma” of Caesar and Pompey); III. v. 8: “persuasus” (_cf._ I. viii. 7). Ellis (_op. cit._, 21) quotes in defence of the latter _Ad Herenn._, I. vi. 9, and Ovid, _A.A._, iii. 679.

[485] I. xi. 6; IV. ii. 16; I. xii. 5; I. xxi. 5. The epithet _fulmineus_ is shared with Ovid and Statius.

[486] III. xviii. 6-8:

“Sed forma uincis, uincis magnitudine; Nitor smaragdi collo praefulget tuo Pictisque plumis gemmeam caudam explicas.”

[487] IV. ii. 4. A case in point is the threefold lesson, each, as it were, numbered and labelled, from the story of the thief who stole an altar-lamp, IV. xi. 16-21.

[488] I. xxxi. 13: “merito plectimur.”

[489] Butler, _Post-Augustan Poetry_, 1909, pp. 70-71.

[490] His usage with regard to various feet is discussed in Müller’s ed., 1877, pp. ix.-xiii. Consult also the careful essay on metre and prosody in Havet, _Phaedri ... Fabulae Aesopiae_, 1895.

[491] _Lat. Lit._, 1899, p. 160.

[492] Suet., _Tib._, lxx.

[493] Wight Duff, _A Lit. Hist. of Rome to Golden Age_, 1909, pp. 619-623.

[494] Text: _In Astron. Veterum Scripta Isagogica Gr. et Lat._ (w. Proclus, etc.) _Ciceronis, Festi Avieni, Germanici Aratea_, in off. Sanctandreana, 1589; _Caesaris Germanici Aratea_ (with Phaedrus, etc.), Orelli, Zur., 1831; with Aratus, Koechly (Firmin-Didot), Par., 1851; Breysig, ed. 1, Berl., 1867; ed. 2, Lpz., 1899; Baehrens, _P.L.M._, i. pp. 148-200. _Cf._ Frey, _Epist. Crit. de Germanico Arati Interprete_, Culm, 1861; Sieg, _De Cicerone, Germanico Avieno Arati interpretibus_, Halle, 1886.

[495] Suet., _Cal._, iii.; Tac., _Ann._, II. 83; Plin., _N.H._, VIII. 155: “fecit et diuus Augustus equo tumulum, de quo Germanici Caesaris carmen est.”

[496] Lact., _Div. Inst._, V. v. 4: “ut Germanicus Caesar in Arateo loquitur carmine:

‘Nec consanguineis fuerat discordia nota.’”

[497] 205-206:

“Sed poenae facies remanet districtaque pandit Bracchia ceu duri teneantur robore saxi.”

[498] _De Germanico Arati Interprete_, 1861.

[499] Ll. 31, 165, 264: “ueterist si gratia famae,” “si uere Iuppiter infans ...” etc.

[500] _Suas._, i. 15.

[501] _Elegiae III. et frag._ (cum interpret. et notis Jos. Scaligeri, etc.), Amst., 1715; Latin w. Eng. version, Kidderminster and London, 1807. The name Albinovanus Pedo suggests a possible relationship with Albinovanus Celsus mentioned by Horace, _Epist._, I. viii. 1. He accompanied Tiberius to Armenia in 20 B.C.

[502] Ll. 20-22:

“Di reuocant rerumque uetant cognoscere finem Mortales oculos: aliena quid aequora remis Et sacras uiolamus aquas?”

[503] The chief authors of comedy traceable during the Silver Age are the Pomponius Bassulus recorded in an inscription at Aeclanum (_C.I.L._, IX., 1165) as a translator of Menander as well as a writer of original plays, and the Vergilius Romanus of Pliny’s letters who composed comic dramas after the old fashion. These, it may be guessed, were not intended to be acted.

[504] Sen., _Ep._, viii. 8.

[505] Suet., _Aug._, xcix.

[506] Juv., VIII. 185-187; Suet., _Cal._, lvii.; Joseph., _Ant._, XIX. i. 13: μῖμος εἰσάγεται καθ’ ὃν σταυροῦται λῃστῶν ἡγεμών.

[507] Suet., _Tib._, xlv.; _Galb._, xiii. See later part of chap. on “Senecan Poetry.”

[508] Lucian, _De Saltatione_; Friedländer, _Sittengesch._, II. iii. 3; Butler, _Post-Augustan Poetry_, pp. 26-28.

[509] Dio, lviii. 24: ἑάλω διὰ τραγῳδίαν.... Ἀτρεὺς μὲν τὸ ποίημα ἦν, κ.τ.λ.

[510] Suet., _Cal._, xxvii.

[511] Tac., _Ann._, V. viii., XI. xiii.; _Dial._, 13;, Plin., _N.H._, VII. 80, XIII. 83, XIV. 56; Plin., _Ep._, VII. xvii. 11; Quint., X. i. 98. Interesting light is thrown on his life and qualities by Cichorius, _Röm. Studien_, 1922, pp. 423-432, where it is shown that Pomponius lived till late in Nero’s reign.

[512] Attraction to the Troy-saga may explain the tragic songs which Paetus Thrasea rendered at the _cetaria_, or festival, in honour of the Trojan Antenor at Padua, where Thrasea came from; _cf._ Charisius, p. 125 K. (based on Pliny, _i.e._ presumably the lost _Dubius Sermo_); Tac., _Ann._, XVI. 21.

[513] Text: In _Scriptores Rei Rusticae Veteres Latini_, ed. Gesner, Lpz., 1735; Bipont. ed., 1787; sep. ed., Ress, Flensburg, 1795. Book X., Lundström, Ups., 1902 (fasc. vi. of edn., of which fasc. i., 1897, was _De Arboribus_); ed. Postgate, _Corp. Poet. Lat._, 1905.

Transln., _Columella: Of Husbandry in Twelve Bks. and His Bk. concerning Trees_, Lond., 1745; _Le Poème des Jardins de L. J. M. Columella_, trad. en vers français avec le texte, Bonafous, Par., 1859; Barberet, _De C. vita et scriptis_, Nancy, 1887; _cf._ _Agricola_, Heitland, Camb., 1921 (esp. pp. 250-269).

[514] VIII. xvi. 9: “in nostro Gadium municipio”; X. 185: “et mea (_sc._ lactuca) quam generant Tartesi litore Gades.”

[515] II. xvi. 4; V. v. 15: “uir illustribus disciplinis eruditus ac diligentissimus agricola Baeticae prouinciae”; VII. ii. 4; XII. xxi. 4: “patruus meus, illustris agricola.”

[516] III. ix. 2.

[517] _C.I.L._, IX. 235 (= Dessau 2923): “L. Iunio L. f. Gal. Moderato Columellae, trib. mil. leg. VI. ferratae.”

[518] II. x. 18: “hoc quidem semen Ciliciae Syriaeque regionibus ipse uidi mense Iunio Iulioque conseri et per auctumnum ... tolli.”

[519] II. xxii. 5-6.

[520] III. iii. 3: “Nomentana regio ... quam possidet Seneca uir excellentis ingenii atque doctrinae.” See discussion hereon in relation to Plin., _N.H._, XIV. (5), 49-51, by Barberet, _De Columellae Vita et Scriptis_, 1887, pp. 23-25. Cichorius, _Röm. Studien_, 1922, pp. 417-422, makes it probable that Columella served on the expedition to Cilicia Trachea in A.D. 36 (II. x. 18), and was at Rome in 41 (III. viii. 2).

[521] I. i. 12-14.

[522] XII. lvii. 6: “Clausulam peracti operis mei, P. Siluine, non alienum puto indicem lecturis (si modo fuerint qui dignentur ista cognoscere), nihil dubitasse me paene infinita esse, quae potuerint huic inseri materiae: uerum ea quae maxime uidebantur necessaria, memoriae tradenda censuisse. Nec tamen canis natura dedit cunctarum rerum prudentiam. Nam etiam quicunque sunt habiti mortalium sapientissimi, multa scisse dicuntur, non omnia.”

[523] See Wight Duff’s _Lit. Hist. of Rome to Close of Golden Age_, for Cato, pp. 262-264; for Varro, pp. 342-343.

[524] III. xvii. 4.

[525] IX. ii. 1.

[526] Other examples are given by Prof. Summers, _Silver Age of Latin Lit._, p. 286.

[527] III. xxi. 3-4.

[528] X. 96-102:

“Pingite tunc uarios, terrestria sidera, flores, Candida leucoia et flauentia lumina caltae Narcissique comas et hiantis saeua leonis Ora feri calathisque uirentia lilia canis, Nec non uel niueos uel caeruleos hyacinthos. Tum quae pallet humi, quae frondens purpurat auro, Ponatur uiola et nimium rosa plena pudoris.”

[529] _Nubigenae_, _uersicoloribus_, _pestifer_ are Virgilian: _frugifero_ and _nubifugo_ are not, though the former was used by Ennius.

[530] X. 80: “Veris et aduentum nidis cantabit hirundo.”

[531] X. 159-160:

“Inuigilate, uiri: tacito nam tempora gressu Diffugiunt nulloque sono conuertitur annus.”

[532] X. 209-214.

[533] X. 227-229:

“Et secum gracili conectere carmina filo Quae canat inter opus Musa modulante putator Pendulus arbustis, holitor uiridantibus hortis.”

[534] X. 255-262.

[535] X. 436 (the closing line): “Ascraeum cecinit Romana per oppida carmen,” echoing Virg., _Georg._ II. 176: “Ascraeumque cano Romana per oppida carmen.”

[536] Text: ed. pr. (before recovery of _Cena Trimalchionis_), _Petronii arbitri satyrici fragmenta_, w. _Scriptores Panegyrici Lat._, etc., Milan, circ. 1482; _Fragmentum Traguriense_ (= _Cena Trim._), Frambotti, Padua, 1664; Burman, _Petr. Satyr. Quae Supersunt_ (copiously annotated), Utr., 1709, and Amster., 1743; Bücheler, ed. maior, Berl., 1862; ed. min., 4th ed., 1904, 6th revised by Heraeus, Berl., 1922; Latin w. earliest Eng. trans. of 1694; Gaselee (illustns.), Lond., 1910; Latin w. Eng. tr., Heseltine (Loeb), Lond., 1913; Mitchell, Lond., 1922; w. French tr., Ernout, Par., 1922; _Cena Trim._ (Germ. tr. and notes), Friedländer, Leipzig, 1891; w. Eng. tr. and notes, Lowe, Camb., 1905; Ryan, Lond., 1905; w. Seneca’s _Apocol._ and Pompeian inscrns., Sedgwick, Oxf., 1925; _Bellum Ciuile_ (from _Satyr._) w. Eng. tr. and notes, Baldwin, New York, 1911. For Poems ascribed to Petronius, see Bährens’s _P.L.M._, vol. iv., and Bücheler’s ed. minor. The 1708 Eng. trans. was privately reprinted, Lond., 1899.

Other wks.: Beck, _The Age of Petronius_, Camb., U.S.A., 1856; and _The MSS. of the Satyricon ... described and collated_, Camb., U.S.A., 1863; Pétrequin, _Nouvelles Recherches hist. et crit. sur Pétrone_, Paris and Lyon, 1869; Boissier, _Un roman de moeurs sous Néron_ in “L’opposition sous les Césars,” Par., 1875; Émile Thomas, _L’Envers de la société romaine d’après Pétrone_, Par., 1892; Collignon, _Étude sur Pétrone_, Par., 1892; and _Pétrone au moyen âge_, etc., 1893; Paul Thomas, _L’âge et l’auteur du Satyricon_, Gand, 1905; F. F. Abbott, _Origin of Realistic Romance among Romans_ in “The Common People of Anct. Rome” (orig. in _Class. Phil._), Lond., 1912, and _Petronius: A Study in Ancient Realism_ in “Society and Politics in Anct. Rome,” Lond., 1914; Mendell, _P. and the Greek Romance_ in _Class. Phil._, XII. 2, 1917.

On Language: Ludwig, _De Petronii sermone plebeio_, Marb., 1869; Guericke, _De linguae vulgaris reliquiis apud Petron. et in inscript. parietariis Pompeianis_, Gumbinn., 1875; Cesareo, _De Petronii sermone_, Rome, 1887 (esp. on Neapolitan elements); Heraeus, _Die Sprache des Petron. u. die Glossen_, Leipz., 1899; and _Cena Trim. nebst ausgewählt. Pompeian. Wandinschriften_ (“Sammlung vulgärlateinischer Texte”), Heidelb., 1909; _cf._ Schuchardt, _Der Vocalismus des Vulgärlateins_, 1866-1868; Cooper, _Word-Formation in Roman Sermo Plebeius_, 1895.

[537] See Studer, “Ueber das Zeitalter des Petr. Arb.,” _Rh. Mus._, ii., 1843, p. 50, p. 202, and others.

[538] He founded on Plin., _N.H._, XXXVII. 20; Plut., _De discr. am. et adul._, 19, p. 60 e.

[539] Tac., _Ann._, XVI. 18-19.

[540] J. Wight Duff, _Lit. Hist. of Rome to Golden Age_, pp. 334-337.

[541] §§ 61-62, 63 and 111-112.

[542] This was Mommsen’s view, _Herm._, XIII. 114 (_cf._ “Trimalchios Heimat u. Grabschrift” in his _Ges. Schr._, 7, 1909, Berl.), which some think incompatible with Trimalchio’s reference to seeing the Sibyl in a cage at Cumae (_Satyr._, 48). For other views see Schanz, _Gesch. d. röm. Lit._, 1913, p. 126. After the sea-voyage, from § 116 to the end, the scene is definitely at Crotona. Some missing incidents may have occurred at Massilia; for Servius (ad Verg., _Aen._, III. 57) ascribes to Petronius the story of a human scapegoat there in time of plague (_cf._ Sid. Apoll., XXIII. 155-156: “te Massiliensium per hortos sacri stipitis Arbiter colonum....” But it is too impetuous to infer therefrom, as some have done, a Gallic origin for Petronius, or to regard his _Satyricon_ as the beginning of the French novel!)

[543] _Sat._, 34:

“Eheu nos miseros, quam totus homuncio nil est! Sic erimus cuncti, postquam nos auferet Orcus. Ergo uiuamus, dum licet esse bene.”

[544] § 59.

[545] § 68.

[546] § 48.

[547] § 50.

[548] § 52: “et pueri mortui iacent sic ut uiuere putes.” Squire Western is equally confused in his recollections of the metamorphosis of Actaeon into a stag: “I’d rather be run by one of my own dogs as one Acton was that the story-book says was turned into a hare and his own dogs killed un and eat un.” Fielding, _Tom Jones_, XVII. ch. 3.

[549] § 53.

[550] § 71.

[551] § 37.

[552] § 41.

[553] § 42.

[554] § 45.

[555] § 46: “Videris mihi, Agamemnon, dicere ‘Quid iste argutat molestus.’ Quia tu, qui potes loquere, non loquis. Non es nostrae fasciae, et ideo pauperorum uerba derides. Scimus te prae litteras fatuum esse.”

