Professional Documents
Culture Documents
R. M. Ogilvie-A Commentary On Livy - Books I-V-Clarendon Press (1965)
R. M. Ogilvie-A Commentary On Livy - Books I-V-Clarendon Press (1965)
LIV
BOOKS
R. M. OGI
WELLINGTON
HONG KONG
KONO
HoNG
COMMENTARY ON
A COMMENTARY
LIVY
L
IVY
BOOKS 1-5
1-5
BY
B
Y
M. OGIL
OGILVIE
R. M.
VIE
Fellow of
Fellow
of Balliol College
College
Oxford
Oxford
OXFORD
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
19
i9 6655
PRINTED IN GREAT BR
I.
w. o.
CONTENTS
LIST OF MAPS
ABBREVIATIONS
x
xiii
INTRODUCTION
Life
Sources
Style and composition
Select Bibliography
i
5
17
22
COMMENTARY
Book 1
Book
Book
Book
Book
2
3
4
5
INDEXES
Persons
Places and Peoples
General
Syntax and Style
Latin
Authors and Passages
23
233
390
526
626
753
760
763
769
770
773
(at end)
1. THE CAMPAG
2. ROME
ABBREVIATIONS
ABBREVIATIONS
E. Burck, Die
Die Erzhlungskunst
Erziihlungskunst des
des T. Livius
Livius (Berlin,
Burck
Burck
Klotz
Livius u.s.
u.s. Vorganger
= A. Klotz, Livius
Vorgnger (Neue Wege z.
Antike,
Antike, I94I).
1941).
= W. Schulze, <ur
Zur Geschichte
Geschichte lateinischer
lateinischer Eigennamen
I934)
Schulze
(Berlin,
(Berlin, I904).
1904).
E.
u.s. Vorganger
= E. Skard,
Skard, Sallust
Sallust u.s.
Vorgnger (Oslo,
(Oslo, I957).
1957).
W.
Soltau,
Livius
Geschichtswerk,
seine
Komposition
= W. Soltau, Livius Geschichtswerk, seine Komposition und
und
sei7le Quellen
seine
Quellen (Leipzig,
(Leipzig, I897).
1897).
Sydenham
The Coinage
Sydenham E. A. Sydenham, The
Coinage of
of the Roman Republic
(London, I952).
1952).
Skard
Skard
Soltau
Soltau
SOURCES
Livy claimed to have read all Greek and L
even be true, although it smacks of the de
Lawrence of Arabia to claim that he had
Oxford Union Library. But, true or false
his method of work. Did he consult the
particular section of the history? Did he co
Or did he follow in the main one authority
another when doubt or interest prompted
questions is of cardinal importance for
literary art and it is afforded by an analysis
one of his principal sources, Polybius, is ex
with Livy page by page and section by sect
a comparison leaves no doubt that for long
transcribed Polybius and that the modifica
makes are for purely literary reasons. A u
vestigations is given by Walsh, Livy, 110-7
that although his methods may be more
mental in the early books, the basic techn
wrong to conceive ofLivy combing throug
sitting down to write a composite account
and adapted a single version for the main n
name variants or cite alternatives, but this is
pedantry expected of an historian. It mea
5
814432
17
21
SELECT BIBLIOGR
22
T H E PREFACE
T H E historian was expected to preface his volume with a prooemium in
which he set out the scope and purpose of his work and advanced his
own attitude to history (Cicero, ad Att, 16. 6. 4 ; Lucian, Quomodo
Historia 52-55). The custom had been begun by Hecataeus, Herodotus,
and Thucydides and had been canonized by the historians of the
Hellenistic period under the influence of Isocrates and others. As
the writing of history was increasingly governed by rhetorical prin
ciples, so the themes deployed in such prefaces degenerated into
rhetorical commonplaces. Their aim was the rhetorical aim of winning
the reader's goodwill by presenting the history as something worthy
of his attention, as something useful and profitable. Into the basis
of that utility they did not closely inquire. It was taken for granted
that the statesman would learn to regulate his policy or the individual
his conduct by historical example.
The Romans inherited the custom from the Greeks with little
change. The impersonal 'Hpo&orov AXiKapv^uoeos or &OVKV818T)S
AOrjvatos might give way to the more intimate ego but the content and
character of the preface remained the same. The rules for its com
position were formulated in handbooks (cf. Rhet, Lat. Min., p. 588. 28
Halm). L. was no exception to the fashion. In form his Praefatio cor
responds to the traditional mode. Most of the arguments can be
paralleled from the prefaces of his predecessors and are illustrated
in the notes below. Yet it would be wrong to assume that because
L. employs commonplaces he does not necessarily subscribe to them
himself. A cliche need not be a lie. In such a formal context it would
have been difficult, if not improper, to make radical innovations,
None the less it is the novelties which tell us most about his intentions,
and it is possible to form some impression of where L. disagreed with
earlier historians.
The closeness of Praef. 9-11 (nn.) to the language used by Sallust
is proof that in writing his preface L. had his formidable predecessor
in mind. In the Catiline and the Jugurtha Sallust had adopted and in
the Historiae only tangentially modified the thesis that 146 B.C. was
the turning-point of Roman history. Before that date the Romans had
uniformly displayed virtus, that is, they had aspired to accomplish on
behalf of the state egregia facinora through bonae artes and so to win
gloria; after that date, when the destruction of Carthage had removed
the last externally cohesive influence on Roman morals (1. 19. 4 n.)
the society was invaded by avaritia and ambitio (cupido honorum) which
23
PREFACE
led remorselessly to depravity (luxuria). It was not a profound thesis.
Sallust was not a profound thinker. Such ideas enjoyed wide circula
tion in contemporary R o m e . But Sallust believed in it enough to dis
tort the facts of history to fit the strait-jacket of his philosophical
scheme. L. rejects it. In assessing the decline of public morality u p to
his own day L. admits the emergence of avaritia but is silent about
ambitio (Praef. 10) because he recognizes that whereas the opportunites for affluent living only became available in the second century,
forces such as ambitio had always been at work from the very founda
tion of the city. By omitting ambitio L. tacitly rebukes Sallust for his
over-simplified and schematic philosophy. L. had the truer historical
judgement. Where Sallust tailored his material to fit his view of the
historical process, L. presupposed no such determinism. For him the
course of history was not a straight progression from black to white
but a chequered patchwork in which good a n d evil had always been
interwoven. Each event had its moral, but the moral was the eye round
which the story could be constructed not a farther stage along a pre
determined path.
L.'s rejection of Sallust's thesis that ambitio was a late and decisive
phenomenon, explained as it may be by the fact that Sallust's earliest
efforts as a n historian were confined to the events of the recent past, is
interesting in another way. In it we may discern the prejudices of the
man. So far as we know, L. held no public office and his ignorance of
public business is disclosed by almost every page of the history. T h e
political ambitions of the normal R o m a n appear never to have
attracted him. ambitio or cupido honorum did not have the same sigficance for him that it did for Sallust, the tribune and pro-consul.
The second singularity of the Preface is L.'s escapism. H e confesses
that early history appealed to him because it distracted the mind for
a time from the present [Praef. 5). O n e m a y search the prefaces of
other historians in vain for a similar confession, but it is very typical
of L. who elsewhere states 'mini vetustas res scribenti nescioquo pacto
antiquus fit animus' (43. 13. 2).
The third distinctive feature is L.'s emphasis on the magnitude of
his task [Praef 4 immensi operis; Praef. 13 tantum operis). From the very
beginning L. gives the sense of being oppressed by what he has under
taken and this feeling, which must often assail his commentators as
well, is coiToborated by the anecdote that he contemplated abandon
ing the work when it was already well advanced (Pliny, N.H. praef
16). It is a new note, not heard in the confident proclamations of his
predecessors.
Thus beneath the conventional themes a n d figures the Praefatio
tells us much. It is the preface of a small m a n , detached from affairs,
who writes less to preach political or moral lessons than to enshrine
24
PREFACE
Praef. i
in literature persons and events that have given him a thrill of excite
ment as he studied them. See also the Introduction, p . 3.
For the preface see H . Dessau, Festschrift 0. Hirschfeld, 461 fF.; G.
Curcio, R.I.G.L 1 (1917), 7 7 - 8 5 ; E. Dutoit, R.E.L. 20 (1942), 9 8 - 1 0 5 ;
L. Amundsen, Symb. OsL 25 (1947), 3 1 - 3 5 ; L- Ferrero, Riv. FiL
27 (i949)> x ~47; O . Leggewie, Gymnasium, 60 (1953), 343~55; K Vretska, Gymnasium, 61 (1954), 191-203; P. G. Walsh, A.J.P. 76
(x955)> 3 ^ 9 - 8 3 ; H . Oppermann, D. Altsprach. Unterricht (1955), 8 7 - 9 8 ;
I. Kajanto, Arctos, 2 (1958), 5 5 - 6 3 ; A. D . Leeman, Helikon I. 28 fF.
For similar prefaces cf, e.g., Hecataeus, F. Gr. Hist. 1 F 1; Herodotus
1.1; Thucydides 1. 1; Ephorus, F. Gr. Hist. 70 F 7 - 9 ; Polybius 1. 1-5;
Tacitus, Hist. 1. 1.
The Reasons for Undertaking a Subject already treated by Many and Dis
tinguished Authors
1. facturusne operae pretium sim: confirmed by Quintilian 9. 4. 74 who
says that the corrupt order facturusne sim operae pretium, found in N ,
had already gained currency by his own day. T h e true order gives
a dactylic opening (7". Livius hexametri exordio coepit) which seems to
have been a fashionable affectation; cf. Tacitus, Annals 1. 1 urbem
Romam a principio reges habuere. It lends no support to Lundstrom's
belief that L.'s opening words are a quotation from Ennius (Eranos,
15 (1915), 1-24). T h e reflection on the worth-while nature of the
task is a conventional way of beginning (3. 26. 7 n . ; see Fraenkel,
Horace, 81). See also M . Muller's n.
a primerdio urbis: cf. Saliust, Hist. fr. 8 M. nam a principio urbis ad
bellum Persi Macedonicum.
res populi Romani: cf. Sallust, Hist. fr. 1 M. res populi Romani. . .
militiae et domi gestas composui: Catiline 4. 2.
2. cum veterem turn volgatam: cf. Xenophon, H.G. 4. 8. 1. For the allitera
tion cf. Plautus, Epid. 350.
novi semper scriptores: for this and (3) in tanta scriptorum turba cf.
Sallust, Hist. fr. 3 M. nos in tanta doctissumorum hominum copia.
aliquid allaturos: cf. Cicero, de Off. 1. 155.
3. principis terrarumpopuli'. cf. Herodotus 1. 1.
et ipsum: for the use of et ipse cf. 7. 4, 12. 3, 46. 2. T h e marginal me
added by the correctors of M and O results from the misplacing of
me in the following sentence.
nobilitate: of L.'s predecessors among historians, Q,. Fabius Pictor
was a senator (Polybius 3. 9. 4), L. Cincius Alimentus a praetor
(26. 23. 1), A. Postumius Albinus consul (Polybius 35. 3. 7), M .
Porcius Cato consul and censor, L. Calpurnius Piso consul and censor,
L. Coelius Antipater a nobilis (Cicero, Brutus 102), C. Licinius Macer
25
Praef. 3
PREFACE
PREFACE
Praef. 6
that his sources for the earliest R o m a n history were directly the poets
but rather that the material which was transmitted about it was more
suited for poetical than historical treatment.
7. miscendo humana divinis: as recommended by Cicero, de Inv. i. 23
for securing the favourable attention of readers.
Interest in the Moral Aspects of History
L's interest in human conduct is not, like Sallust's, didactic or
philosophical but psychological. T h e behaviour and reactions of men
fascinate him as such, while the work of the gods he is ready to ration
alize, abbreviate, or by-pass (cf, e.g., his treatment of N u m a (1.18-21);
the omission of the Dioscuri (2. 19-20)).
9. mores . . . viros: the collocation recalls Ennius, Ann. 500 V. moribus
antiquis res stat Romana virisque but the terms had long passed into the
political vocabulary (see Earl, Political Thought of Sallust, 4 ff.).
artibus domi militiaeque: cf. Plautus' humorous definition of bonae artes
(virtutes) as quae domi duellique male fecisti which shows that there was
a familiar equation of bonae artes and domi duellique bene facta (Asin.
558 ff.)labente . . . desidentes; cf. Sallust, Hist. fr. 16 M . 'ex quo tempore
maiorum mores non paulatim ut antea sed torrentis modo praecipitati:
adeo iuventus luxu atque avaritia conrupta ut merito dicatur genitos
esse qui neque ipsi habere possent res familiares neque alios pati . T h e
similarity extends not only to the thought but to the phrasing as the
italicized words display.
There is doubt about the exact text. N read labente . . . diss (discyi)identis. labente can be defended by comparison with Cicero, Phil.
2. 51 labentem et prope cadentem rem publicam. The metaphor will be of a
large object beginning to slip downhill and gathering momentum for
the final plunge. So in Sallust. Even if it were not at variance with the
metaphor implied by labente, dissidentis would call for comment since
dissido is only found in the perfect (Fraenkel, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v.) and
discido is always transitive (cf. Lucretius 3. 659). dissidentis would,
therefore, have to come from dissideo Tall apart, disagree'. T h e
accepted emendation is desidentes 'subsiding', already proposed by
the early humanists; cf. Cicero, de Div. 1.97: other writers only use the
word literally. Elsewhere, however, L. writes labante egregia discipline
(36. 6. 2) and Cicero tota ut labet disciplina {de Fin. 4. 53), whereas disciplina labitur would be unique here. I think that Gronovius's labante
must be read. If so, the metaphor is not of a slipping body but of a
house tottering, breaking up, and collapsing and dissidentes, describing
the disunity and disintegration of the mores, seems an appropriate
word (cf. Seneca, Benef. 1. 10. 3 ; Epist. 18. 2, 56. 5 ; Dial. 7. 8. 6).
Ratherius so understood it, glossing discordantes.
27
Praef. 9
PREFACE
nee vitia nostra nee remedia: cf. 34. 49. 3 ; Plutarch, Cato min. 20;
Josephus, B.J. 4. 9. 11. T h e conventional character of the expression
might lead us to see in it a general reference to opposition to Augustus 5
solution of Rome's disorders by personal government; cf. Tacitus,
Annals 1. 9. 4. But the connexion between moral, especially sexual,
laxity and political disaster was made in very similar terms by Horace
in Odes 3. 24 intactis opulentior and Odes 3. 6 delicta maiorum at much this
date (soon after 28 B.C.). In 28 B.C. Augustus had attempted to intro
duce moral legislation enforcing marriage by law and invoking
penalties on immorality (Propertius 2. 7), but had been driven by
opposition to withdraw it and was only able to renew the attempt in
18 B.C. and A.D. 9. It is hard, therefore, to doubt that Livy, like
Horace, is referring to the failure of that legislation. See Syme,
Harvard Studies in Class. Phil. 64 (1959), 4 2 - 3 ; G. W. Williams, J.R.S.
52 (1962), 28 ff.
The Usefulness of History
In parenthesis L. pays formal tribute to the moral value of history,
a regular TOTTOS deriving from Thucydides 1. 22. 4 and given an ex
clusively moral application by Hellenistic historians (cf. Polybius
I. 1. 2, 2. 61. 3 ; Diodorus 1. 1. 4 ; Sallust, Jugurtha 4. 5 ; Tacitus,
Annals 3. 65. 1 ; Agr. 46. 3). For L. the moral content is less important
than the literary opportunity thereby provided. See Introduction,
p. 18.
10. hoc illudesse: 5. 2. 3 n.
in inlustri posita monumento: the general sense is clear'history offers
examples of every sort of conduct'but the precise force of these words
is disputed (Foster, T.A.P.A. 42 (1911), lxvi). They have been taken
to mean ' (examples) enshrined in conspicuous historical characters'
(Haupt, Greenhough) but this does not suit the context which is con
cerned more with history in general rather than historical personages/
(cf. in cognitione rerum). I would take monumento to refer to history as
such, the history of a nation'examples set in the clear record of a
nation'.
The Remarkable Character of Rome
I I . amor: cf. Polybius 1. 14. 2: Philinus and Fabius SoKovm . . . /xot
TTeiTOvSevai rt TrapairXriaiov rots* epiocri.
PREFACE
Praef. u
date is lower than that given by most authors who tended to select a
turning-point in the first half of the century, Piso fixing on 154 (Pliny,
N.H. 17. 244), Polybius on 168 (31. 25. 3, 6. 57. 5), and Livy's annalistic source on 187 (39. 6. 7). They were agreed that the causal factors
were the contact with Greek material prosperity, the elimination of
an external menace, and the opportunities for individual Romans to
acquire wealth, avaritia brings luxuria in its train. Apart from the omis
sion of ambitio L. does not dispute the traditional diagnosis fully set out
by Sallust {Catiline 10-12).
For avaritia and luxuria contrasted with paupertas and parsimonia cf.
34. 4. 2-13 (Cato's speech). T h e terms are conventional rhetoric.
The Invocation of the Gods
Such invocations, although regular at the commencement of great
affairs (22. 9. 7, 38. 48. 14, 45. 39. 10) and at the start of poems (e.g.
Homer, Theognis, Ennius, Virgil: for the formulaic opening <rV Aios
dpx<6fj,crda see Gow on Theocritus 17. 1), were not made by earlier
historians. Besides conventional piety L.'s decision reflects on his
attitude to his task. H e saw himself as a creative artist, as a poet rather
than a researcher.
29
BOOK I
T H E first five books were planned and published as a unity, and
Book i states the overall themethe greatness of Rome. Rome
was a great city both as a physical entity and as a world-power. From
the very outset L. stresses the strength of the city (9. 1 iam res Romana
adeo erat valida; cf. 11. 4, 21. 6) and reiterates its increasing size (8. 4
crescebat interim urbs; cf. 9. 10, 30. 1, 33. 9, 35. 7, 37. r, 44. 5). R o m e
early became and remained a great city. And corresponding to her
physical greatness was an imperial greatness. R o m e was to be, as
L. is at pains to repeat, caput rerum (16. 7, 45. 3, 55. 6).
Book r also adumbrates the other themes which form the dominant
threads in the later four books. Book 2 is preoccupied with the nature
and problems of libertas. Already in 17. 3 we are given a foreboding
of this (libertatis dulcedine nondum experta; cf. 46. 3, 48. 9, 56. 8) T h e
consequence oflibertas, as of free enterprise, is discordia as is illustrated
by the events of the latter half of Book 2 and as is already hinted in
r. 17. 1 or 1. 42. 2. A free society requires for its preservation the
exercise by individual citizens of the social virtues. T o give way to
avaritia and to scorn modestia must entail the disruption of society
(Praef. 11 n.). This is clearly seen in the course of Book 3 ; and the way
is prepared in Book 1 where Ancus Marcius' pillaging (35. 7) is in
contrast with Romulus' forbearance (15. 4). It is in modestia and the
corresponding virtue of moderation the theme of Book 4, that the last
Tarquin is egregiously deficient. Book 5 is shot through with pietas:
Rome's success depends both on divine will and on her own observance
of divine ordinance. In many ways this was a daring and novel theme.
Divine causality had been banished from history since Herodotus /
(Cicero, de Orat. 2. 63) but in reintroducing it L. caught the mood of
his generation. Once again he foreshadows it in Book 1. Aeneas, like
Gamillus, is afatalis dux (1.4) and R o m e is founded under the guidance
of the fates (7. 15). M u c h attention is given to the desirability of
performing due rites and ceremonies (18. 10, 19. 7, 36. 6) for only so
can divine co-operation be secured. L.'s own attitude to the gods and
the alleged stories of their intervention on earth is often sceptical and
rationalistic (4. 2 n.). H e will offer a naturalistic interpretation sideby-side with a miracle.
T h e structure of the book is dictated by the length and character
of the reigns of the kings. Tradition had already given each king a
distinctive personality before the philosophies of constitutional his
tory began to press them into the moulds of fxovapxia^ /WiAeia, or
30
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
Tvpawis. L. accepts the general philosophy of deterioration. Tullus
and Ancus are decadent counterparts of Romulus and Numa. Each
is singled out for some one particular quality: Romulus for military
expertise, Numa for the creation of the religious observances of peace
time, Tullus for ferocity, Ancus for the ceremonies of war; and the
comparison between them is expressly drawn (22. 2 (Tullus) ferocior
. . . quam Romulus; 32. 5 Numa in pace religiones, a(b Anco) bellkae caerimoniae). As N u m a founded divine law, so Servius Tullus founds the
social order (42. 4). superbia characterizes the last Tarquin. Thus each
section within the book has its own place within a general framework
and the corresponsion between the two halves of the book gives the
whole a symmetrical shape.
The Foundation of Rome
/ The Facts
There are a few traces of Ghalcolithic and Bronze Age settlement
at Rome, chiefly from the Esquiline, which may correspond to the
legends about Sicels and Aborigines but the first extensive evidence
comes from the middle of the eighth century. A series of post-holes
have been found on the two ridges of the Palatine, the Palatium and
the Germalus, which can be dated stratigraphically and by the
pottery associated with them, which is characteristic of the Early Iron
Age, to c. 750. Contemporary with this earliest community at Rome
was a cemetery in the Forum. Excavations have shown that both
cremation and inhumation were practised. T h e ashes were regularly
placed in a small urn in the shape of a hut which was stored with other
utensils in a large funerary jar. The hut urns correspond precisely
with the plan as it can be reconstructed of the Palatine huts whose
memory was also preserved in the casa Romuli. The primitive culture of
the Palatine community is found at the same period elsewhere in
Latium, particularly at Alba Longa. It is a regional variant of the
Villanovan culture which was widespread throughout Italy in the
eighth century. Little can be hazarded about the ethnic origins of
these earliest inhabitants. T h e linguistic character of the Latin lan
guage has suggested to some that they were a wave of Indo-European
immigrants who came from Central Europe c. 1000 B.C. and who found
their abode in Latium about 800 B.C. The community was a resident
nucleus of shepherds and swineherds.
Very shortly after the first huts had been built on the Palatine and
the first graves sunk in the Forum, other groi )S settled on other hills
of Rome. Cemeteries have been found in
e Esquiline and the
Quirinal, which imply the existence of vl"agc ' ommunities on those
hills as well. T h e excavations on the Quirinal were significant in that
3i
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
they disclosed only inhumation-graves, a fact which lends colour to
the traditional belief that the inhabitants of the Quirinal were of
different racial origin from the inhabitants of the Palatine and that the
mixture of inhumation and cremation to be found in the Forum results
from the gradual fusion and intermingling of the Latins and an off
shoot of the Osco-Umbrians, the Sabines. M a n y of the oldest names at
Rome appear to be Sabine, and Latin demonstrably contains many
Sabine words. T h e duality is to be seen in the formal title populus
Romanus Quirites.
In summary it can be said that a settlement had existed on the
Palatine from pre-historic times, that it expanded in the middle of the
eighth century, that soon afterwards the Quirinal was settled by a dif
ferent, possibly Sabine, community, that the two communities together
with others on other hills gradually coalesced, and that the process of
synoecism was completed by the draining of the Forum and the build
ing of a market-place c. 625-575. T h e salient points of Roman tradition
are thus vindicated."All the attendant details and legends tell nothing
about the actual history of Rome but much about how that history
was written and how it came to be regarded.
T h e archaeological evidence is most conveniently to be found in
the three volumes of E. Gjerstad's Early Rome. T h e best general intro
duction in English is R. Bloch, The Origins of Rome, in the series
Ancient Peoples and Places, published by Thames and Hudson. See also
E. Gjerstad, Legends and Facts of Early Roman History, 6 ff.
The Legends
T w o mutually exclusive legends, of Romulus and of Aeneas,
attend the foundation of Rome. Of these Romulus was the older and
the more deep-rooted; it is assumed in an official R o m a n dedication
at Chios of c. 225 B.C. T h e legend of Aeneas became current\in the
sixth century and represents the view which the Greeks of that time
took of Rome. It was left to later historians to effect a synthesis of the
two.
Romulus is the eponymous founder of Rome. T h e suffix -ulus is
Etruscan a n d denotes a /cricmfc: Gaeculus is the mythical founder
of Praeneste. In the earliest legends he is variously associated with
Latinus, the eponymous hero of the Latins, who had penetrated Greek
consciousness as early as Hesiod (Theog. 1011). I n one version Latinus
was the father of R h o m e and R h o m y l o s . J n another Latinus had a
sister R h o m e and was himself the founder of Rome. In yet another
Latinus had a daughter who married Italus from whom Rhomos was
born. All these accounts say n o more than that Rome was founded
by the Latins. Equally the two dominant facts about the personality
of Romulus as they materialized in later telling, the antagonistic
32
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
rivalry with his brother and the aggressive militarism which contrasts
so abruptly with the piety of his successor, correspond to no historical
actuality. They represent a peculiarly R o m a n form of myth much
older than Rome which belong to the very core of Indo-European
thought. Romulus and Remus are Cain and Abel or J a c o b and Esau.
Romulus and N u m a are Varuna and Mitra or Uranus and Zeus. T h e
detailed biography with which the name of Romulus was clothed
was m a d e up from a series of myths most of which are aetiological in
nature explaining objects and monuments and ceremonies. Many
have been supplemented from the resources of Greek mythology.
They are studied individually in their place.
T h e legend of Aeneas can be more closely determined. Scattered
groups of migrants from Greece or Asia Minor may well have touched
the coast of Latium in the seventh and sixth centuries but the first
connexion of Aeneas with central Italy is revealed by statuettes from
Veii, Greek vases from Etruria and Spina, and on Etruscan scarabs
all portraying Aeneas carrying his father on his shoulders and all
dating from the end of the sixth century. T h e first literary allusion to
Aeneas in Italy occurs a century later (D.H. 1.47-48. 1 = Hellanicus,
F.Gr. Hist 4 F 31 Jacoby) but it is possible that the tradition was
already known to Stesichorus if the Tabula Iliaca, which depicts
Aeneas departing with his father and the sacra eV rqv 'EmrepLav is
based on Stesichorus. T h e route by which the legend reached Italy
is not certain. Weinstock conjectured that it was mediated through
Sicily. More recently Bomer has argued that it came with the
Phocaeans when they fled to the west c. 540. T h e important point is
that it was a Greek view imposed on Italy. T h e Greeks attributed to
heroes of the Greek world the discovery and settlement of the communities of the west with which they had dealings. Diomede, Evander,
and, above all, Ulysses provided pedigrees in their wanderings.
Aeneas found a home in the Etruscan world and in particular at Rome.
Initially the Aeneas story was widely spread in Etruria. It became
localized at Rome partly because the Greeks already recognized in
the Romans of the early fifth century those same qualities of pietas
which distinguished Aeneas and partly because of the accidental
occurrence of a pre-Indo-European place name Troia on the coast
near R o m e (1.311.).
T h e legend represented the changing image of Rome, first as seen
through Greek eyes, then in relation to her position in Latium and
Italy, finally as the adversary of Carthage. Simultaneously a more
mechanical process was at work synthesizing the conflicting stories of
Romulus and Aeneas and devising relationships which would co
ordinate the two incompatibles. These early stages are not germane,
for it was only when Eratosthenes fixed a date for the Fall of Troy
814432
33
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
that the chronological gap between Aeneas and Romulus the founder
of Rome became manifest and required bridging. It is probably that
both Fabius Pictor and Ennius were aware that a prolonged sojourn
at Alba was required if Aeneas and Romulus were to be retained in
the tradition but Cato, who calculated the interval between the Fall
of Troy and the foundation of Rome as 432 years (fr. 17), was the first
to fill the gap with circumstantial events drawn from local traditions.
His version may be briefly summarized. Latium was inhabited by
Aborigines under King Latinus. Aeneas, landing with his father
Anchises (fr. 9), founded Troia (fr. 4). Latinus granted him an
area of 2,700 iugera and the hand of his daughter Lavinia (frr. 8, 11)
and the united peoples adopted the name of Latins. T h e Trojans,
however, dishonoured the treaty by embarking on a foray (fr. 10). I n
disgust, the Latins (Aborigines) turned to Turnus the king of Rutulians who nursed a grievance against Aeneas for marrying Lavinia
(fr. 12). In the resulting war both Latinus and Turnus were killed,
while Aeneas disappeared from human sight. Aeneas' son Ascanius,
now called from his beard lulus, killed Mezentius who had come to
Turnus' aid and ruled over the city of Laurolavinium (frr. 9, 10, 11).
During the disturbances Lavinia had fled to the woods, where she
bore a son Silvius. Thirty years after the Trojan arrival in Italy
Ascanius handed Laurolavinium over to Lavinia and Silvius his halfbrother, and himself founded Alba Longa (fr. 13). Finally he trans
ferred Alba Longa also to Silvius who thus became the father of the
dynasty of Alban kings, the last of whom, Numitor, was father of a
daughter variously known as Ilia, Rhea, or Silvia. It was she who was
the mother of Romulus and Remus.
The Alban king-list did violence to history in order to preserve a
literary chronology. Rome was not the late-born offspring of Alba
Longa. T h e two villages shared a contemporary culture. Nonetheless
Cato's account of early Roman history became the standard vulgate
from which later writers only diverged to assert their individuality.
It finds typical expression in the elogium of Aeneas from Pompeii
(Inscr. Ital. 13 no. 85 : there were elogia of Aeneas and the Alban kings
also at Rome), or in the numerous versions assembled by D . H . T h e
surviving fragments of Cassius Hemina (fr. 2), Sisenna (fr. 2), and
Sempronius Tuditanus (fr. 1) show no disagreement of substance. W e
know of several minor modifications. T h e Aemilii substituted an
Aemilia for Rhea Silvia (Plutarch, Romulus 2). Others doubted the
paternity of Romulus (D.H. 1. 77). Varro added religious and
antiquarian refinements.
It is to this late stage in the synthesis of the legends that the two
authorities which L. consulted belong (1. 6 n., 3. 2 n.). Unlike Virgil,
who appears to have relied on the epic tradition created by Naevius and
34
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
i. i. 1-3
Ennius rather than the Catonian, L. followed recent historians (3. 8 n.).
There is no trace of Ennius in his account. Since nothing survives of
Valerius Antias 5 or Licinius Macer's treatment of the Trojan pre
history of Latium, L.'s sources cannot be certainly identified. T h e only
significant idiosyncrasy is that in L. Ascanius is the son of Aeneas and
his second wife, Lavinia, and Silvius is the grandson not the son of
Aeneas.
T h e principal modern works on the subject are J . Perret, Les
Origines de la Legende Trqyenne de Rome, reviewed by Momigliano, J.R.S.
35 ( r 945) 9 9 _ I O 4 J F- Bomer, Rom und Troia, 1955; A. Alfoldi, Die
Troian. Urahnen d. Romer, 1957; see also P. Ducati, Tito Livio e le
origini di Roma. T h e thesis that L. is dependent upon Ennius is main
tained among others by W. Aly, Livius und Ennius; M . Ghio, Riv. FiL
Class. 29 (1951), 1 ff.
1. 1-3. The Legend of Antenor
Nothing is known historically or archaeologically about the Euganei
who were supposed to inhabit in classical times the sub-alpine regions
above the Po valley. A number of inscriptions from the Val Camonica
dating from later than c. 500 B.G. have been adduced as evidence of
the Euganean language, for Cato ap. Pliny, N.H. 3. 134 listed the
Camunia as part of the Euganean people. T h e language is Italic,
having a closer relationship with the Latin-Faliscan group than with
the Osco-Umbrian. This does not, however, tell anything about the
ethnic or cultural character of the people since the language may well
have been acquired at a late stage in their history. Indeed place-names
from the region have been used to support the traditional account
that the Euganei were very old inhabitants of the area who pre
dated any Indo-European contamination.
Much more is known about the Veneti (5. 33. 10). Their chief
centres were Padua and Este (Ateste), where a settled culture, distinct
from the Villanovan, can be traced from the tenth to the second
century. T h e Veneti were distinguished for their metal-work and for
their horse-breeding and had commercial contacts with the Greeks
from before the sixth century. Their language also is now generally
agreed to have had its closest affinity with the Latin-Faliscan group
although its alphabet was borrowed from the Etruscans and some
words have been claimed as Illyrian. T h e phenomena can be explained
by the cultural pressures to which the Veneti were by their very situa
tion subjected. T h e ethnic origin of the Veneti remains in doubt.
Herodotus (1.196) speaks of 'IWvpt&v 'Everol but the long-fashionable
theory that the Veneti were a wave of migrating Illyrians is no longer
accepted and cannot be supported by the widespread distribution
of the name (e.g. the Venetulani in Latin, the Veneti of Armorica, the
35
i . i. 1-3
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
i. i. i
i. 65) or the name of the subject (cf. Polybius 1.5. 1; Tacitus, Annals
1. 1 urbemRomam; Agricola 4. 1 Cn. Iulius Agricola \ D.H. 1. 8. 9). This
peculiarity led Wex to doubt whether the opening survives in its
original form {Neue Jahrb.f. PhiloL 71 (1855), 123-5). He n o t e d that
Servius (ad Aen. 1. 242) appeared to credit L. with having told of
Aeneas' betrayal of Troy (hi enim duo (Antenor et Aeneas) Troiam prodidisse dicuntur secundum Livium; cf. Origo Gentis Romanae 9. 1-2) and he
observed that L. never uses iam primum to begin a paragraph (cf.
5. 51. 6, 28. 39. 5, 39. 52. 8, 40. 3. 3). From this he concluded that a
sentence or sentences had been lost. But L.'s reason for not naming
Rome at the very beginning is that he gives pride of place to his native
district of Padua and iam primum is not strictly the opening for it
follows on from the general introduction contained in the Praefatio.
satis constat: implying that L. has consulted more than one authority
(48. 5. 5- 33- 5, 37- 34- 7)vetusti: Antenor had entertained Menelaus and Odysseus when they
came to Troy (Iliad 3. 207 with 2J) and had recommended the sur
render of Helen (Iliad 7. 347 ff.; Horace, Epist. 1. 2. 9). T h e earliest
versions do not associate Aeneas in these negotiations but cf., e.g.,
Quint us Smyrn. 13. 291 ff.
1 . 2 . et sedes: the sense is that they had lost their homes because they
had been driven out of Paphlagonia and their leader because Pylaemenes had been killed.
Pylaemene: cf. Iliad 2. 851, 5. 576.
1. 3 . Troia: so also Steph. Byz. s.v. Tpola. T h e same place-name is
better attested on the coast of Latium ( 1 . 4 ; Gato fr. 4 ; Paulus Festus
504 L . ; D.H. 1. 53. 3 ; Servius, ad Aen. 1.5, 7. 158, 9. 47). An Etruscan
oinochoe from Caere depicting a labyrinth has the inscription Truia
and the very primitive military rite at R o m e was known as the lusus
Troiae. Stephanus glosses the name by x^paZ- This evidence, whether
it be coupled with the name of old Troy itself or not, has been taken
to indicate that Troia was a pre-Indo-European term, used as a placename, meaning a fortified place (Rehm, Philologus, Supp. Band, 24
(1932), 46 ff.). When once the Greeks began to spread the Trojan
legend to Italy they naturally attached it to similar names. T h e Latian
Troia is to be sited at or near Zingarini.
1. 4 - 3 . Aeneas and the Alban Kings
1. 4. maiora: by enallage with rerum.
fatis: 4. 1 n.
Macedoniam: the old town of Rakelos in Macedonia-Thrace changed
its name to Aineia (Herodotus 7. 123. 2 ; Lycophron 1236 with U)
and issued coins of Aeneas carrying Anchises, on his shoulders (Head,
37
i. i. 4
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
33 ff.
Siciliam: Thucydides (6.2. 3 drawing on Antiochus) called theElymi
whose chief towns were Segesta and Eryx Trojan refugees, and Hellanicus (F. Gr. Hist. 4 F 31) named Elymus as a companion-in-arms
of Aegestus and Aeneas, though in another context saying that the
Elymi came from Italy (4 F 79 b with Jacoby's note). Their culture
was characterized by elements which were more Phoenician than
Greek, lending colour to the belief that they reached Sicily from the
East before the Greeks (details in Dunbabin, The Western Greeks,
336-7). T h e specifically Trojan origin may have been devised, or at
least published, by Stesichorus of Himera and inspired by the cult
of Aphrodite Aeneias at Eryx (D.H. 1. 53). T h e Aeneas story was
rooted in Sicily at the end of the sixth century and Sicily was a possible
channel by which it could have reached Rome.
Laurentem: 1. 10 n.
tenuisse: sc. cur sum 'he had held course with his fleet to the land of
the Laurentes', cf. 31. 45. 14; for classe cf 36. 7. 15. L.'s use oftenere
is, however, awkward here so close to two places where it is used
in the meaning 'inhabit5 (1. 3 eas tenuisse terras', 1. 5 ea tenebant loca).
Frigell proposed deletion.
1. 5. Aborigines', the inhabitants of Latium were known to Hesiod as
Latini. T h e Aborigines (ab origine) figure first in Gallias (F. Gr. Hist.
564 F 5 a and b) apparently because the introduction of the Aeneas
legend entailed that the Latins could not have been an autochthonous
race but must have been the result of the fusion of Trojan and native
(aboriginal) stock (Cato frr. 9-11 P.). Thereafter they remained a
constant element in the story (for Lycophron's Bopelyovoi cf. Zielinski,
Deutsch. Philol. 1891, 4 1 ; de Sanctis, Storia, 1. 173; Kretschmer,
Glotta 20 (1932), 198),
1 . 6 . duplex: the second version, which spares the Latins the humilia
tion of defeat and the Romans the infamy of aggression, doubtless
gained currency from the late fourth century when the foundation
legend was invoked to improve relations with the Latins. It is in sub
stance the version of Cato, Virgil (7. 170 ff.), and Varro (cf. D.H.
1. 57-60, 64). T h e first version, which makes Aeneas the aggressor is,
like the dismissal of Julian pretensions in 3. 2 (n.), anti-dynastic.
38
FOUNDATION OF ROME
i. 1.6
I- I . 10
FOUNDATION OF ROME
Numicius near Lavinium (Fabius Pic tor fr. 4 P . ; Naevius ap. Macrobius 6. 2. 31) has recently been confirmed by a fourth-century cippus
found at Tor Tignosa 5 miles inland from Lavinium and inscribed
LARE AiNEiA D(ONOM) to be of comparable antiquity with the
Lavinian Penates (Guarducci, Bull. Commun. 76 (1956-8) 3 ff.; Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (1 g6o), 114-18). Now the cult of Aeneas never reached
Rome, although the legend did, and the explanation of the role played
by Lavinium in the Trojan origins of Rome may lie in the significance
of that fact coupled with the peculiar nature of the R o m a n Penates.
In one form the Penates certainly reached Rome from Lavinium but
the word penates must originally have designated the gods of the perms
rather than either di patrii or national protectors like the Dioscuri.
T h e basic meaning is in accord with their association with Vesta (D.H.
8. 4 1 . 3 ; Cicero, Har. Resp. 12). They were the gods of the store-house
and are to be recognized in the primitive statuettes found buried with
hut urns in the earliest graves at Rome and Alba. At some point
therefore a synthesis must have taken place which converted the
primitive penates into the complex and manifold deities with their
Trojan links which are familiar in classical times, and that synthesis
must have been made in the period 520-480 B.C. T h a t is precisely
the period when Rome became mistress of the neighbouring towns
of Latium including Lavinium. T h e hegemony implicit in the first
Carthaginian treaty is finally regularized by the treaty of Sp. Cassius.
Rome developed the Aeneas myth so that it became centred on her
while leaving a transient, if memorable, part for Lavinium; whereas
in fact it was Lavinium with the nearby Troia which had been
the first place in Latium to take u p the myth seriously and to claim
Aeneas and the Trojans as ancestors. Lavinium retained the honour
as the foundation of Aeneas and as the first home of the Penates and
throughout historical times was accorded appropriate respect by the
Romans, but it had become a mere res ting-point on the Trojan path
to Rome.
T h e bibliography is very extensive but is usefully assembled by
Weinstock, R.E. Tenates' and J.R.S., loc. cit., and Bomer, Rom und
Troia.
1. 11. Ascanium: 3. 2 n.
2. 1. Turnus rex Rutulorum: for the name Turnus see 50. 3 n., for the
Rutuli see 57. 1 n. T h e addition of Turnus and, above all, of Mezentius to the Aeneas saga is later than and dependent on the synthesis
of the Lavinian and R o m a n tradition analysed above (1. 10 n.),
although it was firmly settled by the time of Cato (cf. Servius, ad Aen.
1. 267) and admitted only of minor adjustments such as the insertion
of the dream-oracle found in D.H. 1. 57 and Virgil, Aeneid 7. 81 ff.
40
F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME
5
I. 2. 1
I. 2. 6
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
except that Jiuvius is very much the rarer word (33: 182). This
phenomenon alone would incline one to prefer Jlaviiim here were
it not for the proven unreliability of M in these early chapters.
Jiuvius is not used by Caesar, Hirtius, Sallust, Nepos, Velleius, Valerius
Maximus, or the authors of the Wars in Africa, Alexandria, and
Spain.
indigetem: an obscure term which must mean 'divine ancestor'. T h e
di indigetes invoked in prayers include Sol Indiges who according to
one tradition was grandfather of Latinus (Hesiod, Theogony 1011 ff.)
and the Latin word is reproduced by the Greek yevdpxqs (Diodorus
37. 11). See further Kretschmer, Glotta 31 (1951), 157 ff.; Weinstock,
loc. cit.
3 . 2 . haud ambigam: L. betrays clearly that he has consulted two
sources, one of which maintained the identification of Ascanius and
lulus the ancestor of the gens Iulia and another which denied or ignored
it. T h e history of the question can be traced. Ascanius, who is an un
obtrusive figure in Homer, acquired importance with his brothers in
the post-Homeric tradition as the surviving inheritors of the Trojan
kingdom. H e rules over the Daskylites (Hellanicus) or Ida (Demetrius
of Scepsis; cf. Steph. Byz. s.v. aoKavia\ Mela 1. 92) or Troy itself
(D.H. 1. 53. 4). Originally his mother was called Eurydice but
Creusathe name familiar from Virgil {Aeneid 2. 666; see Austin
on Virgil, Aeneid 2. 795)was at a later but unascertainable date
substituted. His brothers are equally fluid. The Verona scholiast
on Aeneid 2. 717 mentions Eurybates and Servius, ad Aen. 4. 159
Dardanus and Leontodamas but there is no firm tradition about
any of them. When Aeneas moved west Ascanius accompanied him
(cf. Sophocles, Antenoridae). So it was natural to believe that Ascanius
was the ancestor of the founder of Rome. Chronological considera
tions which inserted Alba as a link in the history of Rome between the
Trojan landing and the foundation of the city enabled Ascanius to
have an honourable role as founder of Alba. It was doubtless aided
by the family pride of the gens Iulia, an Alban family (30. 2 n.) who
connected their name with Troy by the equivalence lulus = Ilos
and accordingly claimed that lulus was another name for Ascanius.
This was an old claim, already found in Cato (fr. 9 P.)- But the gens
Iulia in the second century was of little influence and it was only in the
closing years that it revived and began to exploit its claims for political
ends. Sextus Julius Caesar, about 125 B.C., minted coins displaying
Venus Genetrix referring to their Trojan ancestry (Sydenham no. 476)
and the theme recurs in the coins of L. Julius Caesar in 94 B.C.
(Sydenham no. 593). T h e consul of 90 B.C. made capital out of the
link and took pains to publicize his patronage of the people of Ilium
42
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
i. 3. 2
i. 3. 6
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
Fasti 4. 35 ff.; Virgil, Aeneid 6. 767 ff.; Diodorus 7 . 5 ; Dio fr. 4) and
will be as old as the realization of the approximate dates of Troy and
Rome. T h e inclusion of Capys points to a third-century date when the
relations between Rome and Capua were fraught. Certainly it was to
be found in some form in Fabius Pictor (fr. 5 P.) and Cato (fr. 11 P.)
but the exact names are not quoted before the first century. In their
invention little ingenuity was displayed. They provide patron heroes
for local places and a symbolic pageant of R o m a n historyLatinus
is succeeded by Alba whose descendant is a Romulus (3. 9 n.), signify
ing the stages of Lavinium, Alba, and Rome. Tiberinus, Aventinus,
and Capetus ( = Capitolium) personify the prominent features of
the city. O n the other side names were selected to emphasize the
Trojan origins of the people. Atys (for whom Ovid, in the Fasti,
Diodorus, and Eusebius substitute Epytus; cf. Iliad 2. 604) is the name
of several members of the Lydian royal house (Herodotus 1. 7, 34, 9 4 ;
7. 27, 74: cf. 'ATTLS). Capys was also the name of Anchises' father (cf.
4. 37. 1 n.). Capetus (elsewhere given as Calpetus to provide a pedigree
for the Calpurnii) was a suitor of Hippodameia (Pausanias 6. 21. 10).
For the more controversial names see in detail below.
Numitor and Amulius cannot be accounted for on these lines because
they belonged to an early stage of the Romulus story and so were
originally independent of the Alban king-list. They were incorporated
in it when the Romulus legend was united with that of Aeneas.
Servius (ad Am. 8. 72, 330) says that L. followed Alexander (Polyhistor) in stating that the Tiber got its name from an Alban king
Tiberinus who perished in it. This has been generally taken to mean
that L. consulted Alexander as a source but the conclusion is neither
necessary nor attractive. Alexander, a slave or freedman given the
citizenship by Sulla (c. 80 B.C.), wrote an encyclopaedia of Eastern and
R o m a n antiquities in Greek (Jacoby, F. Gr. Hist. 273). T h e obscurity
of the author, the unsuitable lay-out of his work, the unfamiliarity of
his language, the unoriginality of his technique, all make him a
most improbable authority for L. to have used. It is now generally
admitted that L. can only have consulted him, if at all, for the specific
detail about Tiberinus (3.8) and not for the Alban king-list as a whole.
Yet even so such a procedure is at variance with all that we know of L.'s
method of work. If Servius is correct in attributing this version of
the name of the Tiber to Alexander, I prefer to believe that L.
learnt it not at first hand from Alexander but through an intermediary.
Since it was argued above that the main source of the chapters was
not Licinius Macer who is quoted only in criticism, it is natural to
think of another admirer of Sulla's who wrote after Alexander and
would have had both occasion and inclination to consult his work
Valerius Antias.
44
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
i. 3. 6
For the king-list see Trieber, Hermes 29 (1894), 124 ff.; Schwartz,
A.G.G.W. 40 (1894), 3 ff.; Bomer on Ovid, Fasti 4. 39 ff.
3 . 6. Silvius: was probably inspired by the character of the land
scape of early Latium, traces of which survive in the names silva
Arsia, silva Malitiosa, &c. It is not plausible, with Sundwall (Klio 11
(1913), 250), to connect it with the Asiatic name ZY'A/fos. casu quodam
in silvis natus is the product of later romanticism.
3 . 7. Prisci Latini'. the casci Latini of Ennius. T h e name is not ancient
but stems from the Latin settlement of 338, when the need arose to
distinguish between the title 'Latin 5 with its juridical implications
which then came into force and the earlier ethnic term 'Latin'. T h e
colonies here referred to, which comprised the area between the
Anio and the Tiber, are equally anachronistic. See Sherwin-White,
Roman Citizenship, 9 ff.
3 . 8. Atys: Epytus in Ovid (Fasti), Diodorus, and Eusebius, emphasiz
ing the Trojan lineage (Iliad 2. 604).
Tiberimts: the eponymous hero of the Tiber had been cast in other
roles besides that of an Alban king. He had been an aboriginal, killed
by Glaucus, an Etruscan, a Latin, or a son ofJuppiter who fell in battle
near the river (Servius, ad Aen. 8. 72, 330).
3 . 9. Agrippa: the original name is likely to have been Acrota (Ovid,
Met. 14. 617; from at<poalluding to the arx as Capetus alludes to the
Capitol) which was then rationalized to Agrippa. Agrippa as a name
was originally a praenomen descriptive of the manner of birth (Pliny,
N.H. 7. 45) and as a cognomen was later in vogue among the Furii and
Menenii. But the only Agrippa of note between the early Republic
and the Empire was M . Vipsanius Agrippa and it is generally assumed
that the substitution of Agrippa for Acrota was out of compliment to
Augustus' general (Trieber; see Reinhold, M. Agrippa, 10 n. 38). The
suggestion is not compelling. T h e formation of the Alban king-list
belongs to the same era that gave such wide publicity to the parable
of Menenius Agrippa (2. 32. 8 n.).
Romulus: the name is given as Aremulus by Diodorus (7. 5. 10),
Cassiodorus, Hieronyrnus (1. 46. 7), and the author of the Origo Gentis
Romanae (18. 2). P. Burman, on Ovid, Met. 14. 616, wished to read
Remulus here, which is more probable than Aremulus in that it pro
vides an attractive aetiology for the ager Remurinus (Paulus Festus
345 L.) and the Remoria (Ovid, Fasti 5. 479). Nonetheless Romulus is
not only better attested; it is a necessary anticipation of the great
Romulus and makes a piquant successor to Agrippa.
fulmine: there was a meteorite held in great veneration on the
Aventine which goes far to explaining this detail.
Proca: etymologically the name is connected with proceres and Proculus and the meaning will be, 'elder, leader, prince' (Walde-Hofmann
45
i- 3- 9
FOUNDATION OF R O M E
s.v.). It may have been chosen also for the reminiscence of Prochyte,
Aeneas' kinswoman, who died en route for Sicily and gave her name to
a Gampanian headland (Servius, ad Aen. 9. 712).
' 3 . 10-4. The Birth of Romulus and Remus
I give only a cursory account of the birth of the founder of Rome in
so far as it is directly relevant to the understanding of L.'s narrative.
The subject is treated extensively in Rosenberg's articles in R.E. ('Rhea
Silvia' and 'Romulus'). T h e primary discussion is by Mommsen,
Rom. Forschungen, 1 ff. An acute analysis, with a full bibliography of
the problem, is given by G . J . Classen, Historia 12 (1963), 447 ff.
Before the insertion of the Alban king-list the founder of Rome,
variously named as Rhomos or Rhomylos, was held to be either the
son of Aeneas (Alcimus ap. Festus 326 L.) or his grandson by a Trojan
daughter (Callias ap. D.H. 1. 72 ; so also Ennius and Naevius accord
ing to Servius, ad Aen. 1. 273, 6. 777), who is consequentially named
Ilia. Originally he was an only son but by the third century at
the latest the tradition of the twins was recognized (Lycophron 1232).
Originally Romulus and Remus may have been no more than the
Etruscan (cf. rumlna and the gens Romilia) and Greek forms of the same
name, misunderstood to give two personalities.
T h e genealogy, therefore, is Greek and two Greek legends were
grafted on to it. O n 4 J a n u a r y 1837 Macaulay in Calcutta com
mented in his copy of Livy that the story of the exposure of the twins
was Very like Herodotus' account of the early history of Gyrus'. A
closer parallel is the fortunes of Neleus and Pelias, sons of Tyro by
Poseidon, set adrift on the Enipeus and suckled by a bitch and
a mare respectively. It is an age-old explanation, like siring by the firegod (39. 1 n.), to account for the emergence of a new force without
background or pedigree. The specifically Roman turn which it took
was to make the foster-mother a wolf. This may be attested as early
as the fourth century when an Etruscan stele from the Gertosa di
Bologna (Ducati, Monum. Antichi, 20. 531) depicts a she-wo If suckling
a human. It is certainly established by the early third century when
the Ogulnii set up a statue of the wolf and twins (10. 23. 11-12) and
the motif is figured on Romano-Campanian didrachms (Sydenham
no. 6). It was evidently the theme of Naevius' play Lupus. We cannot
be certain when or why the she-wolf was selected. T h e most probable
explanation sees it as an aetiological explanation of the luperci (see
note on ch. 5.). T h e recognition of the identity of the twins is a typically
Greek dvayvwptcjts.
Once the exposure story was accepted it became necessary to devise
reasons why the royal heirs should have been so humiliated. Recourse
46
FOUNDATION OF ROME
i. 3. 10
i. 3. 10
F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
1.4.4
49
i. 4. 7
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
FOUNDATION O F R O M E
1.4. 9
holidays. For celebrare cf. Cicero, de Orat. 3. 197; for seria ac iocos cf.
Ps.-Aur. Vict. Epit. 9. 17; Claudian 22. 165.
5. 1-2. Evander and the Luperci
T h e Lupercalia, held on 15 February, was among the most primitive
of R o m a n rituals. Naked patrician youths ran, not, as was once
thought, round the Palatine, but up a n d down the Sacra Via in the
Forum, armed with strips of goatskin with v/hich they hit bystanders.
Three main explanations of the ceremony have been supported and
judgement might be given in favour of one of them if only there could
be any certainty about the etymology of the word Luperci. A. K.
Michels (T.A.P.A. 84 (1953), 35-59 with references to the principal
ancient and modern authorities a m o n g whom notice especially
Deubner, Archivf. Relig.-Wiss. 13 (1910), 481 ff.), points out that the
Lupercalia fell in the middle of three days of propitiation of the dead
(dies parentales; cf. Ovid, Fasti 2. 533-70; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 13)
and that the area where the Luperci ran marked the boundary of the
primitive sepulcretum in the Forum. She sees the festival as intended to
protect the community against the power of the dead manifesting
themselves at this season in the form of wolves (cf, e.g., Petronius 62;
Augustine, Civ. Dei 18. 17; Pliny, N.H. 8. 81) and the Luperci as
priests who are endowed with the gift of controlling wolves or the
spirits of the dead manifested as wolves (lupercus formed from lupus like
noverca; so also Ernout-Meillet). A second theory, maintained by the
ancients themselves (Ovid, Fasti 2.425-52; [Servius], adAen. 8.343; Livy
fr. 63) and championed, for example, by K. Kerenyi (Mobe, 136-47), held
that it was a fertility ceremony and that flagellation was designed to
promote fertility in women. Such a theory cannot account either for
the name Luperci or for the flagellation of men as well as women. T h e
simplest hypothesis is that reaffirmed by Nilsson (Latomus 15(1956), 133).
Taking the Luperci to be derived from lupus and arceo (cf. XvKovpyos),
he regarded the ceremony as the natural concern of a shepherding com
munity to avert depredations on its herds by wolves. T h e superstitious
horror of wolves in early Rome, occasioned by economic necessity, is
plain from the prodigy of 3. 29. 9. Although it seems agreed that this
etymology of Luperci is inadmissible (see Walde-Hofmann; E r n o u t Meillet; also Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 84-86; J . Gruber, Glotta
39 (1961), 273-6), none the less the recognition of the Lupercalia as a
purification of the flocks is most in accord with the character of early
R o m a n religion (cf. the Parilia) and with the ancient evidence. T h e
Luperci may be not wolf-averters but wolf-men, who impersonate and
so control wolves. With the transition from a pastoral to an urban
society, the original character of the ceremony will also have undergone
change, until it came to be thought of as a fertility-rite.
51
I. 5. 1-2
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
Whatever its exact nature, the Lupercalia afforded the grounds for
a link between Greece and Rome. T h e similarity of the Luperci to
the cult of Ztvs AVKOLIOS in Arcadia facilitated the construction, prob
ably in the fourth century, of the myth that the Arcadian Evander had
inhabited the Palatine before the arrival of the descendants of Aeneas.
Evander also supplied an etymology of the name Palatium (5. 1 n.).
It is a purely literary invention, dating from an age which wished to
see Greek precedents for all things R o m a n and, in particular, saw the
influence of Arcadia strong in Rome (Bayet, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 38
(1920), 63 ff.; he argues for Magna Graecia as the intermediary of
the legends). For a different view see Gjerstad, Legends and Facts,
10 ff., who agrees that the rite is of the greatest antiquity.
5 1. monte: wrongly excised by Madvig, is in apposition to Palatio
(cf. Tacitus, Annals 12. 2 4 ; see Andresen, Woch. Klass. Phil. 1916,
976 ff.). Elsewhere mons Palatinus is found but it was necessary to have
the substantive form Palatium here in order to clarify the etymology.
Pallanteo: this etymology is as old as Fabius Pictor (cf. D . H . 1.31.4,
79. 4 ; Pliny, N.H. 4. 20; Pausanias 8. 43. 2 ; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 313)
but it had many rivals, e.g. from a putative son of Hercules and
Evander's daughter Launa (Lavinia) (Polybius 6. 11a 1 with Walbank's note; D . H . 1. 34. 1; Origo Gentis Romanae 5. 3 ; Servius, ad
Aen. 8. 5 1 ; the addition of Hercules helped to justify his encounter
with Cacus); from balare (Naevius ap. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 5 3 ;
Paulus Festus 245 L.), polare (Paulus Festus, loc. cit.) or the god Pales
(Veil. Pat. 1. 8. 4 ; Solinus 1. 15; cf. Palatua: this etymology is de
fended by Vanicek and Altheim). There are, however, a number of
other place-names beginning Pal- or Fal- (cf. Falerii). This points
rather to a pre-Indo-European root meaning'rock, hill' (cf., e.g., Etr.
falad 'sky': see Walde-Hofmann s.v. 'Palatium').
5. 2. Evandrum: in Greek mythology a minor 8cu/xa>v associated with
Pan and worshipped principally in Arcadia. His ties with the Trojans
were partly those of family, for he was related to Dardanus through his
great-grandfather Atlas, and partly political since he had entertained
Anchises on a visit to Arcadia (Virgil, Aeneid 8. 155) and had been
driven from his homeland by the hostility of the Argives. It is possible
that in him is preserved the dim memory of scattered Greek migrations
to Italy in the tenth century (H. Miiller-Karpe, Vom Anfang Roms).
There was a Bronze Age settlement at Rome.
Lycaeum Pana: Pan {TJdiovThe Feeder) began as a local, pastoral
deity of Arcadia. In company with Zeus he made his residence on
M t . Lykaeus near Megalopolis from where his power continued to
spread. In time of famine it was customary for Arcadian boys to whip
his statue with squills (Theocritus 7. 106-8 with Gow's notes; cf.
1. 123 ff.), and this fertility-rite, together with the name Lykaeus, is
52
F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME
1.5-
1-5.6
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
119; Tro. 927) and Sil. Ital. 3. 234. It is no doubt meant to suggest
the Greek SdAous" v<f>alveiv (cf., e.g., Iliad 6. 187).
6. 3 - 7 . 3 . The Foundation of Rome
Only Ovid (Fasti. 4. 809 fif. with Bomer's note) makes any striking
departures from the familiar account of the death of Remus and the
foundation of the city. Yet the story, in common with so much of the
Romulus legend, is a later invention based on Greek mythology. At
bottom is the primitive belief in the sanctity of walls (Festus 358 L.).