[556] § 88.

[557] § 118.

[558] § 119-124.

[559] § 126.

[560] _E.g._ Giton concealed under the bed is compared to Ulysses under the ram; one of Encolpius’s enchantresses is Circe, etc.

[561] Klebs: “Zur Composition von Petr. Satirae,” _Philol._, 47 (1889), p. 623, considers this wrath as the _Leitmotiv_ of the whole romance.

[562] § 139:

“Me quoque per terras per cani Nereos aequor Hellespontiaci sequitur grauis ira Priapi.”

[563] The type is seen in the Widow of Ephesus (_Satyr._, § 111-112). On Milesian tales see Norden, _Die Antike Kunstprosa_, II., 602, 604 _n._; Rohde, _Der Griech. Roman_ (1900), 586; _Kl. Schr._ (1901), II. 25 _sqq._; Lucas, “Zu den Milesiaca des Aristides,” _Philologus_, 61 (1907), 16 _sqq._

[564] Schanz, _Gesch. d. röm. Lit._ (1913), p. 125; Abbott, _Common People of Anct. Rome_, pp. 128-133.

[565] Chauvin, _Les romanciers grecs et latins_, 1864.

[566] For traditional features from banquets in Greek lit. see Geffcken, _Studien zur griech. Satire_ in _Neue Jahrb. f. d. klass. Alt._, XXVII. (1911), 395 and 484; and, in general, Ullrich, _Entstehung u. Entwickelung d. Litteraturgattung des Symposion_, Würzb., 1908.

[567] Collignon, _Étude sur Pétrone_, pp. 254 _sqq._; Revay, “Horaz u. Petron,” _Class. Phil._, XVII. (1922), pp. 202 _sqq._; Shero, “The _Cena_ in Roman satire,” _Class. Phil._, XVIII. (1923), esp. pp. 134-139.

[568] Hor., _Sat._ II. viii. 77-78:

“Et soleas poscit: tum in lecto quoque uideres Stridere secreta diuisos aure susurros,”

Petr., _Sat._, 41, 9: “ab hoc ferculo Trimalchio ad lasanum surrexit. Nos libertatem sine tyranno nacti coepimus inuitare conuiuarum sermones.”

[569] Among the manuscript titles is _Petronii arbitri affranii Satirici lib. incip._, where the at first puzzling appearance of the name of Afranius indicates Petronius’ resemblance to that writer of togata-comedies _in puerorum foedis amoribus_ (Teuffel, _Gesch. d. röm. Lit._, § 305, 1).

[570] _Satyr._, § 132: “damnatisque nouae simplicitatis opus.”

[571] Apul., _Met._, iv. 28–vi. 24.

[572] Even the grammar is intentionally varied; _e.g._ the correct accusative, _Nicerotem_ 61, contrasted with Trimalchio’s _Niceronem_, 63.

[573] _Sat._, 117, 12; 134, 2.

[574] _E.g._ _athlum_, 57; _phantasia_, 38; _philologia_, 39; _polymitus_, 40; _synoccio_, 93); _apoculare_, 62 and 67 (= ἀποκυλίω), and hybrids like _bilychnis_, 30 (= bis + λύχνος; _percolopare_, 44 (= _per_ + κόλαφος); _lupatria_, 37; _excatarissasti_, 67.

[575] _E.g._ _amasiunculus_, 45; _amasiuncula_, 75; _lamellula_, 57; _cor(i)cillum_, 75; _manuciolum_, 63. The loss of force in popular diminutives is plain from “hominem ... ualde audaculum,” 63 = “a mighty bold fellow.”

[576] § 71: “amici,” inquit, “et serui homines sunt et aeque unum _lactem_ biberunt, etiam si illos malus _fatus_ oppressit.”

[577] Guericke, _op. cit._, p. 34.

[578] The neuter form, instead of the usual _margarita_, was used by Varro, Tacitus (_Agr._, 12) and Tertullian.

[579] It is an easy development from the physical sense of _notare_, “to note” or “mark down,” and the transition is found in Cicero.

[580] _Sat._, 123, ll. 209-232: _tantum fugit_ (221) is echoed by the corresponding metrical position of _tantum trahit_ (231); _maerentia tecta relinquunt_ (225) by _maerentia pectora iungant_ (229); _relinquunt_ ends 225 and _relinquit_ 227.

[581] _Sat._, 127:

“Emicuere rosae uiolaeque et molle cyperon, Albaque de uiridi riserunt lilia prato: Talis humus Venerem molles clamauit in herbas, Candidiorque dies secreto fauit amori.”

[582] _P.L.M._, iv. 74-108, 120-121.

[583] _Ib._, 74:

“Inueniat (? inuenias) quod quisque uelit: non omnibus unum est Quod placet: hic spinas colligit, ille rosas.”

[584] _Ib._, 75, l. 5: “Ante oculos stabat quidquid promiserat annus.”

[585] _Ib._, 81:

“Paruula securo tegitur mihi culmine sedes Vuaque plena mero fecunda pendet ab ulmo,” etc.

[586] _Ib._, 84:

O litus uita mihi dulcius, a mare! felix Cui licet ad terras ire subinde tuas, etc.

[587] _Ib._, 99: The English verse is from J. Wight Duff’s “Sonnets from the Antique” in Quatercentenary number of _Alma Mater_, Aberdeen Univ. Mag., 1906.

The elegiacs show Petronius’s departure from the rigorous Ovidian disyllabic ending in the pentameter:

“Lecto compositus uix prima silentia noctis Carpebam et somno lumina uicta dabam: Cum me saeuus Amor prensat sursumque capillis Excitat et lacerum peruigilare iubet. ‘Tu famulus meus,’ inquit, ‘ames cum mille puellas, Solus io solus, dure, iacere potes?’ Exsilio et pedibus nudis tunicaque soluta Omne iter incipio, nullum iter expedio. Nunc propero, nunc ire piget, rursumque redire Poenitet et pudor est stare uia media. Ecce tacent uoces hominum strepitusque uiarum Et uolucrum cantus turbaque fida canum. Solus ego ex cunctis paueo somnumque torumque Et sequor imperium, magne Cupido, tuum.”

[588] Text: Prose wks., ed. pr., Nap., 1475; Erasmus, Bas., 1515, 1529; Lipsius, Antw., 1605, 1615; Ruhkopf, Lpz., 1797-1811; Haase, Lpz., 1852 _sq._; later Teubner ed., Vol. I. 1, _Dialog._, Hermes, 1905; I. 2, _De Ben._, _De Clem._, Hosius, 1900; II., _Nat. Quaest._, Gercke, 1907; III., _Epist._, Hense, 1898, 1914; IV., _Frag._, Bickel. Sep. edns., _De Ben._, Gertz., Berl., 1876; _Dial._, Gertz, Copenh., 1886; _Dial._, X., XI., XII., J. D. Duff, Camb., 1915; _De Otio_, Waltz, Par., 1909; _Ad Helu._, Favez, Laus., 1918; _Select Letters_, Summers, Lond., 1910; _Ep. Mor._, Beltrami, Brescia, 1916; Loeb. ed. (w. trans.), Gummere, Lond. and New Yk., 1917-1920; _De Clem._, Préchac, Par., 1921.

Tragedies and satire: see next chapter.

Transns.: _Prose Wks._, Lodge, Lond., 1614. _On Benefits_; also _Minor Dial. and Clem._, Stewart, Lond., 1889; _Quaest. Nat._ (_Physical Science in Time of Nero_), Clarke and Geikie, Lond., 1910.

Chronology of Wks.: Jonas, _De Ordine librorum Sen._, Berl., 1870; Schanz, _op. cit._; Gercke, _Seneca-Studien_, Lpz., 1895.

Life: Waltz, _La Vie politique de S._, Par., 1909.

Philosophy: (General) Zeller, _Die Philos. d. Griechen_; Martha, _Les moralistes sous l’empire romain_; Boissier, _La religion romaine d’Auguste aux Antonins_; Schiller, _op. cit._; Arnold, _Roman Stoicism_, Camb., 1911; (Special) Corsi, _Lo stoicismo romano ... particolarmente in Sen._, Prato, 1884; Levy-Bruhl, _Quid de deo Sen. senserit_, Par., 1884; Weissenfels, _De Sen. Epicureo_, Berl., 1886; Rubin, _Die Ethik Sen. in ihr Verhält. z. älter. u. mittler. Stoa_, Berl., 1892; Burnier, _La Morale de S. et le Néo-stoïcisme_, Laus., 1908; Gummere, _S. the Philosr. and his modern Message_, Bost., Mass., 1922.

Literary Qualities: Hoppe, _Ueber d. Sprache des Philos. Sen._ (syntactical), Lauban, 1873; Weber, _De Sen. philos. dicendi genere Bioneo_, Marb., 1895; Kunz, _Sentenzen in S.’s Tragoedien zusammengestellt_, Wienerneust., 1897; Nottola, _La prosa di S._, Bergamo, 1904; Merchant, _S., his theory of style_, _Amer. Jrnl. Philol._, 26 (1905); Norden, _Kunstprosa_, etc., p. 311; Bourgery, _Sénèque Prosateur_, Par., 1922; Albertini, _La Composition dans les ouvrages philosophiques de S._, Par., 1923.

For recent lit. on Seneca, Münscher in _Bursian’s Jahresb._, Lpz., 1923, pp. 109-214.

[589] The conjectural date is based on _De Tranq._, xvii. 7; _Ep._, cviii. 17 and 22; _Nat. Q._, I. i. 3. Lehmann, _Claudius u. Nero_, I. 152, prefers 8 B.C. Favez, in ed. of _Ad Helu._, supports the earlier date because of Seneca’s recollection of Asinius Pollio recorded _De Tranq._, xvii. 7; Pollio died in A.D. 5.

[590] He gives his full name, _De Ben._, IV. viii. 3. For his b.p. see Mart., I. lxi. 7-8.

[591] Acts xviii. 11-17. M. Anatole France gives a lively account of Gallio in _Sur la Pierre Blanche_, as already mentioned, p. 44 _n._

[592] _Contr._, II. _praef._ 4.

[593] _Ad Helu._, xix. 2.

[594] _Ep._, lviii. 5, lxxxviii. 3 _sqq._ and 37, cviii. 24; _De Br. Vit._, xiii. 2.

[595] _Contr._, X. _praef._ 2, 8, 9, 12.

[596] _Ep._, xx. 2: “facere docet philosophia, non dicere”; cxv. 1-2: “quaere quid scribas non quemadmodum.”

[597] _Contr._, I. _praef._ 22; IV. _praef._ 1; VII. _praef._ 9.

[598] _Ep._, xvi. 3.

[599] _Ep._, xix. 1, xxii. 1 _sqq._, xcviii. 13.

[600] _Ep._, iv. 10-11, xvii. 3-4, xxxi. 10.

[601] _De Ira_, III. xxxvi.

[602] _Ep._, VI. 1 (sign of grace to see one’s faults); VIII. 3.

[603] _Ep._, vi. 4 (“gaudeo discere ut doceam”), viii. 3 (“rectum iter ... lassus errando aliis monstro”), xxxiii. 1 (“adsero te mihi: meum opus es”), xlviii. 7-8.

[604] _Ep._, xviii. 5-9, cviii. 13 _sqq._

[605] _Ep._, xxxi. 11, xli. 2, xcv. 50.

[606] _Ep._, liv. 1, lxxvii. 9, lxxviii. 1, civ. 1.

[607] _Ad Helu._, xix. 2 and 4-6.

[608] Suet., _Cal._, liii.: “commissiones meras ... harenam esse sine calce.”

[609] _Dio_, LIX. xix. 7 ... πιστεύσας ὅτι φθόης τε ἔχοι κακῶς καὶ οὐκ ἐς μακρὰν τελευτήσοι.

[610] _Ep._, xlix. 2.

[611] _De Ira_, I. xx. 8-9; II. xxxiii. 3 _sqq._; III. xviii. 3-4 and xix.

[612] _De Tranq._, xvii. 3: “miscenda tamen ista et alternanda sunt, solitudo et frequentia: illa nobis faciet hominum desiderium, haec nostri; et erit altera alterius remedium; odium turbae sanabit solitudo, taedium solitudinis turba.”

[613] Dio, LX. viii. 5-6; schol. ad Juv., V. 109.

[614] Tac., _Ann._, XII. viii.

[615] Suet., _Ner._, lii.

[616] The _quinquennium_ is here used in its customary sense, and not the less likely one in which Mr. J. G. C. Anderson applied it to the last five years of Nero’s reign on the ground that the Golden House scheme and rebuilding after the Great Fire were the achievements which aroused Trajan’s admiration. (_Jrnl. Rom. Stud._, I. pt. 3 (1912), pp. 173 _sqq._)

[617] Tac., _Ann._, XIII. ii., vi., xi.

[618] Tac., _Ann._, XIII. v. and xiii.

[619] _Ib._, XIII. xiv.

[620] Dio, LXI. iv. 1.

[621] Tac., _Ann._, XIII. xvii.; XIV. vii. and xi.

[622] _Ib._, XIV. lii.: “exueret magistrum.”

[623] _Ib._, XIV. liii.-liv.

[624] Seneca had been attacked by Suillius in A.D. 58, _Ann._, XIII. xlii.; for attacks in 62 see _ib._, XIV. lii. and lxv.

[625] _Ib._, XIV. lv.-lvi.

[626] _Ib._, XV. xlv.; Dio, LXII. xxv. 3.

[627] Tac., _Ann._, XV. lxv.

[628] _Ib._, XV. lx.-lxiv.

[629] I. vi.

[630] _De Vit. Beat._, xvii. 3: “Non sum sapiens”; 4: “ego in alto uitiorum omnium sum”; xviii. 1: “cum uitiis conuicium facio, in primis meis facio”; _Ep._, lvii. 3: “multum ab homine tolerabili, nedum a perfecto absum.”

[631] _Ep._, lxi. 2.

[632] _Ep._, xxvi. 5-6: “non timide itaque conponor....”

[633] _Journal des Savants_, Par., 1912: “Les travaux récents sur la chronol. des œuvres de Sén.,” p. 213.

[634] See Mr. J. D. Duff’s notice of M. Albertini’s _La Composn. dans les ouvrages philos. de Sén._, _C. R._, May-June, 1924.

[635] Albertini states with admirable clearness the difficulties of the problem and indicates the variety of answers given. His conclusions are often in agreement with Gercke’s.

[636] _Aduersaria Critica_, Vol. II. 344, Copenhagen, 1873.

[637] The logical sequence and arrangement of topics in the treatises (other than _N.Q._) and letters are examined by Albertini, _op. cit._, pp. 51-146.

[638] Only one, the _De Tranq._, has a form suggestive of “dialogue” in the true sense.

[639] Favez, _Ad Helu._, pp. xxxviii. _sqq._

[640] _Ad Pol._, xiii. 3, xviii. 9.

[641] Müller, _De Sen. librorum de ira compositione_, Lpz., 1912; Rabbow, _Antik Schriften üb. Seelenheilung u. Seelenleitung_, Lpz., 1914.

[642] Albertini, _op. cit._, pp. 61-63.

[643] _De Ira_, III. ii.

[644] _Ib._, III. ix. 1-2.

[645] _Ib._, I. i. 3-4.

[646] _Ib._, II. xxv. 2: “questus est quod foliis rosae duplicatis incubuisset.” A longer anecdote, admirably told, is that of Augustus twitting Asinius Pollio with keeping in his house “the wild beast” Timagenes, _ib._, III. xxxiii.

[647] _De Vit. Beat._, iii. 2: “quod inter omnis Stoicos conuenit, rerum naturae adsentior”; viii. 2: “idem est ergo beate uiuere et secundum naturam.”

[648] _Ib._, iii. 4.

[649] _Ib._, xvii. 1: “Quare ergo tu fortius loqueris quam uiuis?” xviii. 1: “aliter (inquis) loqueris, aliter uiuis”; xx. 1: “non praestant philosophi quae loquuntur.”

[650] Ed. _De Otio_. According to Marchesi, _Seneca_, 1920, all three were written about 62. Dessau’s view, _Herm._, liii., 1918, pp. 192 _sqq._, is that they were composed after Serenus’s death, late in Seneca’s career, as a memorial recreating three stages in a dead friend’s advance towards and in Stoicism. Waltz stands not alone, as Dessau said, but has Münscher’s support, for dating the _De Const._ early in Claudius’s reign, about 42. Most concur in putting all three somewhere in Nero’s reign; _e.g._ _De Const._, 54-56; _De Tranq._, 59; _De Otio_, 62.

[651] _De Const._, ii. 1: “Nuper cum incidisset mentio M. Catonis....”

[652] Dessau, _op. cit._, finds difficulties in the usually accepted date, and considers the _De Breu._ was composed about A.D. 62. This view is criticized by Albertini.

[653] _N.Q._, IV. _praef._ 1 and 12. Seneca quotes from a poem of his, _N.Q._, III. 1; a hexameter, _Ep. Mor._, xxiv. 21; iambics, viii. 10.

[654] Schanz, _op. cit._, p. 381, does not think so. On the other hand, Albertini, _op. cit._, p. 102, says; “Je suis de ceux qui croient que la fin du _De Prouid._ est mutilée.”

[655] _De Clem._, II. i.: “Vellem nescire literas!”

[656] _De Ben._, I. xv. 6.

[657] _Ib._, V. i. 1.

[658] M. Bourgery concludes that Bks. VI. and VII., as exhibiting an increase of regular _clausulae_, were written after the other books. M. Pichon asks why, if that metrical criterion holds for VI. and VII., one should not apply it to Bk. V. Bk. V. is credited with only 41% of regular clausulae, and so by M. Bourgery’s test should be earlier than I. and II., which have about 50%.

[659] M. Paul Thomas, _Morceaux choisis de Sénèque_, ed. 8, 1918, p. 145, says: “il serait aussi difficile que peu utile d’en donner une analyse.”

[660] _E.g._ _De Ben._, I. vii. 2: “ut dixi.”

[661] _Ib._, I. xiv. 1: “ad propositum nunc reuertamur”; I. x. 1: “sed longius nos impetus euehit prouocante materia.”

[662] _Cf._ _argumentum_ to Bk. I. in the Strasbourg ed. of 1809: “libri boni sunt sed mehercule in ordine et tractatu confusi, quem uix est uel adnitentem expedire.”

[663] _Ad Helu._, xx.

[664] A table of varying rearrangements is given by Schanz, _op. cit._, p. 400. The last book (VII.) is put first by Gundermann, and the first last by Schultess and Gercke. Diels, Müller and Gercke begin with III., which Bourgery would put at the end according to his metrical tests.

[665] _E.g._ _Ep. Mor._, xlviii. 1, lxxi. 1, lxxv. 1.

[666] _E.g._ Hilgenfeld, Gercke, Schanz, Bourgery. Albertini thinks the letters real, and discusses the problem, _op. cit._, pp. 132-146. I accept his views.

[667] Various attempts have been made: _e.g._ Bourgery, _Rev. de Philol._, xxxv., 1911, pp. 40-55; Albertini, _op. cit._

[668] _Ib._, cxviii. 1-2.

[669] _Ib._, xxi. 5.

[670] _Ib._, cxviii. 1-3.

[671] _Inst. Or._, X. i. 125-131.

[672] Tac., _Ann._, XIII. iii.: “ingenium amoenum et temporis eius auribus accommodatum.”

[673] _Ep._, lxxv. 1: “qualis sermo meus esset si una sederemus aut ambularemus, inlaboratus et facilis, talis esse epistulas meas uolo quae nihil habent accersitum nec fictum.”

[674] _Ep._, lxxvii. 4, 6 and 20, xxxvi. 1 and 4, cviii. 29.

[675] _Ep._, xxiii. 11, ii. 3, xiii. 10, xviii. 6.

[676] Summers, _Select Letters of S._, pp. xlii. _sqq._, gives a careful study; _cf._ Bourgery, _Sénèque Prosateur_, pp. 206-305.

[677] _E.g._ Lact., _Div. Inst._, I. v.: “Annaeus quoque Seneca, qui ex Romanis uel acerrimus Stoicus fuit, quam saepe summum Deum merita laude prosequitur!”

[678] _Ep._, xxxvii. 1.

[679] _Ep._, lxxxix. 8: “ad uirtutem uenitur per ipsam.”

[680] _Ep._, cviii., lvi., lxxviii. 23 and 25.

[681] _Ep._, cxvi. 5.

[682] xlviii., cvi.

[683] cxiii.

[684] liii.

[685] lxxxvii.

[686] Ed. pr. Ven., 1477; Baiter in Orelli’s Cicero; Kiessling and Schöll, Berl., 1875; Clark, Oxf., 1907.

[687] Teuffel, _op. cit._, §§ 300-301. For Probus’s notes on Virgil, see Keil, Halle, 1848.

[688] Mart., III. ii. 12; _cf._ Gell., I. xv. 18. He is to be distinguished from the grammarian Probus of the 4th cent.

[689] Suet., _Gr._, 24.

[690] X. i. 118.

[691] Tac., _Hist._, I. xc.

[692] Tac., _Ann._, XV. lxxi.: “Verginius studia iuuenum eloquentia fouebat.” He is mentioned or cited by Quintilian as “Verginius,” _I. Or._, III. i. 21; III. vi. 45; IV. i. 23; VII. iv. 24; as “Flavus,” VII. iv. 40; as “Flavus Verginius,” XI. iii. 126.

[693] Text: ed. pr. (_In morte Claudii Ludus_), Rome, 1513; Schusler, Utr., 1844; Bücheler, _Symb. philol. Bonn._, Leipz., 1864-1867 (Einl. u. Comment.); ed. min. (w. Petronius), 1871; 6th ed. (Heraeus), Berl., 1922; Ball, (tr. and comm.), New Yk., 1902; Rouse (Loeb ed. w. Petron.), Lond. and New Yk., 1913; Weinreich, Berl., 1923.

[694] Birt, _De Sen. Apoc. et Apoth. lucubratio_, Marb., 1888, thinks Sen. wrote not only the existing political satire, but a lost philosophical _Apocolocyntosis_. Stahr, _Agrippina_, append., Berl., 1867, also refuses to identify the _Apotheosis_ with the _Apocolocyntosis_, but further denies S.’s authorship of the extant skit. Hartman, _Mnemos._, N.S., xliv. (1916) holds that the pumpkinification was contained “in aliquo colloquio” distinct from the extant “Ludus.”

[695] The Greek title ἀποκολοκύντωσις is from κολοκύντη = Lat. _cucurbita_. For the satiric use of _cucurbita_ _cf._ Petron., 39; Juv., XIV. 58; Apul., _Met._, I. xv. The title _Ludus de morte Claudii Caesaris_ is in inferior MSS., and involves an un-Latin use of _ludus_.

[696] lx. 35: συνέθηκε μὲν γὰρ καὶ ὁ Σενέκας σύγγραμμα ἀποκολοκύντωσιν αὐτὸ ὥσπερ τινὰ ἀπαθανάτισιν ὀνομάσας.

[697] Bickel in “Der Schluss d. Apoc.,” _Philol._, lxxvii. (1921) defends the ending as it stands.

[698] _Apoc._, 7: “putares omnes illius esse libertos: adeo illum nemo curabat.”

[699] _E.g._ _Apoc._, 7: “ante templum, ius dicebam”; 10: “antequam audires, damnasti”; 12: “discere causas una tantum parte audita, saepe ne utra”; 14: “illum altera tantum parte audita condemnat.”

[700] Diderot argued that either Seneca’s adulation was sarcastic or that the _Consol. ad Polyb._ was written by some one to damage Seneca’s character.

[701] Tac., _Ann._, XIII. iii.

[702] Tac., _Ann._, XIII. iii.: “postquam ad prouidentiam sapientiamque flexit, nemo risui temperare.”

[703] Dio, lx. 35: τοὺς γὰρ μύκητας θεῶν βρῶμα ἔλεγεν εἶναι: Suet., _Ner._, xxxiii.

[704] Tac., _Ann._, XII. viii.: “infensus Claudio dolore iniuriae credebatur.”

[705] Bücheler dates the _Apoc._ immediately after Claudius’s death. Hirschfeld (_Kl. Schriften_, 1913) connects the composition with Nero’s annulment of Claudius’s consecration (Suet., _Claud._, xlv). Bickel (_op. cit._) accepts Hirschfeld’s date.

[706] For examination of Seneca’s relationship to Menippean Satire, see Weinreich, _Senecas Apocol. ... Einführung, Analyse, Untersuchung_, Berl., 1923.

[707] Helm, _Lukian u. Menipp_, 1906.

[708] _E.g._ (proverbs) 1: _aut regem aut fatuum nasci oportere_; 7: _manus manum lauat_; (colloquialisms) 1: _dicam quod mihi in buccam uenerit_; 3: _in semen relinqui_; (slang) 4: _animam ebulliit_; 9: _mapalia_ (Punic = “shanties”); (parataxis) 2: _si dixero, mensis erat October_; 10: _dic mihi ... quare damnasti_. The diminutives _nummulariolus_, _ciuitatulas_, _auriculam_, and a few more, occur.

[709] Weinreich, _op. cit._, pp. 65-66, considers that he travesties his own _Herc. Fur._

[710] Five out of fourteen lines have an anapaest in the fifth foot.

[711] Baehrens, _P.L.M._, iv. (1882) pp. 55-73; Riese, _Anth. Lat._, Leipz., I. (1894); II. (1906).

[712] Plin., _Ep._, V. iii. 5.

[713] li. 4-5:

“Sic dulci Marcus qui nunc sermone fritinnit, facundo patruos prouocet ore duos.”

[714] ii. 5:

“Corsica terribilis cum primum incanduit aestas.”

[715] xxxvi. 5-6:

“qua frigida semper praefulget stellis Arctos inocciduis.”

[716] Tragedies: ed. pr., Ferrara, _c._ 1481; Lipsius, Leid., 1588; Gruter, Heidelb., 1604; Gronov, Leid., 1661; Pierrot, Par., 1829-1832; Peiper and Richter, Leipz., 1867 (influenced by erroneous belief in strophic arrangement); improved ed., Richter, Leipz., 1902; Leo, Berl., 1878-1879 (vol. i., _Obseruationes criticae_, pp. 232, vol. ii., _Tragoediae_); Miller (Loeb ed. w. prose trans.), 2 vols., 1916-1917.

Trans.: Heywood and others, Lond., 1581; Harris (verse), Lond., 1904; Miller (blank verse and lyric metres), Chicago, 1907.

Dramatic influence: Cunliffe, _Influence of S. on Elizab. Tragedy_, Manch., 1893; Vaughan, _Types of Tragic Drama_, Lond., 1908; Spearing, _Eliz. Transns. of S.’s Tragedies_, Camb., 1912; Godley, _Senecan Tragedy in Eng. Lit. and Classics_, Oxf., 1912; Kastner and Charlton, _Growth of Senecan Tradition in Renaiss. Trag._, introd. to _Poet. Works of Sir W. Alexander_, Lond., 1921; Lucas, _S. and Eliz. Tragedy_, Camb., 1922; Jourdain, _Drama in Europe_, Lond., 1924.

[717] Quintil., X. i. 128: “tractauit etiam omnem fere studiorum materiam: nam et orationes eius et poemata et epistulae et dialogi feruntur”; _cf._ VIII. iii. 31; Tac., _Ann._, XIV. lii.; Plin., _Ep._, V. iii. 5.

[718] Examples may be found in Schäfer’s _De Philosophiae Anneanae in Senecae tragoediis vestigiis_, Jena, 1909.

[719] Birt (_Neue Jahrb. f. d. klass. Altert._, 1911). Jonas, _De ordine librorum Sen._, 1870, aimed at a closer determination of dates, _e.g._ _Med._ and _Tro._ soon after Seneca’s return from exile in 49, _Herc. Fur._ after 57, _Oed._ after the Parthian war of 58, _Thyest._ after Seneca’s retirement in 62. Weinreich (_Apoc._, _Einführung_, etc., 1923, p. 65), founding on Münscher’s metrical analyses, remarks with airy confidence, “Daran denkt man heute nicht mehr dass die Tragödien, ganz oder zum Teil, in der Jugendheit oder während des Exils entstanden seien.” Weinreich maintains that Seneca wrote _Thyest._, _Herc. Fur._ and _Tro._ before he composed the anapaests of the _Apoc._ in 54. He gives Münscher’s dates for the remaining plays: _Phaed._ and _Med._, 54 or 55; _Agam._, a year or two later; _Oed._, 57; _Herc. Oet._ and _Phoen._, 64 or 65.

[720] Cichorius, _Röm. Studien_, 1922, pp. 426-429; Quintil., VIII. iii. 31.

[721] Tac., _Ann._, XI. xiii.

[722] Differences in plot or structure between the Latin and corresponding Greek plays are exhibited in the comparative analyses appended to Miller’s edition (Loeb). The chief differences are summarized by Schanz, _Gesch. d. röm. Lit._

[723] Strauss, _De ratione inter Sen. et antiquas fabulas Romanas intercedente_, Rost., 1887 (combats Ribbeck’s views on ancient Roman tragedy); Liedloff, _Die Nachbildung griech. u. röm. Muster in Senecas Troades u. Agamemnon_, Grimma, 1902; Schreiner, _Sen. als Tragödiendichter in seinen Beziehungen zu den griech. Originalen_ (contains bibliography), Münch., 1909; Tachau, _Die Arbeiten üb. d. Tragödien des Sen. in d. letzten Jahrzehnten, Philol._, 48 (1889) p. 340.

[724] Sen., _Ep._, lxxxiv. 5 “... in unum saporem uaria illa libamenta confundere, ut etiam si apparuerit unde sumptum sit, aliud tamen esse quam unde sumptum est, appareat.”

[725] _Phoen._, 383-386.

[726] _Phoen._, 654.