But the evil consequences which attend contempt of walls is Greek
in origin, recalling the tale of Poimandros and Leukippos (Plutarch,
Q.R. 37) or Oeneus and Toxeus (Apollodorus 1.8. 1 ; Ox. Pap. 2463).
Its localization at Rome, natural as it was in any case, was eased by a
suggestive technical term from augury (Paulus Festus 345 L. 'remores
aves in auspicio dicuntur, quae acturum aliquid remorari conpellunt'). L. gives two versions both of which are of demonstrably late
date (6. 4 n.). A rationalistic account is placed side by side/wittLthe
volgatior fama. T h e former, which on a priori grounds can credibly be
attributed to Licinius Macer, substituted a political motive (6. 4 n.,
regni cupido) for a religious one. L., by temperament in sympathy with
such scepticism, accepts from the vulgate only the curse (7. 2 n.) which
he makes the core of the incident. It is the first of many such episodes
which are m a d e into a unity round a short piece of dramatic and
characterizing speech (7. 4-15, 2. 10. 1-13 n.). It was a story which
evidently had a contemporary message. For although the rivalry
between two brothers in which the superiority of the one entailed the
eclipse of the other represents an age-old theme prominent in many
societies (cf. Cain and Abel), Romulus' victory was only secured by
a crime and that crime of fratricide continued to reassert itself through
out Roman history. T h e evils of the Civil Wars were seen as a legacy
of Romulus' acts (Horace, Epod. 7. 17-20). Thus there was a con
tradiction between Romulus the fratricide and Romulus the conditor
urbis, the bad man and the good. In L. the conflict is still unresolved
for he depended on pre-Augustan sources, but Ovid and Virgil
(Aeneid 1. 292), reacting in different ways to Augustus' assertion of the
Romulus motif (7. 9 n.), were at pains to minimize the crime of
Romulus by emphasizing the sacrilege of Remus, by substituting
Celer for Romulus as the actual murderer, and by depicting Romulus
as shocked and saddened by what occurred. See Schilling, R..L. 38
(i960), 182-99.
6. 4. regni cupido: 17. 1 n., 23. 7, 34. 1, 2. 7. 9, 4. 46. 2.
tutelae: the dative has archetypal authority and may be supported
by 24. 22. 15, 42. 19. 15. Nagelsbach, following Doujat, would read
quorum in tutela, Holscher quorum in tutelam.
54
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
1.6.4
i. 7- 3
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
i- 7-3
i- 7-5
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
1.7.8
i.7.8
F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME
ROMULUS
i. 7. 12
I. 8. 2
ROMULUS
ROMULUS
i. 8. 4
1.8.7
ROMULUS
ROMULUS
i- 9-^3
together into a connected account but L. goes further and turns them
into satisfying romance. His method is to use the Sabine women like
a Greek chorus as a constant background to each episode and to
allow their emotions gradually to change with circumstances. Thus
there is a formal structure which can be analysed as follows:
9. 116
Internal: Rape of the Sabine Women.
10. 111. 4 External: (a) War with Gaeninenses.
(b) War with Antemnates.
(c) War with Grustumini.
11. 5-9
Internal: Tarpeia.
12
External: Mettius Gurtius and the Defeat of the
Sabines.
13
Internal: Reconciliation.
There is also an emotional structure, ranging from defiance and
indignation (9. 14), through resignation (11. 2), to reconciliation
(13. 8 non modo commune sed concors etiam). The whole is knit together;
and a comparison with the parallel versions of Cicero (de Rep. 2. 12),
D.H. (2. 30. 1), and Plutarch in his life of Romulus leaves no doubt
that the artistry is directly due to L. T h e institution of the Gonsualia
for the particular purpose of attracting the Sabines is psychologically
more satisfying than Cicero's casual mention that there happened
to be an annual festival. So too the omission of the numerous circum
stantial details which clutter the pages of D.H. makes for clarity and
movement. Cicero is embarrassed and ashamed by the whole affair.
H e calls Romulus 5 plan subagreste and hastens to point out that the
Sabine women really were well born (honesto ortas loco). There is no
apologetic tone in L. For him it is a noble and inspiring story in
keeping with the importance and size of Romz (9. 1, 9. 8). Where
the scale is noble, the events cannot be unworthy.
Historically the only question is whether primitive Roman society
was the result of a fusion of Sabine and Latin elements. Arch geolo
gically there is ample evidence that in the eighth and early seventh
centuries there were separate village communities on the Palatine, the
Oppian (Esquiline), and the Quirinal, and that the culture of the
Palatine, as revealed by its arts and crafts, was different from that of
the other two hills. T h e same dichotomy may be disclosed by the
existence of two different burial-rites, cremation predominating in the
earliest graves of the Forum and inhumation on the Esquiline and
Quirinal. T h e same phenomenon is to b^ seen in the fields of religion
and language. Certain special ceremonies belong to the Quirinal
alone and have characteristically Sabine affinities.
T h e bsst summaries (with references) of the archaeological evidence
for the Sabine element in early Rome may b * found in R. Bloch,
814432
65
ROMULUS
i- 9-13
{<
K
T h e c o n . i t ^ o n betv
ualia and the R a p e has not yet been
satisfactorily explaii. 1
tain that in origin Gonsus (from condere: see Schulze 474,
Philologica 2 (1957), 175; J.R.S. 51
(1961), 32) was a god
anary or storehouse. Apart from the
etymology, his two festi
1 August; 15 December) are paired
with the Opiconsivia (25 ^ st) and the Opalia (19 December)
and correspond in time respectively to the garnering of the harvest
and the onset of winter when anxiety arises whether the supplies will
last till the following harvest. This much is plain. T h e horse- or muleraces which in historical times accompanied the Gonsualia were no
original feature but will have been added under Etruscan influence
(D. H . 2. 3 1 ; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 636), for such contests are figured
frequently on Etruscan paintings and are Etruscan in character. T h e
motive for the addition may have been a change in the conception of
Consus' functions. As a god of the granary his altar was underground,
but to the Etruscans such shrines (puteal) were associated with the
spirits of the dead. T h e horse was the funerary animal (cf. Aul. Gell.
10. 15. 3 : also the tantalizing entry in Praenestine Fasti for 15 Decem
ber) and equine ceremonies are regular at funerals (cf, e.g., Herodotus
4. 71-72). T h e elaboration of the Gonsualia by the addition of horse
races which turned it into one of the most spectacular of the early
festivals led in its turn to a misrepresentation of the deity in whose
honour it was held. T o the Greeks Poseidon was the god of horses. H e
enjoyed the cult-title "Iimuos and was thought of as a horse-god
(Pausanias 7. 2 1 . 7). Thus Greek concepts suggested the wholly false
and un-Roman notion that the Gonsualia were held in honour of
Neptunus equestris (9. 6; cf. Tertullian, de Sped. 5. 5). The early Nep
tune shared only the aquatic functions of Poseidon (5. 13. 6 n.) his
Greek counterpart.
Three stages, Latin, Etruscan, and Greek, can be postulated for the
evolution of Gonsus but none illuminate his connexion with the Sabine
women. Yet this connexion is old, at least as old as Ennius (Servius,
ad Aen. 8. 636) and perhaps much older (2. 18. 2 n.). It is true that
both in the forms of marriage and in the election of Vestals (veluti
bello captae) a token display of force was used and it may be significant
that at the Nonae Gaprotinae on 7 July sacerdotes publici make sacrifice
to Consus. Equally it could be held that it was a dramatic historization
66
ROMULUS
i. 9. 1
* 9- 5
ROMULUS
ROMULUS
1.9.8
*-9- r 3
ROMULUS
fas ac fidem is an old expression from the law in which per, like the
Greek napd, means 'contrary to' (cf. perfidus). It is preserved in
Plautus, Most. 500 with Sonnenschein's note; Cicero, pro S. Roscio
n o , 116; de Inv. 1. 71 perfidemfefellerunt.
9. 14. docebat; the arguments which Romulus uses to placate the
Sabine women are drawn, at least indirectly, from Greek sources.
L. has deliberately chosen them in order to convey the atmosphere of a
Greek tragedy, in the same way that he had earlier presented Romulus
as a political negotiator (9. 3-4 n.). T h e general argument that women
should make the best of their position recalls Euripides, Medea 475 ff.
Of the three particular arguments used, the plea quibus fors corpora
dedisset, darent animos is not unlike Sophocles, Ajax 490-1, (note also
514-19), the consolation that in marriage at least ex iniuria . . .
gratiam ortam resembles the thought of Andromache when faced with
being a slave of Neoptolemus (Euripides, Troades 665-6), and the
assurance that their husbands will endeavour to fill the place of
parents and country is a clear recollection of Andromache's touching
words to Hector av /zoi eocri irarrip /cat irorvia p-riTqp (Homer, Iliad
6. 429).
10. War with the Caeninenses: Juppiter Feretrius
T h e ancients derived the title Feretrius either from ferre (Paulus
Festus 81 L.), connecting it with the bringing of weapons for dedica
tion, or from ferire (Propertius 4. 10. 46), observing that the shrine
contained the sacred silex used in the conclusion of treaties (24. 9 n.),
but only the former can be sustained philologically. T h e title cannot
be derived fromferetrum which is a loan-word from Greek (fyeperpov (see
Ernout-Meillet; Walde-Hofmann). If the true root is ferre, it will
imply that the function of the god was from the beginning military,
which is in accord with the fact that the diminutive temple had no
cult-statue other than the silex and a sceptre: the silex was used in the
ceremonies of the ius fetiale which prescribed the proper declaration
and conclusion of wars and the sceptre was symbolic of military
success. Yet the cult itself must be a later systematization of a more
primitive worship and certainly cannot be as old as the eighth century
B.C. T h e silex was evidently a meteorite, and superstitious awe of the
object was by slow and rational degrees transformed into reverence
for a thunderbolt sent by Juppiter. Moreover, the worship of Juppiter
as a god of war is unique to Rome, being unknown in any other Italic
community, and must have sprung from the pre-eminent position en
joyed by Juppiter at Rome. In other words, the worship of Juppiter
Feretrius is only comprehensible at a period when Juppiter has already
become the presiding deity of Rome. Besides, the temple of Feretrius
lay on the Capitol, outside the boundaries of the earliest city. O n the
70
ROMULUS
I . IO
other hand, it can hardly be later than the great temple of Gapitoline
Juppiter, for it is unlikely that a new foundation would have been
made inside the area Capitolina. A date in the period 650-550 is in
dicated by the evidence, and some trace of the truth may survive in
the tradition that Ancus Marcius enlarged the temple (33. 9).
T h e custom of setting u p a trophy of captured arms on a wooden
stem can be paralleled from many parts of the Mediterranean world.
Although the Romans did not adopt the Greek habit of setting up a
trophy on the battlefield until 121 B.C. (Florus 1. 37. 6 mos inusitatus),
spolia are clearly analogous to rpo-naia which were dedicated to Zcvs
Tpo7Taios (Gorgias, Epitaphios fr. 6 Diels) and were set up on a wooden
stump so that they should not endure for ever (Diodorus 13. 24. 5).
Thus the local Italic custom was assimilated to the Greek, presumably
in the first age of penetration by Greek religious ideas (650-550 B.C.).
At R o m e it was early confined to the armour taken from the corpse
of the opposing commander. Such an event was sufficiently rare for
there to be some latitude as to who was entitled to claim the honour
(Varro ap. Festus 204 L.) but under the influence of pontifical
codification distinctions were introduced between types of spolia. spolia
prima or opima, offered to Juppiter Feretrius, had to be won by a
general enjoying full command of a Roman army (3. 1. 4 n . ; see the
S.C. of 44 B.C. in Dio 44. 4). Lesser spoils, spolia secunda, and tertia,
were offered to Mars and J a n u s Quirinus (1. 32. 9 n . ; but see L. A.
Holland, Janus, 110 n. 8) respectively. At the same time as this systematization was being undertaken, the attribution of the temple to
Romulus will have been made. Later still an actual inscription was
set up recording the dedication of the spolia by 'Romulus' (cf. Dessau,
LL.S. 64), like the mythical dedications attested for Hercules {I.L.S.
3401).
M u c h has been made of L.'s treatment, scholars finding in it
evidence both for the date of composition of Book 1 and for L.'s
relations with Augustus (10. 7 n.). This is to overlook L.'s purpose.
For him, interested in the literary rather than the political possibilities
of this material, it is an entr'acte in the story of the Sabine women. H e
makes it a unit with its own form and climax, leading through the
briskly military communique of the battle (notice the crisp unsub
ordinated sentences in 10. 4) to the proudly worded statement of the
dedication (10. 6 n.). T h e construction of the episode may be com
pared with 7. 4-15 or 2. 10. 113.
For the temple see Platner-Ashby s.v.; Andren, Hommages Herrmann,
9 0 ; for its restoration under Augustus see 4. 20. 6 n . ; for Juppiter
Feretrius and the spolia opima see W . A. B. Hartzberg, Pkilologus, 1
(1846), 331-9; Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung, 2. 580; Cook, C.R. 18
(1904), 3 6 4 - 5 ; Lammert, R.E. 'rpoiraiov ; L. A. Springer, Class.
7i
I. 10. I
ROMULUS
ROMULUS
i. i o , 7
Licinius Crassus, having defeated the Basternae and killed their chief
Deldo, claimed the spolia opima (Dio 51. 24). His claim was rejected
by Octavian on the score that as proconsul of Macedonia he did not
enjoy full imperium and was therefore not entitled to the honour. T h e
decision was political. Octavian was disturbed at the challenge to his
position as Romulus' successor (see Dessau, Hermes, 41 (1906), 142 ff.;
Syme, Harvard Studies, 64 (1959), 44~47) L. is here silent alike about
Crassus' claim and Octavian's rebuilding of the temple, and his
silence is interpreted by Bayet (tome 1. xvi ff.) as indicating that Book
1 was written before 29 B.C. and Book 4 after 28 B.C. Bayet's argument
is not compelling. There are good grounds for believing that L. began
to write his history in 29 (see Introduction). L.'s connexion with
Octavian arose from the success of his history and not from prior
acquaintance, and it would be easy for a literary historian, not in
the confidence of the inner political circle, to have written of Romulus
and the spolia opima in ignorance of the technical machinations being
devised by Octavian and his advisers.
11. 1-4. Hersilia
A widow with daughters of her own when she came to Rome
(Macrobius 1.6. 16; D . H . 2. 4 5 ; Plutarch, Romulus 14), Hersilia was
remembered as the person who mediated between the Romans and
Sabines. In addition to the version given by L. which made her the
wife of Romulus (Ovid, Met. 14. 830; Sil. Ital. 13. 812; Servius,
ad Aen. 8. 638) and the mother of two inexplicably named children,
Prima and Avillius (Zenodotus ap. Plutarch), she was alternatively
paired with Hostus Hostilius to become the grandmother of Tullus
Hostilius (Macrobius; D . H . ; Plutarch). At death she was legendarily
apotheosized as Hora, remaining Romulus' wife in his new guise
Quirinus. H o r a Quirini figures in inscriptions (Guarducci, Bull. Com.
Arch. 64 (1936), 3 1 ; C.I.L. i 2 , p. 326) but it is evident that au fond
Hora Quirini was not the name of the wife of Quirinus but specified
one of Quirinus' special properties. This much can be inferred from
Aulus. Gellius (13.23) who gives a list of such attributes: Luam Saturni,
Salaciam Neptuni, H o r a m Quirini, Maiam Volcani, Nerienem Martis.
Hora should be connected with horior and hortor and taken to mean
'the power of Quirinus'. It would seem that the story of Hersilia is
an aetiological rationalization of Hora Quirini. T h e first stage was
to make Hora the name of the goddess-wife of Quirinus. Then,
since the divine Quirinus had been the mortal Romulus, a mortal
name and a human role were found for Hora. T h e old gens Hersilia
{C.I.L. 6. 21100; cf. Etr. hersu: see Schulze 174) supplied the lack.
Hora Quirini 'the power of Quirinus' was personified in Hersilia
who reconciled enemies to Romulus. T h a t this is an approximately
73
I. I I . 1-4
ROMULUS
ROMULUS
i. 1 1 . 5
x. 12-13- 5
ROMULUS
ROMULUS
i. 12-13. 5
in 13. 2 - 3 (n.) the nobility of the chorus of Sabine women are finely
suggested. T h e whole is rounded off with a topographical note (13. 5).
Ovid Fasti 1. 255 ff. is directly modelled on L.
See G. Tomassetti, Bull. Com. Arch. 24 (1904), 181 ff.; E. CaetaniLovatelli, Aurea Roma, 1915, 23 ff.; Platner-Ashby s.v. Lacus Curtius
and Juppiter Stator; A. Akerstrom, Svenska Inst, i Rom, 2 (1932),
72 ff.; Lugli, Roma Antica, 156-7; A. Andren, Hommages Herrmann,
99; E. Welin, Studien zur Topographie des Forum Romanum, 75 ff.
12. 1. tamen: resumptive 'however that may be' marking a return to
the main plot after a digression: cf. 3. 42. 5, 4. 58. 5, 22. 39. 6,
35-15-6.
12. 2 . pugnam ciebant: 2. 47. 1, 3. 18. 8, 9. 22. 7. Otherwise found in
Virgil (Aeneid 1. 541, 5. 585, 9. 766, 12. 158) and Silius Italicus (5.
335. 7- 605).
Mettius Curtius: for the name Mettius cf. 23. 4 n. Hostus Hostilius
is a fiction invented to supply a respectable pedigree for his grandson
Tullus Hostilius who would otherwise have seemed an upstart king
(cf. Ancus Marcius). L. preserves the annalistic version, in which
Hostilius was a companion-in-arms of Romulus a n d died bravely
fighting the Sabines. I t will be seen that the conflict of Hostilius and
Mettius is a straight doublet of the conflict between Tullus Hostilius
and Mettius Fufetius two generations later and is in no sense historical.
This naive biography was much expanded by the antiquarians, who
gave Hersilia as wife to him instead of to Romulus (11. 1-4 n.), and,
in consequence of his being the first Roman parent, credited him with
the invention of the bulla aurea a n d the toga praetexta (Macrobius
1.6. 16; cf. C.I.L. 15.7066). Some of this embroidery may stem from the
private pretensions of the gens Hostilia. T h e claim that he was the first
m a n to breach the walls of Fidenae (Pliny, N.H. 16. 11) is certainly in
spired by the exploits of L. Hostilius Mancinus who was the first person
to break into Carthage in 148 B.C. (Pliny, N.H. 35. 23). See Miinzer,
R.E., 'Hostilius (4)'.
12. 3 . Palati: the traditional punctuation, taking the words ad veterem . . . Palati With fusaque est a n d putting a strong stop after Palati, is
to be preferred on linguistic grounds (cf. 2. 49. 12 fusi retro ad saxa
rubra); and it is implied by ipse that Romulus shared the general retreat.
T h e words hie in Palatio are not to be pressed too exactly. Conway's
assertion that the punctuation proposed by Madvig a n d adopted in
the O.C.T. is supported by resulting Ciceronian clausulae is irrele
vant, since in narrative L.'s preference is, if anything, for a dactylic
clausula. D . H . 2. 42 writes, in agreement, TOVS <f>evyovras . . . \L*XP1 T&V
I. 12. 3
ROMULUS
ROMULUS
i . 13. 1
which is less forceful); hinc . . . hinc (for hinc . . . Mine; cf. 2. 46. 2, 3. 23.
7 : elsewhere not before Virgil, Aeneid 1. 162); si. . . si; nos . . . nos . . .
fl0.y. Equally marked is the chiasmus nepotum Mi, hi liberum. In switching
from indirect to direct speech without introducing a verb of speaking
L. accelerates the climax (cf. 47. 6; see Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede,
38), an effect heightened by the contrast with the clipped sentences
which conclude the narrative. In content, too, their appeal seems to
owe something to the traditional pleas of poetry. For parricidio . . .
progeniem cf. Ovid, Met. 14. 801-2.
1 3 . 2 . sanguine se: se sanguine, the order of nX, preferred by H . J .
Muller and Bayet, is certainly right. Apart from the eccentric wordorder exhibited by M , elsewhere in the first chapters of Book 1 (1. 1,
1. 10, 2. 6, 3. 5, 5. 4, 5. 7 et al.), the natural position ose is as near the
second place in the sentence or clause as possible; cf. 3. 28. 10 sanguinis
se . . . non egere; Cicero, Brutus 12 populus se Romanus erexit: see KtihnerStegmann 2. 593.
13. 4 . silentium: 3. 47. 6 n.
13. 5. Quirites: Cures was a Sabine town on the left bank of the Tiber
close to the Via Salaria. It was built on a hill with two summits at the
foot of which flows the Fosso Corese. T h e existing ruins, excavated
by Lanciani (Commentationes Philologicae in honorem T. Mommseni, 1877,
411 ff.; see Hulsen, R.E., 'Cures') date from the late Republic when
Cures survived as a municipium, and the antiquity of the settlement
cannot be established archaeologically. It was, however, intimately
connected with the legends of early Rome, being traditionally the
birth-place of Numa (18. 1).
T h e theory which derived the official name Quirites from Cures
was maintained without serious dissent by the ancients (Columella,
Praef. 19; Festus 304 L . ; Ovid, Fasti 2. 4 7 5 ; Servius, ad Aen. 7. 710),
despite the fact that the ethnic of Cures was Curenses (Varro, de Ling.
Lat. 6. 68) which cannot morphologically be transmuted to Quirites.
T h e etymology of Quirites (the singular is found once in the old
formula ollus quiris leto datus est) remains unsolved. Plutarch [Romulus
29) urged a derivation from the Sabine word for a spear, curis. T h e
only other attractive conjecture is Kretschmer's: *couiriom 'an assembly
of people' (cf. curia).
See Kretschmer, Glotta 10 (1919), 147 ff.; Otto, Rh. Mus. 54 (1905),
197 ff.; Koch, Religio, 23 ff.; Walde-Hofmann s.v.
monumentum: the Lacus Curtius, mentioned incidentally by Plautus
(Curculio 477), Pliny (N.H. 15. 78), and Suetonius (Augustus 5 7 ;
Galba 20), was close to the later Column of Phocas. In Sullan times
the depression was paved over with two layers of grey capellaccio and
brown tufa stone.
79
i. 13. 6-8
ROMULUS
13. 6-8. The Creation of 30 Curiae and 3 Centuries
ROMULUS
i. 1 3 . 8
81
1.14.4
ROMULUS
ROMULUS
i. 15- i
Veientium: the first mention in L. of Veii, for which see the introduc
tion to Book 5. T h e site was first occupied, like the Palatine, by
scattered settlements in the Early Iron Age, and Villanovan pottery
(800-700 B.C.) has been found over a wide area. Contact with Rome at
this very early date is indicated by the discovery at Veii of some dis
tinctively 'Latian' sherds of the same period, but these lend no support
to the historicity of Romulus' war. For a detailed report of the early
finds from Veii see J . B. Ward-Perkins, P.B.S.R. 39 (1961), 22 ff.
15. 3 . dimicarent: the decision to fight an open battle rather than en
dure a siege is exemplified and commended by Frontinus (2. 6).
15. 5. oratores: 38. 2 n.
centum: 30. 7 n.
15. 7. ab Mo: sc. Romulus, a bello Ruperti.
quadraginta: Numa's reign.
15. 8. Celeres: two explanations of the Celeres were current, one
identifying them with the 300 equites of Romulus' army (13. 3 ; cf.
Festus 48 L . ; Pliny, N.H. 33. 3 5 ; Servius, ad Am. 9. 368, 11. 6 0 3 ;
Pomponius, Dig. 1.2. 2. 15, 2. 15. 9 : the name derived from ogvrrjs),
the other, as here, seeing them as a bodyguard (D.H. 2. 13, 29, 64, 4.
71 ; Plutarch, Romulus 26; Numa 7; Diodorus 8. 6. 3 ; Origo Gentis
Romanae 23. 6 : the name derived either from their leader, Celer, who
in some accounts had been Romulus' assassin, or from o^vr^s). T h e
two versions correspond to the antiquarian and annalistic traditions
respectively. Speculation seems to have started from the office of
the tribunus celerum mentioned in connexion with the Salian ritual of
19 March (Fasti Praen. [salii] faciunt in comitio saltu [adstantibus
po]ntijicibus et trib. celer.). Evidently in early times the tribunus celerum
was a military officer of importance: he survived only in religious cult.
Thus the Celeres were remembered but their function and nature were
lost in the past. Now by the second century there was a cleavage
between the social or political status of an eques Romanus and the mili
tary eques, the cavalryman who actually fought. T h e one word eques
covered both the soldier and the civilian. At the same time the uniform
and armour of the contemporary cavalryman were quite different
from the ceremonial dress of the eques Romanus or of the young com
batants in the Ludus Troiae as it is depicted on monuments (Rostowzew, Klio, Beiheft 3) and described by Polybius (6. 25. 3). With the
increasing importance of the equites as a political body in consequence
of the activities of the Gracchi, it was desirable to invent a pedigree for
them, distinct from the pedigree of the cavalry as such. T h e mysterious
Celeres offered scope. Thus it is no accident that the earliest speculation
about the Celeres goes back to M . Junius Congus Gracchanus (fl. c.
100 B.C.).
T h e antiquarian account is, therefore, the older and dates from the
83
1.15.8
ROMULUS
ROMULUS
i. 16
older than the heyday of the gens Julia in the first century, for it is
found in Cicero (de Rep. 2. 20; cf. de Legibus 1.3), but seems to have
been a Julian tale invented to square the Alban origin of the Julii
(30. 2 n.) with a proper feeling that a member of the family must have
played a prominent part in the birth of Rome. Proculus is a farmer
living at Alba who comes to Rome for the day (Cicero; Ovid, Fasti
2. 499: 16. 5 n.).
Throughout R o m a n history Romulus remained a controversial
figure. At the back of his career lurked the fratricide and other violent
deeds, to be turned to his discredit if political needs required. T h e tide
against him had certainly set in by the second century. Even Cicero,
drawing ultimately on Fabius Pictor, reports that Proculus' announce
ment of Romulus' apotheosis was a put-up jobimpulsu patrum. Such
rationalization could be carried farther. Romulus was not translated,
he was torn into little pieces by enraged enemies, by his new citizens,
according to Licinius Macer, wishfully thinking of Sulla, or by the
senators as in the variant cited in 16. 4. With the revival in the for
tunes of the Julii the apotheosis, and by implication the select role of
Proculus, was strengthened. T h e assassination was referred to in the
discussions of 67 B.C. Quirinus is figured for the only time on a
coin of C. Memmius (Sydenham no. 921 ; c. 56 B.C.). After 44 B.C.
the accounts of the death of Romulus are modelled on the murder of
Caesar (D.H. 2. 56. 5 ; Plutarch, Romulus 2 7 ; Val. Max. 5. 3. 1).
L. follows a p re-Caesarian source which favours Romulus (16. 4
nobilitavit) and is, therefore, likely to be none other than Valerius
Antias. But he makes the story into a set piece, whose climax is, as
so often, a passage of moving speech (16. 6-7). T h e preliminaries
are carefully staged. L. stresses the psychological reactions of the
spectators (pavor, desiderio, desiderium) and employs his favourite device
the dramatic pause at the moment of tension (16. 2 n.). Well constructed
and written in memorable language (16. 3 n., 16. 6-7 n.) it is designed
incidentally to illustrate the power of simple faith (fides, fidei, fide).
See J . B. Carter, A, J. A. 13 (1909), 29 ft.; Klotz 207; Miinzer, R.E.,
'Julius (33)'; R. Klein, Kbnigtum u. Konigzeit bet Cicero; Classen, Philologus 106 (1962), 174 ff.; Kajanto, God and Fate in Livv, 31 ; Hubaux
98 ff.; Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 118; Burkert, Historia 11 (1962),
356 ff.
16. 1. immortalibus: 'worthy of immortality'; cf. Seneca, Suas. 6. 5 ;
Pliny, N.H. 35. 50. But, with Crcvier and Ruperti, I would prefer
mortalibus, 'there were the works done in his lifetime'; cf. 2. 6 Aeneae
ultimum operum mortaliumfuit.
Caprae: a depression or swamp in the lowest part of the Campus
Martius near the Pantheon (cf. the Vicus Caprarius), formed by the
silting of a small stream.
85
I. l 6 . 2
ROMULUS
INTERREGNUM
i. 16. 6-7
i . 17
NUMA
NUMA
i . 18-21
ciated unless the Etruscan phase of the city is older than either tradi
tion or archaeology admits: for the auguration (18.6-9 n 0> t n e inter
calation (19. 6-7 n.), the pontificate (20. 5 n.), and the cult of Egeria
(21. 3 n.) are all Etruscan. It would look as if the Etruscan religious
reformers at R o m e in the late seventh and sixth centuries fathered
many of their innovations on a king who was already recognized in
the popular imagination as the founder of Roman religion.
Substantially, therefore, the picture of N u m a as a great religious
founder with many specific institutions to his name will already have
taken shape by 400 B.G. and resemblances detected between the
'theology' of that religious system and the contemporary Pythagoreanism prevalent in southern Italy, in particular at Tarentum, will
have been one of the factors which prompted Greeks to claim N u m a
as a disciple of Pythagoras. In the following century this tendency
will have been boosted both by the general acceptance with which the
concept of the Philosopher King was greeted and by the particular
movement led by Aristoxenus to claim Pythagorean origin for the
laws and constitutions of the cities of Magna Graecia. T h e Pythagoreanism of N u m a was a Greek fiction and Greek historians were the
first to write of him, but the legend quickly took root in R o m e .
A statue of Pythagoras was set up in the comitium, probably in the
third century, Ap. Claudius Caecus subscribed to Pythagorean doc
trines and the Aemilii claimed their ancestor Mamercus as a son of
Numa. T h e idea of divine sanction as a social instrument, which may
well be Pythagorean (see Walbank on Polybius 6. 56. 6-12), was con
genial to the Romans and helped to cement the link between N u m a
and Pythagoras.
Thus by the time that the Romans first came to write their own
history the detailed reign of Numa together with his alleged discipleship under Pythagoras was common currency. T h e surviving fragments
of Ennius (11 g ff. V.) mention Egeria, intercalation (reading menses
for mensas), the ancilia, the Argei, and probably the Pythagorean con
nexion. But reaction was quick to set in. The simplest chronological
calculations, such as necessitated the invention of the Alban king-list to
co-ordinate the Fall of Troy and the Foundation of Rome, showed
that N u m a must have reigned c. 700 whereas Pythagoras was active
in Croton in 509. T h e first explicit awareness of this fact is found
in Cicero's source in de Rep, 2. 29 (cf. Tusc. Disp. 4. 2) but it is likely
to have been appreciated by the elder Cato and to have been a
decisive consideration in 181 B.C. In that year a chest was found on
the Janiculum by a certain Terentius (or, better, Tarentino quodam;
cf. de Viris lllustr. 3. 2) which was alleged to contain twelve books
written by N u m a including writings on Pythagorean philosophy (40.
29. 8; Pliny, N,H. 13, 87). They were brought before the praetor,
89
I. I 8-2 I
NUMA
Q,. Petilius, judged spurious, and ordered to be burnt. One hopes that
chronological considerations affected the decision.
T h e sceptical attitude to the traditional, Ennian data about N u m a
was perpetuated by Gn. Gellius (frr. 16, 17 P.) and Gassius Hemina
(frr. 12, 13 P.)- With the rejection of the Pythagorean motive for his
institutions, a new purpose was found. N u m a wished to use religion as
a political tool to secure a disciplined and harmonious community.
He wished to replace the metus hostilis by the metus deorurn as the unify
ing force in the state. It cannot be discovered who first viewed Numa's
career in this light. T h e idea is an old one familiar from Greece (cf. the
Sisyphus of Gritias) and it may already be implied by Polybius 6. 56. 6.
It is certainly to the fore in L. with the piafraus of Numa's consultation
of Egeria (21. 3-4) and there are strong arguments for believing that
L.'s source for N u m a was Valerius Antias. It cannot have been
Licinius Macer, as he attributed intercalation not to N u m a but to
Romulus (fr. 4 P.) whereas Valerius gave the same account as L. (fr.
5 P.). And a specific example of moral decadence being averted by
metus deorum is afforded by the history of G. Valerius Flaccus (27.
8. 5 ; from Valerius Antias).
If L. did use Valerius for this section it tells us much about his
methods. Valerius gave a lengthy and dramatic accout of the institu
tion of the cult of Juppiter Elicius (fr. 6 P . ) : L. records the mere facts
(20. 7 n.). Valerius related the full story of Numa's books (frr. 8,
9 P.) : L. ignores them and rhetorically dismisses the Pythagorean
connexion (18. 2 n.). L. gives the barest outline of Numa's innovations
and subordinates them throughout to the theme of how peace can
be held without moral degeneration (19. 4 n.). It is peace rather than
religion which is near to his heart. Hence the prominence which he
gives to J a n u s (19. 1-3). The religious institutions are treated sum
marily. For L. an incident which might be developed into a literary
episode was one which exemplified the virtus of a man. He is therefore
content to stress the moral purpose behind Numa's reforms and to
hint at the effect which the example of such a man can have (21. 2).
Even without the allusion in 19. 3 such a treatment would be bound
to strike a contemporary note for L.'s readers. Peace and the example
of the princeps. Did not Augustus reappoint a Flamen Dialis after the
lapse of seventy-five years and reform the Vestal Virgins (Suetonius,
Au
g- 3 1 - 3) ? S e e also 19- * n-> 3- 5- x 4 n See G. Buckmann, De Numae regis Romanorumfabula (Leipzig, 1912);
G. Dumezil, Juppiter, Mars, Quirinus; Glaser, R.E., ' N u m a Pompilius (1)'; F. Ribezzo, Rend. Accad. Lincei, 1950, 553-73; L. Ferrero,
Storia del Pitagorismo nel Mondo Romano, 142-52 ; Koch, Religio, 181 ff.
For L.'s sources and his treatment of them see Burck 146-8; Kajanto,
God and Fate in Livy, 43-44. For the problem of Numa's books see
90
NUMA
i . 18-21
E. von Lasaux, Abh. Munch. Akad. Wiss. 5 (1847), 83 ff.; Delatte, Bull.
Acad. Roy. Belg. 1936; Herrmann, Latomus 5 (1946), 87. Further
references are offered on individual topics below.
18. 2. Samium Pythagoram: according to Timaeus (ap. Strabo 638)
the philosopher left Samos at the age of 18 (c. 570 B.C.). After thirtythree years' travel in Egypt and Babylonia and after a short return
visit to Samos, he migrated to the West settling at Groton c. 530. In
that year the Grotoniates had been disastrously defeated on the Sagra
and their recovery in the course of the next twenty years is unani
mously attributed to Pythagoras' 'moral re-armament' (Justin,
20. 4. 1: from Timaeus). In 510 Groton in her turn defeated and
annexed Sybaris. T h e victory produced a popular reaction against
the Pythagorean system and it was probably in 509 that Pythagoras
was forced to leave Groton for Metapontum where he died. During
his period of influence at Groton he seems to have effected the revival
of Grotoniate morale by instituting a brotherhood or aw&piov of
300 young men, a more philosophical variant of the dvSpcva to be
found in Dorian societies (Iamblichus, V.P. 254-60). Timaeus says
that he left Samos originally because of the tyranny of Polycrates.
T h a t tyranny is currently dated c. 533-522 B.C. which would make
Timaeus' chronology impossible, but there is archaeological and
literary evidence (Ibycus) soon to be published by Mr. J . P. Barron
to show that there were two tyrants of that name, the first reigning
from c. 571 to 540, the second from 533 to 522. L. may preserve a hint
of the same truth preserved by Timaeus: for he places the activities
of Pythagoras at Groton in the reign of Servius Tullius rather than
that of Tarquin to which on established chronology they belong. See
also J . S. Morrison, C.Q.6 (1956), 135-56.
1 8 . 3 . quaefama in Sabinos: sc. pervenisset but the ellipse is harsher than
40. 57. 3 which Frigell cites in defence. The easiest correction is quafama
(with the deletion of the question-mark after Sabinos) as was proposed
by Sigonius and accepted by Gronovius, Madvig, and Walch {Emend.
Livianae, 45). It is confirmed by L.'s use of out.. . ve\ cf 1. 1. 7 unde out
quo casu profecti domo quidve quaerentes . . . exissent, where the main dis
junction is expressed by -ve and a secondary disjunction within the
first half of the main one by out. Thus unde out quo casu would be parallel
to quae fama aut quo linguae commercio, and unde-aut-quo-casu profecti
quidve quaerentes to qua-fama-aut-quo-commercio excivisset quove-praesidio
pervenisset. For fama excivisset cf. 2. 26. 5, 29. 4. 7.
18. 4 . tetrica: for the conventional picture of the ancient Sabines cf.
Virgil, Georgics 2. 167, 532. T h e word is only here in L. and is not
found in prose earlier (Varro, Men. 554). It is chosen for its rhetorical
force and its alliteration with tristi.
18. 6. augure: Varro enlightens the procedure involved in the in91
1.18.6
NUMA
NUMA
i. 18. 7
i. 19. 1-4
NUMA
NUMA
i. 1 9 . 4
Laws 698 B ff.; Polybius 6. 57. 5, 31. 25. 3). In R o m a n thought it was
particularly associated with the destruction of Carthage in 146 B.C.
which removed Rome's last antagonist (Plutarch, Cato maior 27). It
became commonplace both in literature (e.g. Catullus 51) and in
history, being employed both by Polybius and by Sallust [Catiline 10.1 ;
Jugurtha 4 1 . 1 ; Hist. fr. 11 M . ) . There is nothing surprising in L.'s
use of the theory but he makes one typical and significant addition
of his own. Whereas other Romans accepted war a n d military service
as fields in which a man's virtus could be seen to best advantage, L.
rejects that assumption. For him war itself is degradingefferari
militia animos. This is a heterodox notion, found only among Romans
of his time (e.g. Horace, Epode 7; cf. Tacitus, Hist. 3. 25, 31, 33). His
chief care is peace, and it is no accident that his accounts of battles
are invariably schematic and amateurish. Therefore the replacement
of the metus hostilis by the metus deorum which was a political pis aller
to Sallust and others was for L. a consummation devoutly to be wished.
See further Klingner, Hermes 63 (1928), 182 ff.; Passerini, Stud,
ltd. n (1934), 52 ff.; Fraenkel, Horace, 212-13; D. C. Earl, The
Political Thought of Sallust, 47-48.
19. 5. sine aliquo commento: for Egeria see below on 21. 3-4. T h e
deception of an ignorant people for their own good was a traditional
feature of Numa's work (Polybius 6. 56. 9). Such piafraus was per
missible for the Philosopher King whom Plato made yevvatov n ev
ifjevhcodai [Republic 414 B) in order that the people could be properly
amenable to education, and it is from Plato that the idea is ultimately
derived.
19. 6-7. The Reform of the Calendar
Although not explicitly stated, it is implied that Numa's calendar
supplanted a previous one, presumably the 10-month calendar as
cribed to Romulus (Ovid, Fasti 1. 27 ff., 3. 99 ff.; Censorinus 20. 2,
drawing on Republican antiquarians). It was generally held that
those ten months contained only 304 days and that the winter months,
being valueless to a farmer, were not included. This is almost cer
tainly false. T h e earliest community was pastoral, not agricultural, and
herds have to be tended for 365 days a year. Such speculations are a
throw-back from a time when months had a fixed number of days.
There are primitive communities spread over a large area which have
had months of widely differing duration.
T h e change to a 12-month calendar was inspired not merely by
the desire to correlate the lunar and solar year but by a more exact
computation of both undertaken principally by the Babylonians and
mediated through the Etruscans. T h e terminus ante quern is given by the
fact that it did not originally contain any reference to the dedication of
95
1.19. 6-7
NUMA
NUMA
i. 1 9 - 6
97
1. 20. 2
NUMA
by the Penates, became the centre and the maintenance of the sacred
fire was entrusted to an order of six (originally perhaps four; cf.
Plutarch, Numa i o ; D . H . 2. 67. 1; Festus 468 L.) virgins recruited by a
fictitious captio from among the ranks of patrician girls between the
ages of six and ten (Aul. Gell. 1. 12. 1). They acted as serving-women
under the supervision originally of the rex and later of the pontifex
maximus. T h e tradition that they were instituted by N u m a is given
also by Aul. Gell. 1. 12. 10 and Ovid, Fasti 6. 259 but may be no more
than a reconstruction from the connexion between N u m a and Egeria:
the Vestals drew water from the well of the Camenae (Plutarch,
Numa 13). An older, Romulean or Alban, origin is also asserted by Plu
tarch {Romulus 22; cf. D . H . 2. 63). T h e cult of Vesta was also estab
lished at Lavinium, so that it is possible that her worship with colleges
of virgins in attendance was at one time more widespread throughout
Latium. T h e Alban ancestry may be no more than Julian preten
tiousness.
See Wissowa, Religion, 504 ff.; Rose, Mnemosyne 54 (1926), 440 ff.;
56 (1928), 79ff.; Giannelli, 11 Sacerdozio delle Vestali; T.Worsford, The
History of the Vestal Virgins; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 108-10; Weinstock, R.E., 'Vesta', cols. 1732-52.
20, 3 . stipendium: cf. Tacitus, Annals 4. 16. 6.
virginitate: any infringement was regarded as incestum and treated
accordingly (4. 44. 11 n., 2. 42. 11 n.).
caerimoniis: e.g. the ritual attending their induction as Vestals.
The Salii
There were two colleges of dancing priests, Salii (from satire), the
Palatini and the Collini (5. 52. 7). Tradition accounted for them
by supposing that in a time of plague a sacred shield (ancile) fell from
heaven into Numa's hands. H e commanded a smith, Mamurius
Veturius, to manufacture twelve replicas which were entrusted to a
specially created brotherhood of Salii. T h e second brotherhood was
vowed by Tullus Hostilius in the straits of battle (27. 8). ([ServiusJ, ad
Aen. 8. 285 is heterodox.)
Their true origin is a matter of conjecture. T h e participation of
Mamurius Veturius can safely be disregarded, for Mamurius is cer
tainly an Etruscan name (Schulze 228, 360) and he is no more than a
reconstruction from certain words which occurred in the immemorial
song of Salii (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 49), a song which was quite un
intelligible even in antiquity (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 7. 3 ; Horace, Epist.
2. 1. 8 6 ; Quintilian 1. 6. 40). T h e double college recalls the double
college of Luperci (see note on ch. 5 above) and points to an amalga
mation of two separate bodies of Salii belonging to two separate com
munities, that of the Palatine and of the Quirinal. Now the great
98
NUMA
I. 20. 3
I. 20. 4
NUMA
NUMA
i. 2 0 . 4
dating of the power of the pontificate to Numa. Contemporary thirdcentury politics may also be reflected in 20. 6 quo consultum plebs
veniret. Cn. Flavius had opened the pontifical arcana in 304 for
public inspection (9. 46. 1 ff.).
L. suits his language to his theme, using a number of rare but im
posing technicalities (20. 5 n., 20. 7 n.).
See Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 195-7.
20. 5. Numam Marcium: for the praenomen see note on 18-21 above. H e is
named by Tacitus [Annals 6. n ) as praefectus urbi under Tullus Hostilius. His father M . Marcius, the progenitor of the gens Marcia, claimed
kinship with N u m a Pompilius (Plutarch, Numa 3) which accounts
for his praenomen. T h e son himself married Numa's daughter Pompilia,
and was the father of Ancus Marcius (32. 1). T h e snobbish inter
relationship is entirely fictitious. See Miinzer, R.E., 'Marcius (24)'.
exscripta exsignataque: exsignare occurs elsewhere in Latin only in
Plautus, Trin. 655. It is an archaic word chosen here partly to balance
exscripta in the carmen-style and partly for its air of antiquity. Gf.
quibus hostiis, quibus diebus.
20. 7. iusta . . .funebria: cf. Caesar, E.G. 6. 19. 5 for the technical term.
curarentur: Gronovius followed by Crevier, Wimmercranz, Harant,
and other editors, proposed procurarentur, the usual term, but curare is
similarly used by Orosius 5. 4. 19 and sacra curare is frequent (31. 8).
O n the other hand procuranda follows in 21. 1 and L.'s habit of un
conscious repetition (14. 4 n . ; cf. susciperentur . . . suscipienda essent here)
favours the restoration of the proper technical term.
Juppiter Elicius
A stone, the manalis lapis, brought into the city at a very early date
was connected with a magical ceremony for the procuration of rain
(Festus 115 L . ; Varro ap. Non. 547; [Servius], ad Aen. 3. 175). T h e
ceremony was known as the Aquelicium (Paulus 2 L.). Such rainstones are a commonplace of early superstition among communities
which depend on a reliable supply of water. At Rome as a concomi
tant or even, when the concept of the sky-god Juppiter began to grow
and crystallize, as a development of the ritual of the rain-stone,
worship was directed to Juppiter Elicius for the purpose of procuring
rain. T h e cult is obviously ancient. Indeed its situation on the Aventine might be used as evidence for a date before the Etruscanization
of Rome had confined the city as a religious entity within thepomerium.
T h e specific attribution to Numa is groundless, being inspired by his
religious activity and his connexion with fountains (Egeria).
Valerius Antias (fr. 6 P.) told of the institution of the cult at great
length on the model of the Proteus story in Homer. Because it had no
human or dramatic possibilities L. abbreviated it to a mere notice.
101
i. 20. 7
NUMA
NUMA
i. 21. 3
I. 21. 4
NUMA
NUMA
I. 21. 5
See Wissowa, Ges. Abhand., 211 ff.; War de-Fowler, Roman Festivals,
112; Rose, Plutarch, Roman Questions, 98 ff.; Latte, Religionsgeschichte,
412-14. For a rationalistic account see L. A. Holland, Janus, 314 ff.
2 1 . 6 . regnavit: the regnal figures of 37 for Romulus and 43 for N u m a
confirm the relative lateness of L.'s source. Cicero (de Rep. 2. 17),
and hence Polybius (6. 11 a. 2 with Walbank's note) and Fabius
Pictor gave 37 and 39 respectively.
2 2 - 3 1 . The Reign of Tullus Hostilius
T h e third king of Rome reigned traditionally for thirty-two years.
H e was distinguished for his ferocitasferocior Romulo quam JVumae
similis (Servius, ad Aen. 6. 813)a characteristic which was suggested
as much by his name Hostilius as by the contrast with his predecessors.
T h e oldest legends which surround him are more primitive than Rome
herself. T h e battle of the champions and the death of Mettius Fufetius
belong to a stock of legends which is common to many branches
of the Indo-European tradition (24. 1 n., 28. 1 n.). Next came those
events which may reasonably have been remembered from the seventh
centurythe name of the king Tullus Hostilius (22. 1 n.), the name
of Fufetius (23. 6 n.), and the capture of Alba. These are historical
the only authentic elements in the whole story. They were supple
mented by a third source of materialtopographical researches. Rome
possessed numerous monuments, named and unnamed, explained and
inexplicable. These were brought into connexion with the legends of
Roman history and served to add substance and verisimilitude to the
bare legend. Such were the fossa Cluilia (23. 3 n.), the Sepulcra
Horatiorum et Guriatiorum (25. 14 n.), the Sepulcrum Horatiae
(26. 14 n.), the Pila Horatia (26. i o n . ) , and the Silva Malitiosa
(30. 9 n.). It is more likely that in high antiquity they were given
names to identify them with legends than that they preserved names
from actual happenings.
T h e amalgation of these different levels was effected probably as
early as the late third century. T h e reign of Tullus Hostilius was told
by Ennius (126-40 V . : see Norden on Virgil, Aeneid 6. 813) with a
richness of detail which presupposes an extended account. But L.'s
treatment owes nothing directly to Ennius (29. 6 n.). L.'s version,
like the parallel narrative in D.H. 3. 136., has been supplemented by
legal additions (26. 4 n.), in particular by the fetial formula (24. 4 n.)
and the Perduellio proceedings (26. 6 n.) of which the former can be
proved to be a formulation of the second century at the earliest. T h e
historians of that generation in their quest for new material turned to
the law to provide them with mock-archaic precedents which could
be incorporated into the body of their histories. These were dis
tributed among the kingsone fetial formula to Tullus, the other to
105
I. 22-31
TULLUS HOST1LIUS
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
I. 22. 2
senescere: 19. 4 n.
22. 4 . (7. Cluilius: 23. 3 n.
r&y repetendas: 32. 6 n. L. presupposes that the fetial procedure for
declaring war has been instituted.
22. 5. comiter: the variants comiter and comifroute go back to the Nicomachean edition, but comiter 'jovially' (57. 10, 25. 12. 9 ; Cicero, pro
Deiot. 19) is to be preferred to the periphrasis typical of late writing
(Fronto, p. 226 van den Hout).
tricesimum: 32. 9 n.
22. 7. expetant: courteous protestations of the Albans given in or. obi.
(cf. 3. 68. 911. for the conventional invitos) are answered directly
and bluntly, clades is generally taken as the object of expetant with di
as subject understood (cf. 23. 4) ' t h a t they may inflict the calamities
of this war' (Baker)but the tone is better suited by the intransitive
use ofexpetere 'to fall upon' found in archaic, colloquial contexts (e.g.
Plautus, Amphitr. 495, 589; see Hiltbrunner, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v.).
deos facere testes alludes to the formula of 32. 9-10. Notice the em
phatically juxtaposed eum omnes, clades belli.
2 3 . 2. dirutis: 29. 1.
2 3 . 3 . Albani: D.H. has an extended account of a night attack (3.
4- 3-5)fossa Cluilia: 2. 39. 5. Nothing else is known of it and its locality can
only be conjectured (Sette Bassi according to Bormann: see Hlilsen,
R.E., 'Cluiliae fossae'). The supposition that it marked the boundary
between R o m e and Alba introduces political demarcation quite alien
to the period. It is far more probable that it is a prehistoric ditch
(Strabo 5. 230; Pliny, N.H. 15. 119 cluere = purgare) dug to drain the
swampy land and that the person of C. Cluilius is an aetiology to
account for the obsolete term cluilia 'cleaning'. Such antiquarian specu
lation is typical of the early-second-century historians, in particular
Cato, and L. implies that the detail was not the result of recent research.
23. 4. Mettium Fufetium: Mettius is the Latin form of the Oscan title
meddix; for the dictatorship see 2. 18. 4 n. Fufetius as a name is not
found elsewhere, although the Vestal Gaia Tarracia was also known
as Fufetia (Pliny, N.H. 34. 25). It is perhaps to be recognized in the
name of the gens Fufidia. It reflects a known fact that in its last days
Alba was ruled by an elected magistracy not a monarchy.
23. 6. tamen: the manuscripts agree on the reading tametsi vana adferebantur, preserving a unique instance in L. of tametsi common in Cicero
(e.g. Verr. 2. 7 6 ; de Orat. 2. 120). Before repudiating it, we must ask
what is the force of in aciem educit. If it means that Tullus while not clos
ing the door on negotiations took all necessary military steps in case
the talks should prove abortive, then tametsi must be wrong because it
107
i. 2 3 . 6
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
i . 2 3 . 10
i. 24. 3
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
i. 2 4 . 4
iubesne: notice how the formula falls into balanced phrases iubesne
me rex / cum patre patrato / populi Albani / foedus ferire which, with the
marked alliteration, is suggestive of the rhythm of ancient carmina.
See Norden, Altrom. Priest. 99, 285.
patre patrato: within the family the paterfamilias alone was able to
contract. Universalizing this principle beyond the domain of the
family the Romans created an artificial 'pater* who was to act for and
in the name of the state as a whole. T h e paterpatratus should mean 'one
who is made a father' (Latte, Nachr. Gbtting. Gesell. Wiss., 1934, 66 ff.;
but see Plutarch, Q.R. 62). Other explanations, e.g. 'father of the
fatherhood' (patratus, gen. like senatus: F. Muller, Mnemosyne 55
(1927), 386 ff.) or 'the father accomplished (patratus, a nom. agentis
in -tus, a variant ofcpatrator: H . Krahe, Archivf. Relig.-Wiss. 34 (1937),
112 ff.), do not account for the declension of patratus, -ti. Equally
mistaken is L.'s own derivation given in 24. 6. T h e title is proof of
the high antiquity of the office.
sagmina: cf. Dig. 1. 8. 8. 1 'sunt autem sagmina quaedam herbae
quas legati populi Romani ferre solent ne quis eos violaret sicut
legati Graecorum ferunt ea quae vocantur cerycia'. T h e explanation,
a dangerous assimilation of R o m a n to Greek ritual, is false because
the grasses had to be torn out of the ground with their earth (Pliny,
N.H. 22. 5 ; cf. Festus 424-6 L . ; Servius, ad Aen. 12. 120), and were
employed in the ritual act of creating the pater patratus. These acts
can only be accounted for on quasi-magical grounds. T h e earth from
the arx of Rome protected the fetial from foreign influences when he
was outside his native land. He was carrying a piece of his own
country with him wherever he went.
pura: read puram sc. herbam with N (Norden, Alt. Priest. 6 n. 2).
The elipse of the noun may be paralleled by merum, dextra, Scc.pura sc.
sagmina is pointless, sagmina, being ritual plants, are by definition pure.
24. 5. vasa: the utensils, in which the plant and the silex travelled.
24. 6. Sp. Fusium: 3. 4. 1 n.
24. 7. audi: for the triple invocation see 32. 6 n. T h e terms of the
declaration are pseudo-archaic. 'An assembly of the R o m a n people
could not be addressed by popule Romane . . . and the vocative popule
does not occur until the artificial prose of the Empire' (Fraenkel,
Horace, 289 n. 1, citing Wackernagel, Kl. Schriften, 980 ff.: against
Lofstedt, Syntactica, 1. 99). T h e use of the nominative populus Albanus
here instead of the vocative as a form of address is doubtless formed
after the model of Greek tragedy which ventured such modes of
address la>, TT&S Aews. It is, therefore, certainly artificial. T w o other
instances may be noticed. T h e phrase ex tabulis cerave is taken over
from the legal language in which a will and its codicil are drawn up
(Gaius 2. 104) and is evidently anachronistic in an age when even
in
1.24-7
TULLUS
HOSTILIUS
writing is hard to credit. T h e form defexit (cf. 18. 9, 6. 35. 9, 29. 27. 3)
is a putatively ancient form of the future perfect (Kuhnast, Livian.
Syntax, 15). The alliterative pairs of words usually in asyndeton are
characteristic of the carmen-style, e.g. prima, postrema, hie hodie (cf.
Plautus, Miles 1412; C.I.L. 3. 1933, 12. 4333), potespollesque (8. 7. 5,
33. 8; Trag. Incert. 175 R . ; Plautus, Asin. 636: see Fraenkel, Plautinisches, 360).
24. 8. turn tu Me Diespiter: the manuscripts have turn Me dies luppiter.
ferito must be second person (cf.potespollesque) and therefore the name of
the god -piter must be in the vocative. A passage of Paulus Festus (102 L.
si sciens /alio turn me Diespiter . . . eiciat: cf. Horace, Odes 3. 2. 29) has
led editors to see in the words dies luppiter the reading Diespiter glossed
with hip- and to print turn Me Diespiter or the like (Turnebus, Duker,
Alschefski,Hertz, Skutsch, Conway). As Frigell saw (Epilegomena, 80)
this use of Me Diespiter as a vocative is out of the question (Me is
only so used with the third person: Plautus, Most. 398; Amph. 461 ;
Cure. 2 7 ; Cicero, Catil. 3. 22, 2 9 ; Apuleius, Met. 3. 29) and ferito
cannot be a third person.
turn Mo die luppiter is palaeographically unexceptionable and the
Mo die balances hie hodie. The use of turn is regular in such official
language (cf. Paulus, loc. cit.; 32. 7; 22. 53. 11 si sciens/alio, turn me
luppiter . . . leto adjicias.
24. 9. saxo silice: the flint, kept in the temple of Juppiter Feretrius,
was probably an old neolithic celt venerated for its antiquity and
sacred function, which came to be regarded as a thunderbolt, a symbol
of the god (Pliny, N.H. 37. 135: see A. B. Cook, C.R. 18 (1904), 365;
Rose, J.R.S. 3 (1913), 238). The pig symbolized the perjurer. See
note on ch. 10.
T h e description of the battle owes much in its conception to the
Homeric duel between Paris and Hector (Iliad 3) and much of the
detail and language recalls such epic episodes (25. 1 n., 25. 4 n.,
25. 12 n.). Unlike a Homeric battle it is told from the spectators'
point of view (25. 2, 25. 4, 25. 5, 25. 9 ) ; the climax is the triumphant
outburst by Horatius (25. 12).
25. 1. in medium . . . procedunt: cf. the Homeric eV \iiooov Tpwcov /ecu
HXCLLCUV GTixo<*>vTO ( 3 . 3 4 1 ) *
i. 25. 2
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
5
33. 9. 4). animo 'with their minds, their whole attention is then appro
priate. L. elsewhere writes intendere animos (23. 33. 1: hence animos
intendunt H. J. Muller) or animi intenti sunt (33. 32. 10: hence animi
intenduntur Tucking) but the further change is unnecessary. The in
strumental ablative delimits.
25. 4. increpuere: the language is highly coloured; increpuere, for concrepuere^ arma is found only here, elsewhere of bugles, &c.; forfalsere
gladii cf. Virgil, Aeneid 6. 217, 490: the phrase is not elsewhere in
prose except, significantly, Apuleius, Met. 8. 13; for horror perstringit
cf. Valerius Flaccus 7. 81.
25. 5. anceps: taken by Conway as 'two-fold activity of weapon and
shield' (each man was plying weapon and shield at once), but it
must mean 'indecisive5 ('nichts entscheidende5 M. Muller; 'sans
r6sultat5 Baillet) in contrast to the positive vulnera et sanguis. One
moment there was a confused mele in which limbs and weapons
were all that could be distinguished: in the next moment blood could
be seen. For this sense of anceps cf. 7. 25. 4.
25. 6. vice: there is no example of vice -f- gen. = 'on account of*
whereas solliciti suam vicem or the like is standard; cf. 8. 35. i, 23. 9. 10,
26. 21. 2, 28. 19. 17, 43. 9 etc. Read vicem here.
25. 9. qualis . . . solet: 'like the cry raised by supporters as a result of
an unexpected event5, faventium as in Virgil, Aeneid 5. 148; cf. Horace,
Odes 3. 24. 46. R. C, Flickinger (Class. Journ. 16 (1921), 369) points
out that the force of ex insperato is not that their support was un
expected but that it had found vocal expression as a result of the un
looked-for turn of events.
25. 10. nee: TT\ inserted the relative qui but nee procul for non> haud
procul is not attested and cannot be supported by formations such as
necopinans. The insertion of relatives is a common corruption (cf.