[727] Schanz, _op. cit._, II. 2 pp. 56-57.

[728] _Med._ 549-550:

“Sic natos amat? Bene est—tenetur. Vulneri patuit locus.”

[729] So too Ovid in _Her._, iv. (Phaedra’s epistle to Hippolytus) seems to follow the earlier rather than either the later Euripidean version or Sophocles’s lost _Phaedra_.

[730] Leo, _De Sen. tragoediis obseruationes criticae_, 1878, p. 133.

[731] Strauss, _op. cit._, esp. pp. 44-57.

[732] _Inst. Or._, X. i. 98.

[733] Leo considers it in part spurious, _Obseruationes_, vol. i. of his edn., p. 74; _cf._ Summers, _C.R._, XIX. (1905), p. 40. Ackermann maintains the genuineness of the whole, _De Senecae Hercule Oetaeo_, Marb., 1905; _cf._ his _Der leidende Hercules des S._, _Rh. Mus._, lxvii. (1912), pp. 425-471.

[734] _Herc. Oet._, 237-253.

[735] Schreiner, _op. cit._, p. 9.

[736] _Med._, 408-410.

[737] _Med._, 82 sqq.

[738] _Med._, 607-669.

[739] _Med._, 744-747; _H.F._, 750-756; _Phaed._, 1230-1237; _Agam._, 15-21; _Thyest._ 1-12; _Oct._, 619-623.

[740] _Phaed._, 1256 _sqq._

[741] _Agam._, 26-27.

[742] _Phaed._, 350-351:

“amat insani Belua ponti Lucaeque boues.”

[743] _H.F._, 1259-1261.

[744] _E.g._ _Phoen._, 313-319.

[745] _E.g._ _Phaed._, 132-135. There are many _sententiae_ in her speech of remonstrance 129-177.

[746]

_Phaed._, 211: “cur sancta paruis habitat in tectis Venus?”

215: “quod non potest uult posse qui nimium potest.”

[747] _E.g._ conception of a tranquil sea, expressed three times over in _Tro._, 199-203; or notion of the abasement of the proud repeated again and again, _Agam._, 79-107.

[748] _Tro._, 255 _sqq._:

“Quid caede dira nobiles clari ducis Aspergis umbras? noscere hoc primum decet, Quid facere uictor debeat, uictus pati. Violenta nemo imperia continuit diu, Moderata durant; quoque Fortuna altius Euexit ac leuauit humanas opes, Hoc se magis supprimere felicem decet Variosque casus tremere metuentem deos Nimium fauentes. magna momento obrui Vincendo didici. Troia nos tumidos facit Nimium ac feroces? stamus hoc Danai loco Vnde illa cecidit. fateor, aliquando impotens Regno ac superbus altius memet tuli; Sed fregit illos spiritus haec quae dare Potuisset aliis causa, Fortunae fauor. Tu me superbum, Priame, tu timidum facis!... Equidem fatebor (pace dixisse hoc tua, Argiua tellus, liceat) affligi Phrygas Vincique uolui: ruere et aequari solo Vtinam arcuissem ... exactum satis Poenarum et ultra est. regia ut uirgo occidat Tumuloque donum detur et cineres riget Et facinus atrox caedis ut thalamos uocent Non patiar. in me culpa cunctorum redit: Qui non uetat peccare, cum possit, iubet.”

[749] _Tro._, 510-512:

“Fata si miseros iuuant, Habes salutem; fata si uitam negant, Habes sepulchrum.”

[750] _Tro._, 869: “Optanda mors est sine metu mortis mori.”

[751] _Tro._, 917-922.

[752] _Tro._, 792.

[753] _Tro._, 489:

“Haec causa multos una ab interitu arcuit, Credi perisse.”

[754] _Med._, 159 _sqq._

[755]

_Agam._, 115: “Per scelera semper sceleribus tutum est iter.” 130: “Quod ratio non quit saepe sanauit mora.” 144: “Vbi animus errat, optimum est casum sequi.” 259: “Nec regna socium ferre nec taedae sciunt.”

_Thy._, 487: “Serum est cauendi tempus in mediis malis.”

_Phaed._, 249: “Pars sanitatis uelle sanari fuit.” 598: “Honesta quaedam scelera successus facit.” 607: “Curae leues locuntur, ingentes stupent.”

[756]

_Med._, 55: “Quae scelere parta est, scelere linquenda est domus” 503: “Tibi innocens sit quisquis est pro te nocens.”

[757] _H.F._, 135-138:

“Aspersa die dumeta rubent Phoebique fugit reditura soror. Labor exoritur durus et omnes Agitat curas aperitque domos.”

[758] _Med._, 375-379:

“Venient annis saecula seris Quibus Oceanus uincula rerum Laxet et ingens pateat tellus Tethysque nouos detegat orbes Nec sit terris ultima Thule.”

[759] _Tro._, 378-381, 397-398, 402-408:

“... Post mortem nihil est ipsaque mors nihil Velocis spatii meta nouissima.... Rumores uacui uerbaque inania Et par sollicito fabula somnio.... Quaeris quo iaceas post obitum loco? Quo non nata iacent.”

[760] _Thy._, 344 _sqq._

[761] _Agam._, 605-611:

“Perrumpet omne seruitium Contemptor leuium deorum, Qui uoltus Acherontis atri, Qui Styga tristem non tristis uidet Audetque uitae ponere finem. Par ille regi, par superis erit. O quam miserum est nescire mori!”

[762] _E.g._ _Phoen._, 89-103, 146, 151-153.

[763] _Phaed._, 878: “mori uolenti desse mors numquam potest.”

[764] _E.g._ _Epist. Mor._, xii. 10, where “patent undique ad libertatem uiae multae, breues, faciles” significantly resembles _Phoen._, 153, “mille ad hanc (_sc._ mortem) aditus patent”; xiii. 14, lviii. 36. Seneca disapproved of a merely capricious suicide, _Epist. Mor._, xxiv. 25, xxx. 15.

[765] _Phaed._, 972-988.

[766] _Thy._, 396-400 (“Quiritibus ... plebeius”); _H.F._, 164, 839; _Phoen._, 103 (“ius uitae ac necis”).

[767]

_Med._, 109: “rara est in dominos iusta licentia,” and 113: “festa dicax fundat conuicia fescenninus.”

[768] _H.F._, 650-829.

[769] _Tro._, 442-491.

[770] They are all cases of words of four syllables, like _nepotibus_, _Med._, 512. Hardie, _Res Metrica_, 1920, p. 83, adds from _H.F._, 20, _nuribus impiis_, if that is the right reading.

[771] _Med._, 740-751; _Oed._, 223-232; _Phaed._, 1201-1212.

[772] Butler, _Post-Augustan Poetry_, pp. 41-42, 71.

[773] Ellis, _Catullus in XIVth. Cent._, Oxf., 1905, pp. 10-11.

[774] _E.g._ _Seneca: His Tenne Tragedies_, Lond., 1581. (The _Octauia_ is included, wrongly).

[775] _E.g._ 152, Nero is called “iuuenis infandi ingeni.”

[776] Hardie, _Res Metr._, p. 67; _cf._ p. 84 _n._

[777] Nordmeyer, _De Oct. Fab._, Leipz., 1892. For views on this over-discussed question, see Schanz, _op. cit._, pp. 75-76.

[778] Since I wrote this I have noted with satisfaction P. J. Enk’s recent conclusions, in _Mnem._ liv., “De Octauia Praetexta,” that the play was written not long after Nero’s death and by an author well acquainted with Seneca’s tragedies.

[779] _Oct._, 310-375.

[780] _Oct._, 174 _sqq._

[781] _Oct._, 915-916, and she uses the Greek word ἀηδών.

[782] Plin., _Ep._, VI. xxi. 2.

[783] Sen., _Ep. Mor._, viii. 8.

[784] Suet., _Nero_, xi.

[785] Suet., _Nero_, xxxix.

[786] _Ib._, x.: “declamauit saepius publice; recitauit et carmina non modo domi sed et in theatro.”

[787] _Ib._, xxi.

[788] _Ib._, xlvi.

[789] Tac., _Ann._, XI. xiii.

[790] Tac., _Dial._, 2, 3 and 11.

[791] Juv., VII. 12 and 72-73; Mart., XI. ix. and x., with vet. schol. ad Juv., I. 20; Ribbeck, _Trag. Rom. Fr._, p. 269. It has been previously indicated that Martial connects Ligurinus and Bassus with a _Thyestes_, p. 257 _supra_.

[792] MSS. give the Etrurian form _Aules_.

[793] Text: P. Pithoeus, Par., 1585; Casaubon, Par., 1605, etc.; cum schol., Jahn, Leipz., 1843; ed. ii., Bücheler, 1886; ed. iv., Leo, 1910; w. tr. and comm., Conington, ed. Nettleship, Oxf., 1872, 1874 and 1893; Gildersleeve, N.Y., 1875; étude et trad. fr., Rousse, Par., 1884; w. Juvenal, Owen, Oxf., 1902; Némethy, Budapest, 1903; in _Corp. P.L._, II., Summers, Lond., 1905; Santi Consoli, Rome, 1911; w. Juvenal, Eng. tr. G. G. Ramsay (Loeb), Lond., 1918; Cartault, tr. fr., Par., 1920.

To consult: Nisard, _Études sur les poètes lat. de la décadence_, Par., 1834, 1849, 1867, etc.; Martha, “Un Poète Stoïcien” in _Les Moralistes sous l’emp. rom._, 1865, etc.; Wilcke, _Quid elocutio Juvenalis a Persiana differat_, Stendal, 1869; Werther, _De Persio Horatii imitatore_, Halle, 1883; Sorn, _Die Sprache d. Satirikers_ P., Laibach, 1890; Morgan, _A Bibliography of P._, Camb., U.S.A., 1893; Gérard, _Le latin vulgaire et le langage familier dans les satires de P._ in _Le Musée belge_, 1897; Burnier, _Le rôle des satires de P. dans le développement du neo-Stoïcisme_, Chaux-de-fonds, 1909 (bibliog.); Schönbach, _De Persii in saturis sermone et arte_, Leipz., 1910; Villeneuve, _Essai sur Perse_, Par., 1918 (bibliog.).

_Transns._: Batten Holyday, ed. 3, 1635; Dryden, 1693; Thos. Sheridan (prose), 1728; Wm. Drummond, 1797; and in Conington’s and G. G. Ramsay’s edns.

[794] Lehmann, “Zur erklär. d. _Sat. des P._,” _Philol._, vi. (1851) p. 432.

[795] _Sat._, III. 44-51.

[796] Plin., _Ep._, I. xiii. 3: Tac., _Ann._, XIV. 19; _Dial. Or._, 23.

[797] Suet., _Ner._, xxxvii.

[798] _Vita Persii_: “Cognouit et Senecam sed non ut caperetur eius ingenio.”

[799] Cornutus: _Theol. Graecae Compendium_, Lang, Lpz., 1881; Rappe, _De L. Annaeo Cornuto_, Lpz., 1906; Villeneuve, _Essai sur Perse_, pp. 47-102.

[800] V. 22 _sqq._, reading in 34-35:

“Cumque iter ambiguum est et uitae nescius error Diducit trepidas ramosa in compita mentes.”

[801] V. 41-46:

“Tecum etenim longos memini consumere soles, Et tecum primas epulis decerpere noctes....”

[802] These may have been sketches of the nature of Lucilius’s _Journey to the Sicilian Straits_ or Horace’s _Journey to Brundisium_.

[803] _Inst. Or._, X. i. 94: “Multum et uerae gloriae, quamuis uno libro, Persius meruit.”

[804] Pretor, _C.R._, xxi. (1907) pp. 72 _sqq._, argues that the choliambics are a prologue, and, being intended as a blind to safeguard the author against Nero’s vengeance for alleged allusions to the emperor, contain deliberate untruths, _e.g._ that the writer has no capacity for authorship and is only half-educated or at least provincial (_semi-paganus_).

[805] I. 76-78.

[806] I. 99-102: “Torua Mimalloneis inplerunt cornua bombis,” etc. The lines have been ascribed to Nero, but more probably are Persius’s own parodies on the Catullian and pre-Augustan type of poetry favoured by many contemporaries who were court-favourites.

[807] I. 114-118.

[808] II. 61 _sqq._

[809] III. 33-34:

“caret culpa, nescit quid perdat, et alto Demersus summa rursum non bullit in unda.”

[810] III. 38: “Virtutem uideant intabescantque relicta.”

[811] III. 66-67:

“Discite, o miseri, et causas cognoscite rerum; Quid sumus et quidnam uicturi gignimur.”

[812] IV. 23-24.

[813] IV. 52: “Tecum habita: noris quam sit tibi curta supellex.”

[814] V. 52: “Mille hominum species, et rerum discolor usus.”

[815] V. 93-95.

[816] V. 119 _sqq._

[817] Macleane’s is a plausible theory that “uende animam lucro” (l. 75) begins a new branch of the subject which is left unfinished. Pretor (introd. xix.-xxii.) argues that the gap comes earlier in Sat. vi. Jahn, who considered Sat. vi. to be among the first composed and our Sat. i. to have been among the last, believes that the sixth is complete as we have it and that the incompleteness is in Sat. i.

[818] Fiske regards Lucilius as a source for Persius second in importance only to Horace. _Transns. Amer. Philol. Assoc._, vol. 40, pp. 121-150.

[819] Hor., _A.P._, 102:

“Si uis me flere, dolendum est Primum ipsi tibi”;

Pers. I. 91:

“Verum nec nocte paratum Plorabit qui me uolet incuruasse querela.”

Other phrases in Persius’s first satire which may be instructively compared with their Horatian bases are l. 43: “scombros metuentia carmina”; l. 64: “ut per leue seueros effundat iunctura ungues”; l. 106: “pluteum caedit nec demorsos sapit ungues.”

[820] Villeneuve, _op. cit._, p. 179 _sqq._

[821] Villeneuve, _op. cit._, p. 165.

[822] Hor., _Sat._ II. ii. 60: “Bioneis sermonibus et sale nigro.” The varied linguistic elements and polemic artifices of the lost moral disquisitions of Bion are partially discernible in the remains of Teles, an obscure Cynic of the 3rd cent. B.C. For Bion, see Villeneuve, _op. cit._, pp. 130-135.

[823] Pers., I. 44: “Quisquis es, o, modo quem ex aduerso dicere feci”; _cf._ _1 Corinthians_ xv. 35-37.

[824] Lyd., _De Mag._, I. 41: Πέρσιος δὲ τὸν ποιητὴν Σώφρονα μιμήσασθαι θέλων τὸ Λυκόφρονος παρῆλθεν ἀμαυρόν.

[825] “Obuoluisti ipse te caeca nocte.... Nolebas intellegi, forte et tu non intellegebas!... Latebas intra te, ne te curiosa et erudita inueniret sagacitas. Eras ipse inuolucrum tibi.”

[826] V. 92: “Dum ueteres auias tibi de pulmone reuello.”

[827] I. 58:

“O Jane, a tergo quem nulla ciconia pinsit, Nec manus auriculas imitari mobilis albas, Nec linguae quantum sitiat canis Apula tantae.”

[828] _E.g._ I. 9: “istud uiuere triste”; I. 27: “scire tuum”; I. 122: “hoc ridere meum”; _cf._ Hor., _Epist._ I. vii. 27: “reddes dulce loqui: reddes ridere decorum.”

[829] I. 15-21.

[830] III. 1-6.

[831] III. 10-14.

[832] III. 43-51.

[833] III. 78-85.

[834] VI. 43-49.

[835] VI. 29-31.

[836] III. 105-106.

[837] I. 108-109.

[838] II. 50-51.

[839] V. 5-18.

[840] V. 13: “nec _scloppo_ (? stloppo) tumidas intendis rumpere buccas.” The loan-words from vulgar Latin in Persius (e.g. diminutives and obscenities) are such as occur in comedy and satirists like Lucilius and Horace. He also shares colloquialisms (_ebullire_, etc.) with contemporaries like Petronius in the _Satyricon_ and Seneca in the _Apocolocyntosis_.

[841] Specified in the Latin of the _Vita_ as _Neronem principem illius temporis_.

[842] Pichon, _Hist. d. l. litt. lat._, p. 553: “Sans nommer Néron en toutes lettres (la chose eût été impossible) Perse le met en scène sous le nom d’Alcibiade.” Waltz, _Vie de Sénèque_, “_L’Alcibiade est Néron, comme l’a pensé Casaubon_.” Kukula’s _Persius und Nero_ (Graz, 1923) treats the first satire as containing a definite attack on Nero.

[843] _Vita_: “Editum librum continuo mirari homines et diripere coeperunt”; _cf._ Quint., _I. Or._, X. i. 94; Mart., IV. xxix. 7.

[844] Rousse, _Perse_, p. 135.

[845] Schanz, _Gesch. d. röm. Litt._, II. 2, p. 85.

[846] Sorn, _Die Sprache des Persius_, p. 31: “es ist ein Meer von Dunkelheit.”

[847] G. G. Ramsay, _Juv. and Pers._, Loeb, 1918, Introd., pp. xxx.-xxxii.

[848] Vacca, _Vit. Luc._, mentions his “studium uitae quietioris.”

[849] Hieron., _Chron. Euseb._, ad. ann. Abr. 2079: “M. Annaeus Lucanus Cordubensis poeta in Pisoniana coniuratione deprehensus brachium ad secandas uenas medico praebuit”; _cf._ Suet., _Vit. Luc._: “brachia ad secandas uenas praebuit medico.”

[850] Stat., _Sil._, II. vii.; Mart., I. lxi.; VII. xxi., xxii., xxiii.; X. lxiv.; XIV. cxciv.

[851] Tac., _Ann._, XV. xlix., lvi., lvii., lxx.; _Dial._ xx.

[852] Text: Ed. pr., Rome, 1469; Grotius, Antw., 1614, 1625, 1639; Farnaby, Eng. ed., 1618; Amst., 1715; Korrte (= Cortius), 1726; Oudendorp (index), Leyd., 1728; Burman, Leyd., 1740; c. notis Grotii et Bentleii, Strawb. Hill, 1760; Glasg., 1816; Weber, 3 vols., Lpz., 1821-1831 (scholia and Korrte’s comment.); Lemaire, 2 vols., 1830-1832; Weise, 1835; Haskins (introd. by Heitland), Lond., 1887; Hosius, Lpz., 1892 and 1905; ed. 3, 1913; Francken, 2 vols., Leyd., 1896-1897 (bibliog.); Heitland in Postgate’s _C.P.L._, 1905; Housman, Oxf., 1926. Bk. I., Lejay, Par., 1894 (important introd.); VII., Postgate, Camb., 1896; VIII., do., 1917. Fragments: Bährens’s _Frag. P. Rom._, 1886, pp. 365-368. Transns. into verse: Gorges, 1614 [rare]; May, 1627, ed. 2, 1631 (heroic couplets); Rowe, 1719 (heroic couplets); Ridley, 1896 (blank). Studies, etc.: Weber, _Vitae Lucani collectae_, progr., Marb., 1856-1858. Genthe, _De Luc. uita et scriptis_, diss., Berl., 1859; _Scholia uet. e codice Montepessulano_, 1868; Usener, _Commenta Bernensia_, 1869; Nisard, _Études ... sur les poètes latins de la décadence_, ed. 3, 1867, ii. pp. 85-454, ed. 4, 1878. On hist. sources: Baier, _De Liuio Lucani ... auctore_, diss., Bresl., 1874; Singels, _De L. fontibus et fide_, diss., Leyd., 1884; Westerburg, _Luc. Florus und Pseudo-Victor_, _Rh. Mus._, xxxviii. pp. 34-39; Giani, _La Farsaglia_, etc., Turin, 1888; Ziehen, _Luc., als Historiker_ in _Berichte d. freien Hochstiftes_, Frankft.-a-M., 1890; Vitelli, _Sulla composizione e publicazione della Fars._ in _Studi italiani di fil. class._, VIII. pp. 33-72, 1900; _Studi sulle storiche fonti della Fars._, _op. cit._ X. pp. 359-429; Ussani, _Sul valore storico del poema Lucaneo_ in _Atti del congresso internaz. di scienze storiche_, II. iv., Rome, 1903; Jullian, _Lucain historien_ in _Rev. des Études anciennes_, Bord., I. 4, 1900. On philos. sources: Souriau, _De deorum ministeriis in Phars._, thèse, Par., 1885; Oettl, _Lucans philosophische Weltanschauung_, prog., Brixen, 1888; Millard, _Lucani sententia de deis et fato_, diss., Utr., 1891. On lit. sources: Diels, _Seneca und L., Abhandl. der Berl. Akad._, 1886; Hosius, _L. u. seine Quellen_, _Rh. Mus._, XLVIII. pp. 380-397, 1893; Heitland’s introd., Haskins’s ed., pp. cviii.-cxxxi. On the whole question of sources: Pichon, _Les Sources de L._, Par., 1912; on Stoicism in general: E. V. Arnold, _Roman Stoicism_, Camb., 1911.

[853] _Ad Helu._, xviii. 4, 5.

[854] Bährens, _P.L. Min._, 1879-1883, IV. p. 77: _cf._ p. 247 _supra_.

[855] Probus took Persius and Lucan to be of the same time of life; but Persius was Lucan’s senior by about five years. Prob., _Vit. Persii_: “Cognouit per Cornutum etiam Annaeum Lucanum, aequauum auditorem Cornuti. Lucanus adeo mirabatur scripta (Persii) Flacci ut uix retineret se recitante eo cum clamore quin illa esse uera poemata diceret, sua ipse ludos faceret.” (_v.l._ “recitante eo de more.”)

[856] Suet., _Vit. Luc._: “ut praefatione quadam aetatem, et initia sua cum Vergilio comparans ausus sit dicere ‘et quantum mihi restat ad Culicem?’”

[857] Vacca, _Vit. Luc._: “puerili mutato in senatorium cultum et in notitiam Caesaris Neronis facile peruenit.”

[858] Suet., _Vit. Luc._: “ad extremum signifer Pisonianae coniurationis exstitit.”

[859] _Ib._, “matrem quoque innoxiam inter socios nominauit”; _cf._ Tac., _Ann._, XV. lvi. Vacca mentions no such incident.

[860] _Ann._, XV. lxx.: “recordatus carmen a se compositum, quo uolneratum militem per eiusmodi mortis imaginem obisse tradiderat, uersus ipsos rettulit, eaque illi suprema uox fuit.”

[861] _Phars._, III. 638-641; VII. 608-615; IX. 811-814.

[862] _E.g._ by May in the _Life_ prefixed to his translation.

[863] Stat., _Sil._, II. vii. 92: “Cur saeua uice magna non senescunt?”

[864] _Sil._, II. vii. 54-63.

[865] _Vit. Luc._, _ad fin._: “non fastidiendi quidem omnes, tales tamen ut _Belli Ciuilis_ uideatur accessio.”

[866] Genthe, _De L. uita et scriptis_, p. 61, plausibly refers to the _Saturnalia_ the coarse line quoted by Martial, X. lxiv. 6.

[867] What Schanz (_Gesch. d. röm. Lit._) calls “Tanzstücke,” citing Jahn’s description “in usum pantomimorum scriptae,” _Proleg. in Pers._, p. xxxiv.

[868] That is a possible correction of _appāmata_ in the best MSS.

[869] Tac., _Ann._, XIII. xliv. Sagitta in presence of a freedman killed a woman who would not marry him: the freedman sought to take the guilt on himself, but a maid revealed the truth, and Sagitta was brought to trial.

[870] Pichon, _Les Sources de Lucain_, p. 53, footnote: “ces deux poèmes n’en forment peut-être qu’un seul.” In noticing Pichon’s valuable work (_C.R._, xxvii. 1, 1913, pp. 25-28), I mentioned what appeared to me the incredibility of this hypothesis.

[871] Bährens, _F.P.R._, pp. 365-368.

[872] “Pharsalia” is borrowed from IX. 985; the title in MSS. is _De Bello Ciuili_.

[873] I. 125-126:

“Nec quemquam iam ferre potest Caesarue priorem Pompeiusue parem.”

[874] I. 129-130.

[875] I. 135: “stat magni nominis umbra.”

[876] I. 144 _sqq._; “sed nescia uirtus stare loco ... gaudensque uiam fecisse ruina.”

[877] I. 185 _sqq._

[878] II. 1415:

“Sit subitum quodcumque paras: sit caeca futuri Mens hominum fati: liceat sperare timenti.”

[879] II. 52-63.

[880] II. 258-259.

[881] II. 381 _sqq._

[882] III. 1-7.

[883] III. 399-421. Possibly the miraculous fire in the forest was suggested to Lucan by Sen., _Thyest._, 674: “excelsae trabes ardent sine igne.”

[884] IV. 373 _sqq._

[885] IV. 575-581.

[886] IV. 702-710.

[887] V. 476: “Caesaris adtonitam miscenda ad proelia mentem.”

[888] V. 731 _sqq._

[889] VI. 67-68.

[890] VI. 191-192, 198-199, 205, 208, 219.

[891] VII. 207 _sqq._

[892] VII. 24 _sqq._

[893] VII. 61.

[894] VII. 129-130.

[895] VII. 252: “Nil opus est uotis: iam fatum accersite ferro.”

[896] VII. 278: “Et primo ferri motu prosternite mundum.”

[897] VII. 349: “Causa iubet melior superos sperare secundos.”

[898] VII. 440-445.

[899] VII. 457-459.

[900] VII. 695.

[901] VIII. 5-6.

[902] VIII. 76-78.

[903] VIII. 491 _sqq._

[904] VIII. 673.

[905] VIII. 798-799.

[906] Cato, as hero of the desert, receives an epithet found nowhere else—_hareniuagus_, IX. 941.

[907] IX. 556 _sqq._

[908] IX. 566 _sqq._

[909] IX. 980 _sqq._

[910] X. 444-446.

[911] X. 528-529.

[912] VI. 813-814.

[913] _Op. cit._, p. 270. The late Canon Cruickshank, Professor of Greek in Durham, saw a possible limit in the reference to Munda (45 B.C.) as the last battle of the civil wars, I. 40. But some take _ultima_ there as “most distant,” and Lucan, in spite of _ultima_, goes on to refer to Mutina (43) and Perusia (41 B.C.).

[914] _Cf._ the language regarding portentous constellations in _Phars._, I. 527-529, with Sen., _N.Q._, VI. iii. 3 and VII. xx. 3.

[915] For summary of evidence, see Schanz, _op. cit._, pp. 104-105.

[916] _Satyr._, 118.

[917] Livy’s books from outbreak of the civil war till Caesar’s death were cix.-cxvi.

[918] Baier, _De Liuio ... Lucani auctore_, 1874; Pichon, _op. cit._, 1912.

[919] Sen., _Contr._, X. _praef._ 2; _Suas._, vi. 22.

[920] Sen., _Ep._, c. 9.

[921] See Heitland’s _Introd._

[922] Pichon’s explanation of the _picta arma_ of the Lingones as “une allusion aux boucliers ornés d’émail que l’on fabriquait à Bibracte” must interest anyone who has seen the Aeduan antiquities from Mont Beuvray at Autun.

[923] Pichon believes this “sans doute,” _op. cit._, p. 145.

[924] Lucan’s influence on Appian, Dio Cassius and Orosius, asserted by Ussani, is denied on good grounds by Pichon (_op. cit._, pp. 81 _sqq._). Westerburg (_Rh. M._, xxxviii. pp. 34 _sqq._) maintains that Florus drew from Lucan, and so did not simply summarize Livy. Against this theory powerful arguments are arrayed by Pichon (_op. cit._, pp. 69-81). Postgate (ed. Bk. VIII., postscript to introd.) remarks that much of the difficulty would be removed by the assumption that the epitomator of Livy used Lucan as well as Livy and that Florus used the epitome.

[925] Pichon, _op. cit._, p. 226; Heitland’s _Introd._, p. cviii. _sqq._

[926] Fronto, 157 n.: “is initio carminis sui septem primis uersibus nihil aliud quam _bella plus quam ciuilia_ interpretatus est.”

[927] Heitland, _Introd._, p. cxxviii.

[928] _Rh. Mus._, XLVIII. p. 393 _sqq._; Pichon, _op. cit._, p. 235 _sqq._

[929] References are given in Heitland’s _Introd._

[930] VIII. 161-184; X. 172 _sqq._

[931] VII. 144 _sqq._; _ib._, 777 _sqq._

[932] II. 93; III. 306. So it involves a little mythological lore to understand why, among omens of trouble, the flame announcing the close of the Latin festival is said to be parted into two, “copying the Theban pyres” (I. 550-552).

[933] VIII. 458 _sqq._

[934] IV. 589 _sqq._; IX. 359 _sqq._

[935] II. 173 _sqq._; IV. 566 _sqq._; VI. 529-569; VIII. 667-691; VIII. 777-778; IX. 766-781.

[936] II. 201 _sqq._

[937] II. 172.

[938] III. 567 _sqq._

[939] III. 723-751.

[940] VIII. 851 _sqq._

[941] V. 593 _sqq._

[942] VI. 45-46.

[943] VII. 851-852.

[944] He carries condensation too far, e.g. II. 35, _diuisere deos_=“they divided the gods,” _i.e._ Roman ladies took their prayers to different temples; or he uses an over-fanciful conceit, _e.g._ II. 72, _depositum_ applied to Marius, the exile, as “the deposit” entrusted by Fortune to the marshes. But such phrases have at least the intended quality of being striking.

[945] V. 455.

[946] Quint., X. i. 90: “ardens et concitatus.”

[947] Text: Wernsdorf, _Poet. Lat. Min._, 1780, vol. ii.; Gläser, Gött., 1842; Bährens’s _Poet. Lat. Min._, vol. iii.; _Calp. et Nemesian._, Schenkl, Prag., 1885, and by same editor in Postgate’s _C.P.L._, ii.; Keene, Lond., 1887. In Eng. verse (octosyll.), E. J. L. Scott, Lond., 1890.