1. 48. 7) and a single nee frequently introduces a parenthesis (cf.
5- 44- 3)25. 11. aequato: 2. 40. 14 n.
25. 12. manibus: 4. 19. 3. For the concept of Roman suzerainty
cf. 45. 3.
iugulo: defigo with the plain abl. is only found in poetry, e.g. Ovid,
Fasti 3. 754; Silius 4. 454.
25. 13. quo prope: for quo propius (Gruter) cf. Tacitus, Annals 1. 57,
1.68,3.5.
dicionis: 38. 1 n.
25. 14. sepulcra: the site of these monuments cannot be established.
Martial 3. 47. 3 tells of Horaliorum qua viret sacer campus and would
seem to locate it near the Porta Gapena (cf. the sepulcrum Horatiae
26. 14; cf. 26. 2: there may have been a family burial-ground of the
Horatii in the vicinity).
814492
**3
I. 26
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
26. Perduellio
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
i. 26
i. 26. 6
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
centuries the exact method was in doubt in the first century (cf.
Cicero,pro C. Rabirio 13; D.H. 3. 22). It has been supposed that death
was by hanging (Niebuhr, Rom. Geschichte, 1. 365) or by crucifixion
(Turnebus, Advers. 4. 3 ; Mommsen, Strqfrecht, 918) but the former was
unknown at R o m e as a means of judicial execution and the latter
was reserved for slaves and is not older than 217 (22. 33. 2). Only
death by scourging remains, the penalty also prescribed by the Twelve
Tables (8. 9 suspensum Cereri necari). T h e provision vel intra pomerium vel
extra pomerium corresponds to the distinction between imperium domi
and imperium militiae. The iiviri are empowered to hold the execution
wherever is convenient.
26. 7. hoc lege-, to be taken with creati (Daube), not condemnassent
(Brecht). In the succeeding relative clause non belongs with posse (cf.
4. 3. 16, 5. 53. 5 : see Wackernagel, Vorlesungen, 2. 262) and the
negative is reinforced by ne . . . quidem. 'Such were the terms of their
appointment and they felt that under these terms they were not em
powered to acquit even an innocent man.' T h e iiviri were instructed
simply perduellionem iudicare. There was no stated provision for ac
quittal. T h e defendant had recourse to provocatio instead.
Publi Horati: in Zonaras 7. 6 TIovTrXiopaTioi. Other traditions gave
him the praenomen M . (Cicero, de Inv. 2. 78-79; D.H. 3. 27, 1, 30. 4).
T h e earliest legend presumably spoke of a Horatius unadorned.
26. 8. provocatione: the sense requires that the people had to decide
not about the principle of provocatio (certare dep.; 4. 37. 5) but about
the guilt or innocence of the Horatius who had appealed to them, i.e.
provocatione certatum est 'it was argued on appeal', itaque is a neater
correction of the manuscripts than either ita (Frigell) or ita demum
(Proudeville, Lipsius).
Horatia was iure caesa because she was guilty ofproditio.
orabat: the father's appeal, begun in or. obi. and breaking out into
direct speech, is choicely pathetic, egregia stirpe occurs elsewhere only
in Virgil, Aeneid 5. 297 and may be Ennian. 26. 10 inter verbera et
cruciatus is a rhetorical commonplace (cf. Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 5. 24;
Seneca, Contr. 2. 7. 4).
2 6 . 1 0 . pila Horatia: the name is interpreted variously as 'the Horatian
spears' (plur. ofpilum: 26. 11; Propertius 3. 3. 7) or 'the Horatian
column' (sing, of pila: D.H. 3. 22. 9 ; 27 Bob. Cicero, pro Milone, p . 277).
T h e name was given in Augustan times 'to the corner column of one
of the two basilicas at the entrance of the forum on which the spoils
of the Curiatii had once been hung' (Plainer-Ashby s.v.) but the
former interpretation is likely to be the older. A trophy of spears or
some similar object may have long hung in the Forum but disappeared
after the building operations of the mid-second century, leaving only
a name.
116
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
i. 26. 13
26. 13. tigillo: the tigillum sororium was a wooden crossbar supported
by two vertical posts beneath which Horatius had to pass. It stood
ad Compitum Acili (C.I.L. i 2 . 214), that is, near the south-east end of
the modern Via dei Fori Imperiali close to the Colosseum. Nearby
were the twin altars ofJ a n u s Curiatius and J u n o Sororia (see PlatnerAshby s.w.). At first sight the names seem to confirm the traditional
story but in reality two false etymologies have conspired to mislead,
for the tigillum is in any case nowhere near the route of the Horatii
and Guriatii. T h e epithet sororius has nothing to do with soror but is
connected with the verb sororiare (Festus 380 L. sororiare mammae dicuntur puellarum cum primum tumescunt). Juno Sororia was invoked as the
goddess who presided over the passage of girls to puberty. Now Janus
and J u n o (Govella) are also coupled in invocations at the beginning
of each month (Macrobius 1.9. 16, 1. 15. 18), where their functions
as deities of passage speak for themselves. It follows that the cult of
J a n u s Curiatius is a male cult parallel to that ofJ u n o Sororia. It con
sisted presumably in the initiation of boys from all the curiae (hence
Curiatius: cf. Aul. Gell. 15. 27. 2) as warriors. Between them the two
cults represented the most important moments in the life of a primitive
community. T h e ceremony at the tigillum sororium (Festus 380 L.)
was performed on 1 October, when other rites such as the Armilustrium connected with the end of the campaigning season were per
formed. Its shape, analogous to the arcus triumphalis and the iugum,
betrays its purpose. Those who passed through it were purified from
harmful forces whether of blood-guilt or of effective hostility (iugum).
Thus the young boys were initiated at the altar ofJ a n u s Curiatius and
passed out to battle. O n their return the pollutions of blood and battlefever had to be cleansed by passing under the tigillum before they could
take their place in the peaceful community. These primitive rites, long
obsolescent, were subjected to reinterpretation and by the accident of
the title Curiatius brought into connexion with the legend of Horatius.
See Warde-Fowler, Roman Essays, 70 ff.; M . Cary and A. D. Nock,
C.Q. 21 (1927), 122-7; H . J . Rose, Mnemosyne 53 (1925), 407 ff.;
Haw. Theol. Rev. 44 (1951), 1696.; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 133; R.
Schilling, Mel. dWrch. et d'Hist. 72 (i960), 102-13; Gage, Hommages
W. Deonna 255; Renard, Rev. Belg. Phil. 31 (1953), 14 ff.; L. A.
Holland, Janus, 78 ff.
iugum: 3. 28. n . n.
26. 14. Horatiae: nothing else is known of the monument.
27-29. Mettius Fufetius and the Fall of Alba
L. relates the history in three distinct episodes, the battle (27), the
punishment of Fufetius (28), and the Fall of Alba (29), and each
episode has its own distinctive character. T h e battle, which is
117
I. 27-29
TULLUS H O S T I L I U S
Pallor and Pavor are the Homeric Jef^o? and <P6f3os (Iliad 11. 3 7 ;
Hesiod, Theog. 933 ; Shield 195) and were added to the story to provide
Homeric colouring.
27. 8. iubet: Tullus employs a textbook ruse to deceive his own troops
into confidence and to mislead the enemy. False information, as here,
that the Fidenates were carrying out a manoeuvre according to
instructions, is one of the commonest stratagems commended in
antiquity (Polyaenus 1. 33, 1. 35. i ) . T h e second device, blocking the
vision of the Roman troops by a fence of spears, is bizarre. D.H, knows
nothing of it and it is nowhere commended by the theorists. Indeed
118
TULLUS
HOSTILIUS
1,27.8
i. 28. 4
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
1.29
i. 29. 6
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
list of indeterminate length had to be invented to fill the gap and the
figure of 300 years with its mystical properties was an adequate span.
Later research, based on Hellenistic chronology, introduced more
exact dating. Thus it is very probable that L. has taken over the
figure of 400, which disagrees with his own chronology, as given in
the course of the book, from a much older version, for it is a piece of
rhetorical colouring rather than chronological reckoning. If so, it
will be from Ennius a n d will confirm the view that L. is here in
debted to that poet's Albae excidium.
excidio . . . dedit: cf. Aeneid 12. 655 deiecturum arces Italum excidioque
daturum.
temperatum: for the superstition against violating temples see Fraenkel, Aeschylus, Agamemnon 525 flf.; cf. Euripides, Troades 15 ff.
30-31. The Death of Tullus Hostilius
The capture of Alba was the high-water mark of Tullus' reign. T h e
remaining events associated with him are grouped loosely together.
30. 1. Caelius: excavations have not proved yet whether the Caelian
was inhabited from the eighth century but it is a probable assumption.
At some time after 650, and probably between 625-575, the surround
ing valleys were abandoned as burial-grounds and the settlement crept
down the slopes of the Caelian until eventually a synoecism with other
communities on the Esquiline and Palatine was effected. The literary
tradition was far from unanimous, ascribing the addition of the Caelian
to the city to Romulus (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 46), Ancus Marcius
(Cicero, de Rep. 2. 33), Tarquinius Priscus (Tacitus, Annals 4. 65), or
Servius Tullius (Oratio Claudii) as well as Tullus. Thus all that can
be said is that the memory that the Caelian was once separate and
was integrated with the other communities at a n historical date sur
vived as part of the Roman national memory. Each king was associated
with different territorial acquisitions (cf. 33.5-6). See Platner-Ashby s.v.
regiae: the kings were allotted residences by tradition in different
quarters of the city, N u m a on the Quirinal (Solinus 1. 21), Ancus on
the Palatine (Varro ap. Non. 852 L.), Tarquinius Priscus ad Statoris
(41. 4 n.), Servius on the Esquiline (Solinus 1. 25). The seven kings
might have been expected to occupy the seven hills but this is not so,
and the principles of allocation are unclear.
ibique: \JL adds deinde rightly.
30. 2. principes Albanorum: D.H. 3. 29. 7 gives them as 'IovXlovsyZepOVLXLOVS, Koparlovs,
MCTLXLOVS. The
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
i . 30. 2
see 22.1 n.) and suggests Quinct(il)ios for Quinctiosy but the list as a whole
is curious. All the families were genuinely Latin in name and patrician
(for the Cloelii see Bk. 20, fr. 12) but clear evidence could be brought
about each to show that it was not one of the original, autochthonous
gentes. None supplied the name of a tribe. The Guriatii were known
to legend as Albans (24. 1 n.), and the fossa Cluilia demanded an Alban
origin for the Cloelii (23. 3 n.). The Julii had their gentile cult, de
rived from Alba, not in Rome but at Bovillae (C.I.L. 14. 2387; see
Doboi, Ephem. Dacoromana 6 (1935), 240 ff.) and the ties which the
Servilii had with Fidenae and the honour which they paid to a triens
(Pliny, JV.H. 34. 137) are evidence of late arrival. A variety of stories
connected a Geganius, the earliest attested member of the Geganii,
with Servius Tullius (Valerius Antias fr. 12 P.) or Tarquinius Superbus
(Plutarch, Comp. Lye. et Numae 3. n ) which shows an awareness of
their foreign origin. At some date the patrician status of these families
had to be reconciled with their late arrival and the compilation of the
list of Alban families was a step to that end. T h e Fasti also connected
the families. I n 453 a Curiatius and a Quinctilius were consuls
(3. 32. 1 n.) and in 447 a Geganius and a Julius. If we ask when the
definitive list of Alban families was composed, the early second cen
tury is the obvious date. The eclipse of the Geganii is still recent, the
last patrician Cloelius was rex sacrorum in 180, a new strain of Quinctilii comes into the fore in the person of P. Q . Varus, praetor in 203.
T h e date coincides with activities of Gato whose Origines would
naturally have dealt with the social history of Alba as it did of the
Euganei (fr. 41 P.) and is suited by the apparent disregard of the
legend of Proculus Julius (16. 5 n.). Yet L. cannot, any more than
D.H., have taken it directly from Gato, for it is inconceivable that on
whatever principles the list was composed the Julii, obscure and un
distinguished, should have been put before the Servilii who boasted
of consuls in 203 and 202. T h e precedence of the Julii must be an
anachronism of the first century. It need not post-date the dictator:
it must be later than the consuls of 91 and 90. See Miinzer, Rom.
Adelsparteien, 133 n. 1.
templum: for meeting-places of the Senate see 4. 21. 9. n. The
Curia Hostilia, universally attributed to Tullus (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 31 ;
Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 155) because of its name, is in reality likely to
have been constructed in the sixth or fifth century on the initiative
of a member or members of the gens Hostilia. It was restored and en
larged in 80 B.C. by Sulla (Pliny, N.H. 34. 26), burnt in 52 B.C., and
rebuilt by Faustus Sulla (Cicero, pro Milone 90). In 44 B.C. it was
pulled down to make way for a larger Senate-house on a new site
(Dio 44. 5), the Curia Julia. The comment ad patrum nostrorum aetatem
is, then, L.'s own.
123
^o- 5
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
TULLUS HOSTILIUS
1.31- 3
the Feriae Latinae. This festival, for which see also 5. 17. 2 n., was
celebrated with a sacrifice to Juppiter on the Alban mount by a group
of Latin communities and during it an armistice prevailed in Latium.
It is doubtful whether R o m e was even a founder-member of it or
whether Alba enjoyed any special responsibility, but with the decline
and extinction of the Latin states, who had in some cases to be arti
ficially represented at the sacrifice by Romans designated as sacerdotes
Cabenses, Rome gradually assumed a monopoly of it. T h e festival
was usually attended by the consuls and magistrates (25. 12. 2,
44. 2 1 . 3 ; Dio 47. 40. 6) and was held annually on a date appointed
by the consuls directly after their entry into office (Cicero, ad Fam.
8. 6. 3). See Samter, R.E., Teriae Latinae'.
3 1 . 4. novemdiale sacrum: a rite of purification analogous in public cult
to the private ritual performed nine days after a funeral (Porph. ad
Horace, Epod. 17. 48).
haruspicum: 56. 5 n. The variant is anachronistic, for the haruspices
were an Etruscan importation.
3 1 . 8. commentarios: 20. 5 n.
sacrificia: Duker proposed its deletion as a gloss on sollemnia but cf.
5- 52- 2.
Iovi Elicio: 20. 7 n.
operatum: 4. 60. 2, 21. 62. 6, 10. 39. 2, the t.t. for conducting a
sacrifice; cf. Horace, Odes 3. 14. 6; Virgil, Aeneid 3. 136; Lucilius
fr. 992 M . Bentley proposed operaturum but the perfect participle of
deponents is often used with a present force (cf. Virgil, Georgics 1. 339).
It is stated by Pliny {JSf.H. 28. 14) that the historian Piso was the
first to relate the circumstances of Tullus 5 death as told by L.; and
since Piso was the first to make extensive use of the Annales, it is
reasonable to believe that he had some documentary evidence for it,
although such evidence need not and indeed is unlikely to have
been authentic. This fact tends to confirm the impression that some
archival or pseudo-archival material underlies the chapter, but
the manner of his death, contrasting so signally with Romulus',
who was apotheosized, and Nutrias', who died a natural death, is
schematic.
32-34. The Reign of Ancus Marcius
The praenomen is Sabine (de Praen. 4), the name Latin and plebeian,
but did a king called Ancus Marcius ever reign at R o m e ? Later
Marcii certainly believed that he did, for the moneyer C. Marcius
Censorinus issued coins c. 86 B.C. with the heads of N u m a and Ancus
(Sydenham nos. 713, 715; cf. Suetonius, Julius 6; Plutarch, Numa
21. 1) and the Marcii Reges regarded their cognomen as proof. Their
testimony, however, amounts to nothing. T h e cognomen Rex was adopted
125
i- 32-34
ANGUS MARCUS
ANCUS MARCUS
i. 32. 2
32. 5
ANGUS MARCUS
ritual stretch of 'hostile soil' into which the spear was cast ([Servius],
ad Aen. 9. 5 2 ; Ovid, Fasti 6. 205 ff.; Suet. Claud. 25). Furthermore,
since her new enemies did not share iusfetiale with Rome, the fetiales
were replaced by senatorial legati and the whole ceremony secularized.
T h e old ceremony had involved three journeys, the denuntiatio, the
testatio, and the indictio. This was no longer a practical possibility. In
its place the legati were empowered by the Senate and people in
advance to carry out all three stages on their own authority without
reference back to Rome if the enemy refused to give the required
satisfaction. This was the procedure used at the start of the Second
Punic War.
By the beginning of the second century the old iusfetiale was, there
fore, obsolete. Polybius (13. 3. 7) says that only a bare trace of the
original procedure survived in his day (fipaxy n i^vo?) a n d he makes
no mention of the fetiales9 part in declaring war. T h e fetiales suddenly
re-emerged in 136. Although it is certain that the Numantine war was
not commenced by fetial procedure, when the consul Mancinus was
handed over to the Numantines on the repudiation of the peacetreaty which he had contracted, fetiales are recorded as playing a lead
ing part in the formalities of the ceremony. T h e event, which was
little more than a piece of political play-acting, had a profound
influence on the writing of history. T h e annalistic account of the
aftermath of the Gaudine Forks was composed under the immediate
impression of the Mancinus case and Sallust's account of the pre
liminaries of the Jugurthine W a r betrays the lineaments of the fetial
procedure. It may well be that the traditions, which were kept alive
in patrician families from which the fetiales were hereditarily chosen
or through archaic ceremonies like the annual renewal at Rome of the
Lavinian treaty, were now revived and popularized in literature. It is
at this period that the significantly named Annius Fetialis was writing
antiquarian history. Such a revival would be in keeping with the
interest aroused by the publication of pontifical records and similar
documents. But if the old formulae of the fourth century did survive
they would have been, like the chants of the Salii, utterly incompre
hensible. Thus there is every a priori ground for supposing that what in
Livy purport to be the original formulae are in fact either an invention
by second-century antiquarians, anxious to supply the exact details of
a ritual in which they are beginning to become interested or, at the
very least, a 'translation' into appropriate language of archaic pro
nouncements.
T h e antiquarian rediscovery of the procedure at the end of the
second century preserved it among the more scholarly writers of the
late Republic (mentioned, e.g., by Cicero, Verr. 5. 4 9 ; and discussed
in detail by Varro and by L. Gincius), but such interest was purely
128
ANCUS MARGIUS
1-32-5
129
*-32. 5
ANCUS MARGIUS
a branch of the Oscans, they are unlikely to have been the source of
such a widespread Latin rite as the iusfetiale, which other authorities
derive from Ardea (D.H. 2. 72) or the Falisci (Servius, adAen. 7. 695).
T h e attribution of it to them is no more than a late aetiological in
vention inspired by the false etymology aequum colere, but it quickly
superseded the older traditions (cf. the Ferter Resius inscription; de
Viris Illustr. 5. 4 ; Servius, ad Aen. 7. 695). See Hiilsen, R.E., 'Aequi'.
quo res repetuntur: demanding the restitution of objects or property
stolen by the other city. In early times the chief source of complaint
would have been cattle-rustling (Servius, ad Aen. 9. 52). T h e phrase
is old and technical, occurring first in Ennius, Ann. 273 V. See
Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 1047 n. 2.
32. 6. legatus: L. appears to indicate that only one person, a legatus, went
on the mission. According to Varro (ap. Non. Marcell. 850 l^.)fetiales
legatos res repetitum mittebant quattuor, quos oratores vocabant, including the
pater patratus and the verbenarius (24. 5 n.). Varro is less anachronistic,
since L.'s account is influenced by the subsequent developments dur
ing the third and second centuries in the procedure for declaring war
whereby the ultimatum was delivered not by a fetialis but by a
senatorial legatus. See also 32. 9 nn.
Jilolanae velamen est: on the ritual significance of the covered head
cf. 4. 12. 11 n. Thefetiales were likewise forbidden to wear linen tunics.
Wool had potent magical properties, partly because it was a token
from the sacrificial victim, and partly because it was the clothing of
primitive man. Its magical use was widespread in antiquity, lending
itself particularly to knots and spells. At Rome the galerus of the
flamen Dialis was made ex pelle hostiae caesae. For other examples of
wool-magic see Pley, De lanae in antiquorum ritibus usu, 1911; Kroll,
R.E., lana\
The Rerum Repetitio or Denuntiatio
audiat fas: threefold invocation is a ritual solemnity and is met
with in many cults (e.g. the Hylas-cult, for which see Gow on Theo
critus 13. 58, or the chant of the Fratres Arvales) but the presence of
Fas as an object to be addressed betrays that the actual language is
a product of second-century antiquarianism. K. Latte (%eit. Sav.-Stift.
67 (1950), 56) has demonstrated that in early Latin fas, with its
negative connotation ('there is no religious obstacle to prevent o n e ' ;
cf. dies fasti), is only used in the phrase fas est, and the like. T h e first
use of Fas as a substantive is in Accius (trag. 585) and it is not used as
an appellative ( = @e/zi?; cf. PaulusFestus 505 L.), outside this passage
of L. and the very similar 8 . 5 . 8 , before Seneca (H.F. 658) and Lucan
(10. 410). audiat fas is therefore a late formulation, influenced by
Greek concepts.
130
ANCUS MARCIUS
i. 32. 6
i. 32. 9
ANGUS MARGIUS
a7T(j)aLVeV
LS T7]V
fiovArjV
Lp7]Vo8iKaLS
ANGUS MARGIUS
i. 32. n
censes?) consists of a triad of complaints quarum rerum, quas res, quas res.
T h e three clauses are parallel to one another, not subordinate. In the
first clause condixit cannot be taken, in default of a single parallel,
as it is in the Thes. Ling. Lat., = repetivit, nor can it be understood in
the sense of 'concluded an agreement' (Ernout-Meillet) since there
have been no negotiations with the Prisci Latini and, a fortiori, no
agreements. Gaius (Instit. 4. 18) explains condicere autem denuntiare est
prisca lingua ('to give notice', used by a plaintiff) and this meaning
suits the parallelism of the fetial procedure with the civil legis actio per
condictionem (see above). T h e genitive remains difficult. T h e legal
incerti condicere assumes a simple ellipse, as does the frequent genitive
of crime with agere, e.g. furti, adulterii agere (sc. aliquem; cf. Cic. ad
Fam. 7. 22 ; Quintilian 4. 4. 8 ; and especially Ulpian, Dig. 19. 5. 17. 2 :
furti agere possum vel condicere vel ad exhibendum agere), and it is probably
on some such example that the author of the formulae has modelled
this phrase. T h e fact that rerum litium causarum are not properly genitives
of the crime but of the objects involved in the crime reveals the sup
posititious nature of the whole phrase rather than casts doubt on the
authenticity of its transmission. T h e three nouns (res are the stolen
property, lites the disputed property, not the lawsuits (Varro, de Ling.
Lat. 7. 93), causae the subjects of dispute generally) form another
solemn tricolon typical of quasi-legal language (Fraenkel, Plaut. im
Plaut. 359 n. 2 ; cf. also 38. 39. 2 ; Cicero, ad Att. 16. 16. n ) which
should not be disturbed by substituting diem (Schmidt), causa (Madvig)
or causam for causarum; see Lofstedt, Syntactica, 1. 166.
quas res nee dederunt nee fecerunt nee solverunt . . . . dari, fieri, solvi: an
other tricolon. T h e vagaries of the TT family are of no consequence.
T h e difficulty lies in the meaning of solvere. T h e pair dari, fieri are
regular in legal contexts (e.g. Gaius, Instit. 4. 5, 4 1 , 47, 60) and it
looks as if solvi has been imported from the preceding neque ius persolvere (32. 1 o) to make up the tricolon without regard for the particular
sense of the passage. T h e manuscripts read the first phrase in the order
dederunt . . . solverunt . . . fecerunt but since solverunt is the odd one out,
the order unanimously given by the manuscripts for the second phrase
is probably right and solverunt should be the last member of the
tricolon. See E. Norden, Altrom. Priest. 98.
quid censes ?: cf. 9. 8. 2 ; from Cicero, ad Ait. 7. 1.4 (DIG, M . T U L L I ) , it
may be inferred that the senators were also called on by name to
speak to the formal question.
3 2 . 1 2 . puropioque duello quaerendascenseo, itaque consentio consciscoque: this
reply is suspicious in several details. After a motion had bsen put for
ward, the question 'quid censes?' would often elicit a reply couched in
the form censeo . . ., as can bz seen from the laboured parody in
Plautus, Rudens 1269-80 (especially the exchange: Plesidippus: quid
133
I. 32. 12
ANCUS MARCIUS
ANCUS MARCIUS
i. 32. 12
I- 32. 13
ANCUS MARCIUS
ANCUS
MARCIUS
i- 33- 2
i- 33- 6
ANCUS MARCIUS
ANGUS MARGIUS
i- 33- 7
first sight appear to place the ditch around the Janiculum. The
impression is probably mistaken. L. adds the detail without any
topographical specification and in such matters is frequently unreflective (2. 39. 3 n.). We might expect such a ditch to have stretched
round the south-western end of the Aventine but the author of the
de Viris Illustribus (8. 3) notes that the cloaca maxima, constructed by
Tarquinius Superb us, was called the fossae Quiritium. Meiggs {Ostia,
480-1) argues that the name was handed down 'but that there was no
continuing association of the name with any definite place 5 . O n the
contrary, we may hold that the cloaca, which originally flowed in a
ditch, and not underground, through the Velabrum to the Tiber, was
called fossa Quiritium and was variously explained as a defensive work
built by Ancus to safeguard the approaches to the Aventine if the
bridge was rushed and as Tarquin's drain. Festus' reference to the
Quiritium fossa at Ostia (304 L.) does not exclude the existence of a
similar ditch at R o m e and would account for its attribution to Ancus.
T h e point of the name is lost.
33. 8. career: between the temple of Concord and the Curia at the
foot of the Capitol. T h e subterranean part was called the Tullianum,
which was anciently supposed to have been named after its builder,
Servius Tullius (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 151; Festus 490 L.). The Tul
lianum was regarded as an addition and therefore an earlier king had
to be nominated as architect for the earliest part. In fact the lowest
chamber is also the oldest and may be of regal date although the
existing masonry is assigned to the third century B.C. See PlatnerAshby s.v.
3 3 . 9. silva . . . adempta: abl. abs., as always in the style of such formal
notices. It is commonly assumed that the forest lay on the right bank
of the river and was part of or close to the Ciminian Forest, but it is
hard to see how the possession of a forest on the right bank of the Tiber
could affect the colonization of Ostia. T h e only other passage where
it is mentioned is Pliny, N.H. 8. 225 in M. silva Italiae non nisi in parte
reperiuntur hi glires. Now the younger Pliny had a villa south of Ostia
(Epist. 2. 17. 26-8) and the whole of that coastal strip from the Tiber
to Antium was well wooded in antiquity (references in Meiggs 269;
to which should be added 27. 11. 2 where lacus cannot be read).
Pliny's peculiar observation reads like local knowledge and it makes
better geographical sense to identify the Silva Maesia with this coastal
belt of trees. The coastal forests were exploited by the Etruscans for
ship-building from an early time (Theophrastus, H.P. 5. 8. 3).
Ostia: the tradition that Ancus Marcius founded Ostia is unanimous
and was cherished by the inhabitants themselves (C.LL. 14, Suppl.
4338). It has been assailed on the score (i) that the earliest remains
at Ostia date from the fourth-century castrum, (ii) that there is no
139
i- 33- 9
ANCUS MARGIUS
evidence for an early road down the left bank of the Tiber from Rome,
(iii) that the only salinae to be worked in the sixth century were on
the right bank, (iv) that the name Ostia implies that it was founded
as a port at the mouth of the river and not as a settlement to work the
salt, and (v) that R o m e cannot have had any maritime ambitions
at that date, (ii) and (iii) are, however, mere assertion and the anti
quity of Ficana argues for a road. T h e crux of the matter is the salttrade. Rome was at first a pastoral community raising pigs, sheep,
goats, cattle. She switched to an agrarian economy in the sixth cen
tury, probably under the Etruscan influence of the Tarquins. This
switch implies contact and dealings with other people. No longer a
self-contained and self-supporting community, Rome began to enter
upon commercium with others. For her progress she must have had
other things to offer than a crossing where Veientes transported their
own salt from the right bank to the left so that it could continue its
journey up the Via Salaria to the Sabine hinterland. Rome must
have had salt of her own to exchange (Clerici, Economia e Finanza,
168 ff). Thus the emergence of Rome presupposes the working of the
Ostian salt-beds long before the fourth century when she gained con
trol of Veii's. T h e archaeological silence is of little account. T h e oldest
settlement will have been not at the castrum but at the salinae. See the
full discussion in Meiggs, Ostia, 16 ff., 479 ff; also A. Alfoldi, Hermes
90 (1962), 187-94; L. A. Holland, Janus, 145 ff.
The Arrival of the Tarquins in Rome
T h e magnitude of the Etruscan influence on Rome is not and cannot
be doubted. T h e visible remains are mute testimonythe terracotta
and pottery fragments, the R o m a n alphabet, the fasces, the templedesignsand the historical institutions of Rome, her religious dis
cipline and lore, and the names of her leading families confirm it. A
date for the duration of this influence is also given archaeologically.
Recent stratigraphy places the earliest signs of Etruscan contact c.
625 B.C. Attic Black Figure ware, imported via Etruria, is found in
some of the earliest excavated shrines dating from 580-560 B.C. T h e
contact with Etruria coincides with a remarkable change in the
physical appearance of Rome. T h e separate hill-communities had
gradually been approaching one another and the valleys between them
ceased to be used as distinct burial grounds and were built over with
huts. This tendency was accelerated by the creation of a central
market-place between the hills, superseding the scattering of huts
which covered the area. With its forum Rome ceased to be a conglomera
tion of swineherds and became a 7r6\ts. A precise date for it cannot be
fixed but the earliest level of the Sacra Via seems to be about or a
little before 575 B.C. T h e idea of such a noXts must have been inspired
140
ANCUS MARCIUS
i- 34
by Etruscan examples. (For the archaeological evidence see especially
E. Gjerstad, Opuscula Romana, 3. 81 ff.)
Given an Etruscan period at Rome, it is not unreasonable to accept
the tradition of an Etruscan domination of Rome, especially since the
traditional dates for the dynasty of the Tarquins, 616-578 and 5 3 4 510 B.C., correspond uncommonly well with the independent evidence
from archaeology. Moreover, the Tarquins have excellent credentials
quite apart from the disputable Cn. Tar^unies R u m a ^ of the Francois
T o m b . Tarquinius is a latinized form of the common Etruscan n a m e
taryna and recalls the Etruscan hero Tarchon and the Asiatic god
Tarku. No ethnic could betray a family's origins as clearly as the name
Tarquinius. See also 60. 2 n.
But there the difficulties begin. How much else of the traditional
story can be trusted ? T h e settled version, which is as old as Fabius
Pictor (Polybius 6. 11 a. 7 with Walbank's note; Cicero, de Rep. 2.
34-36), made Tarquinius the son of the Corinthian Demaratus and
an emigrant from Tarquinii to Rome. Epigraphical evidence points
to Caere rather than Tarquinii as the home town of the Tarquins, for
the family is most abundantly attested there (cf. 60. 2 n.) and Tar
quinii may have been substituted merely for its name. The point is less
important than the parentage of Tarquin. According to the developed
source Demaratus was a Bacchiad who fled to Etruria with his family
and craftsmen on the overthrow of the Bacchiad aristocracy by
Cypselus in c. 655 (Pliny, N.H. 35. 16, 152; Strabo 5. 219). Blakeway, in a fundamental paper (J.R.S. 25 (1935), 129-48), displayed
that Corinthian pottery monopolized the Etruscan market from c.
700 to c. 625 and that there were unmistakable indications of Greek
craftsmen producing vases at Falerii and perhaps other centres in
Etruria in the second half of the seventh century. In addition the
Corinthian style exercised a striking influence over Etruscan art in
general. Thus the story of the migration of Corinthian craftsmen to
Etruria is confirmed by the evidence of Etruscan art. T h e flight of
Demaratus is to be believed. Less likely is the story that makes him the
father of a Roman king: it fails to account for the name Tarquinius.
If we ask how Demaratus was remembered, the answer must be through
early Greek sources, historians of the fourth century drawing on
Corinthian memories. A Roman source is out of the question and an
Etruscan one only theoretically possible. It follows that the fusion
of the Demaratus story with the Tarquin legend must be the work of
the earliest generation of R o m a n historians. Demaratus migrates to
Etruria, Tarquin to Rome. The pattern is symmetrical.
T h e rest of the story is more easily disentangled. Tarquin is called
by the praenomen Lucumo, which gave colour to his royal pretensions
and also provided motivation for his migration to Rome. O n e of the
141
-34
ANCUS MARCIUS
oldest Etruscan myths was the rivalry between priest and king,
Arruns and Lucumo (see Gage, Rev. Hist. ReL 143 (1953), 170-208).
It recurs in a very similar story in 5. 33. 2 (n.) and in both places it
is a rationalistic explanation of a social distinction. Lucumo for
Lucius is etymological conjecture and, although Polybius merely
speaks of ACVKIOS 6 JrjjuapaTou, it is likely to be another addition to the
outline of the Tarquin legend made by Fabius Pictor or his contem
poraries. Once the two brothers had become part of history it was
natural to pursue the fortunes of Arruns as well. Here researches into
the history of Collatia and into the traditions of the Egerii (cf. 20. 5 n.)
are indicated, suggesting the work of Cato. Tanaquil is Etruscan in
name (34. 4 n.) and the renown of her doings is likely to have kept
her name alive, but wherever we can test the truth of the circumstantial
detail in which her life is clothed we find it to be unreliable. T h e
events of her life are un-Roman and literary (34. 8 n., 34. 9 n.).
R o m a n pride was always aware that the Tarquins were interlopers
and that Rome had fallen into the hands of a foreign power but it
was equally reluctant to explain this humiliation by an Etruscan con
quest of Rome. In this dilemma the historians, while accepting the
appearance of the Tarquins in the king-list of tradition, were anxious
to dispute their legitimacy. Hence two legal niceties are inserted to
discredit the claims of the Tarquins to the R o m a n throne. Lucumo
was not legally the sole heir (34. 3 n.) and he was guilty of fraudulent
behaviour in his capacity as tutor (34. 12 n.). These legal points are
of a piece with the other legal insertions of the second century.
Thus the whole superstructure about Tarquin is precarious. It is
largely the erection of Fabius Pictor, and later historians added little
or nothing to it. L. has no trace of the story originated by Varro that
Tarquin's wife was Gaia Caecilia. But scepticism about the super
structure should not encourage scepticism about the foundations. T h e
Etruscans led by Tarquins came to R o m e towards the end of the
seventh century. Salt and the passage of the Tiber led them on. They
created the city and, by whatever means, controlled it.
T h e excellent discussion by Schachermeyr in R.E., 'Tarquinius',
has not yet been superseded. For the latest treatment of the Corin
thian aspects see Will, Korinthiaka, 306 ff.
34. 1. Lucumo: according to Servius, adAen. 2. 278, 8. 65, 475, 10. 202,
lucumo was the Etruscan for rex: but cf. Censorinus, de Die Natal. 4. 13.
T h e word also occurs on Etruscan inscriptions in various forms sug
gesting that, as here, it was used as a name (e.g. CLE. 3932, 3567,
3872, 3877: see Schulze 179). Mlinzer (R.E., 'Lucumo') argues that
Servius' meaning was the original one but with the decline or dis
appearance of the kingship the title passed into a proper name used by
142
ANGUS MARGIUS
i- 34- i
the leading family of the city (cf. Ionian jSaoxAt&zt). Here it is no more
than a false aetiology for the praenomen Lucius (cf. Auct. de Praen. 4).
maxime: M . T . T a t h a m would read maximi, an artificial sentiment.
cupidine ac spe form a single concept.
34. 2 . Demaratus'. a common Greek name, it was borne by another
Corinthian, the friend of Alexander the Great (Plutarch, Alex. 9, 56).
34. 3 . ventremferre: evidently a technical or legal phrase, for it is found
before the Jurists only in Varro, de Re Rust. 2. 1. 19.
testando: Cicero (de Orat. 1. 241) classes among self-evident cases
which are never disputed in court the nullity of wills made by a father
antequam filius natus esset.
34. 4 . Tanaquil: the n a m e is Etruscan (cf. Qanyvil) and the person
real, but her character as a femme fatale is largely modelled on Greek
prototypes. See Momigliano cited in 4 1 . 2 n . ; bibliography on 39. 1.
ea quo innupsisset: cf. 4. 4. 10. innubo takes the dat. (Ovid, Met.
7. 856 ne thalamis patiare innubere nostris; Lucan 3. 23; Cod. Theod.
3. 18. 1: contrast Lucilius 260 M.). In the present passage the sense
is clear. Tanaquil refused to give up by marriage the station to which
she had been born. T h e contrast is between Us in quibus nata erat and
ea \cum innupsisset (N). The simplest correction is ea quibus innupsisset
but Weissenborn's quo is palaeographically more satisfactory and as
an alternative to quibus for the sake of variety is to be preferred. Cf.
Plautus, Aul. 489-90 quo illae nubent divites dotatae?
34. 6. potissima: the manuscript reading potissimum is impossible to
construe and the necessary meaning 'most suitable' cannot be ex
tracted from Gronovius's potissima. potissimum is used to qualify an adj.
e.g. apta potissimum (Freudenberg) or potissimum apta (Buttner, Meyer)
'particularly suitable', opportuna potissimum (Frigell). But the easiest
correction is Heumann's aptissima, metathesis with subsequent change.
For aptus ad cf. 32. 17. 12, 35. 26. 2, 44. 3. 6.
Tanaquil's persuasion is forthright and thoroughly modern in tone.
For ex virtute nobilitas cf. Sallust, Jugurtha 85. 17 (Marius); for nobilem
. . . imagine cf. ibid. 25.
34. 7. ut cupido: 'seeing that he was eager for office5.
34. 8. aquila: the eagle was the bird of Zeus, king of the gods, in Greek
myth (e.g. Aeschylus, Agam. 113) and therefore its appearance to a
m a n betokened royal power, blessed by Zeus. T h e infant Gilgamos
was saved by an eagle and became king of Babylon (Aelian, N.A.
12. 21). Similar Greek and Oriental legends have been overlooked
in favour of the prodigy which befell Augustus (Suetonius, Aug.
94. 7 'aquila panem ei e manu rapuit et cum altissime evolasset
rursus ex improviso leniter delapsa reddidit'). Suetonius gives no
indication of date and we cannot tell (nor should we expect to know)
the relationship between L. and that event. W h a t is important is that
H3
i. 34. 8
ANGUS MARCIUS
ANCUS MARCIUS
i . 34. 12
145
TARQUINIUS PRISCUS
* 35-38
formula was inserted into the narrative of Tarquin's wars (38. 1 n.).
Motivation and narrative could be supplied by the adaptation of
Greek stories (35. 2 n.).
All these details were the product of inference, not of memory or
documentation. In many matters we may believe that historians did
hit on the truth. In all probability the conquest of the nearby cities
of Latium was accomplished under the Tarquins, for the history of the
fifth century presupposes that it was already effected by then and it can
hardly have been begun before Rome became a city. In all probability,
too, the minores gentes do represent Etruscan immigrants. Nevertheless
a true memory of all these things was not handed down from regal
to classical times.
It can be shown that L. took his version from a later rather than an
earlier historian (35. 6 n., 35. 8 n.). Since L.'s account of the spoil
from Apiolae contradicts that given by Valerius Antias (35. 7 n . ;
cf. 38. 1 n.), Licinius Macer is a candidate. L.'s art can be seen in his
treatment of the reign. T h e contents of 35-38 may be tabulated:
35.
35.
35.
36.
36.
1-6
Internal: institutions A.
7-8
External: Latin war.
8-36. 1 Internal: buildings A.
1-2
External: Sabine war.
2-8
Internal: institutions B.
Attus Navius.
37~3^- 4
External: Sabine war.
38. 5-6
Internal: buildings B.
T A R Q U I N I U S PRISCUS
* 35- 3
* 3 5 - 6
T A R Q U I N I U S PRISCUS
TARQUINIUS PRISCUS
i- 35- 7
scian country near Pometia. Its site is quite unknown. Valerius Antias
fr. i i P. writes: 'oppidum Latinorum Apiolas captum a L. Tarquinio
rege ex cuius praeda Capitolium is incohaverit.'
3 5 . 8. turn: 2. 36. 1 n. There were different traditions about the
origin of the games. D.H. distinguishes the annual games, which he
claims were first founded by the dictator Postumius in 499 (6. 10),
from the votive games which were first vowed by Tarquinius Superbus
after the capture of Pometia (6. 29). Piganiol (Reckerckes, 75 ff.),
accepting the historicity of the distinction, believed that the annual
games were originally plebeian and that they were recognized as the
state games only at the end of the fourth century as a gesture of good
will on the conclusion of the Struggle of the Orders. Conversely the
votive games, celebrated sporadically up till 358 (4. 12. 2, 27. 1, 35. 3,
5. 19. 6, 7. 11. 4), lapsed after that date until revived in 217 as one of
the many panic measures inspired by the Carthaginian menace. It
was for that celebration that the bogus protocol described by Fabius
Pictor (D.H. 7. 70 ff.) was resuscitated. But the ludi magni were, in
R o m a n eyes, quite distinct from the ludiplebeii and there is in any case
no certain evidence that the latter were ever held before 214. It is,
therefore, better to follow Mommsen and believe that the annual
ludi magni evolved out of the sporadic celebration of votive games, akin
to but distinct from the triumphal ludi Capitolini. T h e antiquity of the
games can be approached by reviewing the nature of the games them
selves and the archaeological evidence for the construction of the Circus
Maximus. Wall-paintings belonging to the last quarter of the sixth
century from Corneto ('Grotta delle bighe') and Chiusi ('Tombe
della scimmia') illustrate scenes of Etruscan funeral games which re
semble the traditional R o m a n games in many points of detailhorses,
boxers, spectators, even a puteal which Piganiol with some plausibility
compares with the Ara Consi in the Circus (Recherches, 1-14). There
can be no doubt that the games were Etruscan in origin and date from
the Tarquin period, although later rather than earlier in it (56. 2 n.).
T h e archaeological evidence is inconclusive. T h e earliest datable con
struction belongs to the late fourth century, agreeing with L.'s notice
that the first permanent structure was made in 329 B.C. (8. 20. 1).
In short, common sense and tradition pointed to an Etruscan origin
for the games but there was no firm evidence from antiquity which
involved one or other Tarquin. Hence duplications (35. 8, 56. 2) and
uncertainty.
tumprimum: tunc primum M . See 5. 7. 13 n . ; Housman, Manilius 2 , 5.
p. 116. T h e theory that horse-races at the Consualia were as old as
the festival and so older than the Tarquins is to be rejected (9. 6 n.).
patribus equitibusque: the allocation of special seats for the equites, as an
inferior class to the patres, is a post-Sullan anachronism. It reflects the
H9
i. 35 8
T A R Q U I N I U S PRISGUS
normal seating of the late Republic. Special seats were first reserved
for senators in 194 B.C. (34. 44. 5) and for equites by the Lex Roscia of
67 B.C. Since Valerius Antias is specifically named as one of the
authorities who recorded the precedent of 194 (fr. 37 P.) it may be
inferred that he is not L.'s source here.
35. 9. ludicrum -.5. 1.5. Tacitus, Annals 14. 21, appeals to the authority
of maiores for his contention that only histriones came from Etruria
while horse-races first came from Thurii, but he is confuted by the
evidence from the Etruscan tombs.
sollemnes: 'held at regular intervals', more closely defined by annul,
cf. 3. 15. 4 sollemne in singulos annos, 1. 9. 6. Mommsen, wishing to
vindicate the truth of his theory about the games, punctuated sol
lemnes, deinde annul mansere ludl 'first at intervals and then annually',
but deinde is conclusive against this, deinde must be used here as at
27. 23, 7 is dies deinde sollemnls servatus.
35. 10. divisa . . . loca: cf. 35. 8, an unconscious repetition.
porticus tabernaeque: a recollection of the construction of the Forum
under the Tarquins. For the tabernae see 3. 48. 5 n . ; the porticus is
anachronistic since the first were those constructed in 193 B.C. by M .
Aemilius Lepidus (35. 10. 12). It is another historical throw-back.
36. 1. muro: 44. 3 n.. There are no signs of a Tarquinian wall.
36. 2. Ramnes, Tltlenses, Luceres: 13. 8 n.
Attus Navlus
Attus Navius was a famous augur under the Tarquins. This is what
we are told and we can confidently affirm it, for his name is Etruscan
and, if he had not lived under the Tarquins, he would have been
placed in the reign of Romulus or Numa. There was also a stone,,
probably a meteorite, venerated in the comltlum and surrounded by
pious hands with a puteal (Cicero, de Dlv. 1. 33 with Pease's notes;
D . H . 3. 71. 5). T h e connexion between the two was first made by
those who, whether priests or guides, were concerned to offer an ex
planation of the stone. It is an aetiology of a common type. Once
the connexion had been made it was developed. T h e augur had
performed a miracle with the stone. Such miracles are attested else
where and a close parallel is afforded by the legend of young Arthur
and Excalibur. T h e circumstances of the miracle now called for ex
planation and were provided by the curiosity of the Sex Suffragia.
It was known or might be presumed that Tarquin increased the
cavalry just as he had enlarged the Senate and the patricians, but
the signs of that increase could only be discerned in the duplication of
centuries with the same name. T h e historical oddity of prlmores and
posteriores excited comment and recalled the doings of Cleisthenes of
150
TARQUINIUS PRISCUS
i- 36. 3
Sicyon who renamed the three Dorian tribes in his city and added
one of his own (Herodotus 5. 6 8 ; cf. Cicero, de Rep, 2. 36). Thus
Greek models once again provide motive a n d continuity.
Later embellishments to the story include the naming of a fig-tree in
the vicinity of the putealficus Navia (Festus 168 L . ; Pliny, N.H. 15. 77)
and the erection of the statue (36. 5 n.). T h e activities of Q . Navius
described in 26. 4. 4-10 are purely coincidental and are unlikely to
have influenced the decision to connect Navius with a reform of the
equites. L. treats the story as an illustration of the power of religious
sentiment, although he is himself sceptical of the miraculous aspects
of it. H e admires and is anxious that others should admire the moral
nihil nisi auspicato and achieves his purpose as is his wont (2. 10. 1 n.)
by crystallizing the episode into a dialogue.
See Kroll, R.E., 'Navius ( i ) ' ; Petrikovits, Mitt. d. Ver. Klass. PhiloL
9 (1932), 36 ff.
36. 3 . inaugurato: it is not stated in 13. 8 that Romulus did so create
them but it is a reasonable assumption.
Attus Navius: for the praenomen see 2. 16. 4 n. Navius, the true
form of the name (Naevius in de Viris Must. 6. 7 is a trivialization), is
Etruscan; cf. navesi, navlis and Navinius, Navonius (Schulze 197).
36. 4 . utferunt: ct.ferunt below and 36. 5 memorant. T h e non-committal
attitude to the miraculous part of the story may be taken as some
evidence of L.'s religious scepticism (Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy, 32).
36. 5. statua: according to Pliny (N.H. 34. 21) the base was destroyed
in the conflagration of 52 B.C. but D.H. 3. 71. 5 states that the statue
was still standing and describes it as smaller than life-size. It is probable
that it did not survive to the Augustan age (notice l^.hfuit) and that
D . H . is merely retailing his sources (but see A. Andren, Hommages
Herrmann, 98).
in gradibus ipsis: the ancient comitium was a semi-circular space in the
shape of a theatre (caved). It lay between the two streets Argiletum and
Clivus Argentarius. T h e place of a stage was taken by the rostra, the
seating was arranged in tiers (the gradus mentioned here and in 48. 3),
and the old Curia stood at the top at the back. It was capable of
holding some 6,000 people. T h e gradus are not the steps leading into
the Curia (see details in Sjoqvist, Studies Presented to D. M. Robinson,
1. 4 0 0 - 1 1 ) .
i. 36. 6
T A R Q U I N I U S PRISGUS
TARQUINIUS
PRISCUS
1-37- i
1.38.1
T A R Q U I N I U S PRISGUS
TARQUINIUS PRISGUS
i. 38. 4
I. 38.4
TARQUINIUS PRISGUS
SERVIUS TULLIUS
i. 39-48
* 3 9 - i
SERVIUS TULLIUS
kings were the offspring of the fire-god by mortal mothers and such
manifestations testified to their royal and divine nature, Romulus
and Remus were the children of a slave woman and a flame of fire
according to Promathion (Plutarch, Romulus 2; cf. 1.3.11 n.); Caeculus,
the founder of Praeneste, was conceived through a spark which struck
his mother from the fire, while both Lavinia (Virgil, Aen. 7. 71-77) and
Ascanius (Virgil, Aen. 2. 680-6) were attended by haloes of fire which
played about their heads. (Such supernatural illumination has parallels
in other communities, to be found in Sir James Frazer, Golden Bough,
2. 194-206; A. B. Cook, eus, 2. 114; and Gow on Theocritus 24. 22.)
In the case of Servius it would appear therefore that the crude story
according to which his mother conceived by a flame in the shape of
the genitals (Plutarch, defort. Rom. 10; D . H . 4. 2 ; Ovid, Fasti 6. 631)
was the primitive versionwhich was subsequently rationalized into
the more respectable tale adopted by L. in which divine fire merely
played about the child's head (Cicero, de Div. 1. 121; Pliny, N.H.
2. 2 4 1 ; Servius, ad Aen. 2. 6 8 3 ; de Viris illustr. 7. i ) . According to
Plutarch, Valerius Antias (fr. 12 P.) was the first to improve on that
story by making Servius not an infant but a grown m a n who had just
lost his wife Getania when the divine manifestation occurred. L.'s
version should, therefore, come from Licinius Macer.
39. 2. miraculum: 4. 7 n.
sedatoque earn tumultu: iam, read by the manuscripts, would underline
the clear break between what had happened and present circum
stances. Such a break is unwanted here since the tumult presumably
subsided at a word from the queen ('the queen asked for quiet and
forbade . . . ' ) . Gronovius proposed earn to provide, as well, a subject
for vetuisse. T h e setting of a subject noun or pronoun inside an abl. abs.
often has the effect of a present or past participle in agreement with
the noun, earn is certain here but cf. 40. 37. 6 (Meyer).
39. 3 . videsne: so n. MA have the corrupt vidine which Gronovius
emended to the syncopated viden. Elsewhere L. uses videsne tu (6. 29. 1)
and this alone should lead us to follow TT quite apart from the fact that
viden tu would be lively conversation (Terence, Heaut. 252) and in
appropriate to the formal phrasing of Tanaquil. viden ut-\-indie, is the
accepted poetical usage (Virgil, Aen. 6. 779 with Norden's note).
videsne also occurs in Cicero, Acad, prior. 2. 57 (Frigell, Epilegomena,
37).
scire licet: only here in L. T h e periphrasis lends weight to the point
which is going to be made and is used frequently by Lucretius and
Celsus in their most didactic moments.
lumen . . . praesidiumque: Tanaquil's prophecy with its figurative use
of lumen is an interpretation of the fire-prodigy, an effect destroyed by
Rhenanus's ingenious (co^lumen. Columen would be an appropriately
158
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
* 39- 3
solemn word (Fraenkel, Horace, 217 n. 2) a n d is used in metaphorical
contexts of this kind (6. 37. 10; cf. Horace, Odes 2. 17. 3-4), but the
conjunction 0$lumen andpraesidium can be supported. Cf. Virgil, Aeneid,
2. 281 (from Ennius).
nostra: not superfluous since it adds a measured dignity to her words
a n effect also achieved by the repeated n.
39. 4 . evenit facile quoddis cordi esset: if the consensus of the manuscripts
is right, quod must be a causal relative = quippe quod (cf 45. 7) and
the subject of evenit (aorist) be TanaquiPs prophecy as a whole. T h e
alternative [evenit present; quod . . . est (with Gruter and some recc.)
relative) makes the sentiment general: ' w h a t the gods wish is accom
plished easily' (cf. Petronius 76 citofit quod di volunt or, with Lendrum,
Pindar, Pyth. 9. 6 9 ; notice also Homer, Od. 3. 2 3 1 ; Euripides, Ion
1244; Pindar, Pyth. 2. 49). Gruter's interpretation ( c ut istud substruat
quasi dogma') seems, however, abrupt in the context. This moralizing
generalization reflects a commonplace, often colloquial, practice of
adding a touch of mock-seriousness to a story by inserting quomodo di
volunt and the like: cf. Plautus, Miles 117; Virgil, Aen. 5. 50; Petronius
61 fabulam exorsus est ' . . . ibi, quomodo dii volunt, amare coepi . . .'. For
dis cordi cf. 6. 9. 3, 9. 1. 4, 10. 42. 7, 22. 1. 10, 28. 18. 5, 28. 20. 7.
3 9 . 5 . serva natum: Servius' origins are veiled in darkness but the pattern
of the growing legend can be disentangled. His own name is attested
as early as Timaeus, and his mother's n a m e is equally well grounded
as Ocrisia (for the orthography and etymology see E. Morbach, R.E.,
s.v.). T h e early tradition is unanimous that she was a slave, by
captivity rather than birth, and this could be more than mere etymo
logical conjecture from the praenomen of her son Servius. Plutarch
(Q^-R. 100) discusses the question whether the feriae servorum on the
Ides of August are connected with Servius' birth from a slave woman
and it is noteworthy that the foundation date of the Servian temple
of Diana on the Aventine was the same day (H. J . Rose, ad l o c ) .
It may be that a piece of genuine history has been preserved. Ocrisia
was a prisoner of war from Gorniculum. But his paternity is contro
versial. T h e most likely reconstruction is that his father was either
unknown or soon forgotten. T o enhance Servius' royal claims he was
called the son of the fire-god. This was the oldest tradition (D. H. 4. 2
iv TOLLS imx^pioLs avaypa<f>ats; Plutarch, de fort. Rom. 10). A more
sceptical age, as we have shown above, recoiled from the idea of the
physical paternity of the fire-god and substituted one of Tarquin's
clients as Servius' actual father and turned the fire-prodigy into a mei e
halo. T h a t we presume to have been the version of Fabius Pictor (cf.
Cicero, de Rep. 2. 3 7 ; Plutarch, de fort. Rom. 10 TreAar^s) which was
utilized by Licinius Macer here; cf. also 4. 3. 12 and Claudius, I.L.S.
212. But such a birth was too humble for the greatest of Rome's kings.
159
-39-5
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
His father must have been a king not a mere client. A royal father
was fabricated for himServius Tullius of Corniculum or, according
to a tradition known to Festus 182 L. and inspired by local patriotism,
Sp. Tullius of Tibur. I take this version, which is that preferred by L.
[eorum magis sententiae sum) and D.H. (4.1), to be the creation of Valerius
Antias. Among other authorities de Viris illustr. 7, Servius, ad Aen.
2. 683 (where vericulanum should be changed by a simple metathesis
to Corniculanum), and Zonaras 7. 9 derive ultimately from L., while
Justin 18. 6, Val. Max. 1. 6. 1, and Plutarch, Q.R. 100 content
themselves with referring solely to his mother as a slave woman
without further elaboration.
eorum: probably only Valerius Antias.
Corniculo : 38. 4 n.
(in) Prisci Tarquini domo: the word-order first suggested by Curio is
preferable to Curio's second thoughts (1549) when he proposed Prisci
Tarquinii (in) domo. As Meyer demonstrated, the genitive must come
either after in domo (43. 13. 6 ; 39. 13. 3) or between in and domo
(6. 34. 6). T h e in is required. T h e plain ablative domo without in is
inadequately supported by a reference to Porph. ad Horace, Sat.
1.5-38.
39. 6. et inter mulieres: with et puerum, 'both . . . and'. Not merely did
the familiarity between Ocrisia and the women of the royal household
increase but the boy was liked too.
40. 2. tutoris: 34. 12 n.
Italicae: T a r q u i n was half Greek, half Etruscan.
40. 3 . centesimum fere annum: a round number, actually 138 years.
quam: Virtually 100 years after Romulus held the throne'. T h e
sentence is a combination of two distinct thoughts: (1) the throne
which a god once possessed is now held by a slave (quod regnum . . .
id) and (2) a 100 years after a god ruled, a slave now rules at Rome,
b u t there is no need to alter quam to quod as Drakenborch first pro
posed but rejected.
T h e greatness of Rome's downfall is emphasized by the careful
choice of language attributed to Ancus' sons. T h e dignity of Romulus
is conveyed by calling him deo prognatus; for prognatusy as can be seen
from the remarks of E. Schwyzer, Kuhn's eitschrift 56 (1928), 10 fF.
and Fraenkel, Horace, 82 n. 4, was an archaic and obsolete word as
early as Plautus (cf. Amph. 365) which later authors such as Horace,
SaL 1. 2. 70 only employed to evoke a solemn and august atmosphere.
It does not occur elsewhere in L. With this is contrasted the servile
obscurity of Servius Tullius. N had Servius serva natus, which is read
by Cocchia and other editors or emended to servus serva natus by some
of the later manuscripts and followed by most of the early editors and
160
SERVIUS TULLIUS
i. 40. 3
the O.G.T. It was the worst that the ancients could say of a man that
he was not merely a slave or a rogue but t h a t his parents were too (cf.
Aristophanes, Eq. 336-7; Ran. 7 3 1 ; Lysias 13. 18), and in comparing
Servius with Romulus to the detriment of the former L. can hardly
have failed to omit this double insult. Weissenborn's Servius (servus)
serva natus is more than attractive because of its formal antithesis to
Romulus deo prognatus deus ipse.
4 0 . 5 . ex pastoribus: the circumstances of Tarquinius' assassination
are a literary embellishment added in the third century on the basis
of two well-known stories, the murder of Jason of Phera in 370
(Xenophon, Hell. 6. 4. 31), and the assassination of Glearchus, tyrant
of Heraclea, by two noble youths (Justin 16. 5. 15). D . H . preserves
the original form of the story, which L. has abbreviated, that two
nobles, Marcii, dressed u p as shepherds.
quibus consueti . . . ferramentis: the construction is very odd; ferramentis has to be regarded as an abl. of accompaniment, 'with the
tools they were used to' but no parallel is forthcoming. Perhaps
a word has dropped out, e.g. ferramentis (armati) (G. W . Williams) or
(instructi).
4 1 . 1. clamor inde concursusque: 48. 2 n., military colouring.
populiy mirantium: the plural after a singular collective noun is illus
trated by Lofstedt, Syntactica, 2. 136. There is no need to delete miran
tium with Novak.
quid rei esset: 48. 1 n., 4. 44. 4 n. Gf. 5. 21. 7 mirantes quidnam id esset.
41. 2. paene exsanguem: 48. 4 n.
Tanaquil now delivers two short speeches of widely different and
sharply defined character. T o Servius she speaks, like a general
before battle, in rousing terms calculated to excite his courage and his
enthusiasm; to the crowd she is precise and matter-of-fact, inspiring
confidence by her assured command of medical platitudes (E. Dutoit,
Mus. Helv. 5 (1948), 120). This easy change of style aids L.'s picture of
a clever and unscrupulous woman. See the assessment by A. Momigliano, Misc. Fac. Lett. Filos. Torino, 1938, 4 ff.
4 1 . 3 . si vir es: a taunt, frequent in Latin and in Greek from the
Homeric dvepes care to Gleon's jibe against the generals at Pylos el
avSpcs Lvy but in Latin it is too strong for refined literature and is
favoured by the more excited style of letters (e.g. Cicero, ad Fam.
5. 18. 1 te colligas virumquepraebeas; ad Att. 10. 7. 2 et al.).
pessimum facinus fecere: notice the solemn 'figura etymologica'. See
K r o l l o n Catullus 81. 6.
erige te: cf. Cicero, Q.F. 1. 3. 5 erige te et confirma si qua subeunda
dimicatio erit; Seneca, Epist. 71. 6. At Cicero, Q.F. 1. 1. 4 Wesenberg's
supplement <te> erigas is mentioned but not accepted by Watt.
814432
l6l
I. 4 1 . 3
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
SERVIUS TULLIUS
1.41. 4
i. 4i. 5
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
SERVIUS TULLIUS
i. 41. 7
Scavi, 1903, 289 ff.). For its late history see 53. 2, 55. 7 n., 2. 16. 8 n.,
2. 22. 2. It lived and died like any other border town and had vanished
by Pliny's time.
exsulatum: 2. 35. 5 n. T h e term is used loosely here. There is no hint
of criminal proceedings against them.
42. 1. duos filias: see note on ch. 46.
42. 2. rupitfati necessitatem: the resemblance with Virgil, Aeneid 6. 882-3
si qua fata aspera rumpas, tu Marcellus eris has often been noticed by
commentators both of L. and of Virgil (cf. Norden's note), and Stacey
adducing also Lucr. 2. 254 fati foedera rumpat maintained that all
three authors derived the sentiment and the expression from Ennius.
Elsewhere reminiscences of Ennius in L. have a dramatic purpose,
generally to characterize a speaker by giving him poetic and archaic
diction. Here the words serve no such purpose and it is perhaps pre
ferable to take them as a commonplace of Stoicism (cf. 8. 7. 8) of the
conventional kind which coloured the whole of R o m a n historiography
(Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy, 56-58; cf. Walsh, A. J.P. 79 (1958),
362). L.'s words are casual and designed merely to foreshadow
the tragedy of Servius Tullius. quin: as if non potuit fieri had pre
ceded.
indutiae exierant: no truce has been mentioned before (but see
30. 7) nor does L. mention any war with Veii under Tarquinius
Priscus. T h e last war was in 33. 9 (n.). D . H . 3. 57 does, however,
relate such a war and it is possible that L. knew of it and suppressed
it, for artistic reasons, in 37. 2, but it is more likely that his source
(Licinius Macer) for the reign of Tarquinius Priscus did not contain
it and that L. has now changed to a new source, Valerius Antias.
42. 3 . et virtus etfortuna: 5. 34. 2 n., 1. 7. 15.
42. 4 . Numa\ 32. 5 n.
famaferrent: an Augustan usage, cf. 23. 31. 13, 34. 36. 4; Virgil,
Georg. 3. 47, Aeneid 7. 765; Tacitus, Ann. 16. 2.
42. 5. hunc ordinem: 'this arrangement which follows'. Contrast the
meaning of 43. 12 n.
descripsit: so the manuscripts, but describo and discribo are so con
stantly confused (19. 6 n.) that it seems safest to accept discribo when
the notion of distribution or division predominates, but in other places
to read describo as here and in Cicero, de Rep. 4. 2 ordines descripti,
aetates, classes.
vel pact decorum vel bello: it is hard to be happy about this phrase.
Peerlkamp in his note on Horace Odes 1. 1. 2 and A. E. Housman in
the margin of his copy of Livy both drew attention to the Latin
cliche, 'an ornament for peace and defence for war' (paci decus, bello
praesidium). Thus Maecenas is addressed 0 et praesidium et dulce decus
165
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
i. 42. 5
meum. Peerlkamp compared Sallust, Jug. 19. 1 pars . . . praesidio,
aliae decorifuere; Tacitus, Germania 13. 4 ; Lucretius 2. 6 4 3 ; Pliny,
Paneg. 14. 3. In view of this word-pattern it is not easy to accept Boot's
suggestion (Mnemosyne 17 (1889), 1 ff.) that decorum = aptum here, but,
rather than conjecture that some word has fallen out after bello> we
may perhaps notice that there is no adjective corresponding to praesidium as decorum corresponds to decus and so believe that while L. was
indeed evoking the cliche he could not reproduce it exactly.
The Servian Constitution
O n all general matters see Walbank, Commentary on Polybius, 1. 683-7
with bibliography; the latest treatment is by E. Friezer, de Ordening
van Servius Tullius (Amsterdam 1957); see also the summary by P. A.
Brunt, J.R.S. 51 (1961), 81. A radical reinterpretation of the crucial
passage of Cicero's de Republica advanced by Sumner (A.J.P. 81
(i960), 136-56) is confuted by L. R. Taylor (A.J.P. 82 (1961), 337
and Staveley (Historia 11 (1962), 299-314). It is intended here only to
deal with points which specifically concern the narrative in L.
L. purports to give the actual details of Servius' innovations. While
the broad outline of it makes historical sense, the minutiae are evidently
spurious. It has been demonstrated by H . Last (J.R.S. 35 (1945),
30-48) that a change in the basis of citizenship from qualifications
of birth to qualifications of wealth and domicile was in line with the
social conditions of Rome in the sixth century and was demanded by
her increasing military commitments. T h e Servian reforms are, in
effect, the counterpart of the Gleisthenic reforms at Athens. Their
purpose was military rather than political but, as also at Athens,
the political opportunities were soon exploited, at all events before
450. T h e main tradition of the Servian Constitution may well be
accepted.
But it would require great faith to believe that the document which
is reproduced by L. (43. 1-9) gives the authentic terms of the reforms
or that L. is really drawing on regal evidence (E. S. Staveley, A.J.P.
72 (1953), 1-33; F. C. Bourne, Class. Weekly, 1952, 134). T h e Con
stitution organizes the community for military service into divisions
(classes), based on wealth (not merely land), and sub-divisions (cen
turies) . There is also a cross-division by tribes based on domicile. T h e
fact that wealth is estimated in terms of money is significant. T h e
assessment of the first class is 100,000 aeris. Now it may well be that
the qualification of the first class in the early part of the second century
was 100,000 sextantal asses (10,000 dr. in Polybius 6. 23. 15) and that
the same limit was defined in the Lex Voconia of 169 B.C. (pace Aul.
Gell. 6. 13). At a later date it was raised to the equivalent 01*250,000
sextantal asses = 100,000 H.S., the figure applying in the last years of
166
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
i-43
the Republic (Mommsen, Rom. Munz. 302, 303 n. 4 0 ; Walbank on
Polybius loc. cit.), perhaps by the simple expedient of keeping the
original qualification of 100,000 aeris b u t reinterpreting aeris as
sesterces instead of sextantal asses (c. 89 B.C.; see H . Mattingly, J.R.S.
27 (1937), 105-6). Since the introduction of the sextantal as cannot
itself be placed much earlier than the end of the Second Punic War,
the qualification of 100,000 sextantal asses cannot go back much
beyond the Lex Voconia and the period when Polybius is writing,
certainly not to the regal times if the first R o m a n coinage is no earlier
than 269 B.C. (H. Mattingly, J.R.S. 35 (1945), 65-77). Any regal
assessments would be in terms of cattle (id., Num. Chron. 3 (1943),
2I
~ 3 9 > 4- 3* 3 n 0 ' I n o t n e r words L / s figure for the first class (and it
agrees with D.H. 4. 16: 100 minae = 10,000 dr. = 100,000 sextantal
asses) is the same as that given by Polybius 6. 23. 15 for the first class
in his own day, which prevailed from c. 200 to c. 89 B.C. This element
at least in the Constitution must be an anachronistic reconstruction.
But we can detect a second pious fraud. T h e armour which is
allotted to the different classes is neither the official second-century
R o m a n issue nor can it have been the equipment of regal times. T h e
classical R o m a n army, based on manipular formation, was developed
from an earlier hoplite force, familiar also in Etruria and Greece,
which had itself replaced an older 'heroic' organization. T h e charac
teristic weapons of the most ancient warfare were the long body-shield
and the throwing spear. T h e change to hoplite tactics which involved
the adoption of the round shield {clipeus) fastened to the forearm and the
sword were made in Greece c. 675 B.C. at the latest and had spread
to Etruria and R o m e by the end of the century. A tomb from
the Esquiline dated c. 600 B.C. contains remains of a bronze clipeus. T h e
subsequent modification of the hoplite method which replaced the
clipeus by the scutum and introduced the pilum is less certainly dated,
but may have been the work of Gamillus in the decade of the siege
of Veii (c. 400 B.C. ; but see 8. 8. 6 - 7 ; Maule and Smith, Votive
Religion at Caere, 20-28). It looks as if an antiquarian reconstruction
has been made by a scholar who knew that the Servian army cannot
have been manipular. During the second century such an antiquarian
would have turned for clues either to archaic monuments such as the
statue in the temple of Fortuna burnt in 213 B.C. (D.H. 4. 30) but
restored until a final destruction in October A.D. 31 (Pliny, JV.H.
8. 197) or the statue of Aeneas described by Varro ap. Lydus, de Mag.
1. 13, or to ritual survivals like the parade of the equites and the Salii.
This primitive military priesthood was a suggestive model because,
like the centuriate organization, it was divided into seniores and
iuniores (Servius, ad Aen. 8. 285 turn Salii. . . adsunt. . . hie iuvenum chorus,
ille senum; Diomed., p . 476 K . ; Wissowa, Religion, 555 n. 4) which
167
i-43
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
could be used as evidence that the Salii were the relics of the Servian
system. T h e details of the equipment of the Salii have been assembled
by Helbig {Mem. de VInstiU 27 (1904), 205 ff.) and they correspond
exactly to the armour of the first class as listed by L. T h e armour,
like the census figures, is an intelligent reconstruction by a secondcentury writer who with some knowledge of the past (43. 1 n. octoginta) did not have access to primitive material. H e incorporated
his knowledge and his conjectures into the form of a document which
then passed into the hands of the historians. D . H . and L. give so
similar a version that ultimately they must be derived from the same
source. Where they differ, L. is usually at fault either through care
lessness or misapprehension.
4 3 . 1. octoginta: so also D . H . With this size for the first class it would
be possible to secure a majority of the whole assembly without re
course to the second: ( 8 0 + 1 8 + 2 ) X 2 = 200. Cicero (de Rep. 2. 39)
describes a system of 193 centuries in which the first class had only
70 centuries and 1 offabri, and says that a majority could be obtained
without the whole of the second class being called. Cicero must be
describing a reformed assembly (after 241 when the last of the tribes
was added) in which the 35 tribes were co-ordinated with the cen
turies in some way (43. 13 n.) unless he is merely reproducing a
variant reconstruction of the Constitution made by a rival antiquarian
in the second century. In support of the authenticity of L.'s figure of 80
centuries for the first class in the earlier unreformed assembly it might
also be urged that on his reckoning the number of centuries ofiuniores
in the first three classes amounts to 60 ( 4 0 + 1 0 + 1 0 ) which was the
number of centuries in the earliest R o m a n legion, the light-armed
troops being provided by the fourth and fifth class (P. Fraccaro, Atti del
20 Congresso Nat. di Studi Romani, 3 (1931), 91 ff.; Riv. FiL 11 (1933),
289 ff.; H . Last, J.R.S. 35 (1945) 42~44)iuniorum ac seniorum: the dividing-line was 46 according to Tubero
ap. Aul. Gell. 10. 28. Cf. Polybius 6. 19. 2 ; Cicero, de Senect. 60.
4 3 . 2. galea: a crestless helmet of wolf's skin. Cf. Walbank on Poly
bius 6. 22. 3.
clipeum: a round bronze shield, replaced in historical times by the
scutum but the name remained in general parlance. Cf. 8. 8. 3 ;
Walbank on Polybius 6. 23. 2.
ocreae: greaves were obsolete by the end of the second century.
Cf. Lammert, R.E., c ocreae'; Walbank on Polybius 6. 23. 8.
lorica: a chain breast-plate. Cf. P. Couissin, Les armes Romaines, 1926,
157 fT.; Walbank on Polybius 6. 23. 15.
hastaque et gladius: in apposition to tela, -que et is not found in Cicero,
Caesar, Nepos, or Horace. It is rare in early Latin and may have
168
SERVIUS TULLIUS
i. 43. 2
i. 43.6
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
'43- 7
43- I 2 -
undecim: D.H. 4. 17. 2 ivros CLKOGL KCLL rrivre JJLVWV a-XP1 ScuSe/oi KCLL
rjfjLLcrovs fjLvwv =25,00012,500, but the division by half looks overschematic and L.'s figure may be right. By the middle of the second
century the minimum qualification had been reduced to 4,000 (Polybius 6. 19. 2) and towards the end of the Republic (perhaps between
130 and 125 from the evidence of the large j u m p in census figures
which occurred within that period) to 1,500 (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 4 0 ;
Aul. Gell. 16. 10. 10), presumably to facilitate recruitment. 11,000
sextantal asses might have been the minimum for the fifth class at
the end of the Second Punic War. See, with reservations on chronology,
E. Gabba, Athenaeum 27 (1949), 173 ff.
The Cavalry
4 3 . 8. exprimoribus civitatis: 5. 7. 5 n. There is no hint that they had a
higher qualification.
4 3 . 9. sex . . . alias centurias: 36. 8 n., the Sex Suffragia or six preServian centuries of cavalry. T h e distinction between them and the
twelve Servian centuries may originally have been one of birth, the
Sex Suffragia being exclusively patrician (Hill, Roman Middle Classes,
211). If so, it was soon obliterated and by the end of the Republic
there remained only a distinction of title.
ab Romulo: 13. 8 n.
nominibus: i.e. Ramnenses, Titienses, Luceres.
dena milia: the aes equestre for the purchase of the horse (s). Varro,
de Ling. Lat. 8. 71 equum publicum . . . mille assariorum agrees with
L.'s figure since the assarius, despite its etymology which suggests the
Greek auadptov or as, is said by a late gloss to be equivalent in value to
and may be an easy name for a denarius of 10 asses. Since the 10-as
171
1.43-9
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
i. 43. 10
(Laelius Felix ap. Aul. Gell. 15. 27. 5 ) ; to summon it was called "imp e r a r e " or "convocare exercitum" (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 8 8 ; 9 3 ) ;
the assembly itself was described as "exercitus u r b a n u s " (ib. 93)'
(Last, J.tf.S. 35(1945), 35).
4 3 . 1 0 . neque exclusus: there was special provision in a separate century
which voted last and was called ni quis scivit for anyone who had missed
voting in his proper century {Pap. Ox. 2088 (Fenestella); Festus
184 L.). L. is not referring specifically to this. His meaning is simply
that everyone had a vote.
4 3 . 1 1 . primi: 5. 18. 1 n. In later times the voting was initiated by one
special century (praerogativa) chosen by lot from the first class. Here
it is implied that the privilege of voting first belonged to the equites,
and elsewhere in L. (5. 18. 1; 10. 22. 1) the first voters are called
praerogativae (in the plural), apparently comprising the centuries of
equites (so also D . H . ) . The procedural change may belong to the
third century of the Assembly. See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 290 n. 3 ;
Hill, Roman Middle Class, 14, 4 0 ; and, for a n increase of the praeroga
tiva under the early Empire as implied by the Tabula Hebana, G.
Tibiletti, Principe e Magistrati Repubblicani (1953), 51.
primae classis centuriae primum peditum vocabantur: so the archetype.
Objection has been taken to the last three words, in the first instance
by Sigonius, Gruter, and J . F. Gronovius, on the grounds that the
repetition of vocabantur is intolerable (but see the examples of repeated
verbs in Frigell, Epilegomena, 64), that primum is unintelligible, and that
peditum is out of place since the centuries, other than the 18 centuries
of equites, did not retain their military character in their political
functions. Of these arguments only the second has any strength. T h e
comitia centuriata was felt to be a military organization even down to the
end of the Republic (see above) and Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6.86 preserves
the cry of the herald summoning the people to the censor 'omnes
Quirites, pedites armatos privatosque, curatores omnium tribuum which, what
ever misgivings may hz entertained about the reading armatos, agrees
in general with 44. 1 and shows that peditum is apposite here too.
primum, however, cannot be defended and should be deleted as a
dittography from peditum (so early editors and Frigell).
ibi si variaret: the manuscripts agree in reading ibi si variaret, quod
raw incidebat, ut secundae classis vocarentur nee fere unquam infra ita de
scenderent ut ad injimos pervenirent. A main verb is lacking to govern the
first /-clause vocarentur . . . descenderent {quod raw incidebat is always a
self-contained parenthesis; cf. quod raw fit). T w o lines of approach
present themselves. (1) Delete ut and vocarentur, putting a strong stop
after secundae classis and reading descenderunt. This is the remedy first pre
scribed by the Ed. Princeps and adopted by most editors including the
O.C.T. and, with a minor variation, Cocchia. It is open to objection
i73
1.43- i i
SERVIUS TULLIUS
SERVIUS TULLIUS
i. 43- 12
generally, the comitia would consist of some 373 centuries in all (Pantagathus; de Sanctis, Storia, 3. 1. 363 ff.), 70 centuries in each of the
five classes plus equites and supernumeraries. But for actual voting
purposes it is evident that there were only 193 group-votes cast (the
same number as that given by D.H. for the Servian system). Mommsen
(Staatsrecht, 3. 270 ff.), followed by modern authorities (Walbank,
Staveley), accounts for this discrepancy by supposing that the 280
centuries of iuniores and seniores in the other four classes were, for
voting purposes, amalgamated into groups of two or three on a
principle analogous to that found in the Tabula Hebana. This ex
planation would undoubtedly give meaning to L.'s phrase hunc
ordinem ad summam non convenire; 373 is not the number given by L.
for the total of Servian centuries, but it is important to note that 193
is not either. The total number of centuries according to L.'s account
is 191, or, more probably, 194 (43. 7 n.) and much paper and ink
might have been saved by realizing that L. is saying no more than this:
* there are now 193 centuries. Servius instituted 194. The discrepancy
must be due to the fact that when the centuries and tribes were co
ordinated, the first class was reduced to 70 centuries and the others to
corresponding figures with attendant readjustments so that the total
became 193.' From this it follows that L. does not provide support for
Pantagathus's theory of 373 centuries under the reformed system unless
duplicato earum numero is taken to apply throughout all five classes and
not merely (as the reduction in number from 80 to 70 would favour)
to the first class alone.
43. 13. quadrifariam: 2. 21. 7 n. The tradition that Servius created
four urban tribes to take the place of the three Romulean tribes based
on race goes back at least to Fabius Pictor (fr. 9 P.). Since the names
of these urban tribss (Sucusana, Esquilina, Collina, Palatina, cf.
Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 56; Festus 506 L . ; Pliny N.H. 18.13; D.H. 4. 14)
are the names of hills, we may believe that Servius intended to replace
birth by residence (not the ownership of property) as a qualification
for citizenship, as Cleisthenes did at Athens, in order to include within
the citizen-body the large number of aliens who had come to live in
Rome as merchants and traders, and that the tradition is historical.
Fact and tradition, however, also agree that more than four hills were
inhabited at this time (44. 3 n.) and it would therefore have been
untrue to say that the city was divided into four parts on the basis of
the hills that were inhabited. It would be correct to say that the city
was divided into four regions which took their identity from the
principal hills in each. The manuscripts read regionibusque collibus qui
habitabantur (MTT), where the common misplacing of -que is rightly
emended by A to regionibus collibusque. . . Both nouns are required to
convey the full sense and the deletion of regionibus as a gloss (first
175
* 43- 13
SERVIUS TULLIUS
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
i. 44. 2
44. 2. suovetaurilibus: 28. 1 n., an adult (J. maiora) or suckling ^ .
minora) pig, sheep, and bull (Festus 372 L.). T h e ceremony is found
in several connexions but, whether to purify a body of people, a city,
or an estate, the ritual was basically the same. T h e victims were led
in procession round the object to be purified a n d then sacrificed to
Mars, the guardian against plague and pollution. Gato, de Re Rust. 141,
describes the Ambarvalia: agrum lustrare sic oportet . . . impera suovitaurilia circumagi: 'Mars pater, eiusdem rei ergo made hisce suovitaurilibus
lactantibus esto\ T h e Acta of the Fratres Arvales preserve a similar in
vocation of Mars and similar suovetaurilia offered as a purification
(Henzen 143). The ceremony at the end of the census is, therefore,
very old. Mars is invoked not in his subsequent capacity as God of
W a r but as a tutelary deity to ward off pollution from the newly
assembled citizen-body.
conditum lustrum: the census lustratio was in general similar to the
lustratio exercitus performed for particular armies on particular occasions
(cf., e.g., 23. 35. 5, 38. 12. 2, 37. 8) but was distinguished from it by the
use of the term lustrum condere which denoted a n act peculiar to the
census lustratio. Graphic representations of the ceremony and analogies
from the Iguvine Tables (I B 11-13 ; V I B 49-51) suggest that lustrum
condere may refer to the ritual preparation of firethe most potent
of all purifying agentsrather than, as it is commonly understood,
to the disposal by burial of part of the sacrifice, lustrum is derived from
*Jlu and means 'that which looses' (cf.flustrum fromjluo) and condere
should mean 'to assemble or put together'. T h e importance attached
to the proper acquisition of fire is evidenced also in the annual re
kindling of the flame of Vesta (Festus 94 L.) or in the Catholic rite
of the Easter Vigil and it is natural to derive censor from *cendere ('the
kindler'). lustrum then came to mean generally 'purification'; hence
the less technical expressions 'lustrum mittere' and 'lustrum facere'
and the verb 'lustro' with the noun 'lustratio'. For a detailed dis
cussion of the evidence with illustrations see J.R.S. 51 (1961), 31-39.
L.'s explanation, that the purifying procession with the suovetaurilia
was called 'lustrum conditum' because it marked the end of the census,
appears to understand conditum as 'closed' or 'finished'.
milia octoginta: D.H. 4. 22. 2 says 84,700; Eutropius 1. 7, 83,000.
Unless the text is corrupt, L. gives a round figure to the nearest 10,000.
All three must ultimately derive from the same total which Fabius
Pictor took from the official lists (/caraypa^at) although L. is unlikely
to have consulted Fabius direct. A number of census figures are pre
served for the third century (Livy, Ep. 16, 18, 19, 20; 27. 36. 7, 29. 37.
5-6) which agree well with figures supplied by Polybius (2. 24 with
Walbank's note) for 225. In all cases the figures appear to come from
authentic documents and to include all adult male citizens other than
814432
177
1.44-2
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
the capite censi rather than all men actually under arms or in the seven
teen to forty-six age-group (Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. 2. 401). Since
Fabius had access to the official lists, the figures for the early period
(3. 3. 9 : 104,714 (465); 3. 24. 10: 117, 319 (459)) will be documentary
too, for there is no reason why the records should have been destroyed.
T h e census lists were kept in old censorial families (D.H. 1. 74. 5),
later in the Atrium Libertatis (43. 16. 13), and ultimately in the Aedes
Nympharum (Cicero, pro Milone 73). But although the fifth-century
totals when compared with those of the third century (292,234 in
265) and considered in the light of the size of the ager Romanus at that
time (Bernardi, Athenaeum 30 (1952), 19 ff.; Clerici's computations
[Economia e Finanza, 385 ff.), that the fifth-century figures give a
density of 50-90 per square km. instead of a viable 10-30, are too
rigorous) are just credible, 84,000 seems inconceivably large for the
male population of Rome before the expulsion of the kings. Perhaps it
was the number which Fabius found at the top of the list and which he
inevitably assumed to be Servian whereas in fact it probably belongs
to c. 470. See the discussion by Walbank on Polybius 2. 24 with biblio
graphy; add F. C. Bourne, Class. Weekly, 1952, 134; T. Frank, A. J.P.
51 (1930), 313 ff.
Fabius: the first mention in L. of the historian Q . Fabius Pictor. A
senator and an ambassador to Delphi in 216 B.C., he was the earliest
R o m a n to compose a history of Rome, although he wrote in Greek
and was dependent on Greek sources. It is most unlikely that L.
consulted him at first hand. For an evaluation and bibliography see
A. Momigliano, Atti della Accad. Naz. dei Lincei 15 (1961), 310-20.
44. 3 . addit duos colles, Quirinalem Viminalemque: the two colles are not
to be identified with two of the collibus in 43. 13. L. means that Servius
incorporated the physical districts into the city. Both lay outside the
original settlement and were not included in the Septimontium
(Festus 458, 476 L. (Antistius L a b e o ) ; Lydus, deMens. 4. 155). T h e
ancient tradition is amply substantiated by the fact that the Sabine
gods of the Quirinal (Quirinus) were not included in the earliest
religious calendar of Rome (Altheim, History of Roman Religion, 129)
and that the inhabitants were an inhuming and not (as the Palatine
settlement) a cremating people (evidence in E. Gjerstad, Early Rome,
1955, 2. 267-79). T h e synoecism must have occurred before the in
clusion of the Capitol (38. 6 n . ; 56. 1 n.) and, if Servius' reign marks
a break in the Etruscan domination of Rome, it would be a fitting
occasion for the separate communities to draw together for mutual
protection. D.H. 2. 50. 1 follows a variant belief (found also in Servius,
ad Aen. 6. 783) that the Quirinal was added by Romulus, but this is
a later rationalization based on the identification of RomulusQuirinus. See G. Radke, R.E. 'Viminalis'.
178
SERVIUS TULLIUS
1.44. 3
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
i. 44- 3
this manner is universally affirmed to be Etruscan in origin (Varro,
de Ling. Lat. 5. 143; Plutarch, Romulus 1 1 : perhaps from the East if the
Sumerians had a similar ritual) agreeing well with the Etruscan
ritual for inaugurating a temple (18. 6 n.) and it has recently been
suggested the word pomerium itself is Etruscan (v. Blumenthal, R.E.,
s.v.) since the etymology given by L. and accepted by modern
authorities (pos(t)m. (or alternatively prom, as in U Lucan 1. 594) >
pom. and *moir- > -mer- = 'the space behind or in front of the wall';
see Walde-Hofmann) is linguistically invalid. Moreover, it gives a
meaning which was only a later development. T h e idea of a sacred
no-man's-land on which houses could not be built is certainly sub
sequent to the original concept of a line dividing the hallowed from
the profane. T h e pomerium was a matter of great antiquarian interest
under the early Empire (cf. Tacitus, Annals 12. 24) but there was no
proposal to extend it in the 20's which could account for the dis
proportionate space which L. devotes to it here. Caesar may have
enlarged it in 45 B.G. (Cicero, ad Att. 13. 20; Dio 43. 50. 1; Aul. Gell.
13. 14. 4) and Augustus may also have done so in 8 B.C. (Tacitus;
Dio 55. 6. 6), although doubt has been cast on the latter enlargement.
I t is, therefore, more likely that L. has taken over a substantial dis
cussion by Valerius Antias who was writing at the very time that the
first extension of the pomerium since the Regal period was undertaken
by Sulla (Seneca, deBrev. Vit.13. 8 ; Tacitus; Aul. Gell.). T h e primary
discussion is by Mommsen, Rom. Forsch., 2. 23-41 ; see also v. Blumenthal, R.E., 'Pomerium'; M . T. Griffin, J.R.S. 52 (1962), 109-10.
44. 5. nunc: the evidence for houses built right up to the 'Servian'
walls encroaching on the Pomerium is collected and examined by
J . H . Oliver, Mem. Am. Acad. Rome 10 (1932), 145-82 : see also Horace,
Satires 1. 8.
post id: everything turns on whether the standpoint of the spectator
is from within or outside the citya fundamental flaw in the tradi
tional etymology.
termini hi consecrati: the line of the pomerium was marked by inscribed
stones or cippi (e.g. C.I.L. 6. 31537-9).
45. 1. aucta civitate magnitudine urbis: in theory either civitate or magnitudine could be the subject: (1) 'the state having been enhanced by
the size of the city', stressing the extension of the pomerium and the
physical limits of the city, or (2) 'the size of the city having been
increased by the citizen-body (or citizenship)', stressing the effect
of the census in raising the numbers of R o m a n citizens (2. 1. 2,
38. 16. 3). Scholars have consistently preferred the former which
gains some support from 2 1 . 6 civitatem auxerunt and follows naturally
after the digression on the pomerium, but the two ablatives are awk180
SERVIUS TULLIUS
i. 45. 1
i-45
SERVIUS TULLIUS
conflation could not have escaped notice and comment unless it had
been mediated through several sources. T h e most important of such
sources was Aricia where the cult of Diana (Gato fr. 58 P.) was served
by a religious league of nine Latin communities to which Rome, as
an Etruscan dominated town, did not belong. The Arician cult was
earlier than the Aventine (A. N . Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship,
12-13; A. E. Gordon, The Cults of Aricia, 1934) and had a political
as well as a religious aspect to it, since the Concilium Latinorum which
met at the Lucus Ferentinae in the territory of Aricia (50. i n . ; Beloch,
Bom. Gesch. 183) was the same organization under a different name.
Political and religious competition with Aricia is further indicated
by the transplantation of the Virbius legend from Aricia to Rome
(48. 6 n.) at much the same date. Seeing that the reign of Servius
marks a Latin restoration at Rome, we may well understand the
motives which led him to attempt to consolidate his position by secur
ing a league of Latin cities to whom he could turn if threatened by
Etruria. T h e cult of Diana on the Aventine marks his attempt to
oust Aricia from the political hegemony of Latium (Varro, de Ling.
Lat. 5. 43). The new institution served two needs: it mollified religious
dissatisfaction and promoted political expediency. But what justifica
tion could Servius offer for the innovation? The new cult by the
special place allotted in it to slaves (F. Altheim, Griech. Gotter im alten
Rom, 143 ff.) evidently appealed to foreigners, me tics, strangers, and
the newly enrolled R o m a n citizens generally. Furthermore Strabo
(4. 180-1) records that the statue of Diana was set u p in the same way
as the statue at Massilia and adds that the Massiliot was similar to the
Ephesian. The second settlement of Massilia occurred c. 540 (5. 34.
8 n.) after a period in which the Phocaeans and presumably other
Ionian emigrants h a d tried to colonize Corsica and are sure to have
been brought into contact with Etruria and even Rome. These wan
dering exiles would have furnished Servius with the privileged infor
mation about the Ephesian shrine that enabled him to promote the
superior claims of Diana of the Aventine over Diana of Aricia. Above
all, he devised an almost Callimachean Aetion around a sacred relic,
a gigantic pair of horns, to convince the superstitious and to teach the
moral that the sovereignty of Latium had passed to Rome. Despite
some anachronisms, the story of the Sabine cow must be very ancient
as old as the cult of Diana on the Aventine. T h e exact date of the founda
tion is not disclosed but c. 540 suits both the traditional chronology of
Servius' reign (577-33) and the second settlement of Massilia.
A. Alfoldi {A.J.A. 64 (i960), 137-44; Gymnasium 67 (i960), 193-6)
has recently produced new evidence about the cult of Aricia. H e has
demonstrated that the old cult-image is represented on a denarius of
the monetal P. Accoleius Lariscolus, whose family came from Aricia
182
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
i-45
(43 B.C.; Sydenham no. 1148). T h e shape of the image, a three-figure
goddess Hecate-Artemis-Selene, and the style, particularly of the
hair, both suggest a genuine picture of a primitive statue dating from
c. 500 which survived down to the end of the Republic. H e does,
however, produce no evidence for the assertion that the image and the
league belong to the period of Porsenna's activities rather than fifty
years earlier nor, a fortiori, for the contention that the institution of
Diana on the Aventine should be dated not to c. 540 but to the after
m a t h of Lake Regillus; For a possible fragment of a replica of the
cult statue see Paribeni, A. J.A. 65 (1961), 55.
45. 3 . caput rerum Romam esse: a phrase redolent of Augustan ethos
(cf. 5. 54. 7 ) ; thus in Ovid, Met, 15. 736 iamque caput rerum Romanam
intraverat urbem and later in Tacitus, Hist. 2. 32; M a n . 4. 689. The bold
ness and presumption of the phrase are compared by Fraenkel (Horace,
452) with the sweeping simplicity of Horace's custode rerum Caesare
(Odes 4. 15. 17). T h e first traces of awareness of Rome's destiny are
no earlier than the third century. Until that time R o m e was struggling
for her standing in Italy but her successes against Pyrrhus lifted the
veil on a wider scene. Gf. Lycophron 122633 (if genuine) and Ennius*
translation of Pyrrhus' dedication at T a r e n t u m (199-200 V.). T h e
most that Romans of Servius' day would have aspired to was to sup
plant Aricia as the 'capital' of Latium.
uni se ex Sabinis: Plutarch (QjR> 4 with Rose's note) gives an account
of the same tale which differs in some particulars. H e specifically cites
as his authorities the antiquarians J u b a and Varro. According to them
the Sabine was called Antron Goratius (or Gur(i)atius). O n e of his
slaves escaped to Rome and told Servius about the oracle. He, in his
turn, communicated it to the pontifex Cornelius who duped Goratius
into washing in the Tiber thereby giving Servius the chance to sacri
fice the cow and to dedicate the horns in the temple. I t is generally
thought (Dumezil; J . Hubaux, Rome et Veies, 232-5) that Plutarch
gives the traditional version which L. has adapted in order to minimize
the unscrupulous part played by Servius as not being in keeping with
maiestas Romana. If the story, as an Aetion, is old, L.'s version will
be prior to Varro's which is too full of etymological cleverness (cornu >
Cornelius; servus > Servius) and improbable coincidence. The priority
of L. can be shown in another way. A coin, struck c. 79 B.G. by A.
Postumius Albinus, showing on the obverse a bust of Diana and on
the reverse 'togate figure stg. 1., raising 1. hand over head of ox stand
ing r.; in centre, lighted altar 5 with the legend A. POST, A.F.S.N. ALBIN.
(Sydenham no. 745; cf. Borghesi, Fasti, 2. 4 3 ; Mommsen, Rom.
Mtinz. 617) illustrates the same story but would indicate that before
Varro's investigations established the claim of the Gornelii, the
Postumii, proud of their part in the early fortunes of Rome (Lake
183
1-45-3
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
i. 46-48
I. 46-48
SERVIUS
TULLIUS
SERVIUS TULLIUS
i. 46-48
i. 46. 5
SERVIUS TULLIUS
| Oes ird\w
SERVIUS TULLIUS
1.46. 9
rwv
TvXXiov Ovyarcpwv
/cat d
-47- 3
SERVIUS T U L L I U S
you (istic) there is not merely cowardice (as there was in my previous
husband: 46. 7) but also crime'.
47. 4. quin accingeris: 57. 7 n. Corintho: 34. 2 n.
di te penates: the objects invoked to rouse Tarquin's ambitions are
all distinctively R o m a n in character but the idea recalls Sophocles,
Electra 267-70.
imago: 34. 6 n.
47. 5. facesse hinc: 'away from here', only here in L. (cf. 48. 6), a
dramatic idiom found, e.g., in Pacuvius, frag, 326 K.facessite omnes
hinc; Seneca, Ag. 300; Afranius 203 ; cf. the paratragic play on words
in Plautus, Rudens 1061.
devolvere retro: pass, imperative. H . J . Miiller was alive to the
obscurity of the phrase, noting that there was no other instance of it.
It is difficult to know precisely what the metaphorical force is. In
later Latin devolvere is frequently used of demotion from high place
(Seneca, Suas. 1. 9 regum exfastigio suo devolutorum; Seneca, Ep. 92. 23 ;
Tert. de Castit. 9 ; Hier. Ep. 41. 3. 2), but in earlier Latin the best
illustration is Cicero, Phil. 7. 14 postridie ad spem estis inanem pacis
devolutiy where it is deliberately rough and contemptuous as here.
fratri similior quam patri: Tullia ends her speech in an iambic rhythm
(2. 40. 9 n.) and with a tragic sentiment (cf. Aeschylus, Choeph.
240 ff.).
47. 7. muliebribus instinctusfuriis: 'inspired by a woman's frenzy'; cf.
Virgil, Aen. 10. 68 Cassandrae impulsus furiis. furiae are the frenzied
emotions rather than the actual Furies, but the image, which is
wholly absent from D.H., is introduced by L. to remind his readers
of Orestes hounded by the Furies (as in Aeschylus, Eum. 46 ff.). But
the Orestes touch is immediately succeeded by a picture of a late
Republican demagogue in action which, again, since there is no trace
of it in D.H., is an addition by L.
minorum . . . gentium: 35. 6 n.
circumire et prensare: electioneering terms (2. 54. 3 ; 3. 47. 2 ) ; cf.
Pliny, Ep. 2. 9. 5 itaque prenso amicos, supplico, ambio, domos stationesque
circumeo, quantumque vel auctoritate vel gratia valeam, precibus experior.
allicere donis iuvenes: Catiline iuventutem . . . inlexerat (Sallust, Catil.
16. 1; Cicero, in Cat. 3. 8) by the same inducements and bribes.
Catiline's plot in 65 failed, according to Sallust, because of a mistake
in timing. H e had planned to burst into the Forum stipatus agmine
armatorum but, when they did not arrive on time, instead of making
a victory speech pro curia, he only gave an ill-judged signal to his
henchmen {pro curia signum sociis dare) and, instead of enlarging in
public on the grievances of the state, he had to be content with a
secret agitation in abdita parte aedium (Sallust, Catil. 20. 2-17). T h e
arguments, however, which he used against the regime bear an
190
SERVIUS TULLIUS
1.47. 7
1.48. 3
SERVIUS TULLIUS
gradus: 36. 5 n.
48. 4 . ipse prope exsanguis cum semianimis regio comitatu domum se reciperet
[pervenissetque ad summum cos. primum vicum] ab iis qui missi ab Tarquinio
fugientem cotisecuti erant interjicitur . . cum se domum reciperet (Tullia)
pervenissetque ad summum Cyprium vicum: the bracketed words, which
are found in all the manuscripts, are certainly interpolated from the
corresponding passage below, domum se reciperet, on the other hand,
may be authentic since the fact is recorded also in de Viris Illustribus
7. 18-19 (from Livy): Servius . . . gradibus deiectus et domum refugiens
interfectus est. . . Tullia . . . cum domum rediret. . ., unless it was inter
polated before the composition of the de V.I. regio comitatu recipere 'to
retire with his royal retinue' is unobjectionable and has good parallels
in L. (e.g. 44. 43. 1 frequenti agmine equitum et regio comitatu fugit) and
the fact that the attendants are earlier reported to have fled (fitfuga)
is immaterial since L. has switched from the scene in the Senate to
the description of Servius' return without carefully co-ordinating them.
There is no doubt that the version given by the annalists portrayed
Servius not as a solitary figure, but accompanied by some of his
retinue when he was overtaken and killed (cf. D.H. 4. 38
) so that all attempts to improve the text by depriving
Servius of his companions (sine regio comitatu Alschefski, se amisso r. c.
Frigell) are quite misguided. T h e only objection to semianimis is that
it has been thought an otiose repetition of exsanguis: but the two words
do not mean the same thing: semianimis is 'half-alive' (i.e. half-dead)
and exsanguis 'having lost blood'. T h e victims of poisoning are semiani
mis (40. 4. 15) but not exsanguis, while a severe wound can leave a m a n
exsanguis (41. 2) but not necessarily semianimis. In this case Servius
has been badly hurt and, for an old m a n , such a wound might well
have been fatal. Both words have point in the context in the same way
that L. Bantius in 22. 15. 8 ff. was left on the field of Cannae seminecis
. . . (et) prope exsanguis. They correspond to
. . . ( D . H . 4 . 3 8 ) .
SERVIUS TULLIUS
i. 48. 6
193
I. 4 8 . 6
SERVIUS
TULLIUS
horses. For it is more likely that the scene of Tullia's outrage was m a d e
the clivus Urbius because of its connexion with Hippolytus than that
the story had always been situated there and so gave rise to the equa
tion of Urbius and Virbius-Hippolytus. T h e name and the legends
surrounding it will have been stabilized at least by the fourth century
B.C., although the first mention is only in Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 159
and Festus 450 L. See further Merkel, Ovid, Fasti, cxlvi; Frazer on
Ovid, Fasti 6. 6 0 1 ; Pais, Ancient Legends, 142-4; A. B. Cook, C.R. 16
(1902), 380 n. 3 (who reads Virbium h e r e ) ; F . Altheim, History of
Roman Religion, 509 n. 9 ; F. Bomer, Gymnasium 64 (1957), 122
(sceptical).
4 8 . 7. sceleratum victim: mod. Via di S. Pietro in Vincoli (Platner-Ashby
s.v.). A foil for the Cyprius vicus or Good Street.
furiis: 46. 7 n. Cf. Sophocles, Electra 1080.
contaminata ipsa respersaque: like a tragic murderess.
48. 9. imperium . . . deponere: the mooted abdication was no part of
the original biography of Servius Tullius and, since it never happened,
it could safely be asserted. Sulla's resignation called for precedents in
the same way that his constitutional reforms required the sanction of
mythical propriety. In inventing the rumour about Servius the Sullan
annalists were doubtless inspired by Greek precedentsPittacus and
Maeandrius. T h e phrase itself belongs to republican terminology (cf.
Caesar, B.G. 7. 33. 3 ; Tacitus Hist. 3. 70). It is the technical expression
for laying down the imperium vested in a m a n by a lex curiata. Only by
an historical fiction could it be used of a king. Besides, for L. such a
rumour of contemplated resignation must have recalled the similar
rumour about Augustus who after 31 B.C. de reddenda re p. . . . cogitavit
(Suet. Aug. 28. 1; Syme, Roman Revolution, 324).
quidam auctores: perhaps only Valerius Antias and the authors
quoted by him, if any. Cf. F. Hellmann, Livius-Interpretationen, 13.
49-60. Tarquinius Super bus
If Servius' reign marks a Latin restoration the evidence from archaeclogy and constitutional history leaves little doubt that the story of
Tarquinius Superbus, in so far as it presumes a renewed domination
of Rome by the Etruscans culminating in their violent expulsion, is
substantially historical. T h a t the Rome of the late sixth century was
Etruscan in character is proved both by the deposits on the Palatine
and by the survival of Etruscan institutions, while the violent break
between kingdom and republic is the only reasonable inference that
can be made from the nature of imperium and interregnum. Certain other
facts, traditionally associated with the last king of Rome, are indepen
dently supported. Tarquinius' name is connected with the building of
the temple of Capitoline Juppiter (55. 1 n.) and of the cloaca maxima
194
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
i. 49-60
(56. 2 n.), the capture of Gabii (53. 4 n.) and Suessa Pometia (53. 2 n.),
the colonization of Signia and Circeii (56. 3 n.), and the siege of
Ardea (57. 1 n.). For all these events there is enough external testi
mony to command belief. Such is the hard core of Tarquin's reign.
Various factors conspired to expand the hard core. At a very early
stage in the writing of R o m a n history, the synchronism of the expul
sion of the Tarquins and the expulsion of the Pisistratids was per
ceived (Aul. Gell. 17. 21. 4). T h e inevitable result of this was that
Tarquin's reign and his expulsion were assimilated to the familiar
versions of Herodotus and Thucydides. It is possible that there is a
sub-structure of historical truth in the story of Lucretia but its sig
nificance for the fate of Tarquinius Superbus owes m u c h to the affair
of Harmodius and Aristogeiton, and in marrying his daughter to
Octavius Mamilius Tarquin merely followed the precepts of Hippias
(49. 8 n.). Tarquin had to be painted in the true Greek colours of a
tyrant.
This hellenization of the character of Tarquin facilitated the inser
tion of whole incidents from Herodotus and other Greek sources to
supplement the meagre notices of R o m a n tradition. T h e capture of
Gabii combines the stories of Zopyrus (3. 154) and of Periander and
Thrasyboulos (5. 92). The embassies to Delphi may be original but
all the detailsthe hollow staff, Mother earth, the kiss, the serpent
portentcan be paralleled from the Greek (see nn.) and it is therefore
at least an open question whether they too do not go back merely
to the labours of third-century historians. Certainly the Best Wife
competition and the scene of Lucretia at her home are pure Greek
in only the poorest of R o m a n disguises.
Such must have been the development of the legend of Tarquin
down to the middle of the second century. T h e accident of time which
had turned Tarquin into a tyrant on a Greek model was fortunate for
the philosophical historians who in their concern to fit R o m a n history
to a cyclic mould welcomed a tyranny already m a d e for the purpose.
They did little more than supply further tints suitable to a real
tyrant (49. 1-7 nn.). There was little room for an historian to exercise
invention once the main outline was established, and Cassius Hemina
(fr. 15 P.) clearly had the same material in much the same form as L.
retails it. Even the duration of the kingdom and the length of Tarquin's
reign were common ground from the time of Cato (60. 4 n . : see
Walbank, Polybius, I, p . 666).
T h e version in L. is certainly later than Piso (55. 9 n.) but there is
nothing that points to a date later than Sulla. By a curiously un
resolved contradiction Brutus, although affecting to be of sub
normal intelligence, holds the office of Tribunus Celerum. This
accretion must be later than the revival of interest in that institution
195
I. 49-60
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
For the Roman concept of superhia see H. Haffter, S.F.I.C. 27 (1956), 135-41.
196
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
i. 49-60
1.49-4
TARQUINIUS
SUPERBUS
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
i. 49. 9
old Latin cities of the Alban League. It was a prominent, if not for a
time the leading, member of the Latin League of Diana at Aricia
(Cato fr. 58 P.). In marrying his daughter to Mamilius Tarquin pre
sumably hoped to secure control of that league through Mamilius,
which Servius had tried to achieve by setting up a rival and superior
cult of Diana. In the struggle for power in Latium after the expulsion
of the kings, Tusculum identified its interests with the Latin cities
that resisted Rome's ambitious pretensions but, reconciled to Rome in
the foedus Cassianum (D.H. 6. 95), became a dependable ally. See
G. McCracken, T.A.P.A. 64 (1933), xlvi; R.E., T u s c u l u m ' , with
bibliography; A. E. Gordon, T.A.P.A. 63 (1932), 177-92; SherwinWhite, Roman Citizenship, 12.
Ulixe . . . Circa: a pedigree of which the Mamilii were proud.
Ulysses figures on the coin of a Mamilius monetal c. 150-133 and on
another of Sullan time (Sydenham no. 369). Consequent on this was
the belief that Tusculum was founded by Telegonus, the son of
Odysseus and Circe (Festus 1 1 6 L . ; Horace, Epod. 1. 29 ff.; Odes
3. 29. 8; Propertius 2. 32. 4). There was a statue of Telegonus in the
theatre at Tusculum (C.I.L. 14. 2649). A rival account which made
Tusculum the foundation of Latinus Silvius, king of Alba Longa
(Diodorus 7 fr. 4 ; Origo Gentis Romanae 12), is to be seen as a secondcentury attempt both to discredit the Mamilii and to provide an
irrefutable explanation of the latinity of the city. Such genealogizing
was a marked feature of the second century. W e find the Julii stressing
their descent from Venus (Sydenham no. 593), the Fabii from Her
cules, and the Hostilii from Romulus. See also 2. 19. 2 n.
perque eas nuptias: cf. 49. 5 perque earn causam. The repeated use of
the loose and inelegant Aci? dpofiev-q is another instance of L.'s habit
of unconscious repetition (14. 4 n.). It disposes of Frigell's per quern.
Turnus Herdonius and the Latins
T h e ensuing ruse by which Tarquin secured control of the Latin
League is of doubtful historicity. While it is true that Tarquin's other
actions betray an aggressive policy in Latium and t h a t his marriageconnexion with Tusculum would place him in a favourable position
to dominate the affairs of the Latins, the details of the story are a
curious mixture of the plausible and the impossible. O n the one hand,
the mention of Tusculum, Aricia, and the lucus Ferentinae fit the
pattern of the late sixth century and Herdonius is an authentic Sabine
name. O n the other hand, the story is evidently an Aetion connected
with the site of the Ferentine spring (51. 9 deiectus ad caput aquae
Ferentinae crate superne iniecta) and belongs to a familiar class of stories
which recurs in the fate of Antistius Petro of Gabii. It is myth not
history. Furthermore Turnus Herdonius himself is suspect. Turnus
199
I. 50. I
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
* 5 0 - 3
i. 50. 8
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
i. 5 1 . 2
if Herdonius was a citizen of Aricia he would not have spent the night
under his own roof. The inconsistency points to the story having been
inserted at a later date into the legend.
51. 3. una node: 25. 35. 7; Caesar, B.G., 5. 58. 1 : the quantity of arms
was so enormous that it was an achievement to have smuggled them
all in during the course of a single night. D.H. 4. 47 merely says
VTTO VVKTCL t<f>r) 7ToAA<X . . . l(JVyKLV
6 t ? T7JV KCLTaXvCFLV f r o m
which
Hachtmann proposed prima node but the need for silence and stealth
should be taken into account.
moram . . . saluti. . .fuisse: not in D.H. So Cicero claimed that his
vacillation and delay in taking action against Catiline was in reality
a divinely inspired device to reveal the full extent of the conspiracy
and so ensure the safety of Rome (in Catil. 3. 16-22).
51. 4. populorum: sc. Latinorum. Note the positions of the main verbs
in the oratio obliqua standing at the head of their sentences (ab Turno
dici . . . adgressurum fuisse . . . non dubitare . . . did . . . rogare eos),
emphasizing the abrupt and harsh tone of Tarquin's remarks, an
effect strengthened by the alliteration primoribus populorum parari. See
A. Lambert, Die indirekte Rede, 25.
51. 7. indinatis . . . animis: cf. Tacitus, Hist. 2. 1. 2 (Fletcher).
51. 9. novo genere . . . crate superne inieda: 4. 50. 4, the punishment was
evidently peculiar to the Carthaginians to judge by Plautus, Poenulus
1025-6 (Milphio to Hanno) 'sub cratim ut jubeas se supponi, atque
eo ] lapides impone multos, ut sese neces'. Cf. also Tacitus, Germania
12. 1. Vegetius 3. 4. It is therefore reasonable to suppose that
the manner of Herdonius' death was only precisely defined when
Carthaginian habits were familiar to the Romans, that is, after the
First Punic War. It will be an invention by the first generation of
Roman historians.
52. 1. parricidio: see n. on ch. 26.
verba fedt: the formula for proposing a resolution in the Senate,
generally abbreviated in documents to v./.
52. 2. [in] eo foedere teneantur: 24. 29. 11 teneri alienis foederibus; cf.
Cicero, pro Caec. 41. in may be regarded as a dittography. There is
something in favour of Scheller's iam.
quod ab Tullo: this, the reading of the manuscripts, is accepted most
recently by Bayet where it is translated 'puisque depuis Tullus l'fitat
albain . . . etait annexe'. a(b) with the name of a person in the sense of
'from the time or reign of so-and-so' is, however, confined in Latin to
a few precise idioms: (1) where it is associated with ad, as, e.g., Cicero,
Brutus 328 Me a Crasso . . . ad Paullum floruit; Quint. 1. 10. 30 et aL;
(2) where there is a defining adjective as, e.g., 1. 17. 10 qui secundus ab
Romulo numeretur; Val. Max. 5.10 ext. 2 et aL The nearest approximation
203
I. 52. 2
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
1-53-2
O.CD.
s.v.
but -cepisset is
i. 53- 4
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
i. 53. 5
i. 53- io
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
ut omnia unusp. Gabiisposset: 'that in his sole person the whole power
of Gabii should be visited'. M a n y conjectures have been suggested for
the enigmatic p. of the manuscripts (ipsis R h e n a n u s ; ipse edd. vett.;
prae [Gabinis) Veith; prae aliis {Gabiis) Hertz; prope or praetor Otto;
paene Reuss; praeter ceteros Cornellissen; praecipue Binsfeld ; pro Edwards;
publice Heerwagen) but there can be little doubt that Rossbach has
diagnosed the cause of the interpolation (Berl. Ph. Woch., 1920, 627) by
illustrating the prevalence of the symbol p or p in the manuscripts
of Livy and other Latin authors as an abbreviation forproprium nomen
a note introduced by a scribe to warn the reader that a name is
coming. It had already been deleted by Bekker and Frigell. See the
other examples listed at 2. 15. 1 n.
208
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
i. 54. 6
209
i. 54. 10
TARQUINIUS
SUPERBUS
of Cicero's day, it seems safest to assume that the 'shield' from Gabii
is in fact comparable with orbes aenei from Privernum, as a trophy from
the capture of Gabii in the Latin War of the fourth century. See
further Wissowa, Religion, 130; Norden, Altrom. Priest., 204 ff.; E. G.
Evans, The Cults of Sabine Territory, 237-40; Weinstock, J.R.S. 36
(1946), 105 n. 19.1 have also considered the custom by which Olympic
chariot victors dedicated a wheel inscribed with their own and their
city's names (Pindar, Olymp. 5. 15, 11. 8, 13. 35).
5 5 . 1 . pacem cum Aequorum gente: hostilities are implied but not stated in
53- 8.
foedus cum Tuscis: 42. 2 n., presumably a renewal of the truce which
had then expired.
monte Tarpeio: 11. 5-9 n., denoting either the whole Gapitoline hill
(Varro, de Ling. LaL 5. 41 ; Propertius 4. 4. 93) or, as here, merely
the Gapitolium (Suetonius, Julius 44; ad Herennium 4. 43).
Tarquinios . . . perfecisse: dependent on monumentum. The style is epigraphic. Gf. Dessau, LL.S. 129 (Pantheon) M. AgrippaL.F. Cos. Tertium
Fecit and, for the use of patrem . . .filium, 4318 Antonii Mariani pater et
filius. But no real inscription is intended since the temple was not
dedicated till the Republic and any such inscription could not have
survived till the first century (A. A. Howard, Harvard Studies 3 (1892),
185-6).
vovisse: 38. 7.
55. 2. exaugurare fana sacellaque: Gato fr. 24 P.:fana in eo loco compluria
fuere: ea exauguravit, praeterquam quod Termino fanum fuit: id nequitum
exaugurari; Servius, adAen.q. 446; Augustine, Civ. Dei 5.21. The building
of the temple probably did involve the destruction of a number of other
buildings but there is no record of any shrines or temples other than
Terminus (see below) of greater antiquity on the Capitol. It is possible
that there were private cults which had to be moved but it is more likely
that the tradition concerning Terminus demanded that some shrines
were uprooted. Certainly no such temples are attributed to Tatius
and it is fanciful to see here discrimination against Sabine or patrician
cults.
55. 3. movisse numen: not 'exerted their power' but literally 'moved a
nod' i.e. 'signified their will', numen is used in its literal sensethe will
of the deity displayed by a nod (cf., e.g., 7. 30. 20; Lucretius 3. 144;
Catullus 64. 204 with Fordyce's note; cf. the Homeric Karavevco and
dvavva>). The literal meaning survived only in sacral contexts (monuisse
numen Ruperti; movisse omen Ruhnken).
aves: 'to divine whether the deities were willing to leave their
native shrines'. For the procedure of evocatio see 5. 21. 1 n.
in Termini fano: a shrine consisting of a rude stone (Servius loc. cit.;
210
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
i- 55- 3
! 55- 5
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
i. 55- 8
depict Rome as a second Athens. Piso may have been led to correct the
figure of 40 talents to 400 either because it seemed too small for
such an undertaking or in the light of the cost of the restorations of
179 B.C. (40. 52. 3) or 142 B.C. (Pliny, N.H. 33. 5 7 ; cf. 36. 185).
55. 9. Pisoni: the historian L. Calpurnius L.f.C.n. Piso Frugi (Censorius), cos. 133 B.C. and censor 120 B.C., for whose historical work see
Introduction. Since he wrote in Latin whereas Fabius wrote in Greek,
he gives the figures in their Latin denomination.
summam: read, with Hay ley, nullius ne horum quidem magnificentiam
operum [fundamenta] non exsuperaturam. The run of the sentence neces
sitates that nullius be taken with ne horum quidem . . . operum^ 'none even
of contemporary constructions'. It is equally plain that the contrast is
between the magnificence of modern buildings and the mere founda
tions of an ancient temple. L.'s remark loses all its point if he is m a d e
to compare the foundations of the Gapitoline Temple simply with
Augustan foundations (Frigell). H e is stressing that Piso's figure is
colossal, amply large enough even in present conditions of inflation
to provide for a fine building, let alone a foundation in primitive times.
T h e manuscripts read magnificentiae but magnificentiam is what should
be expected (with operum; cf. 57. 1, 45. 28. 4 ; Vitruvius 6. 5. 2 ; Pliny,
N.H. 7. 94). In that case fundamenta must be a gloss from 55. 7 above.
Translate 'a sum of money which could not be expected from the
booty of a single city of those days and which would be more than
sufficient even for the magnificence of any modern buildings', quia
is found in the manuscripts before summam.
quia is not used as quippe (read here by Bekker, Frigell, Bayet;
cf. 3. 53. 2) without a verb to introduce a clause in apposition. Scribal
interpolations of this kind designed to make the connexion of thought
clearer can be detected at 2. 58. 5 and 4. 44. 3. See further C.Q. 9
(i959)> 2 I 4 56. 1. fabris undique ex Etruria accitis: tradition names Vulca of Veii
as the artist responsible for the cult-image (Pliny, N.H. 35. 157) and
other Veian artists as the craftsmen of the terracotta quadriga on the
apex (Pliny, N.H. 35. 157) and, although only the foundations and two
small terracotta fragments survive from the original temple, they are
sufficient to confirm the traditional descriptions of the temple (D.H.
4. 61. 3 ff.; Vitruvius 3. 3. 5) as a work of Etruscan styleDoric
hexastyle, 55 metres by 60 metres, with lower courses ofcapellacio and
superstructure largely of wood faced with terracotta decorations.
After the fire of 6 July 83 B.C., the temple was restored by Q,. Lutatius
Catulus on the same plan but with a higher elevation (Tacitus, Hist.
3. 72; Val. Max. 4. 4. 11) and, as such, it is depicted on several
Republican coins. It was restored at great expense by Augustus in
213
I. 56. I
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
26 B.G. (Res Gestae 20) and the absence of any allusion to that restora
tion indicates that the present passage was written before 26 B.G.