Other wks.: Haupt, _De carm. bucol. Calp. et Nemes._, Leipz., 1854; Append. _On Later Bucolic Poets of Rome_ in Conington’s Virgil, vol. i., with summary of Haupt’s arguments.

[948] iv. 84:

“At mihi qui nostras praesenti numine terras Perpetuamque regit iuuenili robore pacem, Laetus et Augusto felix arrideat ore....”

vii. 6: “Quae patula iuuenis deus edit harena.”

[949] vii. 83-84:

“... Ac nisi me uisus decepit, in uno Et Martis uultus et Apollinis esse putaui.”

[950] i. 42:

“Aurea secura cum pace renascitur aetas, Et redit ad terras tandem squalore situque Alma Themis posito, iuuenemque beata secuntur Saecula, maternis causam qui uicit _Iulis_” (_v.l._ in ulnis!).

[951] _Ecl._ i. 77-83; Pliny, _N.H._, II. 25, 92; Suet., _Claud._, xlvi.; Dio., lx. 35.

[952] _Ecl._ vii. 23-24:

“Vidimus in caelum _trabibus spectacula textis_ Surgere, Tarpeium prope despectantia culmen”;

Tac., _Ann._, XIII. xxxi. (A.D. 57): “nisi cui libeat laudandis fundamentis et _trabibus_ quis molem amphitheatri apud campum Martis Caesar extruxerat”; Suet., _Nero_, xii.: “munere quod _in amphitheatro ligneo_ regione Martii campi intra anni spatium fabricato dedit....” The games instituted by Nero are mentioned in Suet., _Nero_, xi.

[953] iv. 36-42.

[954] Sarpe, _Quaest. philol._, Rostock, 1819. Keene, in introd. to his edn., agrees, p. 12. Summers, _Silver Age of Latin Lit._, p. 91, thinks that to identify the patron with Seneca or Calpurnius Piso is sheer caprice.

[955] iv. 53 _sqq._

[956] iv. 158-159.

[957] iv. 64-66:

“Magna petis, Corydon, si Tityrus esse laboras: Ille fuit uates sacer et qui posset auena Praesonuisse chelyn.”

[958] i. 11-12:

“Bullantes ubi fagus aquas radice sub ipsa Protegit et ramis errantibus implicat umbras.”

[959] ii. 68-75.

[960] iv. 152-159.

[961] vii. 83-84.

[962] The influence of Calpurnius is illustrated in Prof. Mustard’s notes to his edns. of _The Eclogues of Baptista Mantuanus_, 1911; _The Piscatory Eclogues of Sannazaro_, 1914; _The Eclogues of Andrelinus and Arnolletus_, 1918.

[963] Text: ed. pr. in Sichard’s ed. of Ovid, Bas., 1527; (with Lucan) Corte, Leipz., 1726; Held, Bresl., 1831; Weber, cum proleg., Marb., 1859; Bährens’s _P.L.M._, 1879, vol. i.

[964] Haupt, _Opusc._, I. p. 391; _cf._ Lachmann’s comment on Lucretius, ed. 3, 1866, p. 326, “laudator Pisonis Calpurnius.”

[965] There are three instances, two in the first foot (_atque illos_, 24; _quare age_, 81) and one in the third (_et te credibile est_, 168), among the 261 lines; there are eight elisions, all in the first foot (eleven, if three doubtful cases be admitted) among the 759 lines of Calp. Siculus.

[966] _De Laude Pis._, 248: “Tu mihi Maecenas tereti cantabere uersu.” Calp. Sic., iv. 152: “tereti decurrent carmine uersus.”

[967] For such resemblances, see _Laus Pisonis_ by Gladys Martin, Cornell Univ. diss., 1917.

[968] _Ann._, XV. xlviii.

[969] l. 29: “Mitia legitimo sub iudice bella mouere.”

[970] l. 47: “Flet si flere iubes, gaudet gaudere coactus.”

[971] l. 132: “Obsequiumque doces et amorem quaeris amando.”

[972] _De Laude Pis._, 166, 171, 242. _Chelys_ is, except for Ovid’s use, post-Augustan; _e.g._ Calp. Sic., iv. 66, and in Statius often.

[973] Bährens, _P.L.M._, iii. 60-64.

[974] Schanz, _op. cit._, VIII. ii. 2, p. 98.

[975] Groag, art., “Calpurnius Piso” in Pauly-Wissowa, _Realencycl._, III. 1379; Bücheler, _Rh. Mus._, xxvi., p. 235.

[976] Text: (first published with Virgil), Scaliger, Lyon, 1572; Gorallus (_i.e._ Leclerc), Amst., 1703, 1715 (“P. Cornelii Seueri _Aetna_ et fragm....”); Wernsdorf’s _P.L.M._, iv., 1785; Munro, Camb., 1867; Bährens’s _P.L.M._, ii. 88, 1880 (in _App. Verg._); Sudhaus, Leipz., 1898; Ellis, 1901, and by same editor in Postgate’s _C.P.L._, vol. ii., 1905; Lenchantin de Gubernatis, Turin, 1911; _L’Etna_ (texte et trad.), Vessereau, Par., 1923 (defends Virgilian authorship).

[977] Wight Duff, _A Lit. Hist. of Rome to Close of Golden Age_, 1909, pp. 492-495, for previous discussion of _Aetna_.

[978] _Poema de Aetna monte Vergilio auctori praecipue tribuendum_, diss., Krak., 1882. Brakman, _Mnem._, li. 2 (1923), holding that the treatment is based on Posidonius and that style and metre are Lucretian, marshals internal evidence to support a date about 30 B.C.

[979] _Studia in Aetn. collata_, Erlang., 1896.

[980] _Rh. Mus._, liv. 7.

[981] Gross, _De metonymiis lat. a deorum nominibus petitis_ (diss., Hal., 19 (1911), p. 296), seeks on ground of resemblances between _Octauia_ and _Aetna_ to suggest that the poet of the _Aetna_ was the borrower, and wrote between A.D. 69 and 79.

[982] Sen., _Ep. Mor._, lxxix. 4-7.

[983] _Gesch. d. röm. Lit._, 1910, § 307: “ein inhaltlich sehr anziehendes kleines Lehrgedicht.”

[984] 616-617:

“Defectum raptis illum sua carmina tardant: Hic uelox minimo properat sub pondere pauper.”

I should like to give the poet the credit of sarcastically regarding poems as heavy enough to be a hindrance; but the _carmina_ are possibly charms or spells to which recourse might be had in terror.

[985] 628-629:

“Parcite, auara manus, dulces attollere praedas: Illis diuitiae solae materque paterque.”

[986] Text: Bährens, _P.L.M._, iii., pp. 7-59: _Italici Ilias Lat._ (praef., app. crit.), Plessis, Paris, 1885; _cf._ Tolkiehn, _Homer u. die röm. Poesie_, 1900, pp. 96-119.

[987] Wight Duff, _Lit. Hist. of Rome_, 119 _sqq._; Bährens, _Fragm. P.L._, p. 37 _sqq._

[988] Bährens, _Fragm. P.L._, p. 281 and p. 283; Wight Duff, _op. cit._, p. 123 and p. 245.

[989] Pers., i. 50; _cf._ i. 4 and Schol. The surviving line—

crudum manduces Priamum Priamique pisinnos,

was intended to translate _Il._, iv. 35—

ὠμὸν βεβρώθοις Πρίαμον Πριάμοιό τε παῖδας.

[990] Sen., _ad Polyb._, viii. 2, xi. 5.

[991] ll. 899-902:

“Quem nisi seruasset magnarum rector aquarum, Vt profugus laetis Troiam repararet in aruis Augustumque genus claris submitteret astris, Non carae gentis nobis mansisset origo.”

[992] _La Poésie latine_, Par., 1909, pp. 528 _sqq._

[993] For a record of the discussions on the acrostics see Schanz, _op. cit._, pp. 121-122.

[994] Tolkiehn, _op. cit._, p. 101, quotes treatises by Paul Verres (1881) and by Altenburg (1890) to suggest that the metre of _Ilias Lat._ is better than that of Silius’s _Punica_. The contention is that Silius would not have written his _magnum opus_ in less careful style than an epitome of the _Iliad_. Galdi, _L’epitome nella letteratura latina_, 1922, p. 244, takes the view of Schanz that _Il. Lat._ is a free and brief rehandling of the Homeric _Iliad_ by a dilettante fond of Virgil and Ovid (“innamorato di Virgilio e di Ovidio”). A real epitome would have had more Homeric colour.

[995] _Rh. Mus._, xxiv. (1870), 492 _sqq._

[996] Hor., _Od._, IV. ix. 5-6; _cf._ Petron., _Sat._, ii.

[997] For reminiscences of Virgil and Ovid, see Plessis, _op. cit._, p. 532.

[998] Teuffel, _op. cit._, § 286, 7-11; Schanz, II. ii. § 360; fragments, Bährens, _F.P. Rom._, 1886, p. 368.

[999] Suet., _Ner._, lii.

[1000] Tac., _Ann._, XIII. iii.

[1001] _N.Q._, I. v. 6.

[1002] Mart., IX. xxvi. 9; Suet., _Dom._, i.; _Ner._, xxi., xxiv., xxxviii.; Tac., _Ann._, XV. xxxix.

[1003] _Vit. Pers._; schol. ad Pers., vi. 1.; Quint., X. i. 96.

[1004] Teuffel. _op. cit._, 304, 1.

[1005] Sen., _N.Q._, VI. ii. 7.

[1006] _Ann._, XIV. xlviii. (A.D. 62), XVI. xxviii. (A.D. 66).

[1007] Quint., X. i. 89; Juv., VII. 79-81.

[1008] Plin., _Ep._, III. v., account of his uncle’s works; V. viii., history compared with oratory; VI. xvi., his uncle’s death; VI. xx., continued account of eruption of Vesuvius.

[1009] Text: Barbarus, Rome, 1492; Dalecampius, Lyons, 1587; Gronov, c. not. varior., Leyd., 1669; Harduinus, Par., 1685 (1723); Franz, c. not. Harduini et varior., 10 vols., Leipz., 1778-1791; Sillig, 8 vols., Gotha, 1851-1858; Jan, Lpz., 1854-1865; ed. 3, Mayhoff, 1906 _sqq._; Detlefsen, Berl., 1866-1882, and crit. ed. of geog. bks. (II. 242–VI.), Berl., 1905; _Morceaux extraits de Pline_, trad. en fr., Guéroult, ed. augm., Par., 1845; _Chrestomathia Pliniana_, Urlichs, Berl., 1857; Chapters on Hist. of Art (from XXXIV.-XXXVI.), text and tr., Jex-Blake, introd. and comm., Sellers, Lond., 1896.

Trans.: Philemon Holland, Lond., 1601; ed. 2, 1634; Bostock and Riley, Lond., 6 vols., 1898, etc.

On his science: _Plinius u. seine Naturgesch. in ihrer Bedeutung für d. Gegenwart_, Dannemann, Jena, 1921.

On sources see bibliogr. in Teuffel, _op. cit._, Schanz, _op. cit._, and footnotes in this chapter.

On style: _Der Stil des ält. Plin._, Joh. Müller, Innsbr., 1883.

[1010] _Ep._, III. v. 7, states that he died in his fifty-sixth year; this was in August, A.D. 79.

[1011] _N.H._, _praef._ 1, _i.e._ like Catullus, a native of Gallia Cisalpina, though not, as some have argued, a fellow-townsman from Verona.

[1012] _N.H._, XXXVII. 81.

[1013] _N.H._, VII. 80; XIII. 83. Pliny calls Pomponius “consularis poeta” and “uatis ciuisque clarissimus.”

[1014] _N.H._, _praef._ 3.

[1015] _N.H._, XXXIII. 143.

[1016] XII. 98 (“... qua Rhenus adluit uidi”); XVI. 2; XXII. 8.

[1017] IX. 14-15; XXXIII. 63; XXXVI. 111.

[1018] _C.I.G._, III. 4536; _Herm._, XIX. (1884), p. 644. Since Hirschfeld, in 1887 (Röm. Mitt. d. deutsch. archäol. Inst., 2, p. 152), opposed Mommsen, several scholars, including Münzer, have also attacked the identification. Fabia and Detlefsen support it.

[1019] _N.H._, II. 150: “ego uidi in Vocontiorum agro”; VII. 36: “ipse in Africa uidi”; XVIII. 183: “in Treuerico agro ...”; Plin., _Ep._, III. v. 17: “cum procuraret in Hispania.”

[1020] _Ep._, III. v. 9.

[1021] _Ep._, VI. xvi.

[1022] _Ep._, III. v. 10.

[1023] _Ib._, 12.

[1024] _Ib._, 16.

[1025] _Ib._, 17.

[1026] _Ib._, 19.

[1027] _Ib._, 1-6.

[1028] _N.H._, VIII. 162.

[1029] _Ib._, XIV. 56.

[1030] Plin., _Ep._, III. v. 4.

[1031] _Ann._, I. lxix.; Symm., _Epist._, IV. 18, 16. Lehnerdt, _Herm._, xlviii., 1913, pp. 274-282, discusses the possible survival of a copy in Germany in the fifteenth century.

[1032] Gell., _N.A._, IX. xvi. 1.

[1033] _I. Or._, III. i. 21; XI. iii. 143, 148.

[1034] _N.H._, _praef._ 28.

[1035] For Pliny’s influence on Nonius Marcellus, Nettleship, _Jrl. of Philol._, XV. 189, “Study of Lat. Gram. in 1st Cent., A.D.”; on Gellius and others, Beck, _Studia Gelliana et Pliniana_, Lpz., 1892.

[1036] _Ann._, XIII. xx. (early in Nero’s reign, A.D. 55); XV. liii. (Piso’s conspiracy, A.D. 65); Hist., III. xxviii. (sack of Cremona, A.D. 69).

[1037] For the theories see Schanz, _op. cit._, pp. 495-496.

[1038] Peter, _Hist. Rom. Frag._, p. 310.

[1039] _N.H._, II. 199: “anno Neronis principis supremo, sicut in rebus eius exposuimus”; _praef._ 20 (of Vespasian and his sons): “Vos omnes, patrem te fratremque, diximus opere iusto, temporum nostrorum orsi a fine Aufidi Bassi.”

[1040] _Ep._, V. viii. 5: “historias et quidem religiosissime scripsit.”

[1041] _Ep._, III. v. 6.

[1042] _Praef._ 2 addresses Titus as “sexies consul.” His poem on the comet belonged to his fifth consulate, _N.H._, II. 89.

[1043] This is Urlichs’s view (_Chrestom._, Einl., p. xiv.): “Vermutlich gab er deshalb vor der Reise (von Rom) nur die erste Dekade vollständig heraus.” Bks. XI. and XII. in Riccard. MS. and the last six bks. in the Bamberg. MS. bear the words “editus post mortem.” _Cf._ Detlefsen, _Untersuch. üb. d. Zusammensetzung der Naturgesch._, 1899, p. 18; Klotz, _Herm._, xlii., 1907, pp. 324-325.