(56. 3 n.). For fuller details see Platner-Ashby s.v.; Scott, Mem. Am.
Acad. Rome 7 (1929), 95-116; A. Andren, Architectural Terracottas from
Etrusco-Italic Temples, 335-6; G. Lugli, J.R.S. 36 (1946), 3 ; P. J. Riis,
Etruscan Art, 120; E. H. Richardson, Mem. Am. Acad. Rome 21 (1953),
8 3 ; A. Andren, Hommages a L. Herrmann, 91 ; A. Boethius, The Golden
House of Nero, 14-19.
operis: the conscription of labour is credible enough. Lacking slaves
(cf. 2. 4. 5), Rome had no other means of undertaking such works
(Clerici, Economia e Finanza, 525 ff.).
militiae: dat. 'when this work, far from light in itself, was added to
military service5.
56. 2. foros: 35. 8 n. The stands are also attributed to Superbus by
D.H. 4. 44. 1 ; de Viris Illustr. 8. 3.
cloacam . . . maximam: 38. 6 n., ascribed unanimously by ancient
authors to Superbus (Pliny, N.H. 36. 104), the main sewer of Rome
started in the Argiletum and carried the waters from the Esquiline,
Viminal, and Quirinal through the forum to the Tiber. Originally an
open ditch (Plautus, Curculio 476), it was first enclosed in the third
century. The chief effect of its construction was the final drainage of
the forum which now for the first time became available for largescale building. Preliminary draining had been begun several decades
earlier after which the forum ceased to be used as a graveyard. These
two stages, corresponding to the works of Priscus and Superbus, can
be dated archaeologically to c. 620 and c. 570, although the earliest
extant capellacio work seems to belong to the post-390 period (see
T. Ashby, C.R. 15 (1901), 137-8; Blake, Ancient Roman Construction,
122-3).
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
i. 56. 2
i. 56. 3
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
1.56. 4
that the portent should issue from that ill-starred building whose
construction was alienating the sympathies of the Romans and whose
completion Tarquin did not survive to see. In that case the frightened
crowd would run in regiam and apprise the king of what was happening.
See also next note.
56. 5. publico,. . . domestico: prodigies were public when the attention
of the Senate was called to them and when the Senate decided to
take appropriate measures for their procuratio (Varro, de Ling, Lat.
5. 148; 2. 42. 10, 5. 15. 1,7. 6. 3). But certain classes of prodigies were
not publicly accepted, such as dreams or prodigies which occurred
in privato loco or in loco peregrino (43. 13. 6), although in such cases the
haruspices could be privately consulted and usually were. Tarquin's
prodigy, however, cannot be classed as necessarily private even if
it did appear in the regia (see above) since for religious purposes the
regia was not a private dwelling (Aul. Gell. 4. 6. 2). These considera
tions are in keeping with the tendentious character of the language
[tantum adhiberentur) so that it may be supposed that an annalist (i.e.
Piso or later) wished to devise a connexion between two traditional
elements of the Tarquin legendthe snake portent and the embassy
to Delphiand turned to advantage the fact that the prodigy was
not to be found in the Annales as it ought to have been if it had
been a publicum prodigium. See L. Wulker, Die geschicht. Entwicklung
des Prodigienwesens, 2 ff., 35-36; C. O. Thulin, Die Etrusk. Discipline
131-2.
56. 6. responsa sortium: 21. 62. 5. T h e reply of the oracle frequently
took the form of writing on leaves. See Norden's note on Virgil,
Aeneid 6. 74.
56. 7. L. Iunius Brutus: the cognomen like the nornen are of Latin or
Italic roots and this fact may support the tradition that the Etruscan
dynasty was evicted by him. Junius from J u n o (Schulze 470); for
Brutus 'Stupid 5 cf. the Oscan praenomen Brutulus in 8. 39. 12 and
Walde-Hofmann s.v.
56. 7. alius ingenio: Very different in intelligence from the mask which
he had assumed'. So the manuscripts rightly. Hofmann in Thes. Ling.
Lat.) 'ingenium', col. 1535, collects other instances of similar phrases
(e.g. 45. 10. 8, 34. 5. 6, 23. 7. 12, 35. 47. 7). Cf. Seneca, Contr. 10
praef. 4 alius animo (Meyer).
in quibus: 27. 25. 7, 37. 23. 5. See Kroll on Catullus 10. 6.
timendum . . . concupiscendum: echoed by Tacitus, Hist. 4. 42 nihil
quod ex te concupiscent Nero, nihil quod timeret.
56. 8* ex industrial Claudius, when young, adopted the same policy
(Suetonius 38. 3 ; see D. M . Last, Latomus 17 (1958), 486).
56. 9. aureum baculum: an element of folk legend. Konon, an Augustan
contemporary of L. who drew, by his own admission, on earlier sources,
217
i- 56- 9
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
* 57-59
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
' 57-59
Antias, about the wife of Ortiagon and a licentious centurion. T h e
general similarity of treatment argues for the authority of Valerius
here too.
The subject exercised a fascination on later writers (Ovid, Fasti
2. 721-852 ; Val. Max. 6. 1. 1; de VirisIllustr. 9. 1-5; Diofr. n . 13-19;
Servius, ad Aen. 8. 646 (quoting inaccurately by memory from L . ) ;
Octavia 294 ff.; Sil. Ital. 13. 821 f.) but it was as a topic of moral dis
pute that it endured. Was it right, Augustine asked, that Lucretia
added the wrong of suicide to an offence for which she could not be
blamed {Civ. Dei 1. 19); Alternatively, if it was right to commit
suicide afterwards, surely it would have been better to do so before the
outrage. So Casanova, and so the charming epigram
Casta Suzanna placet: Lucretia cede Suzannae.
Tu post, ilia mori maluit ante scelus.
See Klenze in Schwegler, Rom. Gesch. 1. 804; H. Taine, Essai sur
T.-L. 2 7 4 - 8 ; G. Voigt, Bericht. Kon. Sachs. Gesell. der Wiss. Leipzig, 35
(1883), 1-36; W. Soltau, Anfang Rom. Gesch. 73 ff., 9 3 - 9 9 ; Pais,
Ancient Legends, 185-203; de Sanctis, Storia, 1. 398; C. Appleton, Rev.
Hist. Droit 3 (1924), 2 3 9 - 7 1 ; Miinzer, R.E., 'Lucretia'; Burck 173-5;
B. Croce, Critica 35 (1937), 146-52.
57. 1. Ardeam: for its subsequent history see 3. 71-72 nn., 4. 9-11
nn., 5. 43. 6. T h e town lay some 25 miles south of Rome at a distance
of 7 miles from the sea (Strabo 5. 232; Pliny, N.H. 3. 56) and served
as the capital of the Rutuli, a people of Latin stock later strongly
influenced by Etruscan culture (Virgil, Aeneid 7. 409-11). It is men
tioned as one of the members of the Latin League of Aricia (49. 9 n.)
so that the traditional patterns of its history can be trusted, especially
since the earliest archaeological layers point to an advanced native
population without any trace of Greek or Oriental culture. Reluctant
to accept Tarquin's high-handed usurpation of the league it stood out
against him and had to be reduced by force. Presumably it succumbed.
At all events it is mentioned as being in the R o m a n sphere of influence
when the first treaty was signed with Carthage in 509 (Polybius 3. 22.
11 with Walbank's note). Archaeological confirmation is forthcoming
that there was an important harbour-town c. 500 B.C. with agger and
fossa, and traces of temple decorations in terracotta of Etruscan style
(Strabo, loc. cit.) which preceded the Roman colony. See Hiilsen,
R.E., c Ardea (2)'; Rosenberg, Hermes 54 (1919), 113 ff.; A. W. van
Buren, A.J.A. 36 (1932), 3 6 3 - 5 ; 37 (1933), 503-4; E. Holmberg,
Boll. Studi Med. 3 (1932-3), 6 ff.; A. Boethius, Boll. Studi Med. 5 (1934),
4 - 6 ; Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship, 9 - 1 1 ; Blake, Ancient Roman
Construction, 106; Stefani, Notiz. Scavi, 79 (1954), 6-30.
57. 2. 'besides his general arrogance they had a further ground of
dislike of the tyranny in that they complained that the king had kept
220
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
i- 57- 2
1-57- 7
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
id. . . oculis: language and sentiment recall Terence, Heaut. 2 8 1 4. The situation of a wife surprised at home by her husband was
one frequently handled by New Comedy, and Collatinus' words evoke
such scenes.
necopinato: 3. 26. 5 n.
57. 8. incaluerant vino: 39. 42. 10; Tacitus, Annals 11. 37. 2, 14. 2. 1;
Hist. 4. 29. 1. Notice the short sentences and vivid phraseology
matching the rapidity of the action.
'age sane': 'away then', a scarce phrase found only in a characteriz
ing utterance in Cicero, de Finibus 2. 119, outside Plautus (Menaechmi
153; Pseud. 1326).
avolant: 3. 61. 7 n.
57. 9. Collatiam: 38. 1 n.
convivio lusuque: the received reading luxuque is defended by Kohler
on account of the paraphrase in de Viris Illustr. 9.2 regias nurus in convivio
et luxu deprehendunt and by other editors by the parallel of luxuria in,
e.g., Seneca, Epist. 59. 15 (cf. 114. 11). But luxus is a state, not,
like convivium, an activity and L. elsewhere links lusus and convivium
(cf. 40. 13. 3 lusus, convivii, comissationis; 40. 14. 2) so that Gronovius's
lusu may be preferred to an early corruption.
lucubrantes ancillas: the scene is pure New Comedy again, already
familiar from Terence and so perhaps actually staged by Menander.
The most graphic representation of it is Tibullus' plea that Delia may
remain till he comes ( 1 . 4 . 83-90; W. T. Avery, C.J. 49 (1953), 165).
But the connexion of female virtue and wool-making owes nothing to
any play or poem. In Greece, and particularly in Rome, the ideal
of the maman au foyer, however optimistic, was deeply rooted. All
women should evSov pevew (cf. Euripides, Troades 649; Plutarch, Moral.
139 c; Herodas 1. 37 with Headlam's note; Theocritus, Idyll 28;
Menander fr. 592 K.). At Rome this ideal was intimately connected
with the ritual symbol of wool-making which had originally been an
economic necessity for the household and so symbolized all that a good
household stood for, even when the practice was obsolete. The sym
bolism took concrete shape in the spindle and wool carried by a
Roman bride, but it was also evoked throughout the Augustan age
both in commonplace epitaphs (e.g. Carm. Epigr. 52. 8; Laud. Tur.
1. 30; see G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 48 (1958), 21 n. 20) and in literature
(e.g. Vitruvius 6. 7. 2 ; Ovid, Medic. Fac. Femin. 11 ff.). Such was
the intellectual background, where the concept of pudicitia was
typified by lanificium, which Augustus tried to animate by making his
family spin (Suetonius 64. 2) and which L. took advantage of for the
presentation of Lucretia. Certainly L. is not making deliberate propa
ganda for Augustus' moral reforms which were in any case later than
this book. Both are reacting to the same ethos.
222
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
1-57-9
I-58-5
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
26. 49. 15 and, for the idea, Ovid, Met. 13. 480). expugno, as a technical
term of Love's warfare, is common in such contexts e.g. Plautus,
True. 171; Cicero, pro Caelio 4 9 ; Seneca, Contr. 2. 3. 1.
ita facto maturatoque opus esse: Lucretia's message is poignant with
its short sentences and archaically colloquial language. Cf., e.g.,
Plautus, Amph. 169, 505, 776; Terence, Heaut. 8 0 ; Lucretius 5. 1053.
58. 6. P. Valerio Volesifilio: 2. 2. 11 n. His addition to the story is due
to family history among the Valerii but may be earlier than its crystal
lization in the work of Valerius Antias.
forte: L. has to make a coincidence, since he has altered for dramatic
reasons the original plot where their meeting was deliberate.
58. 7. lacrimae obortae: claimed by Stacey as evidence for poetic ten
dencies of language in the first decade. It is true that lacrimae obortae
only occurs elsewhere in Virgil, Aeneid 3. 492, outside 40. 8. 2 0 : but
it is not true to say that the word oborior is confined to poetry since it
is used, e.g., by Cicero, pro Ligario 6 lux . . . oboriatur and Terence,
Heaut. 680. As the context of 40. 8. 20 also shows, the phrase is highly
coloured and so appropriate to the present situation but such colouring
is distinct from poeticism.
'satin salve?': 'does it fare with thee well enough?', an old-fashioned
salutation to which F . Leo drew attention in his commentary on
Plautus, Stick. 10. Outside Plautus (Trin. 1177; Menaechmi 776) and
Terence (Eun. 978) it is only found in deliberately archaic and
emotional passages of L. (3. 26. 9, 6. 34. 8, 10. 18. 11 and, in close
proximity to the second use of lacrimae obortae, 40. 8. 20). So Fronto
writing to Verus (113. 3 van den Hout), exclaims in his high-flown
and archaizing language: 'satin salve' utpercontarer? an ut complecterer?
an ut exoscularer? an ut confabularer? In the phrase salve is adverbial as
the Plautine passage shows: sc. agis?
vestigia . . . lecto: Lucre tia employs the plain language of the Elegists;
cf, e.g., Propertius 2. 9. 45 nee domina ulla meoponet vestigia lecto and the
parallels collected on that passage by Shackleton Bailey, especially
Tibullus 1.9.57; Ovid, Amores 1. 8. 97. See also Fraenkel on Aeschylus,
Agamemnon 411. vestigia is, of course, literal, 'visible marks'.
viri alieni: 46. 7. vir here may bear some of the force which it com
monly bears in love elegy'the lover in possession': cf. Catullus 68.
135 ff.; Tibullus 1. 2. 2 1 ; Ovid, Amores 3. 4. 1 : G. Luck, Latin Love
Elegy, 150 n. 1.
corpus . . . animus: 58. 9 n.
mors testis erit: for the form of the expression cf. [Ovid], Heroides
20. 101, 103; Ovid, Tristia 4. 9. 22.
sed date dexteras fidemque: note the d sounds. T h e phrase itself is vivid
and lively, and, as such, well suited to Lucretia's last moments. Cf.,
e.g., Plautus, Curculio 307; Merc. 149; Cicero, post Red. in Sen. 24; and,
224
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
i. 58. 7
before all, Virgil, Aeneid 4. 597 where another woman, also about to
face death at her own hands as a result of the misfortunes of love,
exclaims bitterly 'en dextra fidesque\ The correspondence should not,
however, suggest a common source (cf. Carm. de hello Aeg. 6).
58. 8. hostis pro hospite: 1. 12. 8, 21. 24. 4, 23. 33. 7, 36. 29. 6. The
play on words is almost hysterical (cf. Cicero, Phil. 12. 27) and is
employed by Ovid to very much the same purpose in an estimation
of Paris (Her. 17. 10; cf. 13. 44) hospes an hostis eras?
vi armatus: the words recall, as they were doubtless intended by L.
to recall in order to give a contemporary touch to the scene, the crime
of vis armata, violence committed with the use of arms. The charge is
first mentioned in our sources by Cicero, pro Caecina 55 ff. and the
definition recurs in substantially the same form in Julian's redaction
(Ulpian, Dig. 43. 16. 3. 2-12). See further Berger, R.E., 'Interdictum',
cols. 1680-1; Lenel, Edictum, 467.
si vos viri estis: 41, 3 n. Observe the clipped phrases hostis pro hospite,
priore node, vi armatus, mihi sibique, si vos viri estis. pestiferum governs
mihi sibique.
58. 9. mentempeccare, non corpus: the principles of Roman law are once
more invoked, which recognized a distinction between peccata com
mitted dolo malo and those sine dolo. To prove dolo malo it was necessary
to establish intention (consilium): cf. Cicero, Parad. 20; Seneca, Dial,
4. 26. 5-6. But this passage does not reveal anything about the state of
Roman law under the kings. The ideas expressed in it are merely the
expression of contemporary legal opinion in terms beloved by the
sophistic writers of later Greek tragedy. So far from reproducing a
point of law from regal times, mentem peccare, non corpus is a Latin ver
sion of such subtleties as 17 yAaiaa' 6fiu>nox\ r) 8e (f>p7jv ava){ioTos. In the
same spirit Publilius Syrus (640) voluntas impudicam non corpus facit or
Seneca, Phaedra 735 mens impudicam facere non casus solet echo Greek
tragic antitheses.
See further E. Wilhelm-Hooijberg, Peccatum, 33-34 with H. J.
Rose's review in Class. Rev. 70 (1956), 76; G. Luck, Latin Love Elegy,
165-6. It is interesting to compare Lucretia's argument with the
casuistry of Ovid in Amores 3. 14 who says that it is not Corinna's act
of infidelity which constitutes a peccatum and destroys her pudicitia
but the defiant openness with which she commits it.
supplicio non libero: it was widely held that adultery so defiled the
woman that any subsequent progeny would be themselves con
taminated. Hence the woman had to die.
58. 10. vos . . . ego me: notice the emphatic word-order.
58. 11. in corde defigit: a forcefully rhetorical periphrasis for 'stabbed'
(ad Herennium. 4. 65; cf. Cicero, in Catil. 1. 16 (sicam) in corpore defigere).
58. 12. prolapsa in volnus: 2. 46. 4 n. A comparison with Ovid, Fasti
811432
225
I. 58. 12
T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
i. 59. 1
avoided by classical writers (Cicero, Caesar, Catullus) and which,
although occurring often in Plautus and Terence, is only employed by
self-conscious stylists such as Sallust and Apuleius. It must be intended
to carry the same meaning as denique. Finally the whole phrase ferro,
igni, quacumque vi possim (2. 10. 4) is semi-proverbial (cf. Cicero, Phil.
11. 37 ; Suetonius, Claud. 2 1 : cf. re/xvo. . . /catco in Greek; see Fraenkel
on Aeschylus, Agam. 849).
59. 2. novum . . . ingenium: because he had appeared a dullard until
that moment.
utpraeceptum erat: cas they were instructed5 but it may as well convey
a suggestion of the concepta verba or regular formula which every party
to an oath or a prayer repeated after it had been rehearsed by the
principal (praeire).
versi: 2. 40. 5. A tragic -nepnreTeia.
59. 5. The archetype must have read pari praesidio relicto Collatiae ad
portas which is reproduced with various further corruptions in the
manuscripts. The account of D.H. 4. 71 provides guidance, where
Brutus advises Sta <f>v\aKrj$ ra? 77JAa? xcofJLV ^va fA7)&*v GUCT^TCU TapKv-
i. 59- 7
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
1-59- "
I. 60. 2
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
i. 60. 4
r 60. 4
TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
Mm.
1 (1942), 137-9)-
Gjerstad (Legends and Facts, 45 ff.) rests his case for the unhistoricity of Brutus
on the familiar ground that the gens Junta in historical times was plebeian, but the
authentic Fasti of the early Republic are so full of plebeian names that his argument
is quite void.
232
BOOK 2
Liberi iam hinc populi Romani. Liberty is the theme of the second book.
The ancient legends of Rome are retold in the light of Rome's new
found liberty as they illustrate the nature of it or reveal the dangers
entailed by it. For liberty is a complex possession. It can only be en
joyed under the rule of law (cf. Cicero, pro Cluent. 146: see Wirzubski,
Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome), So L. devotes much space to the
organization of the constitution whose balanced system with its
principles of collegiality and provocatio did much in Roman eyes to
safeguard liberty (1. 711, 8. 1-8, 18. 4-11). But other threats could
arise. A number of such threats to liberty occur from within and
from without (Collatinus, the conspiracy of the Vitellii and Aquilii,
Valerius Poplicola; the Tarquinienses, Porsenna, the Latins) and
L. relates each one as a separate, dramatic episode exemplifying the
moral that ceaseless vigilance is required to maintain liberty. In the
second half of the book the threat to liberty remains no longer in
the shape of individual assaults but in the more insidious form of
internal discord (cf. 1.6), springing in the first instance from the
debt-problem (nexum). The threat materializes in different ways
as a demand for the tribunate (22-33. 3)> as an attempt on the city
from outside (34-40 Coriolanus), as a projected coup (41 Sp. Cassius)
until finally the life-and-death struggle against Veii brings the
Romans together under the leadership of the Fabii. The book, then,
has a continuous refrain, just as Book 4 is characterized by the refrain
of moderatio and Book 5 by pietas, and it is given an overall symmetry
by the two big 'Homeric' battles (19-20 Lake Regillus; 45-47 the
battle with the Etruscans). In this way L. endeavours to overcome the
disjointedness from which annalistic or episodic history is apt to
suffer and he introduces the underlying concepts in the short secondary
preface (1. 1-6) with which he opens his account of the Republic.
Within the different sections the material is so arranged as to provide
variety by the alternation of internal and external affairs.
The material at L.'s disposal for the early years was largely but not
exclusively legendaryHoratius Codes, Cloelia, Scaevola, the Battle
of Lake Regillus itself. But not everything in the received history is
suspect. The conventional chronology acquires strong independent
support from external sources (21. 5 n., 54. 1 n.). The archaeological
evidence which suggests that the cultural break with Etruria did not
occur until c. 450 and which has led Bloch and others to down-date
233
INTRODUCTION
the expulsion of the Tarquins by half a century, is susceptible of a
quite different explanation. At the end of the sixth century Etruria
was divided into two distinct areasthe hellenized coastal cities, such
as Tarquinii, Veii, and Caere, and the great inland cities like Glusium.
T h e former had friendly relations with the leading Greek cities such
as G u m a e ; the latter pushing down from the interior were involved in
an aggressive expansion that led them into Campania and Latium
and brought them into conflict with Gumae and Rome. Rome's ties
were solely with the coastal cities as her pottery shows. U n d e r the
Tarquins her relations with these neighbouring Etruscan cities were
friendly and prosperous, and Superbus in particular by his seizure of
Gabii and control of the Via Latina seems to have been anxious to safe
guard the coastal strip from infiltration whether by hill-people like the
Aequi or by imperialist Etruscans from the interior. T h e expulsion of
the Tarquins was a purely domestic matter which need not have upset
commercial alinements. Rome, by her commanding position on the
river and land routes, continued to trade with the coastal cities of
Etruria, and, as the names of her leading families and the tokens of her
political institutions demonstrate, did not turn her back on her Etruscan
past. T h e break with Etruria when it came was caused not by the
expulsion of any particular family but by the jealous emergence of
Veii, as an enemy rather than a rival. It was Veii, not Etruria as a
whole, which cut Rome off from her commercial links and threatened
to strangle her. T h e break was also a matter of politics. After Porsenna's
assault Rome seems to have been governed by a succession of plebeian
consuls most of whose roots were in Etruria. It suggests a policy of
subservience to Etruria and expansion at the expense of Latium. T h e
policy was only reversed by a concatenation of events. A crushing
defeat by the Volscians (concealed by annalistic sources but preserved
in an archaeological notice embedded in Festus), the conspiracy of
Sp. Gassius which discredited the plebeian, pro-Etruscan forces at
Rome, and the decline of central Etruria all played their part.
T h e main lines are credible enough. We may believe that the
Tarquins attempted to secure their own restoration. We may believe
that Rome was attacked by Porsenna although not for the reasons
stated (9. 1 n.). We may believe that the Tarquins eventually found
refuge with Aristodemus at Gumae.
A good summary of the historical issues, with bibliography, is given
by B. Gombet Farnoux, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 69 (1957), 7-44. See
also Bloch, R..L. 37 (1959), 118-32.
1-6. Preface
Liberty was secured at the right moment; if it had been won earlier,
the state would not have been ripe for it.
234
509 B.C.
2. I. I
2. I. 7 - 2 . 2
5 0 9 B.C.
not to Brutus but to Valerius. This may be suggestive for his source
(see below).
The Oath
The fact and terms of the oath are also reported by Plutarch,
Poplicola 2; Appian, B.C. 2. 119. It generalizes the private oath sworn
between the conspirators in 1. 59. 1 (n.). The popular oath here, like
the whole story of L. Junius Brutus, shows signs of being influenced
by the murder of Caesar (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 16 n. 2).
The Senate
The origin of the term patres conscripti, used to denote members of
the Senate collectively, provoked widespread speculation even in
antiquity. The prevailing opinion was that patres were the original
patricians, the leading members of the maiores gentes (1. 35. 6 n.), who
comprised the Senate, conscriptiwerc plebeians, i.e. non-patricians, intro
duced into the Senate by Romulus (Lydus, de Mag. 1. 16), Tarquinius
Priscus (E Cicero, pro Scauro, p. 374), Servius Tullius (Zonaras 7. 9;
[Servius], ad Aen. 1. 426), or, as here (cf. Festus 304 L.; Plutarch,
Q.R. 58), by the first consuls. It is clearly stated by Paulus Festus
'allecti dicebantur apud Romanos qui propter inopiam ex equestri
ordine in senatorum sunt numero adsumpti; nam patres dicuntur qui
sunt patricii gentis, conscripti qui in senatu sunt scriptis adnotati'.
Despite this virtual unanimity the explanation can hardly be correct
since the proper term for senators drafted in from outside would be
adscripti and not conscripti. The very diversity of occasions when such
drafting is supposed to have taken place in itself shows that there was
no settled tradition about it. The Senate which was originally the
council of the heads of the maiores gentes became in turn the council
of the king and of the Republic. The changing situation which re
quired that important persons who were not heads of the gentes or even
members of gentes should have a voice in affairs involved a change
from automatic membership to some form of selection. The Senate
was to comprise those patres (or their equivalent) who were selected
and enrolled as senators (conscripti; cf. D.H. 2. 47; Isidore, Orig.
9. 4. 11 : Cicero, Phil. 13. 28, uses the singular pater conscrip tus). See also
1. 8. 711.
5 09 B.C.
2. I. 10
As was suggested with regard to the fasces above, L.'s silence as to the
part played by Valerius may be taken as proof that he is following
a source other than Valerius Antias at this point. The political slant
and the anachronistic allusion to an equester gradus (5. 7. 5 n.) point
to Licinius Macer.
See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 838 ff.; O'Brien Moore, R.E., Supp.
6, 'senatus' cols. 663-76; U. von Liibtow, Das Rom. Volk, 144-6.
1. 11. videlicet: introduces in L. an explanation or expansion of a fore
going assertion (cf., e.g., 9. 4. 13 quis ea tuebitur? imbellis videlicet atque
inermis multitudo; 9. 17. 12 ; 23. 12. 14) and, except when leading up to
a conjunction, stands second in the clause (cf. 22. 13. 11). It follows
that it must qualify the whole sentence'for you see, they called the
elected members conscript?and cannot be taken with novum senatum
(Madvig)'they called the elected members conscripti, that is to say
the new Senate', novum senatum is thus without construction. The
Renaissance editors favoured <m> novum senatum, varied by Drenckhahn, but the word-order, which requires lectos in novum senatum, is
against it. The simplest and most plausible solution is, with Novak,
to delete the words as a gloss on conscriptos.
prqfuit: mirum quantum, like the Greek Oavfidaiov oaov, is virtually
adverbial (but cf. 1. 16. 8) and is not regarded as introducing an ind.
question. Hence the indicative; cf. Cicero, ad Att. 13. 40. 2 ; Pliny,
N.H. 19. 112, 28. 63.
plebis: the presence of plebeian names in the earliest consular Fasti
is one of many reasons for supposing that discrimination was not
practised against the plebeians at least until the middle of the fifth
century. The comment, whether made by L. or his source, is anachro
nistic and misdirected.
The Rex Sacrorum
As in many Greek cities, the king had possessed by virtue of his
position certain religious functions which after the abolition of the
monarchy had to be passed on to a specially created priesthoodat
Rome to the rex sacrorum, as its holder was properly known (2. 1 n.).
The exact extent of these functions is hard to discover since the rex was
at some date, perhaps in the third century, largely overshadowed
and superseded by the Pontifex Maximus. As evidence of the original
position of the rex may be cited the Regia, later the home of the
Pontifex Maximus, the custom whereby the Vestals, later under the
supervision of the Pontifex Maximus, came on certain days to wake
the rex (Servius, adAen. 10. 228), and the leading position which the rex
held in the religious order of precedence (Festus 198 L.). As late
an> c. 275 the religious calendar is dated by the rex (Pliny, jV.//. 11. 186).
The chief duty of the rex concerned the two festivals on 24 March and
237
2. 2. I
5 09 B.C.
95-7-
5 09 B.C.
2. 2. 2-11
which was aimed primarily against the tyrants and which was first
exercised against a collateral member of the Pisistratid familyHipparchus, son of Charmus. So L. Tarquinius Collatinus is m a d e to
give up the consulshipwhich in historical reality he never held
( i . 6o. 4 n.)because, like Hipparchus, his name had unfortunate
associations and because the state could not with comfort contain
so prominent a figure.
There is, therefore, a Greek model behind the story. It will have
taken shape with the other hellenized legends in the late third century.
In the earliest recoverable version (cf. Cicero, de Rep. 2. 5 3 - 5 4 ;
Brutus 5 3 ; de Off. 3. 40) Collatinus' offence was simply his name but,
instead of abdicating, his imperium was forcibly abrogated by Brutus.
In L., on the other hand (cf. Pisofr. 19 P.), he resigns voluntarily. Here
is a constitutional issue. T h e people had both in theory and in practice
enjoyed the right to abrogate pro-consular imperia (cf. 27. 20. 11 (209
B.C.); 29. 19. 6 (204 B.C.); Asconius 78 C. (107 B.G.) : notice also the
Lex Cassia of 104 quern populus damnasset cuive imperium abrogasset: see
Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 628-30). T h e story of Collatinus was i m
proved' to provide a classic precedent. In making Collatinus resign
L. tacitly rejects the doctrine that a magistrate's imperium could be
abrogated once it had been granted by the people. This is too radical
an innovation for L. himself and the agreement of D . H . shows that
it goes back to a Sullan annalist. T h e motive will be that in 87 the
Senate had abrogated the consulship of Cinna (Veil. Pat. 2.20. 3 ; Livy
Epit. 79). This was the first occasion on which consular, as opposed to
pro-consular, imperium was abrogated. T h e annalist challenged this
right by denying the precedent on which it was based. Collatinus was
not deposed: he resigned. In the struggles of the 8o's we know that
Licinius Macer sympathized with Cinna.
Other authors implicate Collatinus in the subsequent conspiracy
(D.H. 5. 9 ; Plutarch, Poplkola 7; Zonaras 7. 12) but L. keeps the
episode self-contained. It is carefully constructed and poignandy nar
rated. T h e story is introduced by a sententia which serves to generalize
it as an instance of the problems posed by libertas (nescio an . . . modum
excesserint). T h e public gossip (3-4) is balanced by Brutus' speech
(5-7). Both are phrased in terse, compelling terms. Brutus moving
from indirect to direct speech with increasing rhetorical power (cf.
regium . . . regium; id qfficere, id obstare) breaks out into a fine direct
appeal to Collatinus himself (7 nn.). Collatinus' deliberations are
appropriately involved (9-11 postquam . . . cessit) and the whole in
cident is rounded off by two simple, matter-of-fact statements.
See Klotz 2 2 0 - 1 ; Schachermeyr, R.E., 'Tarquinius (8)'.
2 . 2 . an nimium: N seems to have read an nimis which is to be preferred.
nimis qualifies muniendo, minimisque rebus being linked with undique.
239
2. 2. 2
5 09 B.C.
'I can not help wondering whether they did not go too far in their
excessive protection of liberty in every quarter and in the smallest
matters.'
2 . 3 . enim: for this use of enim introducing a particular example of a
general thesis cf. namque (Fraenkel, Horace, 185) and the Greek /ecu yap.
offenderit: the perf. subj., meaning 'although there had been no single
offence at any time', may be kept. Cf. Caesar, B.G. 1. 26. 2.
tamquam alieni: the meaning of these words is obscure. T h e general
sense is 'not even the passage of time had enabled Superbus to forget
the throne but he had forcibly reclaimed it as a family heirloom'. If
tamquam alieniis right, it must mean 'as being in the hands of a foreigner'
(i.e. Servius Tullius). tamquam is normally used when a supposition
contradicts the facts'he used my books as if they were his own'
(tamquam sua)but occasionally it is used merely to provide a true
reason'they were looked up to as being good citizens' (4. 60. 8
tamquam bonos cives). Time could not obliterate Tarquin's memory of
the crown and how it had passed to other hands. I am not wholly
happy about the text even so. Tit tier's alienati for alieni (Weidner,
Weinkauff) does not affect the main difficulty. Boot's (solium) quamquam alieni regni makes good Latin but is absurd with the succeeding
hereditatem. tamquam alieni might be a gloss on velut hereditatem. For
the latter cf. Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 3. 84.
2. 4. datus: sermonem dare is only found here. Editors compare 3. 34. 6
rumores editas, but edere is not parallel for dare. Cornelissen suggested
dilatus (cf. 34. 49. 6 ; Tacitus, Annals 1. 4 ; Nepos, Dion 10). Ruperti
diditus. In such contexts, however, the mot juste is sermonem serere
(3. 17. 10; Plautus, Miles 700; cf. 3. 43. 2, 7. 39. 6) and satus is the
easiest correction.
2 . 7 . 'hunc tu9: the mounting passion erupts into a direct and personal
appeal to Collatinus, heightened by the emphatic juxtaposition and
placing of personal pronouns (tu . . . tua; tuas tibi. . . tui auctore me).
For similar transitions to direct speech attended by a specific address
to a person cf. 3. 9. n , 6. 6. 12, 15. 9, 8. 34. 11, 24. 22. 17 (Lam
bert). For exonera metu cf. Terence, Phormio 843; Seneca, Epist. 86. 3.
A speech was evidently one of the traditional elements in the story
(Cicero, Brutus 53) but these touches are distinctively Livian.
2. 8. incluserat: claimed as a poetic expression but cf. Cicero, pro Rab.
Post. 48, where editors read intercludit. Silences at moments of climax
are characteristic of L.'s narrative technique (3. 47. 6 n.).
2. 10. Lavinium: why to Lavinium? T h e Tarquins are known to have
had contacts with Tarquinii, Caere, and Gabii but Lavinium is not
otherwise connected with them. T h e traditions of a branch of the
Tarquinii or Tarquitii might be suspected but there is no evidence of
any of that name being settled at Lavinium (L. R. Taylor, Voting
240
5 09 B.C.
2. 2. 10
241
2. 3-5
50 9 B.C.
509 B.C.
2-3-5
43
2. 3- 6
509 B.C.
3 . 6 . [alii] alia moliri: the first alii is superfluous: the ambassadors had
only one scheme in view. It is more likely to be a dittography than
a corruption (cum aliis Aldus; callidiBekker; alibi Duker; alias Bayet).
consilia struere: 'lay plans'. Only here in Latin but Terence, Phormio
321, has consilia instruere.
4 . 1. liberi: too much should not be m a d e of the fact that if the sons
of Brutus were executed the later Junii Bruti could not be lineally
descended from the first consul. Surprisingly D.H. 7. 26. 3 mentions
a T . Junius Brutus as aedile in 491.
4 . 2. aliquot: N adds et, retained by Bayet ('plusieurs jeunes gens
appartenant egalement a la noblesse') but his translation requires alii.
For the interpolation of et cf. 4. 5 below.
4 . 3 . bona: 5. 1. n.
4 . 5. cenatum: et cenatum of N cannot be construed, for et. . . que are
not found = 'both . . . and', et was inserted in the false belief that both
cenatum esset and proficiscerentur depended on cum.
5. 1-4. Digression on the 'Bona Regia*
T h e digression which interrupts the narrative of the conspiracy and
by its suspense prepares the reader for the main climax (for this
technique cf. 5. 33. 4 n.) is concerned with three separate items
the bona regia (household possessions, & c ) , the Campus Martius, and
the Insula Tiberina.
'Bona Regia'
T h e origin of the tradition is obscure. Gage's conjecture that it is
based on Latin etymology of an Etruscan *bonorek = TratBepajg may
be remarked. It looks like a doublet of the Bona Porsennae (14. 1 n.).
5. 1. ibi: 'in the Senate', victi ira (N) would mean 'overcome by
anger' (1. 17. 11, 2. 15. 5, 5. 44. 5, 7. 18. 9, 23. 8. 4, 24. 1. 6). T h e
active vicit ira, conjectured by Frey, implies a conflict of emotions in
which anger eventually prevailed (5. 29. 7 vicit gratiam ira; 8. 35. 4,
26. 16. 7, 37. 51. 5, 42. 62. 11). T h e former is the true assessment of
the situation.
in publicum: 42. 1 n.
Campus Martius
T h e Campus Martius was undoubtedly so called because of the
cult of Mars there. According to Festus (204 L.) an Ara Martis was
mentioned in a law of Numa and the cult will be at least as old as the
earliest lustratio exercitus or similar cult (e.g. the Amburbium). T h e
army was debarred on religious grounds from assembling inside the city
and therefore the cult of Mars had to be established outside. T h e
244
5 09 B.C.
2. 5. 2
cult and the name will go back to the earliest times of R o m e , and the
alleged consecration mentioned here (27 Juvenal 1. 132; Plutarch,
Poplicola 8; cf. D.H. 5. 13) is fictitious. T h e association with the
Tarquins appears to have been invented for some etymological reason.
Only so can the existence of two other explanations be accounted for.
Plutarch gives a variant that an adjoining strip of land, the Campus
Tiberinus, was gifted to the state by a Vestal, Tarquinia. A modified
version of this is given by Pliny (JV.H. 34. 25) and Aulus Gellius (7. 7)
who calls the Vestal Gaia Tarratia or Taracia. Gellius adds that she
gifted the whole Campus Martius and not merely the Campus
Tiberinus. Gaia we know. She is a goddess linked in cult with Tiberinus
(8 December). Tarquinius, Tarquinia, Tarratia, Taraciaall look
attempts to explain a name. The most westerly point of the Campus
Martius, where it is enclosed by the great bend in the Tiber opposite
the island and where there was a subterranean cult of Dis (Val. Max.
2. 4. 5), was called Tarentum. Ancient scholars were prolific in their
etymologies (Festus 478 L . ; Servius, adAen. 8. 63) but neither ancient
nor modern scholarship has succeeded in solving it. T h e different
accounts of the acquisition of the Campus Martius by the R o m a n
people are to be viewed in connexion with the enigmatic T a r e n t u m .
See Platner-Ashby s.v. 'Campus M a r t i u s ' ; ' T a r e n t u m ' ; F. Castagnoli, Mem. Accad. Lincei, 1948, 93-111; J. le Gall, Le Culte du Tibre,
96-104.
5. 2. fuit: can hardly mean 'became', 'was known as from then on'.
H . Richards proposed//.
Insula Tiberina
It is probable that the island was formed as a result of silting, as
the Romans believed, and there is no geological evidence for the
fashionable view that the heart of the island is an outcrop of tufa rock.
Sand silting was common before the Tiber was scientifically regulated.
The explanation of the legend that crops were thrown into the river
is harder to seek. The change from a pastoral to an arable economy
must have taken place under the Tarquins (Clerici, Economia e
Finanza, 5 8 ; cf. confarreatio) and conservative opposition might have
been manifested in some such gesture. T h a t is more satisfactory than
to suppose with Castagnoli that the epithet Trvpo<f>6po$ applied to
Tarentum because of its sulphurous springs was misconstrued as
irvpo<f>6po$. There was little, if any, building on the island before it
was taken over as the centre of the cult of Aesculapius in 291 B.C. See
Besnier, Ulle Tiberine, 11 ff.; L. A. Holland, Janus, 180 fT.
5. 3 . tenui: 1. 4. 6.
mediis caloribus: 5. 31. 5 n.
5. 4. credo: an observation of L.'s own. T h e major construction was to
245
2- 5 - 4
509 B.C.
transform the island into the shape of a ship, complete with stern,
mast, &c. T h e surviving walls belong to the period 60-40 B.C., after
the date when Licinius Macer was writing. Less imposing repairs must,
of course, have been carried out in 291. The temples which L. alludes
to were, in addition to those of Aesculapius and Tiberinus, those of
Juppiter Jurarius, Semo Sancus, Faunus, and Veiovis. No porticus is
identified on the island.
tarn . . .firmaque: the text can only be translated as 'so that the
region should be as high as it is now and strong enough to bear
temples and porticoes as well as homes', which does grave violence
to tarn. \Uam is right, the point must be that the R o m a n engineers were
anxious to secure that the island should have strength as well as
height: 'that so high a region should be strong enough for heavy
buildings'. Either -que must be deleted (Novak) or read firma quoque
templis ac: for the misplacing and corruption of quoque cf. 3. 65. 6,
4. 56. 13 n. quoque is awkwardly placed in the manuscripts as it is.
There is no self-evident reason why the ground would need to be
more solid to support temples than houses. With -que, iam (Duker,
Gronovius, Ruperti) would be an unavoidable correction for tarn.
For firmus with dat. cf. Tacitus, Agricola 35.
5. 5. direptis: the narrative is resumed by picking u p the words with
which the digression opened (5. 1-2).
patri de liberis: the juxtaposition serves to underline the tragedy of
the situation. T h e same device is used by Virgil (Aeneid 6. 819 ff.) to
describe the same scene.
dedit: 'allotted'.
5. 8. supplicium: it were superfluous to seek constitutional propriety
in tales of this nature, although a process of law is implied in 5. 5
[damnatx).
voltusque et os: define pater more closely. Cf. 5. 42. 4.
eminente: 21. 35. 7. According to D.H., Plutarch, Polybius (6. 54),
and Valerius Maximus Brutus displayed no emotion. Editors have
tried to square the text of L. by emendation (emineretne animus patrius
Stroth; non eminente Sartorius; minime eminente Koch) but emineo is used
only where an emotion or the like is conspicuous and the pendant
ablative absolute characteristically conveys a detail of substance (cf.
1. 46. 9). L. has altered his original to give a more poignant ending.
Cf. the similar scene in the story of Coriolanus.
5. 9. pecunia: financial rewards for the information leading to the
detection of conspiracies against the state were standard in historical
times (32. 26. 14, 39. 19. 3).
5. 10. vindicta: for the process see above. T h e history of the term
remains in doubt. In the parallel legal process vindicatio, legis actio per
sacramentum in rem, if the object claimed was movable, the plaintiff
246
509 B.C.
2.5.10
2. 6-7- 4
509 B.C.
5 09 B.C.
2. 6. 2
2. 7- 2
5 09 B.C.
Deonna> 226 ff.). There might be a connexion with the cognomen Harsa
(3. 2. 2 n.).
Silvani: so also Val. Max.; D.H. and Plutarch name him Faunus.
The two deities, though later identified (Origo Gentis Rom. 4. 6) and
having much in common, were distinct. Silvanus, god of woods, had
no official place in the religious calendar, no priests, no festivals: his
was a personal cult, one of long standing (Cato, de Re Rust. 83), one
of wide appeal, as the quantities of dedications even from Rome
alone attest, and one which spread as his functions were extended or
his worship, as in Illyria, identified with other local gods. By contrast,
Faunus, whatever his origin, enjoyed official recognition through his
connexion with the Lupercalia and by a temple on the Insula Tiberina.
The complementary characters of the two deities were apt to lead to
assimilation. Here D.H. has probably translated Silvanus into Faunus
as being more familiar to a Greek audience and Plutarch followed.
See Klotz, R.E., 'Silvanus (1)'; Wissowa, Religion, 213 ff.; Latte,
Religionsgeschichte, 83-84.
haec dicta: as Doring and Ruperti saw, those words are an inter
polation from 7. 7 below.
uno . . . Romanum: exactly as the Argives claimed after the Battle
of the Champions (Herodotus 1. 82).
7 . 4 . annus: an aetiological myth to explain Roman mourning customs.
Paulus, Sent. 1. 21. l^parentes etfilii maiores sex annis anno lugeripossunt.
Such customs had to be dated back to the very beginning of the
Republic and the death of Brutus was not merely the first recorded
under the Republic: he was a. pater patriae (5. 49. 7 n.; for the develop
ment of the symbolism see Alfoldi, Mus. Helv. 9 (1952), 238).
7. 5-12. P. Valerius Poplicola
L. passes to the third internal threat to libertasthe alleged ambitions
of the consul Poplicola himself. The grounds for suspicion were afforded
by the age-old association of the Valerii with the Velia. The dwellings
and burial-grounds of the gentes were in early times local. The Claudii
continued to be buried sub Capitolio well down into the Republic
(Suetonius, Tiberius 1), and the Valerii were buried vrf OueAiW (D.H.
5. 48; Cicero, de Legibus 2. 58; Plutarch, Q.R. 79; cf. the elogia of
Messala Niger and Messalla Corvinus which came from the same area).
Equally strong is the tradition that the Valerii resided there. In addi
tion to the present story Cicero (deHar. Resp. 16) says that Poplicola was
given a house in Velia by public subscription; Valerius Antias (fr.
17 P. from Asconius) tells the same story of (M.') Valerius (Volesus)
Maximus, dictator in 494, presumably a Valerian variant to mitigate the
suggestion that Valerii could even be suspected oiregnum. The theme of
the dominating palace may be hellenistic; cf. Seneca, Thyestes 642 ff.
250
5 09 B.C.
2. 7- 5
2. 7- 12
509 B.C.
meaning may well be correct (cf. the plant vica pervica described by
Pliny, N.H. 21. 6 8 ; [Apuleius], Herb. 58); if so, the name should be
compared for its formation (verbal stem with suffix) with, e.g.,
Panda Cela and for its double character with, e.g., Aius Locutius. See
Weinstock, R.E., 'Vica P o t a \
L. does not imply that the shrine replaced the house of the Valerii;
it survived although the house had disappeared.
aedes: the addition is required. T h e only parallels for the ellipse of
aedes are from Vitruvius (3. 3. 2, 5).
8. Constitutional Arrangements
It has been noted that this chapter which is a unit by itself is awkwardly
fitted into context. T h e assembly in which the laws were passed
(latae deinde leges) is not that mentioned in 7. 7 and the summary in
8. 9 haec . . . gesta is unexpected. T h e reason is not that L. here turns
to a new source but rather that in his distribution of material he is
concerned to append the incidental events at Rome to one of the
primary internal threats.
T h e second of the two laws, that against attempts to subvert the
Republic, is not intrinsically suspect. Such consecrationes capitis occur
as penalties for heinous offences (3. 55. 7 n.). If it is authentic, it will
have been recorded subsequently in the Twelve Tables.
T h e first law, on provocation must be rejected. L. does not specify its
terms but Cicero (de Rep. 2. 53) and Pomponius (Dig. 1.2.2. 16) speak
of a limitation of the magistrates' power to execute or scourge without
appeal to the people, while D.H. (5. 19) and Plutarch (Poplicola 11)
extend its scope wider. Such democratic privileges are the endproduct of long evolution and we can trace the beginning of it in the
creation of the tribunate and the provisions of the Twelve Tables and
of the Valerio-Horatian laws of 449 (3. 55. 3 n.) where the magistrate
was empowered but not compelled to allow appeals and refer matters
from his own coercitio to the people. T h e law of 509 is fictitious and
the presence of an identical law in the proper historical sequence
under the year 300 (10. 9. 3-6), ascribed to the consul M . Valerius,
leaves no doubt that it is a doublet. There will, however, have been
a procedure under the earliest Republic which, although not akin to
provocation may have abetted the foisting of the Valerian law on to 509.
T h e first quaestores were not themselves a court: they were merely an
ad hoc jury appointed by the consuls to investigate crimes, especially
parricidium, when charges were brought by agnati. T h e quaestores deter
mined culpability. They convicted, but it was left to the magistrates
to sentence. This division of powers may be the basis behind which the
Valerian law took refuge. See the summary, with bibliography, by
Staveley, Historia 3 (1955), 4 I 3 ~ I 5 252
509 B.C.
2. 8. i
2.8.5
5 09 B.C.
508 B.C.
See Wissowa, R.E.,
pp. 209-10.
a.8.6
For Romans the interest in the war against Porsenna centred on the
three feats of Codes, Cloelia, and Scaevolailia tria Romani nominis
prodigia atque miracuta. T h e war with Porsenna is genuine enough.
Clusium (5. 33. 1-3 n.) and the inland cities of Etruria pursued a
different policy and enjoyed a different civilization from coastal cities
like Caere and Rome. They were aggressive and thrusting. Their
expansion into Campania at this period can be documented in detail.
With the collapse of a strong central government at Rome, the plain
of Latium was left unguarded. Porsenna took his opportunity, broke
down from the hills, and captured Rome. Such, in brief, are the facts
and a dim memory of them survived (Tacitus, Hist. 3. 72. 1; Pliny,
N.H. 34. 139: see Syme, Tacitus, 398).
Falsification played havoc with them. Patriotic sentiment could
not allow Rome to be captured. Rome is made to hold out gallantly
and Porsenna from being a ruthless foe is turned into a sentimental
king with an admiration for R o m a n virtues which passes into friend
ship. Porsenna is regarded as king of all Etruria and his attack on
Rome supposed to be motivated by a desire to restore the Tarquins to
their throne. Such an alliance makes nonsense of the facts. Caere,
Tarquinii, Rome, Cumae were all at the mercy of Porsenna. If Por
senna had acted to aid the Tarquins, it is inconceivable that they
should eventually have found refuge with Aristodemus at Cumae.
With the exception of the intrusive chapter 11 L. welds the material
together into a unit opened and closed by summaries of the military
situation (9. 1-8; 14-15) and containing in the middle the three
chief acts. These acts are in themselves similarly constructed. T h e
climax of each is a topographical detail (10. 12, 13. 5, 13. 11), the
nub of each is a moral {fides, audacia, constantia: notice the repeated
virtus (10. 12, 12. 14, 12. 15, 13. 6, 9, 11)), and each emphasizes that
such qualities are inspired by the love of liberty (10. 8). T h e three
stories form a tricolon crescendo leading up to Cloeliasupra Coclites
Muciosque (Cloeliae) /acinus esse. T h e phase is concluded by Porsenna's
recognition of Roman liberty (15). This arrangement is L.'s work
manship.
See the judicious essay by Ehlers, R.E., 'Porsenna'; Bayet, Recherches
philosophiques, 1931, 264 ff.; Burck 54; Hofmann, Livius-Interpretationen
63-64.
9 . 1. Lartem Porsennam: for the name, which occurs elsewhere only
as a Roman nomen (C.I.L. 6. 32919 Porsina) but is pure Etruscan in
morphology, see Ehleis, loc. cit.
255
5 08 B.C.
2. g. 1-3
Famine
Famine
486
477
476
456
453
440
433
2. 41. 8
2. 51.2,52. 1
D.H. 9. 25
3-31- 1
3- 32. 2
4. 12-16
4- 25. 2
Famine
Famine
Famine
Famine
Famine
Famine
Famine
411
4. 52. 5-8
Famine
Temple of Geres
Imports from Etruscan coast,
Cumae, Sicily
Imports from Sicily
Imports from Campania
5 08 B.C.
2.9.6
257
2. 9- 6
5 0 8 B.C.
pay for the salt and issue free returns to the people. (2) reading omne
sumptum sc. arbitrium, parallel to ademptum. So Gronovius (cf. P. Burman, De Vectigalibus, 1734, 92), on which Leggewie's omnino sumptum
is not an appreciable improvement. T h e second alternative is pre
ferable.
portoriis: so also D.H. 5. 22. 2 : Plutarch, Poplicola 11. T h e exemption
from customs and tribute is demonstrably anachronistic. Such duties
were only established throughout Italy at the end of the third century
(32. 7. 1-3). T h e political tendentiousness of the notice indicates that
it is a throw-back from the propaganda which culminated in the
abolition by Q,. Metellus of portoria in 60 B.C. (Dio 37. 51 ; Cicero,
ad Att. 2. 16. 1). Notice the strong resemblance between 9. 7-8 and
Sallust, Or. Maori 19-21.
liberos: a specious derivation of proletarii.
9. 8. malis artibus: 3. 19. 5 ; Praef. 9 n.
unus . . . universus: for the typically Livian cast of expression cf.
4. 6. 12.
10. Horatius Codes
T h e little which may be added to Walbank's lucid note on Polybius
6. 55. 1-4 is chiefly inspired by the article in Hommages a W. Deonna
by M . Delcourt.
T h e legend is of primeval antiquity. Its ancestry may go back to
Indo-European roots, for the legend of Odin has much in common with
it, but in R o m a n mythology the story of a deformed hero (Codes =
'one-eyed'; he was supposed either to have lost an eye in battle
(D.H. 5. 23. 2) or, according to Plutarch {Poplicola 16. 7), to have had
a congenital deformity) being precipitated from a bridge recalls and
parallels such ceremonies as the Argei (1. 21. 5 n.). Horatius, in fact,
performed a devotio to bless the Pons Sublicius. In time this simple
ritual was enveloped with historical circumstances and from being a
religious act became an historical fact. T h e main elements of the primi
tive story are, however, still preserved in Polybius: Codes drowned
and received no honours. At some date after Polybius an unidentified
statue was moved from the comitium to the Area Vulcani and identi
fied with Codes (Ver. Flaccus ap. Aul. Gell. 4. 5. 1). It must have
represented or been thought to represent a lame man. This dis
covery entailed modifications to the story. Codes must have survived
but been wounded (D.H. 5. 23-35) and the statue set u p to do him
honour.
It is this version of the story which L. recounts. Two features are
indicative of his treatment of it. All the other versions of the story leave
Codes either wounded or d e a d : in L. he returns incolumis. T h e motive
for this alteration is psychological. Just as Brutus is m a d e to show
258
5 08 B.C.
2. 10
2. 10. 7
508 B.C.
50 8 B.C.
2.10.12
Aristogeiton) and of a living not till after 400. It must have been a
cult-image or an ex voto.
uno die: no explanation of this record is forthcoming. It may have
been invented to balance the Prata Mucia (13. 5 n.). T h e gift of as
much land as you could plough in a day is mentioned as a common
reward for heroism by Pliny (N.H. 18. 9).
10. 13. fraudans: 5. 47. 8.
11. The Ambush
Douglas surprised the English garrison of Castle Douglas under Thirlwall by an identical stratagem (Scott, Tales of a Grandfather, 1. 81-82).
It is one of those classic ruses which belongs to the world of heroic
tales. It has no firm place here either (51. 2-4 nn.), D . H . (5. 22. 5 ; cf.
Plutarch, Poplicola 16. 3) places it not after Codes but after Mucius
which shows it to have been a fluid incident. Even in L. it is rather
roughly inserted. At the beginning we read ex agris pecus in urbem
compelleretur (11. 3) which picks up in urbem ex agris demigrant (10. 1);
at the end obsidio erat (12. 1) harks back to consiliis ad obsidendam
(urbem) versis (11. 1 ; for this technique cf. 5. 5 n.). L.'s reason for
including it at this point is to build up the suspense for Mucius and
Cloelia. Further evidence of its isolation may be seen in the lack of
clarity in the narrative. Valerius who was stationed on the Caelian
may be presumed, although it is not stated, to have led his troops out
of the Porta Caelimontana. He was the first to engage the enemy but
they are said to be versi in Lucretium (who was still in concealment at
the Porta Naevia) when they were attacked by the second detach
ment under Herminius from the rear. As the plan of Rome shows
it is indeed true that the Etruscans when engaged with Valerius would
have been facing Lucretiusfor both men were to the south of the
Etruscan position near the Porta Esquilinabut it is not what we would
expect L. to say (Glareanus followed by many editors would substitute
Valerium for Lucretium) and we are left with a very hazy picture of the
battle. T h e names of the commanders are, of course, merely supplied
at random from the Fasti and all the military details (cohortes, manipuli)
anachronistic.
1 1 . 4 . ultor . . . vindicem : the distinction is between private and official
vengeance; cf. Veil. Pat. 2. 7. 6.
1 1 . 9 . concurrit: not elsewhere used with ex insidiis. T h e stock phrase is
consurgere ex insidiis (50. 6 ; Caesar, B.C. 3. 37. 5), which Aritzenius,
followed by Cornelissen and R. Schneider, proposed to read here.
Normally the scene of the ambuscade and of the ensuing battle are the
same, but on this occasion Herminius who lay concealed had to cover
some ground before joining the assault, concurrere, therefore, rather
than consurgere fits the context.
261
2. II. 9
5 08 B.C.
508 B.C.
2. 12-13. 5
2. 12. 5
5 08 B.C.
5 08 B.C.
2. 12. II
L. is saying not merely that their business is with the king alone but
that they are going to attempt it singly. T h e two separate points
demand et.
12. 12. infensus: i. 53. 10 n.
per ambages: 1. 54. 8 n.
12. 13. 'en tibV: cf. Catullus 6 1 . 156 with KrolFs note.
12. 14. hostilia ausus: 1. 59. 4 ; Sallust, Jug. 3. 2, 88. 5 ; Tacitus, Hist.
4. 15. 2, 20. 4.
made: 4. 14. 7, 7. 10. 4, 7. 36. 5, 10. 40. 11, 22. 49. 9, 23. 15. 14.
T h e meaning and origin of this much disputed phrase seems to have
been satisfactorily settled. See Wiinsch, Rh. Mus. 69 (1914), 127 ff.;
Palmer, C.Q. 32 (1938), 57-62 ; Skutsch and Rose, ibid. 220-2 ; Gonda,
Mnem. 12 (1959), 137-8; Walde-Hofmann s.v. Derived from *magere
(cf. magnus), whose root meaning combined two ideas 'to make great',
with the accessory notion of superiority to h u m a n conditions, and 'to
gladden 5 ; cf. Vedic mdhati. macte is the vocative of the past participle,
used originally in invocations: cf. Cato, de Re Rust. 132 macte vino
inferio esto; Cicero, de Div. 1. 17-22. From it the verb macto was formed
which, like dono, is followed (i) by the accusative of the god and the abl.
of the offering to be m a d e ; (ii) by the accusative of the offering and
the person to whom it is offered. Hence macte virtute esse used of men
can be seen both from its syntax and from its sense to be no archaic
phrase. It is an antiquarian idiom concocted to convey something of
the spirit of 'Bravo'. Cf. Seneca, Epist. 66. 50 macte virtute esto sanguinulentis ex acie redeuntibus dicitur. Of much the same character are the other
expressions employed by Porsenna.
12. 15. ut: consecutive; 'to prove that you have won from me by
kindness what you could not have done by threats (I will tell you
that)
via grassaremur: cf. Sallust, Jug. 64. 5.
12. 16. cuiusque: the manuscripts here read utcumque ceciderit primi but
primi cannot be construed either as a gen. singular or nom. plural.
T h e sense intended might be 'as each man's lot turns u p ' or 'however
it will happen' or 'whenever it will happen'. In either of the last two
cases it would be necessary to delete primi (Crevier, Lallemand)
neither primo (Weissenborn) nor primis (Bayet) is intelligiblebut
both seem doubly repetitious when followed by quoad . . . dederit and
suo tempore. T h e mention of sors requires that Mucius should be talking
about the would-be assassins. Hence Madvig's ut cuiusque ceciderit (sc.
sors) primi. T h e only remaining difficulty is the use of cado for excido
(21.42. 3, 22.1.11,23. 3. 7). We must either explain it as an instance of
dramatic speech or, with Queck, read exciderit. cadit sors is found in
Cicero, de Div. 1. 3 4 : elsewhere only in the Vulgate and Carm. Epigr.
1158. 3265
2. 13- I
5 08 B.C.
5 08 B.C.
2. 13. 6-11
508 B.C.
2. 13- 10
13. 10. impubes: the short form, for impuberes, is also found at 9. 14. 11,
42. 63. 10, and e.g. Tacitus, Hist. 4. 14.
quod: not 'because 5 (Pike) but 'her choice' ( = quae res).
13. 1 1 . Romani: L heightens the importance of the reward by making
it the gift of the Romans as a whole. Piso makes the other girls re
sponsible, D . H . the fathers, Servius Porsenna himself.
virgo insidens equo: the statue had been destroyed by fire before
30 B.C. but was subsequently replaced (Seneca, Plutarch). Equestrian
statues, as a type, were borrowed from the Greeks (Pliny, N.H. 34. 19)
and cannot be earlier than the fourth century at Rome. Gamillus
is credited with one (8. 13. 9) as also is Q . Marcius Tremulus (Pliny,
N.H. 34. 23). T h e 'Cloelia' group must be older than Gato a n d so
cannot have represented Cloelia. T h e most likely theory is that it is
of a deity. Pais wished to connect Cloelia with Venus Gloacina
(3. 48. 5 n.) but there are no grounds for the connexion and no
evidence that Venus Cloacina was represented on horseback. Nor
should the coincidence of horse and water be pressed into service as
evidence that the group represented Neptune (or Poseidon). A more
probable identification, made by Schwegler, is with a statue of Venus
Equestris mentioned by Suidas (s.v. A<f>poSlr7j) and [Servius], ad Aen.
1. 720. [Servius] says that her worship was introduced by Aeneas, and
the Gloelii claimed a descent from a companion of Aeneas (Paulus
Festus 48 L.). See also E. H . Richardson, Mem. Am. Acad. Rome 21
(1953), 106-7; A. Andren, Hommages Herrmann, 98-99.
14. Bona Porsennae and Tuscus Vicus
The Bona Porsennae
Plutarch (Poplicola 19. 10) gives more details. When there is to be
a public auction of booty or proscribed property the heralds open
proceedings by announcing 'the belongings of Porsenna*TI\JA]V TO>
avhpl TTJs xdpLTos atSiou iv rrj fJivrjfXT] Sia^vXdrrovrcs The explanation
must be tendentious for the ceremony implies enmity not friendship
and the tradition that turned Porsenna into an unequivocal admirer
of R o m e was a late fiction. T h e custom should be compared with the
audio Veientium. It will have been a semi-religious commemoration of
a R o m a n success. See Ehlers, R.E., 'Porsenna'.
14. 4. inpotestate: N had in potestatem, which many scholars, including
Gronovius, Brakman, and J . S. Reid, retain, esse in potestatem is
occasionally found (Lex Salpens. = C.I.L. 2. 1963; Modest. Dig.
38. 15. 1. 2 ; Gaius, Inst. 1. 55) and is offered as a reading by the
manuscripts in a few passages of Cicero (pro Lege Manilia 3 3 : cf. Aul.
Gell. 1. 7. 16; Cicero, Verr. 2. 67. 5. 98). This distribution prompts
Bulhert's judgement (Thes. Ling. Lat., 'in', 795. 15 ff.): 'usus vulgaris
268
5 0 8 B.C.
2. 14. 4
2. I4- 9
5 08 B.C.
temple (cf. Tacitus, Annals 4. 65). In truth, there had always been
a sizeable Etruscan population at Rome from early times and it was
inevitable that they should have congregated together. There was
also a vicus Tuscus in Pisidian Antioch (C.I.L. 3. 6837). See PlatnerAshby s.v.; Welin, R.E., 'Tuscus vicus'.
15. Peace with Porsenna
The tailpiece to the history of Rome's war with Porsenna is provided
by the embassy which persuades him to recognize R o m a n libertas.
Critics have attempted to dissociate this chapter from the preceding
narrative. Soltau and Seemuller, arguing that there can only have
been a single peace with Porsenna, saw a doublet in the condiciones of
13. 3 and the pax fida of 15. 7. Soltau further claimed that Porsenna's
embassy in 15. 1 was so unmotivated that it must have belonged in
reality to the events related by L. under the preceding year. T h e whole
course of the negotiations between Rome and Porsenna was a creation
of latter-day historians and could be extended to taste. Moreover, 15.6
patently picks up and continues 13. 4. See also 15. 1 n. The chapter,
therefore, belongs closely with the preceding narrative and forms a
fitting conclusion to it. Paxfida cum Porsenna.
T h e Tarquins had their contact with the Mamilii and Tusculum
(1. 49. 9 n.) and the tradition that both the Tarquins and Octavius
Mamilius fought on the same side in the Battle of Lake Regillus is
unlikely to be an invention. It makes good sense. O n the other hand,
the reason of Porsenna for abandoning the Tarquins is far too highminded. As has been shown above, it was most unlikely that he ever
helped them. If the Tarquins did go to Tusculum, they will have
gone from Caere. T h e whole point of the episode is to underline the
great truth that libertas and Rome are synonymousa truth so magni
ficent that it impresses even a barbarian king. It is stated with all the
rhetorical power at L.'s command (15. 3 n.) and is accepted with
equal dignity (15. 5 n.).
15. 1. For a full discussion of the textual difficulties of this passage
see C.Q. 9 (1959), 270-1.
All attempts to secure from the manuscripts two pairs of consuls
are misconceived. T h e separated praenomen in \i (Purius P.) is not a
trace of a telescoped name. I n several manuscripts p. or / . = proprium
(sc. nomen) is inserted before a name to indicate to the reader, in de
fault of capital letters, that he is coming to a proper name (O. Rossbach, B. Ph. W.y 1920, p . 697, n. 1; E. Harrison, Cambridge University
Reporter, 27 May 1930). T h e phenomenon is frequent in N ; cf.
2. 43- 3> 5 1 - 4 61. 1, 64. 2, 3. 12. 5.
Thus L.'s list of consuls for 506 was P. Lucretius and P. Valerius
Publicola. It disagrees with the conventional list given by D . H . (from
270
5 0 6 B.C.
2. 15. I
2. I 6 - I 8
5 05 B.C.
with the Sabines; cf. 18. 2 n.) but even here there was wide scope for
doubt and distortion. Other events, such as the migration of the
Claudii or the activities of Octavius Mamilius, were handed down not
in records but in traditions of varying reliability. T h e credentials of
each are considered in turn below.
D.H. follows a separate tradition from L. In addition to giving a
different chronology for Lake Regillus (19. 2 n . ; D.H. expressly says
that the chronology adopted by L. was that given by Licinius Macer),
he knows nothing of the revolt of Cora and Pometia and the two wars
against the Aurunci. Instead he has four wars against the Sabines and
places Cora and Pometia in 495. Now it has long been realized that L.
duplicates the history of Cora and Pometia, for under 495 (22. 2) he
again speaks of their revolt and suppression, and this later section
is unquestionably derived from Valerius Antias. It follows that the
first account of their revolt (16. 8) cannot be from Valerius Antias.
When it is noticed that L. cites a variant tradition that makes M \
Valerius the first dictator and tacitly agrees with Licinius Macer
concerning the first ovatio (16. 9 n.) it can hardly be denied that he
must be using Licinius Macer as his main authority.
T h e paucity of facts afforded little scope for embellishment. T h e
facts are presented soberly and annalistically. They pave the way for
the great account of Lake Regillus.
16. 1. M. Valerius: a brother of Publicola. See also 30. 4 n.
P. Postumius: 16. 7, his filiation is given as Q.f. by D.H. 6. 69. 3
and the cognomen Tubertus by D.H., Cicero, de Leg. 2. 58, and Pliny,
N.H. 15. 125. For his ovatio see 16. 9 n. and for a possible grandson
4. 23. 6 n. T h e origin of the family is undisclosed. They were a patrician
family but not one of the gentes maiores; they may have come to Rome
with the Tarquins from Etruria. Diodorus (16. 82. 3) mentions
nocTTOfiiov TOV Tvpprjvov a pirate in 339, and a M . Postumius from
Pyrgi is prominent a century later (25. 3. 8-5. 1). Different branches
of the family played a leading role throughout the course of R o m a n
history. See Miinzer, R.E., 'Postumius (64)'.
cum Sabinis: the Sabine menace had been dormant for many years
but Porsenna's incursions coupled with the collapse of the central
government at Rome may have activated them again. T h e record is
inherently probable. T h e triumph figured in the Fasti Triumphales:
M. Valer[ius Volusif.-n. Volusus] cos. [de Sabineis
P. Postu[mius Qsf*-n. Tubertus] cos. [de Sabineis.
It is the first of the Republican triumphs recorded by L. although the
Triumphal Fasti have regal entries and also allot a triumph in 509
to P. Valerius Poplicola over the Veientanes and Tarquinienses. The
authenticity of the records depends in part upon the history of the
ceremony. T h e ancients were unanimous in believing that the triumph
272
505 B.C.
2. 16. i
814432
273
2. i6. 4
504 B.C.
libertas, who are only induced to move to Rome when the oppressive
tyranny of the Tarquins has been cast off.
Appius Claudius may once have borne the praenomen Attus. It is a
Sabine name (cf. C.I.L. 11. 6706. 2 At. Fertrio(s)) carried also by Attus
Navius (1. 36. 4 n.). L., who writes Attius, may have misunderstood it
as a nomen, for there was a gens Attia. But Appius' nomen cannot have
been Clausus. T h e original Sabine form is Claudius from which
Clausus is derived by the regular assimilation of dentals before con
sonant i in almost all the non-Latin dialects of Italy (Conway ad l o c ) .
Antiquarians, noticing the form Clausus in Sabine territory at a
much later date, assumed that it was the primitive form. For his
subsequent history see 21. 5, 29. 9, 30. 2. An Elogium set up in the
late Republic in his honour (Inscr. Ital. 13. 65) also adds that he
was quaestor. See Munzer, R.E., 'Claudius (321)'; Mommsen,
Staatsrecht, 3. 16 n. 1, 175 n. 3 ; L. R . Taylor, Voting Districts, 35-37.
turbatoribus belli: this difficult expression is explained by Ernesti
(Opuscule 322-3) who calls attention to the use of the verb turbare in
the sense of comitate (cf, e.g., Tacitus, Annals 4. 6 7 : cf. the Greek
7rdAe/xos> erapdxOr] in Dem. de Cor. 151). belli is needed to balance
pacis which rules out the conjectures of T a n . Faber (reipublicae), Clericus
(plebis), or H. J. Muller (vulgi). If turbatoribus is wrong, Novak's concitoribus (23. 4 1 . 2, 29. 3. 3) is better that Gronovius's auctoribus or
Crevier's hortatoribus. There are other signs of careless writing (18. 2 n.),
which may excuse the text.
Inregillo: N had cnregillo or the like. T h e Claudii originated from
Regillum (Suetonius, D.H., Appian) but a wrong identification of
cognomina by a scholar, perhaps due to the confusion of Crassin. RegilL
with Crass. Inregill. (see the Fasti for 450) led to a town Inregillum
and a cognomen Inregillensis (8. 15. 5 ; Fasti Cap.) being postulated.
T h e corruption in N favours Inregillo here too and shows the late date
of L.'s source.
magna: D.H. says 5,000.
clientium: 3. 44. 5 n.
1 6 . 5 . vetus . . . appellati: appellata N . T h e problem here is to determine
the meaning of the clause qui ex eo venirent agro. If it means 'those who
come from this district across the Aniofor there were other members
in quite different areas of Italy who were added subsequently to the
tribewere called 'Old Claudians', it will be necessary with Madvig
to read appellati (cf. 1. 43. 2). But the subjunctive is unexplained
(Virtually oblique': Conway), venirent is a misleading term (censerentur Seyffert) and the whole clause qui. . . venirent in the natural
run of the sentence is expected to follow after the plural tribulibus. I
prefer an alternative explanation, putting commas after tribus and
agro and taking qui . . . venirent with tribulibus. 'The tribe was called
274
504 B.C.
5
2. 16. 5
'Old Claudian and there were later added to it new members who
came from that area.' I take eo loco to refer to the land given to the
Glaudii rather than their Sabine homeland. T h e original members
of the tribe were all Claudii, subsequently other residents in the area
where the Claudii settled were given citizenship and enrolled in the
same tribe. A particular example is the case of Fidenae which after its
incorporation was enrolled in the Claudian tribe (C.I.L. i 2 . 1709).
Vetus is to distinguish them from the other pockets of the tribe created
throughout Italy after 241.
L. seems to date the creation of the tribe to the current year but
D.H. in his parallel account says it was created avv XPVC9 after the
migration of the Claudii. Geographical considerations suggests that it
must have been after the fall of Crustumeria, so that both the Claudia
and the Crustumina will belong to 495 (21. 7 n.).
inter patres: 4. 4. 7. L. means that he was m a d e a patrician rather
than a senator.
16. 6. timeriposset: timerepossent N, defended by Drakenborch, is at
least as good.
triumphantes: the Triumphal Fasti differ slightly: P. Valeriu[s Volusi
f.-n.] Poblicol[a II cos I IIIde Sa]bine[is] el Veient[ibus . . . non]as Mai,
16. 7. P . Valerius: the formal vote of a public funeral was recorded in
the Annales and was used by historians as the basis of a brief obituary
(cf. Seneca, Suas. 6. 2 1 : see Syme, Tacitus, 312). T h e earliest notices
are not above suspicion (33. i o n . ) and may be no more than anti
quarian reconstruction.
Agrippa Menenio: one of the oldest R o m a n families, giving its n a m e
to the tribe. They perhaps came from or at least owned land in the
region of Pedum and Praeneste (L. R. Taylor, Voting Districts, 4 3 - 4 8 :
the name is Etruscan). They were in historical times plebeian (4. 53. 2,
6. 19. 5, 7. 16. 1) and there is no reason to suppose that they were not
always plebeian (32. 8). T h e presence of plebeian gentes in the early
Fasti is well attested. Agrippa is remembered for the part which he
played in the First Secession (32. 8-12).
P. Postumio: 16. 1. T h e absence of iteration is not remarkable, for
the practice of noting the number of consulships is the exception
rather than the rule until the institution of the consular tribunate. I
have noticed it only at 2. 8. 9, 16. 2, 3. 22. 1, 66. 1, and 4. 8. 1, whereas
there are twenty-three occasions when possible iterations are omitted.
The incidence of cognomina is equally random.
de publico'. 33. 10 n.
luxere: Eutropius (1. n ) and the author of the de Viris Illustr. (15. 6)
specify a year's mourning. Hence Kohler wished to add annum after
Brutum: it would be better after matronae.
16. 8. coloniae: when last heard of, Pometia had been recaptured from
275
2. i6. 8
503 B.C.
The
503 B.C.
2. iG. 9
5 02 B.C.
it with the Vecilius mons mentioned in 3. 50. 1 (n.). Neither nomen nor
cognomen suggests Etruscan forebears, which may account in some
measure for his part in the negotiations with the Latins. Later Cassii,
who came to prominence in the second century, were plebeian and
employed the cognomen Longinus but there is nothing to prevent their
belonging to the same gens, for Sp. Cassius may well have been a
plebeian himself and a moneyer (L. Cassius Caeicianus c. 93 B.C.:
Sydenham no. 594) certainly claims him as an ancestor. For his
treaty with the Latins see 33. 4 n.; for the dedication of the temple of
Ceres 3. 55. 7 n.; for his conspiracy and death 2. 41. 1 n. D.H. credits
him with a victory over the Sabines and a triumph.
17. 2. igni: cf. 4. 33. 2 n.a conventional stratagem without any
basis in fact. Equally hackneyed is the language in which it is described.
For caede . . . complent cf. 8. 39. 1; Sallust, CatiL 51. 9 (Skard); for
inexpiabili odio cf. 39. 51. 4.
17. 3. sed utrum: sedverum nomen N, which would imply that either L.'s
source gave a corrupt name (i.e. Caelius instead of Cassius) or that
L. thought that he had superior evidence which refuted the statement
which he found in his source ('the sources gave a name but not the
right one'). The only critic to defend the manuscript reading is
Bitschofsky who sees a contrast between nomen and titulus (cf. Ael.
Lamp. Diad. 6. 4 = Script. Hist. Aug.). This is far-fetched. The de
cisive passage is 10. 37. 14: Fabius ambo consules . . . res gessisse scribit
traductumque in Etruriam exercitumsed ab utro consule non adiecit. Lipsius
was the first to conjecture utrum for verum, which must be right. The
change is minimal. But, like Drakenborch after him, he retained
nomen. nomen makes poor sense. It was not so much the name as the
identity of the consul which was in doubt. I would delete nomen with
Hertz and Freudenberg. Nothing is gained by F. Walter's repunctuationsed utrum? auctores non adiciunt (cf. 7. 33. 2, 44. 13. 4). Most
editors have neglected the evidence of 10. 37. 14 and emended the
passage along different lines {sed viri nomen Heerwagen; verum nomen
Alschefski; sed nomen Madvig; ceterum nomen Gundel).
17. 4. relatus: Duker's certain correction of N's relictus (cf. 20. 9).
maiore: N adds bellum, which is retained by Weissenborn and
Pettersson as a kind of zeugma, gestum being understood from inlata
(cf. 25. 6. 19, 39. 25. 16, 42. 49. 10), but it breaks the close connexion
between ira and viribus.
17. 5. mole belli: cf. Virgil, Aeneid 5. 439; a Livian cliche: cf. pcoXos
2. 17. I
'ApT]OS.
in eo esset: 'the situation had reached the point that . . .'. In this
idiom res is usually expressed (8. 27. 3, 28. 22. 8 sing.; 30. 19. 3,
33. 41. 9 plur.). Sigonius could find no parallel in L. or elsewhere
for the ellipse of res and inserted res before esset. Unless the ellipse be
278
502 B.C.
2- 17- 5
2. i8. 3
5 01 B.C.
attack by the Latins ('quae terrore superaret helium LatinurrC Wex). The
solution lies elsewhere. If quod. . . constabat defines the fear and the
fear is additional to the disturbances at Rome, then that fear must be
the subject of accesserat and we are forced to read supra (adv.) belli
Latini metus [id] quoque accesserat quod . . .; cf. 27. 10 super haec timor
incessit Sabini belli, id is interpolated from id quoque in 18. 4.
triginta: the history of the political league of the Latin states can be
traced in outline. It is to be distinguished from the religious community
of Latins who met annually at the cult of Juppiter Latiaris on Mte.
Cavo, whose names are preserved by Pliny (jV.i/. 3. 68). T h e moving
spirits of the political league were Aricia (1. 50. 3 n.) and Tusculum
(1. 49. 9 n.) and the fragment of Cato (58 P.) gives a list of the league
at a very early d a t e : Cora (16. 8 n.), Pometia (1. 4 1 . 7 n.), Ardea
(1. 57. 1 n.), Lanuvium, Tibur, and the Rutulus populus. T h a t was
before Rome under Tarquin had secured association with the com
munity. At the other end of its existence, in 338 13 members survived
Norba (34. 6 n.), Pedum (39. 4. n.), Cora, Aricia, Ardea, Circeii
(1. 56. 3 n.), Nomentum (1. 38. 4 n.), Praeneste (2. 19. 2 n.), Setia,
Signia (1. 56. 3 n.), Tibur, Lanuvium, and Lavinium. At some point
between these two dates the league totalled 30 and the number gave
its name to the community, surviving long after the arithmetical
reality had passed. D . H . 5. 61 ascribes the increase to 30 to the
current period leading up to the treaty of Sp. Cassius. His list is
ApSearcbV) ApiKTjvcov, BoiaXavwv (BotXXavwv S c h w e g l e r ) , BovfievTavcov,
Kopvibv, KapvcvTCLVtoV, KipKairjTtov, KopioXavcov, KopPivTa>v> Kafiavcov
(Kopavtov N i e b u h r ) , Qoprivcicov, Ta^iajv, Aavpevrivcov,
Aavovivltav,
Aa^iviaTwVy Aa^iKavwv, Najficvravtov, Mcopeavtov (Nwpfiavtov Gelenius),
npaiveGTlvtov,
77e8ava>v, KopKorovXavwvy
EarpiKavwv^ ZJfanTTrjviajv,
UrjTtvwVy Tifiovprivcov, TVOKXCLVWV, ToXrjpivwv, TeXXrjvlajv, OvcXiTpavwv,
501 B.C.
2. 18. 3
2. i8. 4
501 B.C.
dictators (18. 5 n.), but if Larcius were the first dictator and Postumius
were dictator in 499, Larcius could only have been dictator in 501,
his first consulship, not 498, his second. T h e truth is given by Varro
(ap. Macrobius 1.8. 1) who states that Larcius as dictator dedicated
the temple of Saturn in 497 (21. 1 n . ; cf. D.H. 6. 1.4). This statement
must have had documentary backing behind it. T h e Latin threat was
gathering strength in the early years of the century. Anticipating an
emergency Rome appointed her first dictator in 497 but the threat
did not actually materialize until the following year. T h e confusion
was caused, at least in part, by the misdating of the Battle of Lake
Regillus and the assumption that dictators held office in the same years
that they were consuls.
See the full discussion and bibliography given by Staveley, Historia
5 (1956), 101-7; add von Liibtow, Das Romische Volk, 205 fF.
18. 4. sed: N reads sed nee quo anno nee quibus facti consulibus. facti is
untranslatable and may be deleted as an anticipation of factione
below or, less well, transposed after essent (Welz). Exception has also
been taken to nee quo anno on the score that it involves a zeugma, 'it
is not known either in what year (it happened) or which consuls
were mistrusted'. T h e zeugma, or rather the ellipse of the verb in
the first member of a two-member interrogative clause, can be justified
(cf. 21. 4, 6. 18. 16, 23. 34. 5, 27. 13. 3, 30. 38. 3, 34. 2. 5) and the
convention of specifying dates both anno and consulibus (cf. 2 1 . 4 ; Ovid,
Ars Amat. 2. 663-4) is too characteristic to be sacrificed. So also H . J .
Miiller, Pettersson, and Bayet.
18. 5. consulates legere: as the text stands consulates must be the object
and not the subject (S. P. Thomas, Symb. Arct. 1 (1922), 53) of legere,
since L. goes on to argue about the consular status of the rival claimants.
T h e subject will be Romani or the Senate understood. T h e fact that
the actual nomination rested solely with the consuls is irrelevant. One
difficulty is that of the early dictators known to us several had not in
fact held the consulship or its equivalent. Such are M \ Valerius in
494 (18. 6 n.), Q . Servilius in 435 and 418, A. Postumius in 431, and
P. Cornelius in 408. T h e law de dictatore creando, if it existed, must have
been specifically concerned with the particular appointment of
Larcius and not have been a general law laying down the terms and
conditions of the dictatorship in general, but it cannot be genuine.
I suspect that Licinius invented the law to accord with later practice.
T h e sense of the passage would be greatly improved if, with Karsten,
we read consulares legere (inf.) lex iubebat.
18. 6. M\ Valerium: the son of M . Valerius consul of 505 (16. 1) to
be distinguished from his uncle the dictator of 494 (30. 5 n., 3. 7. 6 n.).
Festus (216 L.), following the same source, also credits him with the
first dictatorship but it is a clear case of the gens Valeria claiming pre282
5 0 1 B.C.
2. 18. 6
2. ig. i
499 B.C.
499 B.C.
2. 19. 2
2. 19-20
499 B.C.
accept, therefore, the battle as genuine and 496 as the most probable
date. For the site see 19. 3 n.
For L. himself the chief attraction lies in the telling of the story.
Several of the actual incidents of it are modelled directly on Homer.
Thus the encounter between Valerius and Tarquinius (20. 1-3) is
exactly modelled on the episode of Paris and Menelaus in the Iliad
(3. 15 ff). Like Tarquinius, Paris begins by daring the Greeks to fight:
like Tarquinius, ai/j 8' irdpatv etV tOvos ix^T0 KVP7 dX^vojv when
Menelaus appeared. No sooner has Valerius conquered than he is
struck by an arrow: so Menelaus is wounded, albeit not mortally, by
the archer Pandarus after his victory over Paris (4. 104-54). T h e
wounding of Aebutius may be compared with the wounding of
Agamemnon (11. 251-74) while Mamilius who is struck on his chest
but recovers to inspire the Latins to new efforts finds his model in the
286
499 B.C.
2. I9~20
VCFfALVTjV.
procerum: 2. 46. 7 n.
19. 6. aetate . . . gravior: 3. 33. 6, 5. 12. n , 7. 39. 1, 10. 34. 12; Virgil,
Aeneid 9. 246; Ovid, Her. 8. 31.
19. 7. impetum dederat: 51. 4, 3. 5. 10, 4. 28. 1, 5. 38. 3, 9. 43. 15,
10. 4 1 . 9; 37. 24. 2. T h e use of dare for facet'e in such periphrases is
common enough, but impetum dare is only found before L. in Bell.
Hisp. 25. 8 and after him in Tacitus, Annals 2. 20 (cf. Seneca, JV.Q,6. 7. 4), which suggests that like impressionem dare it is military slang.
contraque: there is no need to alter the received contra quern. For the
287
2. ig. 7
499 B.C.
use of the relative cf. 5. 47. 8, 9. 40. 10, 10. 18. 9, 27. 16. 8
(Pettersson).
19. 8. venientium: the repetition after veniens is harsh and unlooked for
in such a carefully written narrative. Gronovius's invehentium, although
it cannot claim any manuscript authority, is attractive (cf. 1. 30. 10,
2. 49. 11, 10. 5. 7, 26. 4. 8, 29. 2. 12 et al.).
19. 10. films: presumably Titus Tarquinius, since Sextus (1. 60. 2)
and Arruns (2. 6. 9) are both dead.
20. 3 . labentibus . . . defluxit: an imitation of the Homeric 6 8' VTTTIOS
ovhti plaOr} (Iliad 7. 145, 11. 144, 12. 192). T h e use oidefluo is confined
to verse (Bibac.^/r. 8 M. habenas misit equi lapsusque in humum defluxit; Ovid,
Met. 6. 229; Virgil, Aeneid 11. 501). retardo is found only here in L.
20. 5. delectam: such corps d9 elites were first organized by Scipio
Africanus Maior (29. 1. 1).
20. 8. insignem veste armisque: cf. Virgil, Aeneid 6. 403.
20. 9. veruto: 1. 43. 6.
20. 10. descendant: 24. 44. 10, 39. 31. 11. Elsewhere descendere ex equis
is only found in BelL Hisp. 4. 2, 15. 2 and the Scrip tores Historiae
Augustae which is decisive for its military tone; cf. Cicero, Cato 34.
T h e curiosity of cavalry dismounting and fighting on foot may be
instructive. There is good evidence to show that the original equites
were not cavalry in the proper sense but mounted hoplites who used
their horses, as Homeric heroes their chariots, to get to and from the
scene of battle. If so, it looks as if a genuine detail has been remem
bered about the conditions of primitive fighting. See W. Helbig,
Die Equites als berittene Hopliten; H. Hill, Roman Middle Class, 2.
dicto paruere: 18. 8, 9. 32. 4, 4 1 . 13. This synonym for the more
technical dicto oboediens esse (5. 3. 8) is not found in classical prose,
only in Plautus, Pers. 812; Terence, Hec. 564; Virgil, Aeneid 1. 695,
3. 189, 7. 4 3 3 ; cf. Ennius, Ann. 299 V.
20. 12. Castori: it was commonly believed that the worship of the
Dioscuri reached R o m e in two distinct ways. T h e oldest cult was the
cult of the Penates who were, and were identified with, the Dioscuri
([Servius], ad Aen. 3.12; other references in Weinstock J.R.S. 50 (1960),
112-13). Tradition avers that they came to R o m e from Lavinium
and there is nothing to confute and much to support tradition on the
point. T h e Penates must antedate the temple of Castor (and Pollux)
by long enough for the essential identity of the two cults to be obfus
cated. Castor and Pollux were venerated at many places, at Larinum,
Ardea, Cora, and Ostia, but their principal shrine was at Tusculum
(Cicero, de Div. 1. 9 8 ; C.I.L. 14. 2620). Lake Regillus lay in agro
Tusculano so that it was natural to think that the Romans vowed a
temple to the Brothers for having changed their allegiance and aided
288
499 B.C.
2. 20. 12
the Romans in battle. Not strictly an evocatio, but analogous, and the
cult must have come from a Latin rather than a Greek source for the
decemviri s.f. had no say over it. Such seems to have been the belief of
the ancients too. A coin of L. Servius (Sulpicius) Rufus c. 43 B.C.
(Sydenham no. 1081) depicts on the obverse the Dioscuri and on the
reverse a view of Tusculum with a gateway inscribed TUSGUL. A com
plicating factor is the recent discovery at Lavinium of a bronze tablet
dated to the fifth century and inscribed GASTOREI PODLOVQVEIQVE
QVROIS (see Castagnoli, Studi e Materiali 30 (1959), 109 ff.). It
indicates that the cult of the brothers as Castor and Pollux as well as
Penates was prevalent at Lavinium at much the same time as the
dedication of the temple at Rome. T h e importance of the dis
covery should not, however, override the much greater weight of
evidence in favour of a Tusculan origin. For the title and date of the
temple see 42. 5 n.
L. blandly omitted the theophany which was the motive for the
vow and the climax of the engagement. T h e participation of the
Dioscuri in battle is a common Greek tale (cf. their presence at Aegospotamoi; the Battle of the Sagra: see Frazer, The Magic Art, 2. 50),
but after Lake Regillus their next activity on R o m a n behalf is not till
Pydna in 168 (Cicero, deJVat. Deorum 2. 6 ; Val. Max. 1.8. 1) and then
against the Cimbri (Pliny, N.H. 7. 86) and at Pharsalus (Dio 41. 61).
This should not, however, lead us to believe that the story of their
presence at Lake Regillus was a late invention based on Greek history.
Theophanies in the heat of combat are more widely current than that.
T h e Romans believed that the Dioscuri sided with them. For other
examples see Mayor on Cicero, loc. cit. See Wissowa, Religion, 268 ff.;
Wilamowitz, Sappho u. Simon. 234; Mattingly and Robinson, P.B.A.
18 (1932), 245 ff.; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 173 ff. For the temple see
Platner-Ashby s.v. See also R . Bloch, Rev. de Phil. 34 (i960), 182-93.
20. 13. triumphantes: a loose use. Only the dictator triumphed :
A. Postu[mius P.f.-n. Albus] Regil[lensis diet, de Latineis].
2 I . 4 9 8 - 4 9 5 B.C.
2 1 . 1. Q.Cloelius: 13. 6 n.
A. Sempronius: consul again with M . Minucius in 34. 7. Both con
sulship shave been disputed as late interpolations (a Minucius was
consul in 305, a Sempronius in 304) but the Minucii were an oldestablished family (3. 33. 3 n.) and the Sempronii supply consular
tribunes in 444, 425, 420, 416, and consuls in 444 (but see 4. 7. i o n . )
and 423. In historical times they were a plebeian family, which has
been held against their early magistracies. Even if a transitio adplebem
is excluded there is nothing to prevent plebeians having held the
814432
289
2. 21. I
497 B.C.
consulship in the early years (cf. Cassius, Brutus, Menenius) and their
prominence in the lists of consular tribunes is in favour of plebeian
status. A. Sempronius, at least, must be genuine, for he is among those
listed by Festus (180 L.) as having been cremated in the Circus.
2 1 . 2. Saturno: the construction of the temple is attributed variously
to Tullus Hostilius, Tarquinius Superb us (Varro ap. Macrobius
i. 8. i ) , T . Larcius (D.H. 6. 1.4), Postumus Cominius, or L. Furius,
trib. mil. (Gellius ap. Macrobius: see 4. 25. 5 ; he was perhaps re
sponsible for the restoration after the Gallic sack), in addition to
Sempronius and Minucius. There was clearly no substantive evidence,
but the cult itself must be of high antiquity. T h e name Saturn is
Etruscan (cf. Volturnus, J u t u r n a ) and there was an archaic altar
on the site of the later temple (Festus 430 L.). T h e Saturnalia also
must, in origin at least, be an old winter festival. Although there is no
connexion between Saturnus and sata (crops), yet the festival was held
on 17 December, at the end of the year, and the sigillaria and other magic
spells are proper to festivals celebrating the end of one agricultural year
and seeking success for the next. A temple is likely to have been con
structed in the opening decades of the Republic to supersede the primi
tive altar but the notice that dated the institution of the Saturnalia
to the same date is simply a confusion based on the coincidence of the
natalis of the temple with the festival (C.I.L. i 2 , pp. 245, 337). U n d e r
the year 217 L. writes (22. 1. 20): 'Saturnalia diem ac noctem clamata
populusque eum diem festum habere ac servare in perpetuum iussus'.
W h a t L., forgetful of the present passage, mistakenly regards as the
institution of the Saturnalia, was a radical reorganization of it under
Greek influence which introduced a lectisternium and other ceremonies
derived from the worship of Kronos. See Wissowa, Religion, 204 ff.;
Platner-Ashby s.v.; Herbig, Philologies 74 (1917), 446 ff.; Latte,
Religionsgeschichte, 254-5; ^. Gjerstad, Hommages Grenier, 2. 757 ff.
2 1 . 3 . dubiae: D.H. gives an extended account of the affair. T h e
suspicion looks like a precedent for domestic malice between the
Verginii and the Postumii but no historical issue comes to mind.
T h e Postumii seem to have broken with the Glaudian-Fulvian party
in 180 B.C. and a L. Verginius served under Q . Claudius in 207 (see
Scullard, Roman Politics, igo ff.).
2 1 . 4 . tanti errores implicant temporum: is taken to mean 'such mistakes
of date perplex (the historian)' but the absolute use of implico is un
paralleled and cannot be justified on the pretext that L. is here speak
ing propria persona or that there are other inelegancies in this scrappy
chapter (21. 6 n.), as Brakman would defend it. An object for implicant
must be provided. Duker read tempora, but it is not so much the
years that are confused as the reckoning of years, i.e. temporum
(jationem) (Wolfflin, H . J . and M . Muller). errores, however, is
290
496 B.C.
2. 21. 4
2. 2 1 . 6
4 9 5 B.C.
coepere: the use of the active of coepisse with passive infinitives not
used medially is avoided by Cicero and Caesar. With fieri L. else
where uses coeptum esse (3. 65. 7, 8. 2. 6, 9. 42. 7, 43. 16, 21. 58. io,
24- i9- 9>47- 4, 48. i3> 25. 1 1 . 6 , 3 4 . i 3 J 2 7 . 4 2 . 5 5 3 I - 2 3 - 7, 37- J 8 . 9>
38. 4 1 . 7, 44. 13. 4) but the solitary exception is to be claimed not as
a poeticism but as an oversight. In this passage L. is briefly and some
what casually listing a number of events which have no interest for
him since they have no historical possibilities. For similar off-hand
uses of language see Introduction p . 21. See Wolfflin, Livian. 21 ;
Stacey, Archiv f. Lat. Lex. 10 (1898), 6 6 ; Gries, Constancy, 6 6 - 6 7 ;
Lofstedt, Syntactica, 2. 123; Riemann 208-13.
2 1 . 7. Signia: 1. 56. 3 n. It might seem an impossibly bold move at
this date to colonize Signia, an outpost as far from Tusculum as
Tusculum was from Rome, but Volscian hostilities were a real threat
and the decisive Battle of Lake Regillus, by uniting a major part of the
Latin world behind Rome, had enabled the allies to face the Volscians on the frontiers of Latium. Signia is not to be thought of as a
colonia in the later sense but as a blockhouse dividing the Hernici from
the Volscians and keeping watch over the Trerus valley.
una et viginti: N read una et triginta (or the equivalent numerically).
una et viginti is the reading solely of FB which do not constitute
'excellent ms. authority' (L. R. Taylor, Voting Districts, 6 n. 11) but
twenty-one is undoubtedly the correct total. There is a record of four
new tribes in 387 and of two each in 358, 332, 318, 299, and 241 which,
since the final number of tribes was never more than thirty-five,
means that there were twenty-one before 387 (cf. 4. 46. 1). Excluding
the four urban tribes, and the Claudia and Clustumina, the remaining
fifteen all are named after gentes, some of whom were prominent in
the early Republic while others had evidently passed from the scene
even before the Republic dawned. There is thus a clear-cut break
between the old and the later rural tribes. T h e Claudia and the
Clustumina would make the total up to twenty-one. T h e Clustumina
can only have been created after the fall of that city (19. 1), but
need not have waited for the fall of Fidenae in 426 which was only an
enclave guarding a river crossing. Rome required extra agricultural
land. Geographical considerations would require that the Claudia
was incorporated simultaneously. It was called after the gens more
perhaps in honour of the consul of the year than because the Claudii
monopolized the land. (See, however, the views of Badian, J.R.S. 52
(1962), 201.)
una et viginti, therefore, is what truth requires. It is the total given by
D.H. (7. 64) and by the Epitome of L. (numerus tribuum ampliatus ut
essent xxi). T h e mistake X X X I for X X I is easy, but I suspect that it is
rather a 'correction 5 by the Nicomachean editors. Vennonius, quoted
292
4 9 5 B.C.
2. 2 1 . 7
by D.H., said that Servius divided the ager into thirty-one parts and
thirty-one was the number of rural tribes throughout classical times.
This may have influenced the text. See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3.
166 n. 3 ; Beloch, Rom. Geschichte, 2643*.; von Lubtow, Das Romische
Volky 41 ff.; Bernardi, Athenaeum 30 (1952), 3 ff.; A. Alfoldi, Fest
schrift E. Salin, 117 ff.; Hermes 90 (1962), 206-7.
aedes Mercuri: 27. 5 n.
22-33. 4. The Struggle for the Tribunate
The Romans claimed that the years 495-3 were years of turmoil
during which theplebs > oppressed by debt and military service, agitated
for a magistracy of their own to protect them from the outrages per
petrated by the patricians and eventually were rewarded with the
tribunate. The claim deserves examination before it is dismissed as a
fiction. The two foundations on which it is built are economic de
pression and the debasement of the plebs. The first is clear enough.
Tyrants habitually stimulate expansion and Tarquin was no excep
tion. The public works at Rome alone are pointers to his prosperity.
But with the expulsion of the Tarquins and the capture of Rome by
Porsenna, the country fell on hard times. We do not know whether
Porsenna imposed any restrictive terms on Roman trade. We do know
that twice in twenty years Rome was affected by severe shortages of
grain. More important still she founded a temple of Mercury (27. 5 n.).
A community only propitiates its gods with such foundations when
things are going wrong. Ceres is vowed a temple in time of famine,
Apollo in time of plague, Mercury in time of commercial failure. Some
support for this depression can be seen archaeologically. There is a
steady decline in the imports of Attic Red Figure vases after 500.
Moreover, the creation of new tribes shows that the population was
rising faster than the acreage.
The position of the plebs has been so overlaid with prejudice and
dogmatism that it is difficult to discern the truth. Three details may
be significant. The Fasti for 509-486 reveal a high proportion of
plebeian gentes, among them the Larcii, the Junii, the Cominii, the
Cassii, the Menenii, the Tullii, and the Sempronii, the great majority
of whom are of proven Etruscan extraction. After 485 such plebeian
gentes do not figure in the Fasti; indeed the Larcii, Junii, Cominii,
Cassii, and Tullii disappear for good together with other gentes who
gave their names to some of the old tribes, while the Sempronii and
Menenii have to wait fifty years before obtaining office again. Secondly,
the new cults of Ceres and Mercury were predominantly plebeian cults.
Thirdly, the leading statesman of these years, Sp. Cassius, who aimed
to meet Volscian agression by a policy of Latin alliances and Etruscan
friendship, was himself a plebeian.
293
2. 22-33- 4
4 9 5 B.C.
4 9 5 B.C.
2. 2 2 - 3 3 . 4
2. 22. 4
49 5 B.C.
22. 4 . quoque: not 'they sent legates as well (as troops) to rouse
Latium' but, taking quoque with the sentence as a whole, 'a further
action was to send legates to rouse Latium 5 .
22. 5. sex milia: 5,500 in D . H . 6. 17. 2. D.H. gave the Latin army as
40,000 foot and 3,000 horse, the R o m a n as 23,700 and 1,000. It is
fanciful to see in the numbers, as Klotz does, an echo of the forces
engaged at Pharsalus. Such figures are typical of Valerius. In his
account of the battle L. did not specify any totals.
foedere: this may be a hidden allusion to the fact that the Latin
treaty of Sp. Gassius was signed in this year rather than in 493. It is
reasonable to expect it to come close on the heels of the battle and it
is easy to see how if it were negotiated by Sp. Cassius and signed by
him as fetial, not consul, it would subsequently be transferred to one of
the years in which his name stood in the Fasti.
22. 6. in ingenti gloria: Gronovius and Porson (Adversaria 308) would
delete in. in gloria esse is well attested in L. (cf. 1. 3 1 . ; 1) cf. also Cicero,
adAtt. 14. 11. 1; de Off. 3. 85.
coronam: 3. 57. 7 n.
23-24. The Nexi
T h e problems arising from archaic R o m a n debt-procedure are com
plicated by the disappearance of the system, known as nexum, in 326
(or 313 B.C.), long before the age of legal commentaries or textbooks.
T h e procedure by which people became bondsmen (next) in con
sequence of their debts was obscure even to the earliest classical
jurists and more so to L. In addition to L. who refers to it on several
occasions without describing it in detail (6. 14. 3, 7. 19. 5), it is men
tioned once in the Twelve Tables (6. 1 cum nexum faciet mancipiumque,
uti lingua nuncupassit, ita ius esto), by Festus (160 L. 'nexum est, ut ait
Gallus Aelius, quodcumque per aes et libram geritur, id quod necti
dicitur; quo in genere sunt h a e c : testamenti factio, nexi datio, nexi
liberatio. nexum aes apud antiquos dicebatur pecunia quae per nexum
obligatur'. See also Cicero, de Orat. 3. 159) and in a long note of Varro,
de Ling, Lat. 7. 105: 'nexum Manilius scribit omne quod per libram
et aes geritur in quo sint mancipia. Mucius quae per aes et libram
fiant, ut obligetur, praeterquam mancipio dentur. hoc verissimum esse
ipsum verbum ostendit de quo quaerit: n a m id <aes> quod obligatur
per libram neque suum fit, inde nexum dictum, liber qui suas operas
in servitutem pro pecunia quam <debet d a t ) , d u m solverit, nexus
vocatur ut ab aere obaeratus', a passage which proves how little the
ancients themselves knew about nexum.
T h e analogy of nexum and mancipatio stated by the sources implies
that in the former the creditor in the presence of the required five
witnesses and scale-holder weighed out the copper which the other
296
49 5 B.C.
2. 23-24
2. 23-24
4 9 5 B.C.
that there were at least two methods of contracting debt at this period
goes far to resolving much of the traditional dispute about nexum.
L. speaks of a son entering into nexum on account of a debt which he
had inherited from his father (8. 28) and of an insolvent debtor enter
ing into nexum as a final recourse. This is intelligible if the previous
debts had been incurred not under nexum but on a stipulation or similar
contract. T h e debtor now contracted with his creditor: he was given
a sum under nexum to pay his outstanding debts in exchange for his
services. T h e solution had much to commend it to both parties. T h e
creditor gained because he now had a bondsman whom he could
maltreat at pleasure and exploit with impunity (23. 6 n.) instead of
a iudicatus whom he had to keep for sixty days and treat with due
attention the while (Twelve Tab. 3. 1-6), with only the doubtful satis
faction at the end of killing him or selling him trans Tiberim. T h e debtor,
on the other hand, whatever his plight, was at least better off nexus
than servus or dead. T h e system was abolished because it gave too
much power for the creditor to abuse. Self-help had too much scope and
it was better for the obligations and the penalties to be more closely
regulated by the state. It was not a pretty sight to see a Roman citizen
in chains.
nexum is obscure and controversial. The above account is no more
than an attempt to state the issues and reconcile the facts. There is,
however, no doubt that it was operative in the period of which L. is
writing and that it would have been mitigated by tribunician auxilium
(23. 8 n.). But the story in L. cannot itself go back to contemporary
sources. T h e unkempt and impoverished centurion is one of the classic
* stage 5 types of which Achaemenides in Virgil, Aeneid 3. 590 affords
a good example (cf. Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 3. 26), and his prolonged
service is a theme which is often repeated (3. 58. 8, 4. 58. 13). These
are the dramatic trappings. Underneath them lies a plot which bears
every mark of being one of those case-histories invented by early
lawyers to illustrate the workings of the Twelve Tables. There are
several later instances, K. Quinctius and vadimonium, P. Sestius and
cadavera, Verginia and vindiciae ad libertatem, the maid of Ardea and
conubium. T h e present story besides showing nexum in action is concerned
to establish the point that the nexus does not lose his citizen-rights
(24. 6). T h a t is the point and the moral of the whole episode. L.
adapts it, making it part of a continuous narrative instead of a selfcontained case and setting it in a contemporary atmosphere (23. 4 n.,
6 n., 7 n.).
T h e primary works on nexum are Huschke, Vber das recht das nexum
(1846); Milleis, ZdU Sav.-Stift. 22 (1901), 96 ff; P. Noailles, Fas el
Ius, 91-146; M . Kaser, Altromische Ius, 232-50 with full bibliography.
See also de Zulueta, L.Q.R. 29 (1913), 137-53; von Lubtow, '/.
298
4 9 5 B.C.
2. 23-24
2. 2 3 - 8
49 5 B.C.
49 5 B.C.
2. 24- 4
24. 4. maxima quidem ilia: Alan wished to rephrase the sentence maxima
ilia quidem parte civitatis sed tamen parte, but for the position of
quidem cf. 28. 42. 5, 42. 8. 1 : see Shackleton Bailey, Cicero: 'ad Atticum\
76-77.
24. 5. nee posse: Servilius seconds his pious sentiments with extreme
syntactical obscurity. T w o preliminary points can be cleared up.
N read hostes between cum and prope which was omitted perhaps by
error in the O.G.T. (it is printed in Conway's Pitt Press edition) and
which greatly clarifies the situation. Secondly N's praevertisse would
be not merely an unexampled intransitive use of praevertere but an
equally unparalleled instance of the aorist sense of the perf. inf. after
posse. L. must have written praeverti (3. 22. 2). 'When the enemy are
at the gates, nothing can take priority over w a r / a se which is added
by Bayet, following Pohlig, although Ruperti seems to have prece
dence for the conjecture, would refer to the Senate, which unduly
limits the area of concern and is superfluous since praevertisse for prae
verti is adequately accounted for by the perfect infinitives before and
after.
T h e overall structure of the whole sentence is 'nee (1) cum hostes . . .
essent, praeverti quicquam nee (2) si sit laxamenti aliquid
(a) plebi honestum . . . non cepisse
(b) patribus decorum . . . consuluisse'.
Two main propositions are stated, the second of which is subdivided
into two. T h e trouble arises when in the subdivision L. writes nee
(2) . . . aut plebi . . . neque patribus, where either out patribus or neque
plebi (the secondary neque . . . neque resuming the negation after the
introductory nee (2)) would be logically anticipated. T h e inconsis
tency can be emended {outpatribus H . J . Miiller; velpatribus Ruperti),
although neither Novak's deletion of aut nor Wienkauff's proposed
sat plebi honestum (cf. 36. 40. 9) is acceptable because both destroy
the balanced colon in which plebi and patribus match one another im
mediately after the disjunctive particles. Alternatively it can and
should be recognized as an inconcinnity, in a logical anacoluthon,
caused by L.'s instinctive reluctance to employ a secondary nee . . .
nee. A similar phenomenon is found in Fronto 165. 1 ff. van den Hout
(see P. R. Murphy, A.J.P. 79 (1958), 50). Cf. also 10. 8. 3 and see
Madvig's Cicero, de Finibus Excursus I, p . 794.
24. 6. edicto: 'by an edict', cf. 34. 8. 5, 35. 24. 3. T h e underlying
principle of the edict is that the nexus retains his civic rights and
obligations. These extended beyond military service (8. 28. 1 ff.).
Notice the edictal language ne quis . . . neu quis (cf. S. C. de Bacch. 3
neiquis . . . velet; Gracchus ap. Aul. Gell. 10. 3. 3).
24. 7 sacramento: cf. 4. 53. 2.
301
2. 25-26
495 B.C.
25-26. Wars with the Volscians, Sabines, and Aurunci
49 5 B.C.
2. 27. I
2. 27 4
495 B.C.
494 B.C.
2. 2 8 . 2
22. 55. 6. T h e text, which has been much emended {delata Perizonius;
de delata Walters; senatum H . J . Muller), is to be retained because de
is used when the object of the motion under discussion is stated
(e.g. de caede), the plain ace. when only the motion itself is referred to
(e.g. rem; cf. Plautus, Menaechmi 700; Virgil, Aeneid 11. 344: cf. also the
common ea res quae consulitur). Radical alteration such as Muller's is
further excluded by L.'s habit of picking u p a verb by a participle of
that verb (1. 5. 3 Remus cepisse, captum tradidisse; 10. 4, 12. 9, 23. 7. 6,
2 4 . 3 0 . 14, 29. 37. 13).
28. 3 . curias contionesque: 4. 13. 9. T h e clause cum . . . concilia is a palp
able gloss on the foregoing words. This is betrayed by in Esquiliis, for L.
never uses a preposition with that name (cf. 28. 1, 26. 10. 1, 5). T h a t
the words should merit a gloss suggests that they are sound, mille curiae
must mean 'a thousand senate-houses', each secret conclave through
out the city being disparagingly contrasted with the Curia Hostilia.
T h e words could hardly mean 'a thousand sessions of the Senate'.
J . S. Reid who felt the difficulty proposed circulos for curias but that
does not account for the gloss.
dispersam et dissipatam: cf. Cicero, de Orat, 1. 187; Caesar, B.G.
2. 2 4 . 4 , 5 - 5 8 - 3 28. 5. otio lascivire: 1. 19. 5 n.
28. 7. arma danda: the contemporary tone of the whole altercation is
revealed not only by the language (see the preceding notes; for the
contrast between patria and domini cf. Pliny, Paneg. 88. 1) but by the
contents of the pronouncements, arma danda presupposes that the state
furnishes the armour (3. 15. 7) which is at variance with the martial
organization of primitive times.
28. 9. abdicare: with the ace. for the common se abdicare consulate, as
at 5. 49. 9, 6. 18. 4, 39. 1, 28. 10. 4 (see Catterall, T.A.P.A. 69 (1938),
299). Here the choice is in part dictated by a desire to make a regular
balance with deponere imperium,
29. 5. quaestionem: the appointment of special commissions of investi
gation only became a regular practice after the quaestio of 132 (Sallust,
Jugurtha 31. 7; Veil. Pat. 2. 7. 3).
29. 7. P. Verginius: read T. Verginius', for the corruption see 15. 1 n.
T h e proceedings in the Senate were being conducted ordiney that is
starting with the consulars if there were no consuls designate (Aul.
Gell. 14. 7. 9, 4. 10. 2 : Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 969 ff.). There was,
as yet, no consular P. Verginius. Strictly the consuls of 495, Ap.
Claudius and P. Servilius, should have been asked their sententia first
but A. Verginius, by a precedent which is first attested in 61 B.C.
(Cicero, ad Att. 1. 13. 2), invites his brother first.
Verginius was anxious to restrict to special cases any concessions
814432
305
2. 29- 7
4 9 4 B.C.
4 9 4 B.C.
2.30.5
494 B.C.
2. 3 i . 2
*c^
=^
494 B.C.
2.31.4
14. 34: it revolted in 390), and 338. The dates are not incompatible
or mutually exclusive. The first colonization was a natural safeguard
against the Volscian encroachments on the plain of Latium. The
colony was lost either in Coriolanus' campaigns or as a result of the
spread of malaria. A refounding in 401 is in keeping with other indica
tions of Roman activity in the area at that time (cf. 4. 61. 6). Its loss
after the Gallic War was an inevitable consequence of that disaster
which retarded Roman expansion by almost a century (cf. 6.12. iff.
13. 8, 17. 7, 22. 3 et aL). Velitrae was predominantly a Volscian city as
is shown by the Tabula Veliterna, a bronze inscription in Volscian
dating from c. 350 B.C. For its later history see Radke, R.E.y 'Velitrae'.
3 1 . 5. in adversos montes: Alan, comparing 51. 7 and Saliust, Jugurtha
52.3, proposed adverso monte'up the mountain' but 30.9 shows that more
than one mountain was involved. 'To the mountains facing them/
31. 7-33. 3. The Final Act: The First Secession of the 'Plebs'
31. 9. reiecta: 'removed from the agenda'.
31. 10. discordiae: Valerius alludes to the classic definition of the
emergencies that justify the creation of a dictator (cf. Cicero, de Leg.
3. 9; Claudius, I.L.S. 212 (Lyons)) which was doubtless aired to
legitimize the innovations of Sulla.
31. 11. suam: i.e. of the plebeians.
32. 1. in consulum: the dispute sounds like an echo of a later con
stitutional controversy. Fimbria murdered the consular L. Valerius
Flaccus in 84 B.C. and took command of his army. He was, however,
unable to secure its loyalty, for it deserted on the approach of Sulla
(docti nullum scelere religionem exsolvi).
per causam: 'on the pretext o f : see Nisbet on Cicero, de Domo 10.
The first secession and the creation of the tribunate are indissolubly linked. They stand or fall together. They have been subjected to
severe assault and it is apparently the received opinion today that the
Secessions are fictitious and that the tribunate was created in 471
at the earliest. On investigation, however, the arguments levelled at
the traditional account are not damaging, whereas on the other side
there are some arguments of weighty support. The sceptics, starting
from the presupposition that the creation of the tribunate, being an
extra-constitutional office, would not have been recorded in the
Annales, point to the inconsistencies and contradictions within the
sources and, before all, to the silence of Diodorus, who says nothing of
the tribunate under 494 but under 471 writes rore 7rp<orcos Kar^araOi]aav 8r)fjiapxoi rerrapc?. Diodorus' testimony is irrelevant. The wordorder, with Tcrrapcs placed last, shows that he is emphasizing the
number not the office'for the first time four, as opposed to two,
309
494 B.C.
2. 32. I
5
494 B.C.
2. 32. 1
T o the final objection that since the tribunes were not yet magis
trates of the state their institution cannot have been recorded in the
Annales, it may be replied that the Secession will have figured there
it had obvious religious repercussionsbut that the tribunate was
one of those landmarks of plebeian history which would have been
recorded in the temple records of Geres (33. 3 n.). In any case they
were events which could be remembered without documentation.
T h e detailed narratives of these events show a gradual development.
Cicero (deRep. 2. 58 ;pro Cornel, fr. 48) speaks of a Secession to the Mons
Sacer, the demand for leges sacratae (33. 3 n.), and the appointment
of two tribunes comitiis curiatis (32. 2 n.). So also Festus 422 L. Even
this version, which will go back to Polybius at the least, may not be
the original. Piso placed the Secession on the Aventine (32. 3). It is
a more probable site in that it was the plebeian hill (3. 31. 1 n.) and that
the substitution of the Sacred Mount could easily be caused by a
false etymology for the leges sacratae (see on 3. 50-54). The original
number of tribunes was two. Five was a supplement of the postGracchan age who desired to bring the number of tribunes into rela
tion with the number of classes (58. 1 n . ; cf. Asconius, in Cornel.
p. 77. 2 Clark singulos ex singulis classibus). T h e names are equally
fluid: neither Cicero nor Festus names them. Asconius quotes Tuditanus
(fr. 4 P.) for L. Sicinius L.f. Velutus and L. Albinius C.f. Paterculus.
Livy gives C. Licinius and L. Albin(i)us adding that three more were
co-opted including Sicinius quidam. D.H. (6. 89. 1) lists the first two as
L. Junius Brutus and C. Sicinius Vellutus, and, in addition, C. and
P. Licinius and C. Viscellius (?) Ruga (cf. also Suidas s.v. S^/xa/^ot).
From this it emerges that D.H. at any rate is following a tradition
much influenced by the late democratic prestige of the Junii Bruti, a
prestige due in part to Atticus' researches into the family and in part
to the activities of the tyrannicides. L., on the other hand, seems to
have displaced Sicinius for Licinius, a significant alteration when
taken in connexion with other features of 32. 2-33. 3. For D.H.'s
account of the secession is not merely more diplomatic (there is a
ten-man delegation to conduct negotiations with the plebs): it is pungently Valerian. T h e auctor concordiae is not Menenius, but Valerius
(D.H. 6.43. 4 ; so also Cicero, Brutus 5 4 a n d the Elogium cited on p. 306
above). Seignobos drew attention to Livy, Epit. 83 (85 B.C.): effectum
est per L. Valerium Flaccum, principem senatus, et per eos qui concordiae
studebant ut legati ad Sullam depace mitterentur. Valerius Antias must have
been responsible for supplanting Menenius. O n the other hand
Licinius for Sicinius points to Licinius Macer and it may well be that
L. turned to the latter for the account of the actual secession itself
(note the citation of variants at 32. 2 and 33. 3).
See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 272-330; E. Meyer, Kl. Schriften,
311
2. 32. I
494 B.C.
4 9 4 B.C.
2. 32. 9
2- 33- 3
494 B.C.
forms. This reveals both the Italian character of the secession, for
Ceres had come from Campania to be the tutelary deity of the
plebeians, and also its partisan aims. Juppiter was the god of the
community as a whole. They elected their own officers, the tribunes,
and although the patricians must have recognized the tribunes and
the principle of auxilium before the plebeians would have ended the
Secession, the first move to incorporate the tribunes into the con
stitutional framework was not taken till 471.
Such seems the best account of the lexsacrata, of which many inter
pretations were current even in antiquity. If it is basically correct, it
supports the traditional outlines. See Latte, Gott. Gel. Nachricht.,
1934/6, 69 fF.; F. Altheim, Lex Sacrata.
33. 3-40. Coriolanus
No sooner has Rome emerged from the throes of the First Secession
than she is once again plunged into danger by political disunion. Just
as before the quarrel arose on the question of debt, so now it breaks
out over the distribution of corn imported during a shortage. O n this
occasion it is not the impartial mediation of a Menenius but the
presence of a remorseless aggressor which persuades the Romans to
close their ranks and L. uses the legend of Coriolanus not, like Shake
speare, as a study in the limitations of the man of action but as a
parable on the text externus timor maximum concordiae vinculum (39. 7).