[1044] _Praef._ 33.

[1045] _E.g._ XXXIII. 22, he makes a reference forward to his book on precious stones (viz. XXXVII.): “sicut dicemus in gemmarum uolumine.”

[1046] _Praef._ 17: “ex exquisitis auctoribus C.”

[1047] _Praef._ 21: “est enim benignum, ut arbitror, et plenum ingenui pudoris fateri per quos profeceris.”

[1048] Montigny, _Quaestiones in Plin. nat. historiae de animalibus libros_, Bonn, 1848, p. 7: “uana eruditionis ostentatio.” Rabenhorst, _Die Indices auctorum u. die wirklichen Quellen der N.H._, in _Philol._, 65 (1906), sees in Pliny’s desire to acknowledge literary obligations merely a rhetorical trick.

[1049] VIII. 43-44: “Aristoteles ... uir quem in his magna secuturus ex parte praefandum reor,” i.e. Aristotle is for zoology his great authority, and Pliny proceeds to mention his summary of 50 volumes of Aristotle (“collecta in artum”). Klotz points out that the words in VI. 49, “Demodamas ... quem maxime sequimur,” only mean that Pliny’s material at this point goes back in the last resort to Demodamas (“in letzter Linie zum grössten Teil auf D. zurückgehen,” _Herm._, xlii., p. 327).

[1050] Brunn, _De auctorum indicibus Plinianis disputatio isagogica_, Bonn, 1856.

[1051] On the relation between the order of authors’ names in the special indices and the order followed in a general index common to Pliny’s books on closely allied subjects, see Klotz, _Herm._, xlii., p. 323 (1907), and his _Quaestiones Plinianae Geographicae_, 1906, p. 4 _sqq._

[1052] Numbers often constituted a difficulty in the MSS., and uncertainty led to gaps. Klotz, _loc. cit._, p. 325, cites Dicuil, _De mens. orb. terr._, as aware of imperfections in Pliny MSS. On the figures, _cf._ Birt, _Das antike Buchwesen_, Berl., 1882, p. 333.

[1053] Montigny, _op. cit._, showed that Pliny often named in his indices authors whom he had not directly consulted.

[1054] Teuffel, _op. cit._, 313, 3: “Im übrigen hat die Phantasie des modernen Quellenforschers hier, bei dem Verlust der meisten Quellen, weiten (auch reichlich benutzten) Spielraum.”

[1055] Rose, _Aristoteles Pseudepigraphus_, Lpz., 1863 (“ipsius nunquam Aristotelis Graecos libros adhibuit”); Birt, _De Halieuticis Ouidio falso adscriptis_, Bonn, 1878 (criticized by Aly, _Zur Quellenkritik_, 1885, pp. 17-18); Koebert, _Das Kunstverständnis des Plinius_, pp. 134-146, in _Abhandlungen ... W. v. Christ dargebracht_, 1891; Rabenhorst, _Der ältere Plinius als Epitomator des Verrius Flaccus_, Berl., 1903, and _Die indices auctorum u. die wirklichen Quellen der N.H._, _Philol._, 65, 1906 (examined by Klotz, _Herm._, xlii., p. 324 _sqq._, who declines to regard Pliny as a miserable humbug, “elender Windbeutel” and swaggerer, “Aufschneider.”) For brief account of Verrius Flaccus, see Wight Duff, _Lit. Hist. of Rome to Golden Age_, pp. 629-631; Trogus, _ib._, pp. 631, 636-637; Figulus, _ib._, p. 346; Juba, _ib._, p. 667.

[1056] Aly, _Zur Quellenkritik des älteren Pl._, Marb., 1885; Münzer, _Beiträge zur Quellenkritik der Naturgesch._, Berl., 1897.

[1057] Jahn, _Ueber die Kunsturteile des P._ (in _Berichte d. Sächs. Gesellschaft d. Wissenschaften_, 1850, pp. 105-142.)

[1058] Brieger, _De Fontibus Librorum XXXIII.-XXXVI._ _Nat. Hist. Plin. quatenus ad artem plasticam pertinent_, diss., Greifsw., 1856.

[1059] This is well summarized in E. Sellers’s introd. to _The Elder Pliny’s Chaps. on Hist. of Art_, 1896, where attention is directed to relevant works by Schreiber, Furtwängler, Oehmichen, Robert, L. Urlichs, his son H. L. Urlichs, and others. Münzer, _Zur Kunstgesch. des Pl._, examined the Greek bases for Pliny’s history of art in _Herm._, xxx. (1895), pp. 499-547. To this list may be added Kalkmann’s _Die Quellen der Kunstgesch. des Pl._, Berl., 1898. He denies Pliny’s indebtedness to Pasiteles of Naples included in the indices, and maintains that Pliny here relied instead on a chronological compilation by Apollodorus as well as a current catalogue of artists.

[1060] Aly makes this probable, _op. cit._, pp. 18-19.

[1061] _N.H._, XIV. 44-47. Münzer, _Beitr. zur Quellenkrit._, pp. 12-13.

[1062] _N.H._, XI. 273-276.

[1063] _E.g._ on Pliny’s “Arbeitsweise,” Aly, _op. cit._, pp. 19-21; Münzer, _op. cit._, pp. 3-133; Klotz, _Herm._, xlii. 323-329.

[1064] Plin., _Ep._, III. v. 10: “adnotabat excerpebatque.”

[1065] Furtwängler, _Pl. u. seine Quellen üb. die bildenden Künste_, in _Jahrb. für klass. Phil._, Supplbd. ix., Lpz., 1877, p. 4 _sqq._, regards Pliny’s mode of compilation as having been “nach einer unter Rubriken geordneten Excerptensammlung.”

[1066] _Cf._ his nephew’s description, _Ep._, III. v. 17: “electorum commentarios ... opisthographos quidem et minutissimis scriptos.”

[1067] _Op. cit._, pp. 20-21.

[1068] Since Aly wrote in 1885, the claims of Juba as a source have been pitched higher: Münzer, _op. cit._, 411-422.

[1069] II. 167-170.

[1070] _N.H._, II. 54: “macti ingenio este, caeli interpretes, rerumque naturae capaces ...”; 95: “Hipparchus nunquam satis laudatus”; 117: “ista plures sine praemio alio quam posteros iuuandi eruerunt.”

[1071] See list of works on the subject by Oehmichen, Gruppe, Detlefsen, Cuntz, Klotz and others in Schanz, _op. cit._, § 492.

[1072] _N.H._, XXV. 9: “cui summa auctoritas erat in ea arte nostro acuo.” Wellmann, “Beiträge zur Quellenanalyse des älteren Plinius,” _Herm._, lix. (1924), p. 129 _sqq._, has endeavoured to awake fresh interest in Castor as a Latin source and in Solon of Smyrna as a Greek source for Pliny’s medical botany.

[1073] This Xenocrates, the statuary who wrote _de toreutice_, is to be distinguished from Xenocrates, a physician of Aphrodisias in Cilicia, whose name appears in many previous author-lists, and from whose recent compilation Pliny borrowed remedies of a superstitious character.

[1074] _N.H._, III. 2: “locorum nuda nomina et quanta dabitur breuitate ponentur”; III. 39: “nec ignoro ingrati ac segnis animi existimari posse merito, si obiter atque in transcursu ad hunc modum dicatur terra.”

[1075] III. 138.

[1076] III. 39-42.

[1077] West, “Multiplication of Cities in Anct. Geog.,” _Class. Philol._ XVIII. 1, Jan., 1923.

[1078] XXVI. 18: “magicae uanitates.”

[1079] _N.H._, _praef._ 33: “Tu per hoc et aliis praestabis ne perlegant, sed ut quisque desiderabit aliquid id tantum quaerat”; Gell., _N.A._, V. xvi.: “degustandum ex philosophia censet, non in eam ingurgitandum.”

[1080] _N.H._, X. 81-82: “tanta uox tam paruo in corpusculo ... in una perfecta musica scientia modulatus editur sonus.” The lavish measure of Holland’s paraphrase is apparent here: three Latin words, _infuscatur ex inopinato_, become “anon all of a sudden, before a man would think it, she drowneth her words that one can scarce hear her.” His “descant between the plain song” and “crotchets, quavers, semiquavers and double semiquavers” add to the general effect of rich freedom in his tribute to the bird.

[1081] The chapters on _papyrus_ are specially treated by Dziatzko, _Untersuch. üb. ausgew. Kapitel d. antiken Buchwesens_, mit Text übers. u. erkl. von _N.H._, XIII. 68-69, 1900.

[1082] XIV. 142: “ex ore halitus cadi, ac fere rerum omnium obliuio, morsque memoriae.”

[1083] XXXVI. 101-125.

[1084] I think it not unlikely that “mola tantum salsa litant qui non habent tura,” _praef._ 11, is an echo of Persius, II. 75, “farre litabo.”

[1085] _N.H._, II. 13: “hunc esse mundi totius animum....”

[1086] _Ib._, 14.

[1087] _Ib._, 15-16: “maior caelitum populus etiam quam hominum intellegi potest.”

[1088] II. 18: “Deus est mortali iuuare mortalem, est haec ad aeternam gloriam uia.”

[1089] _Praef._ 16: “qui ... utilitatem iuuandi praetulerunt gratiae placendi, idque iam et in aliis operibus ipse feci.”

[1090] VII. 2: “hominem tantum nudum et in nuda humo natali die abicit ad uagitus statim et ploratum.” _Cf._ Lucret., V. 222-227.

[1091] VII. 3: “Heu, dementiam ab his initiis existimantium ad superbiam se genitos!” 5: “At, hercules, homini plurima ex homine sunt mala”; XVIII. 2-3: “ferro ipsi nocentius aliquid damus, nos et flumina inficimus, et rerum naturae elementa ipsumque quo uiuitur aerem in perniciem uertimus.”

[1092] XXII. 117-118: “parens illa ac diuina rerum artifex.... Naturae quidem opera absoluta atque perfecta gignuntur.... Scrupulatim quidem colligere ac miscere uires, non coniecturae humanae opus, sed impudentiae est.”

[1093] XXII. 1 ... “nihil ab rerum natura sine aliqua occultiore causa gigni”; XVIII. 1: “si quis aestimet uarietatem, numerum, flores, odores coloresque et sucos ac uires earum (herbarum) quas salutis aut uoluptatis hominum gratia gignit.”

[1094] XXIV. 1: “sacra illa parente rerum omnium nusquam non remedia disponente homini”; 4: “Naturae placuerat esse remedia parata uolgo,” etc.

[1095] XXI. 1-2 ... “inenarrabili florum maxime subtilitate, quando nulli potest facilius esse loqui quam rerum naturae pingere lasciuienti praesertim et in magno gaudio fertilitatis tam uariae ludenti ... ne pictura quidem sufficiente imagini colorum reddendae.”

[1096] The imprecation would be “sit tibi terra grauis.”

[1097] II. 154-155.

[1098] XVIII. 1: “Patrocinari terrae et adesse cunctorum parenti iuuat, quamquam inter initia operis defensae.”

[1099] II. 157-158.

[1100] II. 174-175 ... “cum ad mensuram auaritiae suae propagauerit, quam tandem portionem eius defunctus obtineat.”

[1101] XVIII. 19-21.

[1102] XXXIII. 148: “Asia primum deuicta luxuriam misit in Italiam”; XXXIV. 34: “usque ad deuictam Asiam, unde luxuria.”

[1103] IX. 104-105, 114.

[1104] XII. 82-4.

[1105] XIII. 20.

[1106] XIX. 52-55.

[1107] XXII. 4: “Non est nunc propositum ista consectari.”

[1108] XVI. 14: “O mores aeternos qui tanta opera honore solo donauerint....”

[1109] XIV. 2-6.

[1110] II. 117-118.

[1111] XXV. 22-23: “fortassis aliquibus curam nostram friuolam existimaturis: adeo deliciis sordent quae ad salutem pertinent ... misereri sortis humanae subit.”

[1112] XXXIII. 3: “Quam innocens, quam beata, immo uero et delicata esset uita, si nihil aliunde quam supra terras concupisceret.”

[1113] _Antig._, 332 _sqq._: πολλὰ τὰ δεινὰ, κοὐδὲν ἀνθρώπου δεινότερον πέλει, κ.τ.λ.

[1114] _N.H._, XXXIV. 138 (= Chap. xiv.).

[1115] Homer, VII. 108: “pretiosissimum humani animi opus”; XVII. 37: “fons ingeniorum Homerus”; eulogy on Cicero, VII. 116-117, XVII. 38: “Cicero, lux doctrinarum altera”; Virgil, VII. 114.

[1116] XXIX. 14.

[1117] _Praef._ 6: “uolgo scripta sunt”; 12-13: “(hi libelli) nec ingenii sunt capaces, ... neque admittunt excessus aut orationes sermonesue ... sterilis materia rerum natura, hoc est uita narratur....”

[1118] X. 9: “tendente ... abigente ... cadente ... ostendente ... emergente.”

[1119] III. 39 _sqq._

[1120] XXXVII. 201.

[1121] Galdi, _L’Epitome nella letteratura lat._, 1922, pp. 157-174.

[1122] The dispute concerning the relation of Solinus to Pliny as a source is discussed by Galdi, _op. cit._, pp. 159-166.

[1123] Welzhofer, _Bedas Citate aus der N.H._, in _Abhandln. W. v. Christ dargebracht_, pp. 25-41, Münch., 1891.

[1124] Rück, _Auszüge aus d. Naturg. des P. in einem astronomisch-komputist. Sammelwerke des 8-ten Jahrhts._, Münch., 1888.

[1125] Rück, _Das Excerpt der N.H. des P. von Robt. v. Cricklade_, Münch., 1902; _Die Geographie u. Ethnographie der N.H. des P. im Auszüge des R. v. Cricklade_, Münch., 1903 (with conspectus of Pliny’s “Fortleben” prefixed).

[1126] Singer, _Greek Biology and Gk. Medicine_, Oxf., 1922, p. 63.

[1127] Tac., _H._, I. viii., IV. xliii.; _Ann._, XIII. xx., XIV. ii.; Suet., _Ner._, xxi.; Dio, lxiii. 14.

[1128] Tac., _Agr._, x.; _Ann._, XIII. xx., XIV. ii., XV. lxi.

[1129] Tac., _Dial._, xv. 1, xxviii. 1-6, xxxii.; _H._, III. ix, xxv, xxviii; IV. xlii.

[1130] Stat., _Sil._, IV. vii. 53 _sqq._

[1131] Tac., _Agr._, ii.; Suet., _Dom._, x.; Dio, lxvii. 13.

[1132] Suet., _Dom._, x.