T h e theme is not a new o n e : it has been hinted at several times
before but for the first time L. uses it as a moral around which to
build his narrative. H e subordinates the whole of his material to it.
T h e tragedy leads on to the supreme interview between Coriolanus
and his mother in which Coriolanus acts out the secondary moral
that in the last resort a true Roman's love for his country outweighs
every other consideration. T h e method by which L. constructs this
unified episode is evident from a comparison with the parallel narra
tive of D.H. Only here does L. abandon the regular annalistic practice
of introducing each year formally with its list of magistrates, and since
the lists are to be found in D.H. (7. 68. 1,8. 1. 1 Q,. Sulpicius, Sp.
Larcius; C.Julius, P. Pinarius) and are presumed in the computation
of dates which L. himself makes later (4. 7. 1), we are entitled to
assume that he deliberately omitted them in order to preserve an
Aristotelian unity of time rather than that his source was defective.
A logical inspection of the timing of Latinius 5 dream points to a
similar conclusion. In D.H. 6. 68-69 Latinius has his dream before
Coriolanus is expelled from Rome (68. 1-3) so that Coriolanus knows
that the games are to be repeated and therefore that they would
present a suitable opportunity for provoking the Romans to slight
the Volscians. In L. the dream occurs after Coriolanus has left and it
3J4
493 B.C.
2. 33- 3-40
493 B.C.
2. 33- 3-40
493 B.C.
2. 33- 3
2. 3 3 - 4
493 B.C.
oath peculiar to the Celts and one which was still in use among the
Irish in the eighth century. As such it would be inconceivable for
primitive Romans and Latins. It is likely enough that the inscription
was altered and re-carved to keep pace with subsequent developments,
as other cities subscribed to the treaty, and that the copy from which
D.H.'s text was taken had not been standing in the Forum for much
more than a century before it became finally obsolete in 89 and
disappeared.
Nor can it be demonstrated for certain that the treaty is correctly
dated to 493, Cassius' second consulship. His name stood in the treaty,
but perhaps in his capacity as fetial rather than consul. In any case
the treaty would not have differentiated between his consulships.
493 could well have been chosen as the date simply because of the
erroneous belief that Cassius had to be consul in order to make a
treaty. Although the condition of the Latin world in 493 is equally
compatible with the terms of the treaty it is natural to expect that it
would have been made in the aftermath of the Battle of Lake Regillus
and a trace of such a treaty may even survive in 22. 3-4 n.
See R. von Scala, Die Staatsvertrdge des Altertums, 3 1 - 3 3 ; E. Taubler,
Imperium Romanum, 1. 262-317; H. M . Last, C.A.H. 7. 488-92; A. N .
Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship, n - 3 0 ; Steinwenter, R.E., 'ius
Latii'; E. Badian, Foreign Clientelae, 291 n. C.
The Latin Counter-Offensive against the Volscians
Antiates Volscos: Antium, mod. Anzio, originally a Latin city
which with other coastal towns formed part of an Etruscan hegemony
centred on Rome. It figures as an ally or dependant of Rome in the
first treaty of 508 B.C. with Carthage (Polybius 3. 22. n : ApSearcov,
AVTLGLTCUV, Apevrlvcov, KipKaurcov, TappOiK.ivITcov: see Walbank, ad
loc.) but in the unsettled conditions following the expulsion of the
kings it had passed under Volscian control. T h e annalist Valerius
Antias came from here (Introduction p. 16). For the archaeological
remains see Lugli, Tecnica edilizia, 270-1.
Longulam: identified by Nibby with Buon Riposo, a settlement on
the road from Antium to Ardea 26 miles from Rome and 10 miles
from Antium. In Pliny's list of the Alban League of Juppiter Latiaris
(JV.H. 3. 69) the received text Longani is better corrected to Longulani
than understood with O . Seeck (Rh. Mus. 37 (1882), iff.) as an
ignorant duplication of Albani to denote the inhabitants of Alba
Longa. If so, Longula was one of the earliest Latin communities.
See Philipp, R.E., 'Longula (2)'.
3 3 . 5. protinus Poluscam, item Volscorum : a certain correction by Cluver
in the light of the parallel account in D.H. 6. 91. 3 and the campaign
of Coriolanus (39. 3). T h e site is put by Nibby at Osteria di Civita
318
493 B.C.
2. 33- 5
where the roads to Antium and Satricum divide, 20 miles from Rome
and 15 miles from Antium. Like Longula it may be recognized in
Pliny's list (Pollustini) as an Alban community which had subsequently
fallen into Volscian hands. Both cities disappear from history after
their recapture by the Volscians under Coriolanus and may well have
been destroyed. They are absent from the list given by D . H . (5. 61)
which purports to preserve the composition of the triginta populi in
500 B.C., but more probably reflects a state of affairs prevailing around
400 B.C. (18. 3 n.). In that case they will have ceased to exist by the
end of the century. Hofmann, R.E.y Tollusca'.
Coriolos: placed by Gell and Nibby on M t e . Giove. Unlike Longula
and Polusca it is listed as a Latin city by both Pliny and D . H . from
which it may be inferred that after being captured twice by the Vol
scians it ultimately regained its independence and survived as a Latin
community at least until after 400 (3. 71. 6 n.).
erat turn in castris: cf, 4. 19. 1 erat turn inter equites. L. is fond of intro
ducing his central characters by this Hellenistic formula which, to
take but one example, is the regular way of beginning a novel; cf.,
e.g., Xenophon Ephes. 1. 1 T}V iv yE<f>4.aco dvrjp TWV rd nptoTa e/cef
Swa/zeVcov, AvKOfxrj8rjg ovo/xa; Chariton Aphrodis. 1. 3. It makes the
reader aware that a special story is coming. Cf. Horace, Sat. 2. 3. 281.
Cn. Marcius: the manuscripts at 35. 1, 39. 1, 39. 9 are unanimous
for the praenomen Cn. which should be read here as well, in preference
to the C. of 7rA. Cn. is traditional (Val. Max. 4. 3. 4 ; Aul. Gell. 17. 21.
11) but D.H. (hence Plutarch and Shakespeare's, 'Ay Marcius, Caius
Marcius') follows a separate tradition attributable to Licinius Macer.
et consilio et manu promptus: 3. 11. 6 n., and for the combination of
consilium and manus cf. Sallust, Jug. 96. 3 ; Tacitus, Hist. 2. 5, 3. 17,
an historical commonplace taken over from Hellenistic writers and
possessing epic and tragic overtones. Cf. Homer, Iliad 13. 727-8;
Euripides, Chrysippos fr. 842 N . : see H . D. Kemper, Rat und Tat (Diss.
Bonn, 1957).
cui cognomen postea Coriolano fuit: it is implied that he received the
cognomen, which is not found elsewhere, for his exploits against Corioli.
This must be a fabrication. T h e earliest cognomen derived from a cap
tured city is perhaps Privernas (329 B.C.) or Messalla (263 B.C.),
while the first one formally bestowed is said to have been Africanus
(30. 45. 7: 201 B . C ) . H e must have been so called because Corioli
was the Marcian home town (cf. Praenestinus, Veliternus, Auruncus),
but a new explanation was required when the legend was tied down
to a period in which Corioli, being in Volscian hands, could not have
produced a Roman citizen. Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. 2. 295; B. Doer,
Die Rom. Namengebung, 1937, 48-50.
33. 7. per patentem portam ferox inrupit: caedeque in proxima urbis facta
319
2. 33- 7
493 B.C.
493 B.C.
2. 33- J o
16. 9. 4) and for this reason would naturally occur to the pen of an
historian with a desire to give circumstantial verisimilitude to a public
funeral. It is significant that the only other cases of this custom concern
Valerii, L. Valerius in 3. 18. 11, and P. Valerius Publicola in Plutarch,
PopL 16: ? Valerius Antias.
The Corn Shortage
34. 2. caritas primum annonae: 9. 6 n., from the Annales. T h e mention
of Ostia may be accepted (Meiggs, Ostia, 18-19, 479)* If c o r n w a s
not available from the surrounding plains of Caere, Vulci, and the
Pomptine flats but had to be imported from farther afield, it will have
come up the Tiber to Rome. Ostia would have figured in the record.
T h e other regions are credible. T h e Sicilian corn will have come not
from Syracuse or the eastern end of the island but from places like
Segesta in the west where Carthaginian interest was strong enough
for the Romans to exploit their treaty with Carthage. T h e authenticity
of these notices is enhanced by the simultaneous foundation of a cult
of Ceres at R o m e (D.H. 6. 7. 12-14, 94. 3 ; omitted by Livy but see
3. 55. 7 n.). T h e main centres of the cult were Cumae and Sicily. It
was Demeter who guided the Chalcidians to C u m a e and Xenocrite, the
mistress of the tyrant Aristodemus, prided herself on being the priestess
of the cult. In Sicily there was a long-established tradition of Demeter
worship at Henna (Val. Max. 1. 1. 1). T h e connexion between the
cult of Ceres and the annona is well attested in later times (cf. Lucilius
fr. 200 Marx). See H . le Bonniec, Le Culte de Ceres, 242 ff.
ex incultis per secessionem plebis agris: cf. 34. n utantur annona quam
furore suo fecere. Contrast 32. 4 where the plebs secede per aliquot dies
only and do no damage to the countryside (neque lacessiti neque
lacessentes).
34. 3 . sed quaesitum in Siciliam quoque: quaesitum (supine) should be
retained, taking in Siciliam with dimissis. T h e merchants were to buy
corn in Italy and beg for it in Sicily.
34. 4. Aristodemo: 21. 5 n.
periculum . . . frumentatoribus fuit: a second-century note. T h e un
popularity usually arose when the corn merchants sold their corn
(4. 12. 10 n.), not when they bought it, but the development of Roman
trade made such perils household tales. Cf. Cato, de Re Rust, praef 3 ;
Cicero, Verr. 5. 157.
3 4 . 5 . Tiberi venit: cf. 4. 12-13, 52. 6. le Gall (Le Culte du Tibre, 56)
believes river traffic on the Tiber at this date to be an invention based
on the regular trade of classical times (Juvenal 7. 121), A guess it
may be, but a good guess, for the corn could not have come by any
other means.
pestilentia ingens: malaria ? T h e spread of malaria to the Pomptine
814432
321
2. 34- 5
492 B.C.
4 9 1 B.C.
2- 35- 1
the violent phrase linguam exertare which he found in Claudius Quadrigarius (Aul. Gell. 9, 13) to a mild linguam exserere (7. 10.5: McDonald,
J.R.S. 47 (1957), 167). So here he substitutes tergo for corio while
retaining the essentially popular flavour of the phrase to charac
terize plebeian complaints. The same demagogic tone is continued
in the following sentence (56. 8 n.). carnifex is Cicero's word for Verres
and his henchmen, while aut mori aut servire iubeat echoes the indignant
outburst of in Pisonem 15. Riots against corn shortages were frequent
in Rome after the Gracchi.
35. 3. auxilii. . . esse: cf. 56. 11.
35. 4. qua . . . qua: 2. 45. 3, 4, 16, 3. 11. 6 (J. Wackernagel, Archiv
f. Lat. Lex. 15 (1908), 213), a use confined to the first decade which
it is hard to classify. It is met with in Plautus (e.g. Miles 1113, Asin. 96)
but despite its comparative rarity in the intervening period and its
popularity with the archaizers (e.g. Claudius, I.L.S. 212. 25 qua ipsius
qua Jiliorum eiusperhaps from L.: see D.M. Last, Latomus 17 (1958),
484Valerius Maximus, Pliny the younger, and Fronto) it is difficult
to agree with Hofmann {Lat. Umgangsprache, 62) that it is an archaism
in view of its frequency in the letters of Cicero (e.g. ad Att. 2. 19. 3,
9. 12. 1, 15. 18. 2 ) .
2. 52. 3
476
Accused
Prosecutor
Coriolanus
Sp. Cassius
tribunes
quaestors
(K. Fabius
L. Valerius)
tribunes
(Q. Considius
T. Genucius)
tribunes
(L. Gaedicius
T. Statius)
tribune
(Cn. Genucius)
tribunes
(M. Duilius
Cn. Siccius)
tribune
(A. Verginius)
quaestors
(A. Cornelius
Q. Servilius)
T. Menenius
2. 52. 6
475
Sp. Servilius
2. 54. 2
473
2. 61. 2
470
L. Furius
A. Manlius
Ap. Claudius
3. 11. 9
461
K. Quinctius
3- 24. 3
459
M. Volscius
323
Charge
perduellio
"
falsus test
491 B.C.
2. 35- 5
Date
Accused
3. 25. 2
458
M. Volscius
3-31-5
454
3-3'-5
454
T. Romilius
3. 56. 1
449
Ap. Claudius
4. 21. 4
436
L. Minucius
- Veturius
A. Servilius
4. 40. 4
4. 42. 3
M. Postumius
T. Quinctius
422 C. Sempronius
4. 44. 6
420
C. Sempronius
5. 11. 4
401
L. Verginius
M. Sergius
5- 2 9- 7
393
5- 32. 8
423
Q/ Pomponius
A. Verginius
391 Camillus
Prosecutor
quaestors
(T. Quinctius
M. Valerius)
aedile
(L. Alienus)
tribune
(C. Galvius)
tribune
(L. Verginius)
tribune
(Sp. Maelius)
tribune
(Sp. Maelius)
tribune
(G. Junius)
tribune
(L. Hortensius)
tribunes
(A. Antistius
M. Canuleius
Sex. Pullius)
tribunes
(P. Curiatius
M. Minucius
M. Metilius)
plebs
Charge
falsus testis
falsus testis
caedes civis
indemnati
.,
,.
tribune
(L. Apuleius)
491 B.C.
2- 35- 5
2. 35- 5
491 B.C.
of the offence, the accusations fall into two main groups: (i) military
incompetence (476, 475, 423, 422, 420, 401, and 393 on which see
5. 29. 6 n.); (2) false testimony (459, 458, 436) and peculatus (454,
454, 391). These two classes correspond to two general categories of
crime: perduellio, tried by the duoviri, and the parricidium-type crimes,
investigated by quaestores. The significant point is that in two of the
parricidium-type trials quaestores are actually mentioned (and perhaps in
a third as well; see 5. 32. 8-9 n.), and in two at least of perduellio there
was a record of two judges although the names cited are patently
fictitious. I infer from this that the cases were entered in the Annales
under a bare note which alluded either to quaestores or to duoviri, and that
the trials were modernized by later historians who substituted the
legal procedure with which they were familiar, tribunician prosecu
tion before the tribes, and added appropriate names.
Sp. Cassius and Coriolanus are special cases because their stories
were more elaborately worked over and distorted. Both should have
been accused of perduellio. I think it likely that Cassius was and that
the process of falsification can be traced (41. 11 n.). Coriolanus is
more shadowy. As told by L. the trial reads like a misunderstood
iudicium populi, a iudicium populi in that there were preliminary hearings
and a final session (die dicta) at which the sentence was to be passed
but which Coriolanus forestalled by going into exile, but misunder
stood in that the deprecatio would have been made on the preliminary
hearings (Quintilian 7. 4. 18; Cicero, de Inv. 2. 104-8), that tribunes
could have had no part in it and that Coriolanus is alleged to have
been sentenced to exile, a fate which only prevailed from Sullan times.
In short, it looks as if the trial of Coriolanus was fabricated in the late
third century and brought up to date by Sullan Annalists.
See Strachan-Davidson, Problems, 1. 152-69; E. G. Hardy, J.R.S. 3
(1913), 25-32 ; C. H. Brecht,Perduellio, 282-3 \Z<tiL Sav.-Sttft. 59 (1939),
261 ff.; A. Heuss, rif. Sav.-Sttft. 64 (1944), 93 ff.; J. Bleicken, Das
Volkstribunat, 106 ff.; Staveley, Historia 3 (1955), 422; Walbank on
Polybius 6. 14. 7; Jolowicz, Historical Introduction, 321-4.
35. 6. in Volscos: Themistocles fled to the court of his personal enemy,
the Molossian king, Admetus.
percipiebantur: praecipiebantur N, which could only mean 'anticipate'
(in the imagination). But the Volscians have no need to anticipate his
emotion; what they might with profit anticipate is his intended action.
35. 7. Atti Tulli: Tullius is the nomen (1. 22. 1 n., 39. 1 n.), Att(i)us
the praenomen (16. 4 n.). The Tullii are deep-rooted in Latium (cf.
Servius Tullius; Plutarch, Cicero 1. 1), so that the tradition about
Tullius is likely to be old and genuine. Greek writers (D.H. and
Plutarch) were muddled by the names and took Tullus as the praeno
men on the false analogy ofTullus Hostilius (Miinzer, R.E., 'Tullius (3)').
326
491 B.C.
2. 36
2. 36. i
491 B.C.
has been taken to timorem (sc. Iovis: he was haud sane liber religione) since
from its position it seems to go with the following ne. Editors have
printed timorque (H. J . Miiller), timorve (Bayet), et timor (Madvig) or
deleted it altogether. But the verbal interweaving secures a forceful
effect which any emendation is bound to destroy just as it also destroys
the fine idiom verecundia timorem vincit (27. 12. 15, 28. 15. 9 (Gronovius);
cf. 3 7 - 4 3 - 4 . 3 8 - 5 - 3)36. 4. ne causa dubia esset . . . tunc enimvero deorum ira admonuit: there is
no manuscript authority for the text printed by Bayet (causa ei dubia
. . . deorum eum ira; after Conway). T o limit the application of J u p piter's lesson to Latinius alone destroys its universal effect. T h e
Romans as well as Latinius have much to learn about Juppiter's dis
pleasure (ira). See C.Q. 9 (i959)> 274.
in somnis: Stacey (see Lofstedt, Syntactical 1. 55 ff.; Gries, Constancy\
59-60) was the first to regard the phrase as evidence for the poetic
character of the language of the first decade which L. subsequently
modified (8. 6-11) or abandoned. T h e phrase does occur in poetry
(Ennius, Annales 219 V . ; Accius ap. Cicero, de Div. 1. 4 4 ; Virgil,
Aeneid 2. 270 (cf. Servius, ad loc.: out per somnos: out si insomniis legeris
erit synizesis), 3. 151) but it is equally common in prose, e.g. Cicero,
de Div. 1. 49, 54, 121, 2. 144; de Nat. Deorum 1. 82.
36. 6. consilio: it is hard to find actual examples of the family council;
those usually quoted (Val. Max. 5. 8. 2, 5. 8. 3, 5. 9. 1) are not very
good. T h e last passage gives an account of a serious historical case
where in addition to relatives nearly all the Senate are summoned to
join the consilium. It is doubtful whether there were any occasions on
which custom would require a consilium restricted to the family; the
paterfamilias could always act on his own authority (J. A. Crook,
Consilium Principis, 5).
328
491 B.C.
2-37
2. 38. 2
491 B.C.
491 B.C.
2. 39- 2
2. 39- 3
4 9 1 B.C.
with the Latin cities (as in D.H. and Plutarch). L. follows this account
initially. Coriolanus is made to start from Circeii and would have gone
in Latinam viam if L. had not decided to conflate the two campaigns
and been led by geographical considerations to narrate the second
campaign before the first. Too late, for L. had already written the
tell-tale in Latinam viam transgressus. All emendations by transposition
do violence to this lay-out and toL.'s use ofinde. T h e right appreciation
lurks in Conway's appendix I to his edition (Pitt Press, 1902); A.
Reichenberger, Studien, 2 8 ; Meyer's note ad loc. See Ashby, Roman
Campagna, 208.
Satricum: identified with the mod. Borgo Montello on the R. Astura
by the discovery there of a temple with an inscribed cippus {Not.
Scavi, 1896, 23 ff.). Not a member of the Alban League but included
both in the synthetic list which precedes that league (Pliny, N.H.
3. 68-69 5 s e e above) and in D.H.'s Latin League of c. 400 B.C. (5. 61).
Sacked and destroyed by the Romans in the fourth century (7. 27. 5 - 9 :
347 B.C.) it disappears from memory (Philipp, R.E., 'Satricum').
Some recent epigraphic fragments are published by N. Bonacasa,
Stud. Etrusc. 26 (1958), 37-45.
Longulam, Poluscam, Coriolos: 33. 4-5 nn.
Mugillam: the modern site is as shadowy as its ancient history. It is
placed by Abeken (Mittelitalien, 69) south-west of Bovillae and is
known only as the source of a branch of the gens Papiria, which implies
that it was not very far from Tusculum.
haec Romanis oppida ademit: a resumptive use of hie, gathering up a
long list, for which Meyer compares 1. 38. 4 Corniculum, Ficulea vetus,
Cameria, Crustumerium, Ameriola, Medullia, Nomentum haec de priscis
Latinis . . . capta oppida and Macrobius, Sat. 3. 9. 13.
Lavinium: 1. 1. i o n .
39. 4 . Corbionem: probably the modern Rocca Priora, on the east
end of the Alban hills (f. Ashby, P.B.S.R. 5 (1910), 408). Not a
member of the Alban League and therefore not one of the earliest
communities, but its strategic situation near the pass of Algidus
(3- 3- 3) brought it to prominence in the Latin Wars, throughout
which it is frequently mentioned. It was partially destroyed by the
consul Horatius in 457 (3. 30. 8 Corbionem diruit) but only partially,
for it emerges again in 446 (3. 66, 69) and figures in the Latin League
ofc. 400 B.C. (D.H. 5. 61). This was its last effort: it leaves no other
trace (Hulsen, R.E., 'Corbio').
Veteliam: 5. 29. 3, an old community (Pliny, N.H. 3. 69). Its name,
like Bovillae, may be connected with bull-worship (Conway, Italic
Dialects, 4 8 ; Altheim, History of Roman Religion, 66). Being in agro
Aequo it should lie near the modern Labico (Lugnano), although its
disappearance after the fifth century indicates that it cannot have been
332
491 B.C.
2.39.4
2. 39-
I0
488 B.C.
488 B.C.
2. 40' 5
the deliberate nature of the tricks which fortune plays; cf. Horace,
Sat. 2. 8. 25; Val. Max. 6. 9. 1; Tacitus, Hist. 1. 4 8 : R. G. Nisbet,
A.J.P. 44 (1923), 27 ff. The complaint 'was it for this that I was
allowed to live to this great age?' is a tragic commonplace (H.
Lloyd-Jones, C.R. 72 (1958), 21 on Pap. Ox. 2377, to whom the greater
part of these references is due).
senecta: the poetic alternative to senectus, used six times by L., always
for effect as here.
40. 7. quamvis infesto animo et minaci perveneras: quamvis is not used as
a concessive particle with the indicative in L.except here, where it
goes closely in sense with infesto et minaci, 'no matter how hostile
your mood en route'. Editors, missing the point of its unique force,
delete perveneras (Novak, Meyer). See Riemann, Etudes, 224 n. 5;
E. Mikkola, Die Konzessivitat, 20-21.
ira cecidit: not a prose expression. As one might expect in such a
display of emotion L, uses appropriate language. Elsewhere in
Ovid, Amores 2. 13. 4 ; Seneca, Medea 989; Lucan 4. 284; Persius
5-9140. 8. ergo ego: introduces a histrionic cri-de-c&w, as in Suetonius,
Nero 47 ergo ego . . . nee amicum habeo nee inimicum? Seneca, Contr. 1. 5. 3
(Weissenborn); Prop. 3 . 2 1 . 1 7 ; Ovid, Am. 1.12. 27; Shackleton Bailey
on Prop. 2. 8. 13.
sed ego nihil iampati nee tibi turpius quam mihi miserius possum nee . . . diu
futura sum: rightly understood by Pettersson, Commentationes Livianae,
26 ff.: 'but I can have nothing now to suffer either which could be as
wretched for me as it would be shameful for younor, wretched as
I am, shall I be so for long', nee . . . nee do not correspond strictly.
Instead of following up the alliteration and dramatic double compara
tive with which she began, Veturia breaks off and states her approach
ing end simply and directly. Had she continued in the same vein, a
corresponding clause would have been something like nee mihi ipsi
tarn diuturnum quam miserum (Meyer). See also P. R. Murphy, A.J.P.
79 (1958). 5 0 - 5 1 ; cf. 24. 5 n .
40. 9. -matura mors out longa servitus manet: she ends with a perfect
iambic line.
virum: note its position. He was a man but a woman won.
40. 10. complexus . . . movit: after the passionate appeal of Veturia
couched in high-flown language L. rounds off the whole episode in
two short sentences of the utmost simplicity.
40. 11. apud Fabium: 1. 44. 2 n. Although Fabius Pictor wrote before
the contamination of Coriolanus and Themistocles, he had already
given the story a Greek veneer. The saying multo miserius seni exsilium
esse\% an old Greek reflection, repeated often in tragedy (e.g. Sophocles,
O.C.) and in [Demosthenes], Epist. 2. 13, 3. 4.
335
2. 40-
488 B.C.
488 B.C.
2.40. 12
their alliance with the Volscians: in 39. 1 Attius is leader of the Volscians. T h e awkwardness may be due at least as much to the transition
from one source to another as to abbreviation and suppression by L.
himself
40. 13. fortuna: 1. 46. 5 n.
40. 14. 7*. Sicinius: 32. 2 n. All other authorities, with the possible
exception of Festus 180 L., call him Siccius; see Broughton, M.R.R.
1.2011. 1. A partiality for Sicinii is characteristic of Licinius Macer.
See Klotz, Klio 33 (1940), 176.
C. Aquillius: 3-5 n.
Hernicinam ii quoque in armis erant: L.'s somewhat apologetic ex
planation hints at a longer account which has been concealed by the
change of source. D . H . (8. 64. 1) supplies details and divergences.
T h e difference in L. must be in part due to a difference of source, but
a keen desire to keep the following year clear for Cassius' lex agraria
and at the same time to minimize Cassius' good qualities may also
be responsible for his confining the war to a single year and making
it so indecisive.
aequo Matte: claimed, e.g. by Stacey, as a poetic phrase in view of
its use in Virgil, Aen. 7. 540 aequo dum Marte geruntur; Lucan 3. 5 8 5 ;
Sil. Ital. 5. 233, &c. A poeticism in this context would be utterly in
appropriate and the words, here as elsewhere (6. 10; 51. 2 ; 9. 44. 8 :
cf. 1. 33. 4), belong to the semi-official language of the W a r Office.
So Caesar writes (B.G. 7. 19. 3 ) : paratos prope aequo Marte ad dimicandum.
Note also Fl. Vopiscus, Aurelianus (= S.H.A. 26) 21. 2 cum congredi
aperto Marte non possent.
41. Sp, Cassius
T h e indisputable facts about the life of Sp. Cassius (the cognomen
Vecellinus is a later creation) are few. If, as one must, one accepts
the evidence of the Fasti, he was consul three times in 502 (17. 1),
493 (33- 3)> a n d 4^6- T h a t all subsequent Cassii were plebeians is not
so much an obstacle as a corroboration of the truth of the tradition:
for he is in good company and the praenomen Spurius is not adopted by
the later Cassii. During his second consulship he was responsible for
the treaty with the Latins. H e was condemned to death in the year
after his last consulship, 485. His second consulship coincided with
the Secession of the Plebs which was ended by the foundation of the
Tribunate. It also coincides with the traditional date for the dedica
tion of the temple of Ceres (41. 10 n.) and the institution of the largely
plebeian cult of that goddess. His third consulship coincides with the
treaty with the Hernici and a strong tradition records, despite in
dividual variations, that on his condemnation he and his were declared
sacri to Ceres. From these facts emerges a clear, if conjectural, picture
814432
337
2. 41
486 B.C.
of a man who was aware that the great danger to Rome was from the
powerful enemies (Voisci, Aequi) around her, that the duty of a states
man to rebuff this danger was to consolidate as strong an alliance of
neighbouring communities as possible and to encourage the Roman
people, who formed the backbone of Rome's fighting power, by
championing their aspirations. Hence the alliances with the Latins
and the Hernici. Hence the temple of Ceres and the leges sacratae. His
fall, like that of Themistocles, may have been due to the fact that
the plebs were not yet confident enough or vocal enough to come
to his rescue when the aristocracy counter-attacked. What is certain
is that his ascendancy coincided with a major disaster to Roman
arms in which many of the leading citizens fell at the hands of the
Volscians and that after his death the plebeians were discredited,
even disbarred, power passing to a narrow patrician oligarchy, led
by the Fabii. For a while the democratic process was baulked. It
bided its time with mounting momentum till the Decemvirate.
For L., faced with the difficulties ahead of constructing a coherent
narrative out of a scrappy series of isolated incidents, Sp. Gassius pro
vided an admirable focus. On the one hand he could be made the
archetype of subversive proposers of agrarian laws (dulcedo agrariae
legis ipsa per se . . . subibat animos) which would hold together the events
of subsequent years. On the other, following after Coriolanus, he
demonstrated how the Roman people, however great their strife,
would unite in the face of a threat to their liberty, whether from
within or without. L. was content to accept the form of the story that
was current in his sources without inquiring into its reliability.
The development of that form can be traced to a certain extent.
The oldest version, though even that is unhistorical (41. n n.), is
given by Cicero (de Rep, 2. 60) and will derive ultimately from Fabius
Pictor: de occupando regno molientem . . . quaestor (? K. Fabius) accusavit:
. . . cum pater in ea culpa esse comperisse se dixisset, cedente populo morte mactavit.
486 B.C.
2.41
2. 41. I
486 B.C.
valuable corridor separating and isolating the two major powers, the
Aequi and Volsci. The Hernici could, therefore, be potentially allies
of great importance to Rome. The terms of the treaty are said (D.H.
8. 69. 2) to have been the same as those of thefoedus Cassianum (33.4 n.),
i.e. it was afoedus aequum of primarily defensive character. It is un
certain whether it was concluded with Rome alone or with the Latin
people as a whole. The war had been a federal war involving Latin
contingents (D.H. 8. 65. 1) and the proposed allotment of land equally
to Romans and Latins might indicate 'the working of the clause of
the Cassian treaty which provided for the division of booty' (SherwinWhite). Elsewhere, however (e.g. 6. 10. 6, 9. 42. 11), the Hernici
appear to be independent of the Latins in their relation to Rome and
grave doubt has been cast on the annexation of Hernican land since
at a time of crisis Rome would hardly have risked alienating the
sympathies of such strategic allies. Moreover, it dovetails suspiciously
with Cassius' unhistorical rogatio agraria. If the treaty was concluded
between Rome alone and the Hernici, it marks the enhanced position
of Rome in Latium and the personal ascendancy of Sp. Cassius.
partes duae: 'two-thirds'. The error may have been caused by a
misunderstood memory that the Hernici, in alliance with Rome and
the Latins, received an equal share of the spoil, viz. one-third: cf. D.H.
6. 95 Aa<f>vpajv re KGLI Acta? taov fiepos. See 5. 4. 10 n.
4 1 . 3 . lex agraria\ throughout the century there is mention of such
agitation to distribute agerpublicus (in 482, 481, 476, 474, 467, 441, 424,
421,420, 416, 414, 412, 410: see 43. 3,44. 1,48. 2, 52. 2,54. 2 , 6 1 . 1,
63. 2, 3. 1. 2 , 4 . 4 3 . 6,47. 8,49. 11, 51. 5, 52. 2, 53. 2, 5.12. 3). Although
a shortage of land for pasture and cultivation was a factor in Roman
economy at the time, the record of these proposals is to be rejected.
The great majority of them are abortive threats which would never
have been documented. Moreover, it is only with the large acquisition
of ager publicus from the fourth century onwards that the need for such
measures arose. Whether they were intended to displace monopolistic
landlords holding large areas under uncertain title, or to settle new
land, they reflect the abuses and conditions of the century of the
Gracchi and many of them can be disproved in particular detail (see
notes). See L. Zancan, Ager Publicus; Clerici, Economia e Finanza,
290-301.
hanc: Praef. 4. Not merely a conventional reference to the distur
bances attendant on the proposals of Licinius Stolo, G. Gracchus,
and M. Drusus but a comment on the evils of more recent leges
agrariae, like Caesar's in 59 or Octavian's in 30 B.C., which were con
cerned with resettling veterans after campaigns.
4 1 . 4. fastidire munus volgatum a civibus isse in socios: isse An egisse M.
The Symmachian edition may have had, as Winkler believed, the
340
486 B.C.
2.41. 4
alternatives esse (which was the reading of Vorm.) and isse which are
combined in the conflation egisse found in M . If so, the true reading
was already in doubt in the fourth century since neither alternative
is right. (1) T o consider esse first: volgatum . . . esse must be taken
together as a dependent clause after fastidire. 'The plebs had begun
to resent that the gift was being disseminated from citizens to allies.5
So Rhenanus, Freudenberg, and others. T h e Thes. Ling. Lat. gives no
adequate parallel for such a dependent clause: the nearest is 6. 4 1 . 2
se inspici, aestimari fastidiat which is reflexive. In any case the past
tense is wrong. It was only in process of being disseminated. (2) Most
editors read isse (Aldus, Gruter, Heinsius, Bekker, Kreyssig, and
recently Bayet). 'The plebs had begun to resent that the gift had been
cheapened and had gone from the citizens to the allies.' Here again,
fastidire with ace. and inf. is uneasy and the naked isse cheap. Madvig
circumvented the first objection by putting a semicolon after volgatum
and taking a civibus isse in socios as a self-contained parenthesis stating
the reason for the resentment of the plebs. H . J . Muller improved it
by reading abisse, but the exisse of Luterbacher, Weissenborn, and
Meyer gives better sense with its connotation of dispersal and is
palaeographically attractive (cf. the similar mistake in the manuscripts
of Columella 11. 2. 101). Against this it must be said that a relative
clause quaeprimo coeperat. . . deinde . . . audiebat could not be broken by
such an abrupt insertion. Above all, the tense is wrong. Cassius' pro
posal is still only a rogatio. It is not yet on the statute book: the deed
is not yet done. A present, not a perfect, infinitive is required.
A passage of Seneca (de Benef. 2. 18. 6 munus suum fastidire te iniuriam
iudicaturus est) suggests that munus volgatum is the direct object of fastidire
here too. volgatum a civibus . . .in socios, despite the fact that elsewhere volgari in is apparently confined to diseases (4. 30. 8, 5. 48. 3 ; Curtius
9. 10. 1 ; cf. 4. 1. 3), must be right in view of the resumption in 41. 8 and
the inability to express the precise notion of the possession of the gift
passing from one body to another in any other way. T h e corruption
is therefore localized to egisse. None of the possible present infinitives
convinces (e.g. abigi or exigi). egisse should be seen as a corruption of
ipsis, where ipsis is used to underline the notion that it was citizens who
were being cheated in this way (Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana,
257). T h e line of argument was devised by G. Fannius in 126 B.G.
quid ita enim: 'for what (else) does this partnership with the Latins
mean ?' T h e force of quid ita is to pick out a particular happening and
hint a misgiving about it. So also 3. 40. 10, 6. 15. 11 : cf. the abso
lute use of quid ita? in Cicero, pro Mil. 17, et al. It corresponds to the
phrase quid attinet (6. 23. 7, 37. 15. 2) 'what is the point of?', so that
quid ita adsumi must be parallel to quid attinuisse . . . reddi. Most editors,
however, have adopted the manuscripts attinuisset and taken adsumi
341
2.41-4
486 B.C.
no less than reddi to be dependent upon it, the two being connected
by the repetition of quid.
socios et nomen Latinum: an anachronism, since, disregarding the
Latins and the Hernici, the Romans have as yet no other allies. But
note Cicero, Brutus gg (Domitius) unam orationem de sociis et nomine Latino
contra Gracchum reliquit and Appian, B.C. i. 23. A Gracchan touch.
4 1 . 7. intercessor: a loose use of the word since one consul could not
veto the actions of his colleague (see McFayden, Studies . . . F. W.
Shipley, 117).
plebi indulgere: the bidding for popular support is drawn from the
competition between C. Gracchus and M . Livius of whom Plutarch
(C. Gracchus g) says that he aimed imepPaXeaOai rov Taiov ya.pvri rtov
TToWtOV.
486 B.C.
2. 41. io
well with the mood of a Rome which witnessed in the same epoch the
establishment of temples of Mercury (21.7 n.) and Castor (42. 5 n.).
The expansion of Rome brought her into increasing contact with the
religious concepts of the Greeks. Moreover, the cult of Geres was pre
dominantly plebeian, serving the needs of a section of the community
which was now for the first time beginning to assert itself. There may
well have been a family legend that Gassius and his belongings were
consecrated to Geres, since interest in Sp. Gassius was lively among the
gens Cassia; two separate moneyers, L. Gassius Gaeicianus c. 93 B.C
and L. Gassius Q . f. in 78 B.C., strike denarii with historical representa
tions of their ancestor (S. Gesano, Stud. Num. 1 (1942), 145-7). But
the irony of the servant of Geres being offered to Ceres is too rich.
One suspects that because consecratio bonorum was generally made to
Geres as the goddess who nourishes human life (3. 55. 7 n.; Cicero,
de Domo 125, with Nisbet's note cf. Greenidge, Roman Public Life, 55;
le Bonniec, Le Culte de Ceres, 83-87, 233-5) anc ^ because, further, the
penalty for the most serious capital offences as early as under the
Twelve Tables was suspensum Cereri necari (Pliny, N.H. 18. 12), it re
quired little ingenuity on the part of family historians to frame the
legend of Sp. Gassius' end. There is no historical truth in it. On the
temple of Ceres see also H. Siber, R.E., 'Plebs', col. 116; Beloch,
Rom. Gesch. 329; G. de Sanctis, Riv. Fil. 10 (1932), 443; W. Hoffmann,
Philologus, Suppl. 27 (1934), 100; Platner-Ashby s.v. Geres and, on its
connexion with the plebs, the remarks of E. S. Staveley, J.R.S. 45
(1955), 183-4.
Cereri consecravisse: 8. 2. The procedure of consecratio bonorum is fully
outlined by Cicero, de Domo 123-5. Consecration was performed
capite velato, contione advocata, foculo posito . . . adhibito tibicine. In early
days it was the corollary of consecratio capitis: the offender and his
belongings were declared sacerpresumably, since the presence of
pontifices was not needed, by the supreme magistrate. In later times
consecratio bonorum was distinct from consecratio capitis and restricted to
offences against plebeian magistrates, in particular against the
tribunes (3. 55. 7). If a tribune was attacked he retaliated by con
secrating the goods of his assailant, which amounted to selling them
publicly and giving the proceeds to the temple of Ceres. By Cicero's
date the practice was obsolete. But in either case the validity of con
secratio seems to depend upon the position of the person who performs
the ceremony (consul or tribune) and the fact that Cassius' father
acts as a private individual confirms the suspicion that the story
is an invention. See further Wissowa, R.E., 'Consecratio'; StrachanDavidson, Problems, 1. 187; Nisbet's edition of Cicero, de Domo,
Appendix 6.
Ex Cassia familia datum: not 'given by the family of the Cassii'
343
2 . . 4 1 - 10
486 B.C.
486 B.C.
2. 4 1 . II
with parricidium (Marcian, Dig. 48. 4. 3) indicates that before the laws
were codified and written down a separate system of dealing with
perduellio already existed and hence that the duoviri were not an in
vention of the Decemvirs. T h e outstanding feature of their legislation
was not innovation but publication of what till then had been aypa<f>oi
vofjLoi. If quaestores existed before the Twelve Tables, it is at least as
likely that duoviri did. Secondly, the reference to the trial before the
populus is universally admitted to be anachronistic, which casts doubt
on the rest of the details of tradition. Thirdly, the earliest version, in
Cicero's de Republica, speaks not of two but only of a single quaestor.
A more credible sequence, if there is any truth at all in Sp. Cassius'
trial, would be that he was tried by duoviri perduellionis a n d the
evidence of his father played some part in the trial, that when the
duoviri came to be forgotten only the memory of a trial and the part
played in it by Cassius5 father remained, that Fabius Pictor, gathering
the material for the first serious, annalistic history of Rome, found a
family tradition that a Fabius had been concerned in the trial and
designated him a quaestor or quaesitor because of the etymology and
obscurity of the office and the uncertainty as to how early R o m a n
trials were conducted, that the implausibility of his account led some
to substitute the family trial and others to improve on it by introducing
another quaestor and thereby preserving the important R o m a n prac
tice of collegiality, while at the same time speciously bringing them
into relation with quaestores parricidii. T h e source used by D.H. imparted
a more outrageous anachronism in the person of a tr. pi. C. Rabuleius
(8. 72. 1-4). See 3. 35. n n. In general see Mommsen, Staatsrecht,
2. 537 ff.; Munzer, R.E., 'Sp. Cassius'; K. Latte, T.A.P.A. 67 (1936),
2 4 - 3 3 ; C. H . Brecht, Perduellio, 267-79; H . Siber, Magistraturen, 56 ff.;
Zeit. Sav.-Stift. 62 (1942), 381 and 385; A. Heuss, 7. Sav.-Stift. 64
(1944), 93 ff- 5 E - s - Staveley, Historia 3 (1955), 4 2 6 - 7 ; Jolowicz 323.
L. Valerius: cos. 483 and 470, and praef. urb. 464. His presence may
owe something to the Lex Valeria de sacrando cum bonis capite eius qui
regni occupandi consilia inisset (8. 2 n.).
dirutas publice aedes: the demolition of the houses of persons found
guilty of perduellio or the like is well attested. Cicero {de Domo 101)
classes together the cases of Cassius, Sp. Maelius (4. 12-16), M .
Manlius (6. 20. 13, 7. 28. 5 ; Ovid, Fasti6. 185), and Vitruvius Vaccus
(8. 19. 4, 20. 8), and in each case the tradition is ancient and reliable.
Notice also the story of the Velia (7. 5-12). T h e temple of Tellus
was not built until 268 (Florus 1. 14) but it replaced an earlier shrine
that went back to the original demolition (C. Hulsen, Topograph. 1.
323: Weinstock, R.E., 'Terra mater', col. 804; le Bonniec 5 2 - 5 5 ;
Platner-Ashby s.v. Tellus). T h e house was situated on the Esquiline,
in Carinis (D.H. 8. 79).
345
2- 4 2 - 5 " . 3
485 B.C.
42-51. 3. The Fabii and Dulcedo Agrariae Legis
For this section Roman historians were faced with a disjointed series
of notices about battles and a long sequence of Fabii in the consulate.
Their problem was to form a connected narrative out of such material
and they did it by emphasizing the dominant position of the Fabium
nomen and by introducing as a recurring refrain the theme of agrarian
laws. T h e plebs agitate for the law: the patres resist: the Fabii attempt
unavailingly to reconcile the two sides and restore Concordia (47. 12):
a sudden invasion saves the day. T h e pattern is simple and in origin
goes back to Licinius Macer at least. L. adapts it to the scheme of the
book. In character and length the story of the Fabii (41-50) plays the
same part in the second half of the book as the episodes culminating
in Lake Regillus (14-21) play in the first. T h e symmetry is underlined
by the presence in each of a strongly marked 'Homeric' battle (45 n.).
L. also strengthens the pattern by an experiment of his own. Instead
of prefacing the opening of each year by a list of consuls, he weaves
their election into the course of the narrative (42. 2 termerepatres ut. . . ;
cf. 42. 7, 43. n , 48. 1,51. 1) and binds the whole section into a unity.
L. also abbreviates in order not to disperse the climax towards
Cremera, as a comparison with the parallel version of D.H. shows
(e.g. 8. 87 C. Maenius tr. pi.; 8. 90. 4-5 the interregnum of 482 5 9 . 2
Furius' operation against Veii; 9. 12 the exploits of T . Siccius; 9. 16
wars with Volsci and Aequi). At bottom the factual content of the two
writers corresponds with the historical situation when the mountain
peoples as well as the Etruscans were pressing down on Rome. But
already in their sources it has been supplemented by invention (the
agrarian laws) and political distortion (the ideal of Concordia, the
oppression of the plebs), D.H. utilizes at least two authorities (cf.
9. 18. 5 djLt^orepot Xoyoi): L. shows knowledge of only one, and per
sonal details (43. 3 n.), political bias (42. 1, 48. 2), and material
connexions (42. 5 n., 46. 4 n., 51. 1 n.) indicate that he is continuing
to trust Licinius Macer whose special interest in the gens Fabia is
evidenced by fr. 19 P. It is to be remembered that the Fabii and
Licinii were hand in glove between 384 and 354 B.C.
See Soltau 159; Burck 76-77; Klotz 244-6; Hellmann 6 7 - 6 8 ; see
also below on Cremera.
42. 1. dulcedo . . . subibat: cf. Tacitus, Agricola 3. 1.
fraudavere: 4. 51. 5 n., the political attitude is characteristic of
Licinius Macer.
In fact the legal position about praeda was always quite clear. All
immovables, land, houses, & c , belonged to the state (Pomponius,
Dig. 49. 15. 20. 1). T h e soldier had a right of plunder over whatever
movables came his way (Gaius, Dig. 4 1 . 1. 5. 7; cf. Aristotle, Politics
346
485 B.C.
2. 42. I
2. 42. 5
484 B.C.
483 B.C.
2. 4 2 . IO
vates: a loose term for the haruspices who were consulted whenever
prodigies occurred. T h e interpretation of prodigies was made in the
main either by Auguration, the study of the flight of birds (technically
auguria ex avibus), or by extispicium, the inspection of the entrails, i.e.
nunc extis nunc per aves. In both departments, particularly the latter,
Etruscans excelled (cf. 1. 55. 3).
publice privatimque: 1. 56. 5 n.
extis . . . per aves: the variety of construction emphasizes the dif
ferent nature of the two procedures, as well as being a favourite trick
of L.'s (6. 3. 10, 7. 30. 17, 9. 5. 2). L. substitutes/w aves for the tech
nical ex avibus to avoid the repeated ex- sound.
haud rite: cf. 1. 31. 8.
42. 11. qui terrores\ 43. 3, a repetition suggestive of careless writing.
See 1. 14. 4 n.
tamen: the contrast is between the vague widespread alarm and its
localization in the discovery of the individual sinner, tandem (Madvig)
is unnecessary, although the corruption is common (cf., e.g., 5. 11. 2,
52. 13)Oppia: it is clear from 22. 57. 2 (the case of Opimia and Floronia
in 216 B.C.) that the misconduct of Vestals was reckoned as aprodigium
and so would have been entered in the Annales (Wissowa, Archiv. f.
Relig.-Wiss. 22 (1923/4), 201 ff.). T h e present case, therefore, is also
sound, although there is some doubt about her name. T h e manuscripts
of L. agree on Oppia, although sources deriving from L. (illia Per. 2 ;
Popilia Oros. 2. 8. 13; Pompilia Euseb. 2. 102) suggest either Pompilia
(the family name of N u m a who founded the Vestals) or Popillia (a
first-century B.C. Vestal). D.H. 8. 89. 4 calls her rwv -naptiivuiv /Lu'a . . .
'Om/zia. But although Opimius is attested for the early period
(10. 32. 9), it is more likely that 'Om/u'a is an error for 'OTT(TT) la
arising from a repetition of /xta. Oppia thus is the best form and is
supported by the presence of an Oppius in the Decemvirate (3. 35. 11).
Like the Cassii the Oppii of historical times were a plebeian gens. See
Miinzer, Philologus 92 (1937), 211-16, who holds the notice to be
genuine but the name fictitious, inserted by the opponents of the
nobility (P. Popillius Laenas and L. Opimius) in Gracchan times,
since damnatio memoriae would have been ordered.
incesti: any offence which defiled the sanctity of religious laws and
involved the loss ofcastitas was incestum. In the case of Vestals vowed to
virginity any sexual relations were incestum.
poenas: 4. 44. n , 8. 15. 8, 22. 57. 2. They were buried alive. Cf.
Festus 277 L.
4 3 . 1. C. Iulius: 1. 30. 2 n., see Broughton, M.R.R. s.v., but it is
possible that Licinius Macer, using the corrupt libri lintei, did write
349
482 B.C.
C. Tullius and that L. followed him (4. 52. 4 n.). The notices for this
year are ultimately from the Annales.
43. 2. Ortonam: 3. 30. 8. A Latin community of uncertain locality
mentioned also in the same connexions by D.H. 8. 91. 1 'Opwva
{con. Sylburg), 10. 26. 2 prwva. It is otherwise unknown but it has
been plausibly identified with the Hort(on)enses in the list of the Alban
League given by Pliny, JV.H. 3. 69. If so, it will be a primitive com
munity of Latium which disappeared from history after being cap
tured by the Aequi in 457. van Buren (R.E., 'Ortona (2)') places it
between Tusculum and Praeneste but since it was captured after
Gorbio it should lie between Tusculum and Corbio. Mte. Salomone,
which certainly had a medieval fort, is a better site than Mte. Montagnola. D.H. 8. 91. 1 dates it to the previous year 482 B.C.; cf. 42. 9 n.
43. 3. redibat: cf. 24. 2.
detractandi militiam: Refusing military service', the technical ex
pression for the offence: cf. Cicero, Or. fr. a 1; Caesar, B.G. 7. 14. 9;
L-4-53- 7,5- J 9- 5> 7- " : %etal.
Sp. Licinius: Licinian bias; D.H. 9. 1. 3-2. 2, following a different
source, names him Sp. Sicilius, emended to Sp. Icilius by Sylburg.
43. 4. auxilio: 44. 6, 4. 53. 7. Taken by editors specifically of the
tribunician ius auxilii whereby the tribunes could rescue the consuls if
the latter were arrested by Sp. Licinius on a charge ofviolating his sacrosanctity, but the word here is more general than that and means no
more than 'by their assistance', whether their assistance took that
particular form or was manifested in speeches, vetoes, or persuasion.
2. 43- i
that the abortive war was fought against the Aequi, and 46. 1 supports
the same inference.
The inconsistency, first seriously pointed out by Sabellicus, has
been variously tackled. Sigonius, followed by Fayus, Klockius, Drakenborch of the older editors, wished to read Fabio in Aequos, in Veientes
Furio datur et in Veientibus quidem nihil dignum . . . . A simpler variation
481 B.C.
2. 43- 5
the parallel treatment of D.H. This fact must stand. T h e sources were
agreed that Fabius' battle was against the Etruscans. This is doubly
sure if the source was a Fabian sourcei.e. Licinius Macer. In
addition Otto's emendation requires one to suppose that Livy could
say that Fabius' war with the Aequi was not worth describing (nihil
memoria dignum) and then describe it for 20 lines. 43. 6-11 must relate
the doings of Fabius (43. 6 n.) and doings against the Veientes, not the
Aequi.
Glareanus seeing the difficulty of departing from the agreed dis
tribution of provinces, read victis Veientibus in 44. 11 and cum Veientibus
in 46. 1. This also, though logical, is palaeographically unacceptable.
T h e only other radical emendation is that of Conway and Walters
who read: ducendus Fabio in Aequos, Furio datur in Veientes. (in Veientes}
nihil memoria dignum gestum [est]; et in Aequis quidem Fabio aliquanto plus
. . . . This solution, commended by Bayet and Meyer, is equally in
admissible. It sacrifices the one certain correlation with D.H., and
produces un-Latin at the e n d ; in Veientes for in Veientibus would be un
paralleled in Livy and the chiasmus d. F. in V. in A. F. d. should be
preserved.
T h e text, therefore, must stand here and also at 44. 11 and 46. 1.
It is to be explained not as a change of source but, as Sabellicus saw,
as a mistake by Livy, partly perhaps through negligent forgetfulness
but influenced also by the fact that the Aequi, unlike the Etruscans,
were always being defeated. Note, in particular, 42. 1 above devictis
eo anno Volscis Aequisque, 3. 8. 11, 7. 30. 7; cf. C.LL. 6. 1308 devictis
Aequis et Volscis subactis. Whereas the Aequi to a R o m a n historian
were so much cannon-fodder, Veii was a serious proposition. Psycho
logically it was natural to write victis Aequis at 44. 11 and once it was
written cum Aequis in 46. 1 followed as a matter of course. Gf. also,
for L.'s fondness for recurring phrases, 3. 3. 10 in Aequis nihil deinde
memorabile actum.
4 3 . 6. unus . . .sustinuit: i.e. K. Fabius. T h e words are reminiscent
of the praise of another great Fabius, quoted in 30. 26. 9 sic nihil
certius est quam unum hominem nobis cunctando rem restituisse, sicut Ennius ait.
43. 8. etsi non . . . saltern: L. uses si non . . . saltern (5. 38. 1, 28. 40. 9,
31. 49. 11, 38. 53. 4) or etsi non . . . certe (22. 54. 6, 25. 6. 2) except
here where Muretus deleted et and Conway, unless the reading of the
O.G.T. is a misprint, divided et si. T h e construction, even if unparal
leled, can hardly be objected to, particularly in a section which shows
other traces of haste. See Bitschofsky, Berl. Phil. Woch., 1915, 882.
4 3 . 10. remedia: Praef. 9 n. As Hellmann (68 n. 2) observes, the whole
sentence is a comment by L. on the events of his own century. Unlike
Marius or Pompey the soldiers, and unlike Sulla and Caesar the
politicians, Augustus showed every sign of possessing both qualities.
351
2. 43' J o
481 B.C.
480 B.C.
2. 44- 5
353
2. 45
480 B.C.
480 B.C.
r 2
2 . 4 5 . 12
an
2. 45- 4
480 B.C.
conceptis verbis iurant: post quos in eadem verba iurantes tantummodo dicunt: idem in me'.
4 5 . 15. armati: sc. iubent; 'now when they were armed let the lip-bold
enemy face them' (Foster).
4 5 . 16. Fabium nomen Fabia gens: so the manuscripts. Shafer, earlier
than Madvig, had realized that Fabia gens was a Nicomachean variant
on Fabium nomen: cf. Sulp. Sev. Mart 7. 7 beati viri nomen enituiL enite(sc)o
is scarcely found of people.
46. 1. detractant: 43. 3 n.
non magis secum pugnaturos quam pugnaverint cum Aequis: pugnaverint is
omitted by H, but the pleonasm is in L.'s manner. Pettersson com
pares Praef. 7, 4. 32. 2, 6. 14. 11.
cum Aequis: 43. 5 n.
46. 3 . vix explicandi ordinis spatium: Gronovius rightly took ordinis as ace.
plur., followed by Lallemand and Madvig, among others, on the
ground that the singular would imply spreading out the individual
soldiers who comprised the rank or ordo, whereas L. would seem to
mean spreading out the separate ordines in line of battle (1. 27. 6, 3. 60.
10). The singular is used by Frontinus (1. 4. 2; cf. the second hand
in Fronto 121. 9 van den Hout) but probably in the former sense.
pilis: anachronistic since the pilum belongs to the armoury of manipular tactis.
pugna iam in manus, iam ad gladios . . . venerat: in manus venire 'to come
to close quarters', with an army or a person as the subject, is usual in
the historians (Sallust, Jug. 101. 4 ; Tacitus, Annals 2. 80) but the
quasi-impersonal construction with the battle as the subject belongs
to the realm of military communiques. Cf. Bell. Hisp. 5 . 5 .
Mars est atrocissimus: unparalleled and not to be confused with
aequo Marte and similar phrases (40. 14 n.). It may be inspired by the
memory of the Homeric fiporoXoiyw !A.prjt [Iliad 11. 295, 12. 130).
46. 4 . tertio . . . anno: 43. 1.
praeceps . . . in volnus abiit: no wholly satisfactory explanation has yet
been offered for the phrase, praeceps (ab)ire is not infrequent for 'to fall
headlong' (Sallust Cat. 25. 4, 37. 4 praeceps <i)erat; Suet. Calig. 35;
Catullus 17. 9), ab- conveying the idea of falling from something, e.g.
a horse. This must be the meaning here, for abire 'to depart (life)' is
only followed by in when the direction is towards the ultimate des
tination, i.e. the grave, the underworld, or heaven. Yet if the meaning
is 'he fell headlong on to the wound' (cf. 1. 58. n ; Lucretius 4. 1049;
Virgil, Aeneid 10. 488), it is strange that the wound is not said to be
fatal and that his death has to be presumed from the context. The
explanation may lie in an attempt by Licinius to reproduce a Homeric
phrase like the obscure Trprjvrjs iXtdadt] (Iliad 15. 543).
356
480 B.C.
2. 46. 4
2- 47- 7-9
4 8 0 B.C.
479 B.C.
2. 48
Cremera
Each of the preceding four years (483-480) contained considerable
military activity undertaken by Veii. T h e record is trustworthy.
Recent events had forced Veii to take the initiative. T h e creation of the
new tribes of Claudia and Clustumina had deprived her satellite
Fidenae of most of her land and afforded Rome a stranglehold over
Veii's salt trade with the interior. T h e formation of the Latin alliance
had made Rome rather than Veii the centre of commerce in the area.
Veii's survival depended on her ability to regain control of the left
bank of Tiber upstream from Rome and so to reopen free communi
cation with Praeneste and the cities of the south. T h e campaigns
undertaken by Veii will have figured in the Annales. T o counter this
threat it was a natural experiment to plant a block-house near the
Cremera (mod. Fosso Valchetta) which would command the river
and enable the Romans both to harass traffic on the roads to Capena,
Fidenae, and Rome, and to have advance warning of impending
campaigns.
Such a reconstruction differs only slightly from the reconstruction
made by Roman historians and antiquarians from the bare facts in
the Annales. T h e Roman version, however, suffered distortion. T h a t
Fabi were responsible for the idea is possible (the old rural tribe Fabia
may have bordered on Veii and included Fabian estates; but see
Badian, J.R.S. 52 (1962), 201); that a large number of them were
involved and perished is likely enough; but that 306 Fabii should
be the sole casualties and leave only one survivor, is, in D.H.'s
words, irXda^iaaiv eot/ce OearpiKots (9. 22). T w o separate factors are
responsible for the embellishment. T h e gens Fabia were a lively re
pository of private traditions. Ovid can be shown to have learnt some
curious oddities about the family from Paullus Fabius Maximus.
Equally partisan was the family tradition which recorded the massacre
by the Etruscans of 307 R o m a n prisoners from the army of C. Fabius
Ambustus in 353 B.C. (7. 15. 10) or the death of 300 Romans under
Fabius Maximus in the Second Punic W a r (Plutarch, Vit. Par. Min. 4).
It seems, then, that the Fabii were themselves to blame for making out
of a notice of the destruction of a Roman praesidium at Cremera
a castrophe limited to their own family. W h a t started as a legion (306
+ 4,000) including a number of Fabii (Diodorus 11. 53) ends as a
corps d'elite of Fabii with dependants and retainers (Festus 450 L.,
Aul. Gell. 17. 21. 13; Servius, ad Aen. 6. 845).