[1133] Ed. pr., Campanus, Rome, 1470; Badius, Par., 1516; Gronov, Leyd., 1665; Burman (with declamns.), Leyd., 1720; Caperonnier, Par., 1725; Gesner, Gött., 1738 (Eng. ed., Oxf., 1806); Spalding, rec. et annot., 4 vols., Lpz., 1798-1816; vol. 5, indices, Zumpt, 1829; vol. 6, lexicon, Bonnell, 1834; Bonnell (Teubn.), Lpz., 1854 _sqq._; Halm, Lpz., 1868 _sqq._; Meister, krit. Anm., Prag, 1886-1887; Radermacher, I.-VI., Lpz., 1907.

Sep. bks.: I., Fierville, Par., 1890; Colson, Camb., 1924; X., J. E. B. Mayor, Camb., 1872; Hild, Par., 1885; Bonnell, Berl., ed. 6, 1912; Peterson, Oxf., 1891 (Introd. treats Q.’s life, lit. criticism, style, MSS.); Dosson, Par., 1904.

Trans.: Guthrie, Lond., 1805; Watson (Bohn), Lond., 1856; Butler (Loeb), Lond., 1920 _sqq._

Saintsbury, _Hist. of Criticism_, I., 1900, pp. 289-321, gives a readable conspectus of the _Institutio_; _cf._ extracts in his _Loci Critici_, 1903. For comprehensive reports of modern studies on Q., Bursian’s _Jahresberichte üb. d. Fortschritte d. class. Altertumswissenschaft_, 1887, 1901 and 1922.

[1134] Martial, II. xc. 1-2:

“Quintiliane, uagae moderator summe iuuentae, Gloria Romanae, Quintiliane, togae.”

[1135] Hieron., _ann. Abr._, 2104 = A.D. 88, “Quintilianus ex Hispania Calagurritanus”; Auson., _Prof. Burdig._, I. 7.

[1136] _I. Or._, IX. iii. 73. It is doubtful whether this is the Quintilianus of Seneca’s _Contr._, X. _praef._ 2; _ib._, iv. 19.

[1137] _I. Or._, VI. i. 14 (_cf._ Tac., _Ann._, XIII. xxxiii.), V. vii. 7, XII. xi. 3.

[1138] Juv., VI. 452. Colson, _Quint._, I., _Introd._, p. x., suspects the scholiast.

[1139] X. i. 24 and 118, VI. iii. 27 and 42, V. vii. 7, XII. x. 11.

[1140] Plin., _Ep._, VII. vi. 11.

[1141] _I. Or._, X. i. 102.

[1142] X. i. 119-120.

[1143] X. i. 119, XII. v. 5 and x. 11.

[1144] _I. Or._, X. i. 119, XII. x. 11; Tac., _Ann._, XIV. xxviii., _Hist._, II. x., IV. xli. and xliii.; _Dial._, viii. and xiii.

[1145] _I. Or._, X. i. 120, iii. 12.

[1146] Hieron., _ann. Abr._, 2084 = A.D. 68.

[1147] Hieron., _ann. Abr._, 2014 = A.D. 88: “Quintilianus ... primus Romae publicam scholam et salarium e fisco accepit et claruit.” Jerome’s date is too late; for Suet. _Vesp._, 18, shows that Vespasian, who died A.D. 79, first gave the annual grant to _rhetores_.

[1148] Auson., _Grat. Act._, 7. Possibly Juvenal is thinking of the same thing in VII. 197: “fies de rhetore consul.”

[1149] VI., _pr._ 16.

[1150] XI., ii. 39.

[1151] IV. i. 19 (“pro regina Berenice”), IV. ii. 86, VII. ii. 5 and 24, IX. ii. 74 (where a ticklish case is cited from his own experience).

[1152] _Ep._, II. xiv. 9: “ita certe ex Quintiliano praeceptore meo audisse memini.”

[1153] _Cf._ _I. Or._, I. ii. 4 _sqq._ with _Sat._, XIV. 31 _sqq._ In X. 122 Juvenal cites as his example of Cicero’s bad verse one of the well-known lines quoted in _I. Or._, XI. i. 24. When, however, Juvenal was caned at school (I. 15), his master was presumably not Quintilian, who did not believe in corporal punishment (_I. Or._, I. iii. 13).

[1154] Reuter, _De Qi. libro qui fuit de causis corrupt. eloq._, Bresl. 1887.

[1155] _I. Or._, VI. _pro._ 3, VIII. iii. 76, II. iv. 42 (“alio quoque libro”), II. x. 3-5, V. xii. 17-23, VIII. iii. 57-58 (“corrupta oratio”).

[1156] VII. ii. 24.

[1157] IV. i. 19, IX. ii. 73-74.

[1158] I. _pro._ 7.

[1159] See introd. epistle to Trypho, 1-3, I. _pr._ 1.

[1160] Colson, _op. cit._, p. xvi., suggests an earlier date, A.D. 86, as a possibility, on the ground that twenty years of teaching might include an unknown period in Spain.

[1161] I. _pr._ 21-22.

[1162] J. Overbeck, in an art., “Die Entdeckung d. Kindes im I. Jahrht. n. Chr.” (_Neue Jahrbr. für d. klass. Altertum_, liii.-liv., 1924), establishes, from literary and medical sources, the intelligent interest taken at this period in children and their upbringing. Stoicism contributed to it.

[1163] See chap. on “Roman Education under the Empire,” esp. pp. 27-29.

[1164] II. xii. 4-7: “maledicit ... laudari disertum.”

[1165] II. xii. 12.

[1166] II. xiii. 2.

[1167] II. xiii. 15-17.

[1168] II. xvi. 12-19: “deus ille, parens rerum fabricatorque mundi nullo magis hominem separauit ... quam dicendi facultate.”

[1169] I. _pr._ 9-10, II. ii. (whole section), II. xv. 1, XII. i. 1.

[1170] II. xxi. 14.

[1171] I. _pr._ 16, XII. ii. 10, XII. iii. and iv.

[1172] III. i. 8-21.

[1173] III. viii. 49.

[1174] V. xii. 17-23.

[1175] VI. iii. 6.

[1176] VII. i. 42-62.

[1177] VIII. _pr._ 3.

[1178] VIII. _pr._ 27.

[1179] _Ib._, 28 and 31.

[1180] VIII. iii. 1.

[1181] From another standpoint oratorical prose may be “simple” or “grand” or “intermediate,” X. i. 44: _Cf._ XII. x. 58-61 and 63.

[1182] X. i. 73, 32 (_cf._ 101 for Livy); 32 and 102 (for Sallust).

[1183] Claussen, _Quaest. Quintilianeae_ (Fleckeisen, Jahrb. Suppl., 6), Lpz., 1873; Dionys. Halic., _lib. de imitatione rel._, ed. Usener, Bonn, 1889. Usener denies Q.’s dependence on Dionys., but see Peterson, ed. Bk. X., Intr., pp. xxx. _sqq._; Heydenreich, _De Quintiliani Inst. Or. libro X., de Dionysii de imitatione libro_, II., etc., Erl., 1900.

[1184] Nettleship, _Lity. Criticism in Lat. Antiquity_ in _Jrnl. Philol._, XVIII., pp. 225 _sqq._; Cole, _Q.’s Quotatns. fr. Lat. poets_, C.R., XX. (1906), p. 47.

[1185] X. i. 105-112. The test of real progress, he says, lies in the student’s enjoyment of Cicero: “ille se profecisse sciat cui Cicero ualde placebit.”

[1186] X. i. 125-131. Rocheblave, _De Q. Senecae iudice_, Par., 1890, defends Seneca against Q.’s antagonism.

[1187] X. i. 98-99.

[1188] XI. iii. 30: “in quo nulla neque rusticitas neque peregrinitas resonat.”

[1189] XI. iii. 126: “quot milia passuum declamasset.”

[1190] Eurip. _Hec._, ll. 254 _sqq._

[1191] _E.g._ II. xvii. 19 (false argument comparable to a military ruse); _ib._, 36 (strict veracity may be postponed to public utility).

[1192] XII. x. 35-36.

[1193] _Ib._, 40.

[1194] _Ib._, 48.

[1195] _Ib._, 51.

[1196] _Ib._, 58-61.

[1197] _Ib._, 73.

[1198] _Ib._, 79.

[1199] _Ib._, 80.

[1200] XII. xi. 8: “id uiro bono satis est docuisse quod sciret.”

[1201] XII. xi. 10.

[1202] XII. xi. 17.

[1203] XII. xi. 30.

[1204] His _prooemium de scriptoribus artis rhetoricae_ (III. i.), as indicated, is a kind of ancient bibliography for rhetoric. For modern works on his sources, see Schanz, _op. cit._

[1205] I. i. 4 and 16, etc.

[1206] It has been calculated that he refers to over 450 passages of Cicero and nearly a third as many Virgilian passages.

[1207] XII. vi. 4: “plusque, si separes, usus sine doctrina quam citra usum doctrina ualet.”

[1208] X. ii. 24: “non qui maxime imitandus et solus imitandus est.”

[1209] XII. x. 45.

[1210] X. iii. 13-14.

[1211] _E.g._, XXX.: φῶς γὰρ τῷ ὄντι ἴδιον τοῦ νοῦ τὰ καλὰ ὀνόματα.

[1212] See Laurie, _Hist. Survey of Pre-Christian Educn._, Lond., 1895. Colson, _op. cit._, Introd., gives an account of Q.’s relation to the education of his times, his own educational principles, his scheme for teaching the mother-tongue and a brief comparison with (pseudo-)Plutarch’s _De Liberorum Educatione_ and Tacitus’s _Dial._

[1213] Froment, _Quid e Qi. orat. institutione ad liberos ingenue nunc educandos excerpi possit_, thes., Par., 1874; H. A. Strong, _Q. the Roman Schoolmaster_ (_Some of his probable views on mod. educn._), Univ. Press, Liverp., 1908.

[1214] II. v. 21-22.

[1215] On Q.’s style, Peterson, Bk. X., _Intr._, pp. xxxix. _sqq._; Bonnell’s _Lexicon_ (_Proleg._); Dosson, Bk. X. (_Remarques sur la langue de Q._); Marty, _De Quintilianeo usu et copia verborum cum Cic. comparatis_, 1886.

[1216] Fuller lists are given by Peterson, _op. cit._, xli. _sqq._

[1217] Hirt, _Ueber d. Substantivierung des Adject. bei Q._, Berl., 1890.

[1218] “Pas un seul augmentatif en _per-_,” Laurand, _Manuel des études gr. et lat._, Par., 1918, p. 606.

[1219] Q.’s _clausulae_ have been examined by Gladisch, _De Clausulis Quintilianeis_, Bresl., 1909, and De Groot, _Der antike Prosarhythmus_, Gron., 1921. Their statistics are arrived at by different methods, but both indicate considerable contrast (though apparently not the same amount of contrast) between Cic. and Q.

[1220] _E.g._ IV. ii. 122.

[1221] IV. ii. 127: “perire artem putamus nisi apparet, cum desinat ars esse si apparet.”

[1222] Colson, Bk. I., _Intr._, traces through the centuries the evidence for knowledge of either the _Institutio_ or its author.

[1223] To this century belongs the “Liber Glossarum,” that portentous medieval collection of glosses, which was perhaps compiled by Adelhard, abbot of Corbie. Three scraps from Q.’s ninth book are quoted in the medieval glossaries to exemplify the use of _pugnaciter_, _caesim_ and _austera_, but there is no proof whether these come direct from the text or through some intermediary. See Mountford, _Quotations fr. class. authors in medieval glossaries_ (Cornell publn.), New Yk. and Lond., 1925, pp. 85-86.

[1224] Colson, _op. cit._, li.

[1225] It survives as Parasinus, 7720.

[1226] _C.R._ xxi. (1907), pp. 33 _sqq._

[1227] For Q.’s influence on humanism, see Colson, _op. cit._, pp. lxiv. _sqq._, and Messer, _Q. als Didaktiker u. sein Einfluss auf die didaktisch-pädagogische Theorie des Humanismus_ in _Neue Jahrb._, 1897.

[1228] _Essay on Criticism_, ll. 669-694; _cf._ Pope’s own notes.

[1229] _The longer declns._, Merula, Ven., 1481; with Tac., _Dial._, Oxf., 1675, 1692; _Inst. Or. et Declam. XIX. et Calpurn. Flacci Declam._, c. not.... Burm., 3 vols., Leyd., 1720; Lehnert, Lpz., 1905 (to some extent based on Dessauer’s _Handschriftliche Grundlage_, 1898). _Cf._ Reitzenstein, _Studien zu Q.’s grösser. Declam._, Strassb., 1909. Trans.: Warr, “from the Oxford Ed.,” Lond., 1686. _The Tenth Declam._, Robinson Ellis, Lond. and Oxf., 1911.

_The shorter_: ed. pr. Ugoletus, Parma, 1494; Aerodius, Par., 1563 (136 pieces), Pithoeus, Par., 1580 (all the 145 extant); Ritter, Lpz., 1884 (_cf._ Ritter’s _Die Quintilianische Decl., Untersuchung üb. Art u. Herkunft_, Freib. u. Tüb., 1881.) Against Ritter’s belief in their authenticity may be put Trabandt, _De minoribus ... declam._, Greifsw., 1883; Fleiber, _De minoribus_, etc., Münst., 1890.

[1230] Ritter, _Quintilianische Declam._, 1881; groups (1) I.; (2) X.; (3) II., IV., V., VII., VIII., XI., XIV.-XIX.; (4), a group which may show the influence of Quintilian or a pupil, III., VI., IX., XII., XIII.

[1231] Reitzenstein, _op. cit._; Golz, _Der rhythmische Satzschluss in d. gröss. pseudo-Quintilianischen Decl._, Bresl., 1913; esp. pp. 61 _sqq._

[1232] Hammer, _Beitr. zu den 19 gröss_ ... Münch., 1893, p. 44. Ellis, _Notes on the 19 Larger Decl._, in _Hermathena_, 1909, pp. 328 _sqq._, alludes to these almost forgotten exercises as “dating perhaps from the second, perhaps from the fourth century A.D.” The latter alternative seems too late.

[1233] Trebell. Poll., _Trig. Tyr._, iv. 2; Auson., _Prof. Burdig._, i. 15-16.

[1234] _I. Or._, I. _pro._ 7.

[1235] _E.g._ The charge of attempted parricide brought against a son found mixing poison in No. ccclxxvii. may be compared with Sen., _Cont._, VII. iii., and No. xvii. of the longer declamations.

[1236] cccxl.; _cf._ Suet., _De Rhet._, i. The case is stated in the chapter on Roman education, p. 34 _supra_.

[1237] _Ossa eruta parricidae_, ccxcix.; Ritter, p. 180.

[1238] _Cf._ Liban., _Decl._, xlix., with the first of the xix. longer declamations.

[1239] _I. Or._, III. i. 21.

[1240] Mart., V. lvi. 6: “famae Tutilium suae relinquat.”

[1241] _I. Or._, III. i. 21: “parco nominibus uiuentium.”

[1242] Hieron., _Ann. Abr._, 2092 = A.D. 76; _cf._ Tac., _Dial._, xxvi.