W h a t guided the course of the story and may even have determined
the numbers involved was unquestionably the synchronism with the
Battle of Thermopylae (cf. Coriolanus and Themistocles, 33. 4 n.).
Gellius mentions that Cremera and the invasion of Xerxes coincided
359
2. 48
479 B.C.
479 B.C.
2. 48
fall of Cremera caught the Romans off their guard and that Menenius
was not in the field or in camp. Licinius Macer also rejected the syn
chronism of Cremera and the Allia, since he devises a different omen
to take the place of the Unlucky Day as a common link of misfortune
between the disasters (17 P.). It may be hazarded that L. has drawn
on Licinius and only suppressed niceties (48. 10 n.) which com
plicated the picture he was creating. Licinius Macer (and in this he
was following the lead of second-century scholars who were always
attempting to bring traditional legend into line with legal and con
stitutional realities) mentions a meeting of the comitia curiata and
implies the passing of a lex de imperio. He must, therefore, have nar
rated both a policy-making session of the Senate and a ratification by
the curiae. L., unconcerned with legal niceties, abbreviates and sim
plifies. It is more effective that the consul, K. Fabius, should command,
and that the sweep of the story should not be interrupted by dusty
antiquarianism. A trace of the curiae may, however, accidentally
survive in e curia egressus.
That Ovid presumably supplemented L. with personal knowledge of
his own is immaterial. Attention has often been called to the linguistic
resemblances between the two authors. What is also interesting
psychologically is that Ovid's ear was more fixed upon the sound and
appearance of words than their meaning. Note 49. 12 fusi retro ad
Saxa Rubra = 212 Tusco sanguine terra rubet; 50. 5 rara hostium apparebant
arma = 217 armentaque rara relinquunt; 50. n maximum futurum auxilium
= 241 posses olim tu, Maxime, nasci. See also 49. 4 n., 49. 8 n.
See further Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. 2. 246-8; O. Richter, Hermes
17 (1882), 425-40; Soltau, Phil. Woch., 1908, 9896.; Pais, Ancient
Legends, 168-84; A. Elter, Porta Carmentalis u. Cremera, (1910) ;H.Last,
C.A.H., 7. 504-6; Burck 8 3 ; Klotz 249; F. Bomer, Gymnasium 64
(1957), 113 ff.; J. B. Ward-Perkins, P.B.S.R. 29 (1961), 3 ff For Livy
and Ovid see E. Sofer, Livius als Quelle von Ovidius Fasten; Bomer's
introduction to his edition of the Fasti. For Silius Italicus' use of
Ovid see R. T. Bruere, Ovidiana (1958), 490-1.
48. 5. res proxime in formam latrocinii venerat: so the manuscripts. L.
uses proxime 'closest to' as a preposition, never as an adverb. Cf. 30.
10. 12 proxime speciem . . . navium, 24. 48. n . Rhenanus rightly deleted
in, a false echo from 46. 3.
48. 6. bellum quiete . . . eludentes: cf. Tacitus, Annals 2. 52. 3.
moturos se: the sense is clear'other wars are either actually im
minent or shortly to be expected'and the position of alia bella outside
out . . aut leads the reader to suppose that alia bella will be the subject
of instabant and the object of moturos. The intrusive se defeats that ex
pectation. Secondly, whereas bellum movere is common (21. 39. 1,
33. 45. 5, 43. 1. 11; Sallust, Cat. 30. 2 and a dozen more references in
361
2. 48. 6
479 B.C.
Thes. Ling. Lat.), examples of se movere 'to stir oneself to hostile activity'
are lacking in L. Seyffert's esse is preferable to Madvig's excision of se.
48. 7. quod . . . sinebat: (deleted by Wecklein (Jahrb.f. Class. Phil. 113
(1876), 632)) contains the substance of what troubled the Romans.
48. 8. tutam . . . maiestatem Romani nominis: recalling the rider to
the later R o m a n treaties in which the socius is bidden maiestatem populi
Romani comiter conservare (33. 3 1 . 8 ; Cicero,pro Balbo 35-36). T h e Fabii
can be depended on like a loyal ally. For the news of the incursion see
3.4. i o n .
48. 10. senatus consultum: so Festus 358 L. T h e Fabian expeditionary
force was regarded by Roman legal opinion not as militia legitima but
as a coniuratio (Servius, ad Aen. 2. 157, 6. 845, 7. 614, 8. 1), a force not
constituted according to the official dilectus but raised in an emergency
as and how volunteers could be found. T h e formation of such a
coniuratio could be the subject of discussion and approval in the Senate
but L. oversimplifies the issues when he states that a s. c. ratified the
whole expedition. T h e Senate could not by itself initiate war nor
could it regularize a coniuratio which by its very nature lay outside the
constitutional framework and did not even have to be commanded
by a magistrate. D.H. (9. 15) states unequivocally that in the original
form of the story the leader of the Fabii was not a magistrate, not, as
in L., the consul paludatus K. Fabius, but his brother M . Fabius. T h e
only body which could invest the commander with imperium and the
army with official standing was (in theory, at any rate) the comitia
curiata (5. 46. 11 n.).
49. 2. postero die: the manuscripts give postera die which, as Fraenkel
(Glotta 8 (1917), 58) observes, besides being the only feminine occur
rence of the expression in L., would violate the distinction between
dies fem., a space of time or the closing day of such a space, and dies
m a s c , a day or date. T h e feminine is unconvincingly claimed as a
variatio by Gatterall (T.A.P.A. 69 (1938), 314).
quo iussi erant conveniunt: echoing the sacramentum (3. 20. 3 conventuros
iussu consulis). L. unconsciously makes the expedition a militia legitima
to enhance the tragedy of it; cf. also consul paludatus (1. 26. 2). Con
trasted with the bleak formality of D.H.'s igrjevav avv euxaf? /ecu
Ovaiats the scene of departure in L. is solemn and full of pathos. It has
been inspired largely by the account in Thucydides of the departure
of the Athenian expedition to Sicily (6. 30, 31) adapted to a R o m a n
setting by the judicious insertion of peculiarly R o m a n prayers.
49. 3 . in vestibulo: i.e. of his house on the Quirinal (5. 46. 1-3 n.).
nunquam: cf. Thuc. 6. 30. 1, 31. 6.
4 9 . 4 . quorum neminem ducem sperneret egregius quibuslibet temporibus senatus:
so the manuscripts. Ovid, Fasti 2. 200, writes e quis dux fieri quilibet
362
479 B.C.
2. 49. 4
aptus erat which is less suggestive than Eutropius 1. 16, also dependent
o n L , qui singuli magnorum exercituum duces esse deberent. L. is saying that
any one of the Fabii was good enough to command the finest army of
any time and it displays an over-sensitive tenderness for constitutional
propriety that he should say so by laying the emphasis on the Senate
selecting the duces for its armies. Madvig, therefore, proposed sperneres,
egregius . . . senatus 'you would not reject any one of them as a leader,
and as a whole body they would have been a magnificent Senate at
any period of history'. T h e artificiality of the universal-second person
singular sperneres is matched by the absurdity of recommending an
efficient army for the sedentary duties of a Senate. T a n . Faber long
ago suggested exercitus for senatus and the same conjecture may be
found in Bentley's copy of Livy in the Wren library at Cambridge.
Two additional factors commend it. Eutropius is here an exact and
not a loose precis of L. Secondly, whereas egregius . . . exercitus is a
common collocation (7. 35. 4, 8. 13. 15; Tacitus, Agr. 17 magni duces,
egregii exercitus; Hist. 2. 47), egregius senatus is only found elsewhere
once, in the Theodosian Code (6. 4. 2 1 ; 372 A.D.) when egregius, as the
title vir egregius witnesses, had acquired a technical connotation. T h e
ready slip of a late-imperial editor should not be allowed to supplant
the true reading. For examples of this type of corruption in Greek
see Page on Euripides, Medea 1064.
49. 5. sequebatur: the 4,000 attendants, but under the influence of
Thucydides (6. 30. 2) L. has transformed them into a crowd of
spectators, propria alia . . . alia publica not two separate crowds, but one
crowd containing partly friends who had come for personal reasons
and partly the general public. T h e same make-up of the crowd is given
by Thucydides.
spem . . . curam: = /zer' eXirihos re dfia /cat SAofivpfitov in Thucydides.
49. 6. ire fortes, irefelices iubent: 5. 30. 5. T h e heading of a letter in the
Biography of Aurelian (Vopiscus4i. 1) felices et fortes exercitus s.p.q.R.
recalls the frequent incidence of a similar turn of phrase on property
inscriptions (cf., e.g., C.I.L. 6. 29778). It was a solemn formula to pro
claim the successful accomplishment of an undertaking, giving due
weight to the respective claims of god and man. There is harsh irony
in the allusion to the formula here which casts a very Roman shadow
over the departing army. T h e trochaic r h y t h m may be deliberate.
49. 7. faustum atquefelix: 1. 17. 10 n., the ritual language of prayer.
sospites . . . restituant: 2. 13. 6, ritual phraseology.
4 9 . 8 . dextro ianoportae Carmentalis: 'through the right-hand postern of the
Carmental gate' (Baker) and the same sense should be given to Ovid's
Carmentis portae dextro est via proxima iano (201 ; for text and interpreta
tion see Bomer's note). This is the natural interpretation of the Latin,
but there are difficulties. T h e Fabii are making for the Pons Sublicius.
363
2. 49- 8
479 B.C.
478 B.C.
2. 50. 1
2. 50. U
478 B.C.
477 B.C.
2. 5!- 6 5
was on 13 February and the consuls had only been in office for seven
months, they had the rest of the year to face the Etruscans. Combine
the two chronologies and the same events will be recorded twice under
two pairs of consuls. T h e explanation will also account for the awk
wardness of in futura proelia (51. 3 n.) and cladem (51. 4 n.).
The passage, as a whole, has the closest affinities with 22 fF. (52. 2 n . ;
the description of Ap. Claudius; 59. 7 and 25. 1 night attack by the
Volsci; provocatio) which may be due to a common source. It also has
express links with the story of Coriolanus as told in 34 fF. (52. 4 ;
54. 6). Conspicuous is the pride shown in the town of Antium
(63. 6).
Soltau 156-60; Seemuller, Die Doubletten in der Ersten Decade (1904);
Burck 8 3 - 8 5 ; H. Bruckmann, Die romischen JViederlagen, 4 7 - 4 9 ; Klotz
25"35 1 . 1. cum . . . est, iam: Crevier's correction is certain. T h e indicative
is used when only the point of time is meant. Cf. 21. 39. 4, 23. 49. 5,
45. 39. 1. Horatius'praenomen is C. here (Licinius) but M . in 3. 30. 1 n.
(Valerius). He was son of the consul of 507 (2. 8. 4-5).
5 1 . 2. annona: 9. 6 n., from the Annales. T h e Etruscans, by investing
the city on both sides of the river, prevented access to the cornland
in Latium.
ad Spei: not, as commentators take it, the temple of Spes in the
forum Holitorium which was only built in the First Punic War (Cicero,
de Leg. 2. 28) but an ancient shrine on the Esquiline just inside the
later Porta Praenestina (see plan of Rome) which disappeared soon
after the foundation of the second temple but not before it had given
its name to the region (Frontinus, de Aqu. 1. 5 ad Spem veterem). Being
the highest point on the east side of the city, it was a strategic area
and had been the scene of a similar battle in 2. 11. 5 fF. See PlatnerAshby s.v.
aequo Marte: 40. 14 n., military jargon.
5 1 . 3 . in futura proelia: a curious expectation which suggests a com
promise with the sources.
5 1 . 4. Sp. Servilius: N has/?, servilius here but Sp. Servilius in 52. 6.
D.H. 9. 25. 1 gives the praenomen Servius, Diod. 11. 54. 1 Gaius. T h e
Fasti under 463 gives his son's filiation as P . Servilius Sp.f. P. n. which
corroborates Sp. here. For the symbol/?, see 15. 1 n.
proxima pugna: a certain correction by Gronovius. Since the battle
referred to is that ad portam Collinam in which the Romans were only
just superior and gained a psychological rather than an actual success,
it is very odd to call it a clades.
velut ab arce laniculo: cf. 10. 1. 7. For the manuscripts' Ianiculi
see Madvig, Emendationes, 63-64.
impetus dabant: 19. 7 n.
367
2. 51- 5
476 B.C.
476 B.C.
2. 52- 3
2. 52. 5
476 B.C.
475 B.C.
2. 53- i
Sabini: 48. 6 n.
fl/ia: adverbial, sc. via, 'in different directions'. Cf. 30. 4. 2, 44. 43. 3.
5 3 . 3 . superatae sunt: L. omits that P. Valerius was awarded a triumph
for his services, a fact recorded in D.H. 9. 35 and the Fasti Triumphales.
5 3 . 4. sine Romano out duce aut auxilio: 3. 6. 5, 4. 45. 4 : see 3. 4. i o n .
This curious detail cannot have been invented but must have h a d a
place in the Annales, since it betrays a truth, which the Romans were
later anxious to conceal, that the earliest treaty with Latium and with
the Hernici was afoedus aequum which left the Latins and Hernici free
to act on their own initiative when they wished. It follows that if the
treaty with the Hernici was afoedus aequum the alleged partition of
their land by the Romans (41. 1) must be a confusion. See SherwinWhite, Roman Citizenship, 22.
54. 1. C. Manlius: the praenomen may be corrupt. T h e Decemvirs were
all consulars and advanced in years. One of their number was
A, Manlius (3. 33. 3 ; D . H . 10. 56. 2) and he is to be identified with
the cpnsul of 474, whose praenomen is given by D . H . 9. 36. 1 as AvXos
also (MdpKos in Diod. 11. 63. 1). Since L. drew his material for the
Decemvirate and the present passage from the same source, it would
not be quixotic to read A. Manlius here. See Broughton, M.R.R., s.v.
indutiae: the peace lasted till 437 (4. 17. 8), a period of 37 years but
no mention is made of the treaty being violated then, which may
indicate that it was of shorter duration than 40 years and was no
longer in force by 437. T h e treaty is to be connected with the crush
ing defeat which the Etruscans received at the hands of Hiero and the
Syracusans in 474 at Cumae. T h e coincidence is a valuable proof of the
soundness of the Roman archival tradition.
Cn. Genucius: 52. 3 n. For the prosecution see 35. 5 n.
arripuit: 3. 58. 7, Pliny, Ep. 4. 11. 1 1 ; short for arripi iussit.
54. 3. Vopiscum Iulium pro Verginio: D.H. 9. 37. 1, Diodorus 11. 65. 1
&nd the Fasti Cap. (
] lulus) all agree on the rival tradition that
Vopiscus Iulius was consul. The source of the mistake can be seen
from a fragmentary entry in the Fasti Cap. for 478:
E]squilinus.
T h e space on the stone leaves no doubt that this was the name of a
suffect consul and it has been plausibly restored as Opet. Verginius -f.
-n. Esquilinus (Degrassi 24, 356 ff.). In 478 the ordinary consuls were
L, Aemilius II and C. Servilius. In some authority the suffect consulate
was wrongly transferred from Aemilius' second to his third consulate
an,d was then mistaken for the second ordinary consulate of that year.
T h e singularity of the mistake is in keeping with what we know of the
libri lintei. For the praenomen Opiter cf. 17. 1 n. Vopiscus is a very
ancient Latin word meaning, according to Pliny, N.H. 7. 47, the sur
viving twin when the other has died after premature birth (? connected
371
2. 54- 3
473 B.C.
473 B.C.
2. 54 8
2. 55-
4 7 3
B G
- -
473 B.C.
2. 55- 4
Latin name (Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. i. 45). For the Publilii cf.
5. 12. 10 n.
quod ordines duxisset: 23. 4, 7. 41. 4; cf. also ordinem ducere 3. 44. 4.
T h e use of ordines = centuriae seems to belong to army slang (LL.S.
206 (Claudius); Tacitus, Annals 2. 80: see E. Bickel, Rh. Mus. 95
(1952), 109-111). But to make Publilius a centurion is in any case an
anachronism. It is not known whether a m a n who had held rank as
a centurion had a right to refuse to serve in a lower grade unless he
had been demoted for some disciplinary reason. It had, however,
been a burning issue in 171 B.C. when twenty-three centurions on. being
called up appealed to the tribunes of the plebs. T h e case was discussed
in a contio during which one of the centurions, Sp. Ligustinus, made so
moving a speech that the memory of it was recorded (42. 32-34).
T h e case of Publilius is founded on it.
5 5 . 5 . spoliari... et virgas expediri: 8. 32.10,29.9.4. spoliari = 'stripped*,
L. employs the official police language. Cf., e.g., Cicero, Verr. 5. 161 ;
Val. M a x . 2. 7. 8,
(
provoco' inquit lad populunC Volero: the word-order with the separa
tion oiinquit from Volero (25. 18. 6, 33. 13. 11) is effective. It stresses
both provoco and populum, marking the importance and significance
of the appeal.
virgis caedi: 36. 1 n.
circumscindere: only here in Latin, perhaps coined by L. because it
sounded pseudo-technical.
55. 6. clamitans: L. has carefully built up the dramatic excitement of
the scene. T h e crescendo is marked by emphatic word-order and the
urgent use of the historic infinitives (circumscindere, spoliare). T h e storm
breaks with Publilius' appeal to the mob which is couched in lively,
colloquial terms. Yor Jidem imploro cf. 23. 8 n.; adeste . . . adeste, the
very ancient form of invoking the help of gods (2. 6. 7 ; Horace, Epod.
5. 53 ; Catullus 62. 5) or men (Sallust, Or. Lep. 2 7 ; Catullus 42. 1 adeste,
hemdecasyllabi: cf. Prinz in Thes. Ling. Lat. 923. 80-925. 49), is streng
thened by the repetition (cf. Val. Max. 4. 1. 12 concurrite, concurrite).
Particularly pathetic is the use of commilitones. It is only used by L. in
speeches (3. 50. 5 n., 6. 14. 4, 22. 59. 10, 28. 19. 8, 25. 38. 6, 25. 7. 3,
24. 30. 8) which shows that he employs it for special effect. T h a t it was
a sentimental term is obvious from its meaning; cf. Suetonius, Julius
67 nee 'milites' sed blandiore nomine 'commilitones* appellabat.
Like the English 'comrade 5 , L. felt it to be a form of address em
ployed by one member of the lower classes to another. Note the
chiastic shape of his last sentence (nihil est . . i opus est) ending in a
monosyllable (5. 54. 7 n.).
55. 10. audaciam.: 4. 2. 11, the Senate apply to Volero the stan
dard term of political disparagement used in the late Republic by
375
2. 55- io
473 B.C.
the boni against populates whom they suspected to be plotting the over
throw of the existing order. See Wirszubski, J.R.S. 51 (1961), 12 ff.
55. 11. ira: abl.
56. 2. post. , . habito: 'postponing his own resentment to the public
interest' (Baker). T h e tmesis does not occur elsewhere in L. (cf.
7, 36. 10, 8. 34. 2) but is frequent in the writing of other historians
(Tacitus, Hist. 3. 6 4 ; Sallust, Jug. 73. 6) and may be a feature of the
historical style.
ut . . . fierent'. 58. 1 n. L. fails to distinguish between plebs and
populus. At this date a tribune had no standing to introduce measures
ad populum.
sub titulo: 3. 67. 9. Gf. also the judgement on the censorship in
4. 8. 2 ff.
56. 4. actioni: the proposal made by the tribunes.
cum: the train of thought is: the patres resisted with all their might
and, although they could not secure the co-operation of a tribune to
use his veto, the proposal was so momentous that the struggle was
spun out for a whole year. T h e real reason for the delay is given by
D.H. 9. 48 who preserves the valuable fact that there was a severe
epidemic that year.
nee quae (neque N) una vis ad resistendum erat: 4. 26. 3, 5. 9. 7, 30. 16. 3,
44. 20. 3. T h e order is nee posset adduci ut.
molimine: only here in L., elsewhere molimentum (5. 22. 6), but found
also in Lucretius, Ovid, and Horace. It would, however, be misleading
to label the word 'poetic'. T h e -men termination is of more ancient
origin that -mentum and it is therefore natural that such words, being
more striking and more emphatic, should be at home in a passage
where L. is underlining the epoch-making character of Volero's pro
posal and in the artificial language of poetry where metrical considera
tions also play a part. See Lofstedt, Syntactical 2. 297; Schmidt,
Beitrage Liv. Lex. (1888), 4 ; J . Marouzeau, Mem. Soc. Ling. 18 (1912),
148.
56. 5. ad ultimum dimicationis: 1. 15. 2.
Ap. Claudium Appifilium: 3. 33. 7 n. He is probably to be identified
with the Decemvir but historians preferred to separate the two per
sonalities, a respectable consul in 471 and the monstrous Decemvir.
His character and behaviour duplicate throughout that of his father
(23-27). His reactionary attitude is in keeping with the legendary
vetus atque insita Claudiae familiae superbia (Tacitus, Annals 1. 4). It is
likely that this picture owes much to the work of Valerius Antias.
Cicero knows nothing of the early Glaudii; indeed, even in his attack
on Glodius, he disregards their very existencewhich at least is
guaranteed by the Fasti. Valerius, on the other hand, took a lively
376
471 B.C.
2. 56. 5
interest in them because the Glaudii and the Valerii were natural
counterparts in the politics of the age of Sulla. See especially 16. 4 n.,
2
3 - 15 n-> a n d references there cited.
invisum infestwnque: 5. 8. 9, 26. 39. 15.
56. 6. sic <C> Laetorius: the praenomen is given by D.H. 9. 46. 1 and is
required here by the convention which L. follows of introducing each
new historical character formally. It would easily have been lost by
haplography after sic (Munzer, /?."., 'Laetorius (1)'). Like his ances
tor M . Laetorius (27. 6 n.), G. Laetorius can be no more than a
fiction created to provide a foil for Ap. Claudius. Only one name in
each annual list of tribunes before 471 can be genuine and there is
every reason for supposing that in 471 the genuine name was Volero
Publilius. G. Laetorius has all the marks of a doublet. He is a tough,
blunt soldier (56. 7 = 27. 6 ; a family trait inspired by the Horatian
heroism of P. Laetorius who single-handed held the bridge to allow
G. Gracchus to escape in 121 (Val. Max. 4. 7. 2)). He is a hereditary
foe of the Glaudii, an enmity that may go no farther back than the
galling embassy of G. Laetorius to Ap. Claudius after the defeat of the
latter in 212 (25. 22. 2).
56. 7. ipse incusationem . . . exorsus: in accusationem N. exorsus is followed
by an ace. without any preposition. Of the proposed corrections,
incusationem was first put forward by Doring, adopted by Grevier,
and later conjectured independently by J . W. Mackail. It is a more
appropriate word for the irresponsible attacks which Laetorius was
unleashing than the formal [in] accusationem (proposed by Grevier),
but apart from a single occurrence in Cicero (de Orat. 3. 106) it is not
found until late and church Latin.
T h e remarks of Laetorius which follow are designed to be in charac
ter. His language is rough and crude whereas D.H. 9. 47 allows him
a polished and fluent speech.
56. 8. carnificem: 35. 1 n.
56. 9. quandoquidem: cf. 12. 15 for a similarly pompous use of the word,
introducing a concluding sentence. It has the overtones of the English
'be that as it may'. See Kroll on Catullus 101. 5.
non facile . . . quam = non tarn f . . . . quam. The ellipse of tarn in
negative comparisons of this kind is adequately attested in L. It is,
however, notable that almost all the examples are in direct speech
(35. 49. 7, 26. 31. 2 : cf. 25. 15. 9) which indicates that the usage may
be colloquial.
praesto: 'I make good what I have said'. In this sense, the word is
not used before Cicero and, significantly, he reserves it for familiar
correspondence (ad Fam. 5. 11. 3 ; ad M. Brutum 1. 18. 3). T h e touch
of the colloquial suits the speaker.
crastino die: the periphrasis for eras is first employed by L. and, like
377
2. 56. 9
471 B.C.
471 B.C.
2. 56. 12
is that not even consuls could by virtue of their office order people
discedere. H e could only request them. H o w much less right, then, had
tribunes to issue such orders. T h e argument is based on a linguistic
quibble.
si vobis videtur, discedite, Quirites: it is generally assumed that discedite is used technically of the division or vote in the comitia centuriata
(or, later, tributa), as described in Asconius' commentary on the pro
Cornelio (p. 71. 12 Clark): 'cum id solum superest ut populus sententiam ferat, iubet eum is qui fert legem discedere: quod verbum non
hoc significat, quod in communi consuetudine, eant de eo loco ubi
lex feratur, sed in suam quisque tribum discedat in qua est suffragium
laturus'. If that is the meaning the formula is very curious. A magis
trate in fact gave a simple order to vote (cf. Asconius cit. sup.; Cicero,
de Leg. 3. 11) and his order will have been conveyed in the unvarnished
imperative discedite. si vobis videtur has no place with it. O n the other
hand the senatorial address to the magistrate would have been couched
in the polite placet ut. . . si eis videatur (cf. Donatus on Terence, Adelph.
511 ubi enim aliquid senatus consulibus iniungit addit 'si eis videatur'; 22.
33. 9, 25. 41. 9, 26. 16. 4 ; often abbreviated in inscriptions to s. e. v.:
Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 1027 n. 2). Mrs. Henderson (J.R.S. 47
(1957), 85) suggests that the instruction in L. 'is an ignorant confusion
of the magisterial imperative with the senatorial address' and that
the whole anecdote with its linguistic quibbles was designed 'to prove
a limitation of the consul's imperium\ T h e legalistic wrangle has no
place in D.H.'s narrative but since it forms the kernel of the whole
incident it is more likely that D.H. has omitted it because the tech
nicalities were too obscure to be appreciated in Greek than that L.
has invented it. If, then, it goes back to L.'s sources, men who, unlike
L., were in touch with live politics and knew the workings of the
assemblies, it becomes incredible that they could have made such a
confusion or, at any rate, could have based such an argument upon it.
In fact, if discedite is to be taken as meaning 'vote', one must assume
that L., unfamiliar with Republican procedure, has misunderstood
and confused something in his source. He made comparable blunders
over senatorial procedure (1. 32. 12 n.). In that case nothing follows
about antiquarian quibbles to prove the limitations of imperium. In
this unsatisfactory position, a second solution might be entertained.
Appius is arguing that the tribunes have no right to order the dis
persal of people. His argument is a fortiori. He, a consul, has no right
pro imperio. How much less entitled are the tribunes. Discedite, there
fore, ought to be used not in the technical sense of 'to vote' but in
its literal sense 'to disperse'. T h a t discedere was used officially in the
literal sense is indicated by the solecism cited by Qiiintilian 1. 5. 36
siplures a se dimittens ita loquatur cabi' aut 'discede'; cf. also L. 3. n . 4,
379
471 B.C.
2. 56. 12
in consulem esset.
X
56. 15. Quinctius' attempts to assuage the tempers of the plebs and of
the tribunes have much in common with the arguments urged by
Seneca in the de Ira. Both depend ultimately on a common stock of
rhetorical commonplaces which L. draws on to fill out an idea.
Hence L. repeats them at 8. 32. 14. darent irae spatium = Seneca, Dial.
5- 2 5 - 2.
57. 2. advocabantur: contrast 3. 63. 7.
57. 3 . There is nothing in D.H. 9. 49 corresponding to the pleas of
the Senate and the protestations of Appius and L. has put into their
mouths, as so often, rhetorical cliches suited to the mood and the
occasion.
dum . . . rem publicam: inspired by Sallust, Jug. 4 1 . 5, unless both
authors derive it from the resources of the many orators' handbooks
which were circulating in Rome and were popular in the schools. T h e
thought goes back ultimately to Thucydides' analysis of Stasis (3. 82);
cf. also Seneca, Epist. 104.
consules tribunique: see C.Q. 9 (1959)? 212.
57. 4. prodi. . . deseri: 54. 8 n.
non . . . deesse: since L. elsewhere shows a detailed memory of the
first Catilinarian speech (1. 46. 5 n.), it is likely that he was here
inspired by Cicero's famous disclaimer non deest reipublicae consilium
neque auctoritas huius ordinis: nos, nos, dico aperte, consules desumus (3).
Sacro monte: 33. 2 n.
58. 1. tributis comitiis creati tribuni sunt: how had they been elected pre
viously (33. 2 n.)? L. gives no hint except that the new system hin
dered the patricians from influencing the elections per clientium sujfragia.
380
471 B.C.
2. 58. 1
tradition, then, was that the tribunes were elected by the comitia
curiata (so also Cicero). It is true that in such an assembly organized
by family and birth it was possible for the great houses to control the
votes, but the revolutionary character of the tribunate rules out the
idea that such an assembly could ever have been employed for the
elections. The tribunes were officers of the plebs, not the populus: they
had secured such recognition as they had by force, not negotiation.
It is, therefore, necessary to reject the notion that the comitia curiata
was ever used for the election of tribunes, as an attempt by some
second-century constitutionalist, aware that the comitia centuriata could
never have been the electoral body, to find a respectable origin for
the institution and election of tribunes. The tribunes must have been
chosen at some unofficial assembly of the plebsa concilium plebis, prob
ably based on a tribal organization (21. 7 n.). The first step to secure
official recognition was to form the tribal assembly into a legitimate
comitia. It was this which was achieved by the Lex Publilia, wrongly
so called since the law must have been the result of a decision by the
comitia centuriata to which the Senate had given its auctoritas. The comitia
tributa is not attested before 471: it features increasingly in the sources
thereafter for the election of minor magistrates (Tacitus, Annals
11. 22), less certainly for the election of the consular tribunes (5. 18.
1-2 n.), for certain acts of legislation (3. 71-72) so that the Lex
Valeria Horatia of 449 recognizing the decisions of the comitia tributa
(3. 55. 3 n.) may be partly grounded in fact. The patricians would
not have been slow to see the advantages of a tribal assembly over the
cumbrous machinery of the centuriata and were prepared to accept
a compromise proposal which, although it gave a certain measure
of de iure recognition to the tribunes, promised also to be of great
benefit to themselves. In other words the Lex Publilia brought into
being a legitimate comitia tributa, side by side with and sprung from
the unofficial concilium plebis. It would, of course, have been recorded in
the Annales. See further Ihne, Rh. Mus. 28 (1873), 353 ^ ? Mommsen,
Rom. Forsch. 1. 177 ff.; Staatsrecht, 3. 148; U. Kahrstedt, Rh. Mus. 72
(1917), 258ff.; G. W. Botsford, Roman Assemblies, 271-3; H. StuartJones, C.A.H. 7. 450-6; H. Siber, R.E., 'Plebs'; A. G. Roos, Med. Kon.
Nederland. Akad. Weten. 3 (1940); E. S. Staveley, Athenaeum 33 (1955),
3 - 3 1 ; R. Sealey, Latomus 18 (1959), 526.
numero . . . additos tres: it was advanced above (33 3 n.) that Piso was
right in saying that the tribunes were originally only two in number
and that L. had derived this information not from first-hand consulta
tion of Piso but through Valerius Antias. Here again there is no reason
to suppose that L. has himself studied Piso. Piso's views would have
381
2. 58- i
471 B.C.
been cited by Valerius. It is, however, less certain whether Piso was
right in saying that the number was now raised to five. Diodorus
11. 6 8 . 8 w r i t e s : TOTE Trpwrojs KareoTaSrjuav hrjiiapxpi rirrap^
-Tato?
EiKivios /cat AevKios iVe/iercupto?, npos 8e TOVTOIS MdpKog AovLXAios /cat
471 B.C.
2. 58. 2
2. 58. 7
471 B.C.
471 B.C.
2. 59-
lx
(Varro, de Ling, Lat. 5. 90). For the rank see Fiebiger, R.E., 'Duplarii 5 ;
for the form of the word Lambertz, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v.
decimus quisque: the earliest recorded decimation, but it will hardly
have been preserved in any documentary source. As with many
Roman institutions an archetypal example was created to provide
a precedent for subsequent practice. It is notable that the first his
torically reliable instance occurred during the operations of Ap.
Claudius Gaecus and Q . Fabius Maximus Rullianus in Samnium in
296 (Frontinus 4. 1. 35) and the coincidence of names is striking. That
the origin of the punishment was mythical is made plain by Cicero,
pro Cluentio 128. For later examples see Polybius 6. 38. 2 with
Walbank's note and J. Sulser, Disciplina (Diss. 1920), 56.
60. 2. actae praedae: ea omnis: see C.Q. 9 (1959), 212. The plural is used
of the variety of spoil gathered: cf. 1. 5. 4, 5. 12. 5, 24. 2 et al. For the
allotment of spoil see 42, 1 n.
60. 3 . sibi parentem, alter'i exercitui dominum: 4. 42. 8, a piece of senti
mentality displayed by the armies of the late Republic which gradually
merged with other similar concepts into the symbolic ideal of the
Princeps as Father of his people. In the Republic, however, the general
as father to his army is to be sharply distinguished from compliments
in other spheres like patriae parens.
Thus Gn. Calpurnius Piso became so popular with his troops ut
sermone vulgiparens legionum haberetur (Tacitus, Annals 2. 55. 4 ; 3. 13. 2)
and Caligula was called castrorum Jilius et pater exercituum (Suet. 22. 1).
See A. von Premerstein, Vom Werden und Wesen des Prinzipats (1937),
102; A. Alfoldi, Mus. Helv. 9 (1952), 208. For dominus see Syme,
Roman Revolution, 155.
60. 5. patribus ex concilio submovendo: it is argued that the manuscript
reading may be defended and explained if patribus and submovendo are
separately ablatives of instrument (Lofstedt, Syntactica, 2. 163 n.;
Schmalz-Hofmann 597; Pettersson). The only passage adduced to
support this interpretation is Cicero, de Domo 1 ut. . . cives remp. bene
gerendo religionibus sapienter interpretando remp. conservarent but the diffi
culties of that text are considerable (see Klotz, Glotta 6 (1915), 215)
and the arguments which Nisbet puts forward for supposing it to be
corrupt and to have read something like remp. bene gerendo religiones,
religiones sapienter interpretando remp. are compelling. Similar considera
tions apply here. An inspection of the Mediceus shows that the ter
mination ib. was a correction made by Ratherius himself and that the
original reading was patres. It is possible that both go back as variants
to the Nicomachean recension but in any case patres is clearly to be
preferred here.
patres: it was only a theoretical truth that patricians were excluded
814432
385
cc
2. 6o. 5
471 B.C.
from the comitia tribute (cf. Laelius Felix ap. Aul. Gell. 15. 27. 4) since
from 200 at least no attempts were made to debar them from attend
ing. Their very numbers would have made their influence negligible.
This comment reflects the typical antiquarian rationalization of the
second century. See E. S. Staveley, Athenaeum 33 (1955), 4-7.
virium . . . additum . . . demptum: for the choice of words cf. 56. 16.
61. 1. 77. Aemilio: T. Aemilio codd. Titus Aemilius codd. at 3. 1. 1.
Diodorus n . 69. 1 Titus, 11. 74. 1 Tiberius. D.H. 9. 51. 1, 59. 1
Tiberius. It is likely that the consul of 470 is the same as that of 467
and that the authorities thought so too. In which case the praenomen
Ti. should be read in both places of L.
61. 2. causamque possessorum publici agri: 41. 3 n.
diem dixere: 35. 5 n.
The Trial of Ap. Claudius
An incidental interest of the section lies in the fact that it evidently
inspired the Emperor Claudius who, perhaps in A.D. 47, delivered an
attack on contemporary legal practice and especially against reliance
on adventitious aids to arouse pity {Bed. Griech. Ur. 611; see J. Stroux,
Sitz. Bay. Akad. (1929); F. von Woess, Zeit. Sav.-Stift. 51 (1931), 336 ff.;
D. M. Last, Latomus 17 (1958), 481-2).
61. 3 . iudicium . . .populi: 35. 5 n.
61. 4. modum . . . egressum: cf. Tacitus, Annals 11. 7, 13. 2 ; Quintilian
9. 4. 146.
61. 5. vestem mutaret: the habit of accused persons putting on mourn
ing dress and allowing their beards to grow was indeed a feature of
criminal trials of the late Republic (cf. Cicero, pro Plancio 29) but since
shaving was not known in Rome before 300 B.C. (Pliny, N.H. 7. 211;
cf. Aul. Gell. 3. 4), all accounts of such squalor reorum must be rejected
as apocryphal. It is remarkable that early mentions of it seem con
nected with the Claudii (3. 58. 1, 6. 20. 2). They may have originated
the custom in the fourth or third century. See Marquardt, Manuel,
18. 2. 63-64.
61. 6. spiritus: 'arrogance' not 'gusto' (cf. Pindarico spiritus ore in Prop.
3. 17. 40 with which Shackleton Bailey compares Quintilian 10. 1. 61)
or 'spirit' (35. 8).
61. 7. diem ,. . prodicerent: a misinterpretation of the usual procedure
before a iudicium populi which required three separate meetings at
stated intervals. Appius has already spoken at one ( = causam semel
dixit) but before the next is due he dies. The confusion is probably
a mistake by L. himself. See 35. 5 n. The nature of the trial is unknown.
61. 8. morbo moritur: 3. 33. 3 n. Historically the consul of 471 was
identical with the Decemvir, but family loyalties, wishing to divorce
386
470 B.C.
2. 6 1 . 8
2. 63. 3
469
-G.
speaks as if the Senate did order the consuls to take certain actions
(8. 13. 1) so that Niebuhr was being over-sensitive in reading coacto
extemplo senatu here.
63, 5. Antium: 33. 4 n.
virtus militum . . . neglegentia consulis: a psychological explanation
typical of L.'s battle-descriptions. Cf. 48. 5, 6. 22. 6.
63. 6. Antium . . . opulentissimam: 50. 2 n. The exaggeration betrays
the partiality of the authority, as also may the mention of the port of
Caeno, unless it was recorded in the Annales. Gaeno does not occur
in any other place. It has left no trace in Strabo, Pliny, or the geo
graphers and although it has been plausibly identified by le Bas with
Nettuno (see also Nissen, ltd. Land. 2. 627; K. Lehmann-Hartleben,
Klioy Beiheft 14 (1923), 190 and n. 3), it must have been a place
familiar only to a man intimately connected with the area.
64. 1. pacis . . . sollicitaepacis: for such repetitions cf. 2. 9. 3, 4. 44. 13,
27. 12. 5, 5. 54. 4 (Pettersson).
64. 2 . interesse . . . noluit: D.H. 9. 57. 1 knows nothing of such passive
resistance. It was devised by L. to perpetuate the theme of Stasis.
A quorum was not required at meetings of the assemblies.
similem annum priori consules habent: seditiosa initia, bello deinde externa
tranquilla: tranquilla to be taken gramatically with initia but the sense
is rather 'the opening of the year was full of agitation but, when the
threat of war arose, the rest of the year was trouble-free'.
64. 3 . Crustuminos: 1. 9. 8 n.
64. 6. salubri mendacio: such timely lies play a decisive role in many
heroic battles. The Battle of the Standard was won by a precisely
similar cry (Scott, Tales of a Grandfather, 1. 27 ff.). The tone is thus set
for the character of the fighting which follows. It is in L.'s best manner,
with touches of epic and of contemporary jargon mixed together to
create the effect almost of a ballad. But a comparison with D.H. shows
that this is all L.'s workmanship and owes nothing to actual poems
on the subject.
dum se putant vincere vicere: Gonway compares Aeneid 5. 231. Both
doubtless go back to a common source in older epic.
6 4 . 8 . tacitis indutiis: 18. 11.
64. 9 . tertiafere vigilia: 25. 1.
64. 10. Hernicorum: in compliance with the treaty of 41. 1 n.
canere . . . iubet: D.H. has no hint of the stratagem. It seems, therefore,
likely that L.'s source has introduced it to improve the account of the
battle. He will have taken it from one of the many anthologies of strata
gems. Frontinus distinguishes a special category of ruses designed to
secure the most favourable moment for battle by exhausting the enemy
and obtaining a good night's sleep for the troops; cf. the ruse by which
388
468 B.C.
2. 64. IO
BOOK III
Introduction
The third book is the central book of the first Pentad and within its
framework the story of the Decemvirate and the fate of Verginia occupy
the central position (33-54). That such an arrangement is not for
tuitous is suggested by two considerations. Books 2-4 deal with the
hundred years from 510 to 404. The chronological middle of that
period is the years 451-450, the years of the Decemvirate. The rest of
the material is so compressed or elaborated that the Decemvirate is
structurally as well as chronologically at the very heart of the work.
Secondly, for L., who throughout the first five books is preoccupied
with the problem of acquiring and safeguarding liber tas, the whole
episode is the clearest illustration of the three outstanding dangers
which beset a newly independent peoplethe ambition of individuals,
the jealousy of classes or factions, and the hostility of outsiders. Book 3
is concerned with the need for restraint on the part of the government
(moderatio), iflibertas is to be upheld, but it closes with an illustration
that a corresponding restraint on the part of the governed (modestia)
is also requiredthe theme of Book 4. Such at least would seem to be
the implication of his comment (65. n ) : 'adeo moderatio tuendae
libertatis, dum aequari velle simulando ita se quisque extollit ut
deprimat alium, in difficili est cavendoque ne metuant homines
metuendos ultro se efficiunt, et iniuriam ab nobis repulsam tamquam
aut facere aut pati necesse sit iniungimus aliis.'
The book falls into three main sections:
(1) 1-32. The proposal of C. Terentilius Harsa and the events
leading up to the embassy to Athens.
(2) 33-54. The Decemvirate.
(3) 55~72- The aftermath culminating in the speech of T. Quinctius.
1-8. Wars with the Aequi and the Volsci
467 B.C.
3- i-8
earlier activities (i. 2 n.). On the other hand, the section has much in
common with the previous Licinian passage which ended at 2. 51. 4.
The Fabii return to power (1. 1 n.). Political catchwords such as
largiendo (1. 3 n.) reappear.
The impression that L. has abandoned Valerius Antias in favour of
Licinius Macer again as his principal authority from the beginning
of the book is confirmed by the citation of Valerius as a variant source
at 5. 12 and the implied citation of the same variant at 8. 10 (n.).
Other possible additions from the same source are found at 3. 10 (n.),
and 4. 1 (n.). L. has made little attempt to create an artistic unity out
of his material but the increased wealth of details which the Annales
now supplied (1. 6 n., 5. 14 n.) would have made it difficult for him
to have done so without taking considerable liberties with the facts.
As it is, a comparison with D.H. reveals that L. and D.H. have fol
lowed different but related traditions (2. 1 n., 3. 10 n.), and that L.
has streamlined the data which he took over (4. 4 n., 5. 8 n.) and
confined himself to the essentials.
See Soltau 160-3: Burck 9-14; Klotz 253-8.
1. 1. Antio capto: 2. 65. 7. For the form of connexion between books
by the repetition of words cf. 5. 1. 1, 23. 1. 1, 24. 1. 1 (I. Nye, Sentence
Connection (1912), 136).
77. Aemilius: 2. 61. 1 n.
hie erat Fabius -fQuinctus qui unus: Quinctius is nonsense and is
generally assumed by editors to be a dittography of qui unus (Madvig,
Conway). It might be a corruption of Quintus caused by the rarity
of a postponed praenomen. The phenomenon of a praenomen following
the nomen is, however, found in Livy as well as of the nomen following
the cognomen (4. 23. 1 n.). It certainly occurs in verse (e.g. Ennius,
Annales 304 V.) and in some half-illiterate inscriptions (C.I.L. i 2 . 831)
but, outside L., there are no prose examples other than Varro, de
Ling. Lat. 5. 83 Scaevola Quintus, which is corrupt. There is one un
disputed instance of the mutation in L. (2. 32. 8 Menenium Agrippam)
but there the praenomen was sufficiently obsolete to make the change
easy (cf. 4. 17. 2 n.). At 30. 1.9 the Puteanus reads sub Lucretio Spurio
and at 29. 2. 11 the Puteanus and Spirensis traditions preserve Cornelium Servium but in both passages, as at 7. 22. 10, the manuscripts
are probably at fault. Besides the present passage, the archetype also
read Fabius Quinctius at 3. 29. 7 and Fabius Quintum at 10. 22. 1, where
Quintum can scarcely be right. Palaeographical arguments encourage
emendation throughout but some caution is advised by the case of
Menenius Agrippa and the disputed text of 1. 56. 11. In the latter
passage the archetype read Tarquinius Sextus . . . ut ignarus . . . esset rem
taceri iubent but the humanist correction Tarquinii, ut Sextus . . . [ut]
ignarus . . . esset, rem taceri iubent appears in most texts. There is, in any
391
3.
i. i
467 B.C.
case, no justification for Bayet's hie erat qui. The problem is discussed
by Mommsen (Rom. Forsch. i. 41) and G. Lahmeyer (Philologus 22
(1865), 468-75).
qui unus: 2. 50. 11. That Fabius would have been impossibly young
for a consulship if he was only a boy at the time of Cremera is a reflec
tion not on the reliability of the Fasti but of the traditional account
of that battle.
1. 2. iam priore consulate: there is no whisper of Aemilius' activity in
2. 61-62 although it is treated extensively by D.H. 9. 51. L. may have
suppressed it for artistic reasons but the inconsistency could be ex
plained by the change of source.
agrarii: those who hoped to gain from the agrarian law.
in spem . . . erexerant: 29. 14. 1, 33. 3. 12. It is favoured by Cicero
(de Domo 25; Phil. 3. 32). Notice the variation of tenses (erexerant. . .
suscipiunt. . . manebat).
utique: 'could be accomplished in any event with the assistance of
the consul'.
1 . 3 . principem civitatis: the language of first-century politics. For most
Romans of the late Republic the term principes (civitatis) described the
collective body of ex-consuls. Cicero himself uses principes as a synonym
for omnes consulares (Phil. 8. 22, 14. 17). princeps (civitatis), on the other
hand, was a value term applied to the man judged to be the most
prominent or influential of the principes (de Orat. 1. 225 (L. Licinius
Crassus); Deiot. 31 (M. Aemilius Scaurus); de Domo 66 (Pompey);
Brutus 80; ad Fam. 3. 11. 3). L. conforms to this Republican usage.
For principes as omnes consulares cf. 2. 2. 8, 16. 5, 46. 7, 3. 12. 1, 4. 6. 6,
5. 25. 11, 5. 30. 4 n.; {orprinceps, besides the present passage, cf. 2.16. 7
(P. Valerius) and 6. 1. 4 (Camillus). There is no hint of the Augustan
conception of Princeps, the ruler in all but name, which owed some
thing at least to Cicero's de Republica. See Syme, Roman Revolution, 10,
311, 519; L. Wickert, R.E., 'Princeps' with bibliography; H. Drexler,
Maia 10 (1958), 243-80.
largiendo: 2. 42. 6 n. The whole phrase is a proverbial commonplace
(Otto, Sprichworter; cf. Seneca, de Clem. 1. 20. 3 ; Epist. 16. 7 de alieno
liberalis sum).
1. 4. ductu et auspicio: technical, echoing the formal announcement of
the campaign. The phrase implies that the army was personally
commanded by the holder of imperium. When the general was only
a legate of a magistrate with imperium, he would be said to lead the
army (ductu) but the auspices would be those of his superior. As a
result he was not qualified to celebrate a triumph. So in an inscription
from Lepcis (Ehrenberg and Jones, Documents, no. 43): Marti Augusto
sacrum auspiciis imp. Caesaris Aug. pontificis maxumi patris patriae ductu
Cossi Lentuli cos . . . liberata civitas Lepcitana.
392
467 B.C.
3- i-4
See also 3. 17. 2, 42. 2, 5. 46. 6, 6. 12. 6, 40. 52. 5; Plautus, Amphitryo 196, 657; Bell. Alex. 43. 1.
agri captum ... aliquantum a Volscis esse: the reading capti transmitted
from archetype destroys the meaning of the sentence. The emphatic
position of the opening words shows that Fabius is recalling an historical
fact ('the previous year Quinctius captured some land from the
Volsci'), and not merely treating of an existing situation ('there is
some land captured the previous year from the Volsci'; cf. 42. 4. 3).
Gobet's captum is certain. Assimilation of endings is responsible for
other corruptions in L. (3. 15. 8 n., 19. 6 n., 4. 47. 3 n.).
1 . 5 . [propinquam] opportunam et maritimam urbem: Madvig objected to
the three adjectives on the ground that L. never writes a tricolon with
a copula only between the second and third members (i.e. A, B, and G).
His formulation of the rule is too rigid (Emendationes 82). Emendation
cannot eliminate passages like 44. 43. 6; cf. 5. 13. 6 n . A more
valid objection is that propinquam is both untrue and otiose. Antium
was over 40 miles from Rome so that it could only be said to be near
in so far that it was readily accessible {opportunam). propinquam is
probably a Nicomachean gloss on opportunam. For the conjunction of
opp. and mar. cf. 27. 30. 3, 45. 30. 4 ; Cicero, de Rep. 2. 5 ; but note also
41. 24. 8 opportuni propinquitate . . . sumus.
civitatem in concordia fore: Fabius sounds one of the themes of the
book (16. 3, 24. n , 33. 8, 52. 2, 54. 7, 57. 7, 58. 4, 65. 7) which is
resumed and elaborated in the great speech of Quinctius at the end
(67-68). But the connexion of the Fabii and Concordia is older than
L. and goes back at least to Licinius (2. 47. 12).
1. 6. triumviros agro dando creat: 4. 11. 5, 5. 24. 4, 8. 16. 14, 9. 28. 8,
10. 21. 9, 32. 2. 6. L.'s terminology is technically incorrect. Their
title historically was iiiviri agris dandis assignandis (Lex Lat. Bant. 15 ;
Lex Agr. 15) and they were not 'created5 by the consul (hence Gronovius' conjecture creant) but were elected in elections held by the
praetor after the passing of a special lex or plebiscitum (10. 21. 9,
34. 53. 2: so also the inscriptions cited above). Such inexactitude is,
however, typical of L. It is clear from the wealth of circumstantial
detail of magistrates, plagues, and prodigies which now begins to fill
the pages of L. that for this period the contents of the Annales survived
in a fuller form. The iiiviri would have figured by name there. For
Verginius see 2. 63, for Furius 2. 56. The names have the added chance
of being authentic in that 'the iiiviri who had founded a colony became
the hereditary patrons' (Badian, Foreign Clientela, 162). Squared-stone
tufa masonry at Anzio may belong to the colony or to the later settle
ment of 338 (Giovenale-Marchetti, Not. Scav., 1897, 240-1).
1. 7. fecit. . .fastidium copia: proverbial, cf., e.g., Plautus, Trin. 671.
Volsci: according to D.H. the other participants in the colony
393
3- i . 7
467 B.C.
were Latins and Hernici, not Volsci. That view is inherently more
probable and the mention of the Volsci by L. may be explained as a
misunderstanding of the fact reported by D.H. (7. 13) that the Volsci
were allowed to retain part of their possessions in the city after its
capture by the Romans.
1. 5. is venerat: abrupt and unexplained. D.H, 9. 59 devotes much
more space to Fabius' activities which suggests that L. has abbreviated
his material. The detail came from the Annales.
2. 1. Sp. Postumio: 2. 42. 5 n.
stativa habuit castra: see C.Q.g (1959), 217.
morbo: the nature of this and other plagues mentioned in L. cannot
be established with certainty. They were certainly recorded in the
Annales since the measures taken to avert them (3. 7. 8 n.) were of
importance pontifically, but no detail of symptoms is given. L. notices
the following cases:
490 pestilentia ingens (2. 34. 5; cf. 2. 35. 8).
466
463 annus pestilens urbi agrisque (3. 6. 2 ; cf. 6. 5, 7. 7-8, 8. 1, 9. 7,
13-2).
453 pestilentia foeda homini, foeda pecori (3. 32. 2).
437 pestilentia, inopia Jrugum (4. 20. 9).
436 pestilentia (4. 21. 2).
435 pestilentior inde annus (4. 21. 6).
433 morbo implicitis cultoribus agrorum (4. 25. 4).
432 vis morbi levata (4. 25. 6).
431 morbo (4. 26. 5).
428 stragem pecorum, volgati in homines morbi (4. 30. 8).
412 pestilentia minacior quam perniciosior (4. 52, 2).
411 pestilentem annum inopia frugum (4. 52. 4).
399 pestilens omnibus animalibus aestas (5. 13. 4).
392 pestilentia in agro Romano (5. 31. 5).
390 Gallos pestilentia urgebat (5. 48. 2).
Little help is provided by contemporary Greek records. There is
evidence of plague or malaria in Ionia in 494 (Herodotus 6. 12), in
Sicily about 475 (Pindar, Pyth. 3. 66), in Athens between 460 and 450
(27 Aristoph. Equites 84; cf. I.G. i 2 . 3 1 ; Plutarch, Pericles 37. 4), of
typhus in Athens from 430 to 427 ('The Great Plague'), of malaria in
Athens in 422 (Aristoph. Vespae 277, 281, 813) and, presumably, in
Sicily in 413, and of typhus in Sicily in 396 (Diod. S i c ) . These dates,
except for 428, scarcely correspond with the Roman epidemics. The
worst decade at Rome was 440-430, at Athens 430-420, but the Great
394
3. 2. 1
466 B.C.
Plague came from the east, not the west. It is, however, certain that
malaria first became seriously endemic in the northern Mediterranean
during the fifth century (W. H. S. Jones, Malaria and Greek History,
23-40; A. Gelli, Die Malaria; Glerici, Economia e Finanza, 26 n. 4) and
round Rome malaria was encouraged by the draining of the salt-lakes
at Ostia, since the Anopheles does not breed in salt water, and by the
extent of the Pomptine marshes. That fact taken in conjunction with
the total disappearance of several communities occupying strategic
positions in Latium during the century (e.g. Ardea, Laurentum,
Gabii, Longula, Polusca) is a strong indication that at least some of
the reports are to be identified as malaria. In particular, the epidemics
among the Volsci in 490 when they were operating in the Pomptine
area and among the Gauls in 390 who were encamped in the lowlying and swampy parts of Rome, together with the singling out of the
cultores agrorum as victims in 433, look like malaria. But malaria does
not attack animals (453, 428, 399) and it must be assumed that in
addition to a regular malaria curve several 'famine-plagues', perhaps
of the typhus species with murrain, also attacked the population. In
particular anthrax, the only disease known to attack cattle and men,
which certainly existed in Italy in Nero's time and being a persistent
disease might have been active for centuries previously, is a serious
candidate. See also Kind, R.E., 'Malaria'; Hofmann, R.E., Suppl., 8,
Tomptinae Paludes'; H. Zinsser, Rats, Mice and History, 104-49;
E. Kornemann, Intern. Monatsch. 14 (1919), 491 ff. D.H. 9. 60. 8
adds a further fact from the Annales that Postumius dedicated the
temple of Dius Fidius (Ovid, Fasti 6. 213-18).
3- 2. 3-5
465 B.C.
465 B.C.
3. 2. 10
3- 3- io
465 B.C.
464 B.C.
3-4- 9
4. 9. quae forma s.c. ultimae semper necessitatis habita est: 6. 19. 3 ; semper
is tendentious. There is no evidence that there was any precedent for
such a S.C. before 121 when on the instigation of the consul Opimius
the Senate passed a resolution de republica defendenda notifying the
consuls that a situation had arisen which required emergency action
to be taken but not conferring upon them any legal powers which
they did not already enjoy by virtue of their imperium (Plutarch,
C. Gracchus 14; Cicero, in CatiL 1.4).
The formula of the S.C. was as given by L. here and more fully
by Cicero (Phil. 8. 14; ad Fam. 16. 11. 2 ; in CatiL 1. 4) uti consules
rempublicam defendant operamque dent ne quid resp. d. c. The title Senatus
Consultum Ultimum is not found before Caesar (B.C. 1. 5). It might be
expected that such a resolution would have its origins in a military
emergency before it was adapted to political circumstances, but if
there were any earlier precedents Cicero must have invoked them.
The present passage is therefore an invention by the post-Gracchan
annalists to supply a pedigree for the actions of 121 (Plaumann, Klio
13 (1913), 360; O'Brien Moore, R.E., 'senatus', cols. 755-8). The
S.C. ultimum was used subsequently against Saturninus and Glaucia
in 100 B.C., against Lepidus in 77, against Catiline in 63, and against
Caesar in 49. The invention may be older than Licinius. It may even
be due to Piso who was involved in the Gracchan disturbances. But
it is interesting that Licinius, L.'s source here, included it, since it is
a remarkable instance of his political interpretation of history.
negotium daretur (uty videret: cf. 4. 45. 4.
4. 10. pro consule: cf. 5. 2. 9; a curious anachronism to be compared
with the S.C. ultimum above. Since the chief magistrate at Rome was
almost certainly known as praetor until 450 (1. 60. 4 n.) and the office
of pro-consul was not regularized (8. 26. 7) until the Punic Wars, there
can be no doubt that the notice, as it stands, is not original. The
tradition, however, that a Quinctius had once acted as general of a
Latin army, which did not include Romans, is so strong (cf. 7. 38. 5 42. 7) that it cannot be set aside. It is to be seen against the back
ground of information provided by the antiquarian Cincius (ap.
Festus 276 L.; see Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 35, 662; A. Piganiol,
Mel. a"Arch, et a"Hist. 38 (1920), 285-313; U. Coli, Regnum, 145-68;
J. Pinsent, Class. Journ. 55 (1959), 81-85), from which it can be
inferred that from an early date Rome's special position in the Latin
League entitled her from time to time to appoint one of the two prae
tors of the league (8. 3. 9; D.H. 3. 34. 3) without contributing a
contingent to the army and that the ritual of such an appointment
survived and was transformed into the normal procedure for dis
patching pro-consuls and pro-praetors to the provinces. L. (or rather
his source, Licinius, since D.H. 9. 63. 2 also writes dpxfj KoafirjddvTa
399
3. 4- io
464 B.C.
464 B.C.
3 . 4 . 10
pected or whether the city which supplied the commander was likely
to be called on for troops. So, in the present passage, it has come to
Rome's turn to provide the Latin praetor but she does not provide
troops as well.
This is all that can be discovered about the workings of the league.
For the rest we have a series of notices dealing with the Latin reports
of enemy activity (e.g. legati ab Latinis atque Hernicis nuntiabant. . .).
They occur in 495 (2. 24. 1), 479 (2. 48. 6), 465 (3. 4. 9), 462 (3. 8. 4),
461 (3. 10. 8), 459 (3. 22. 2), 457 (3. 30. 2), 456 (3. 31. 3), 449 (3. 57. 7),
431 (4. 26. 1), 424 (4. 36. 4), 423 (4. 37. 4), 419 (4. 45. 3), 410
(4. 53. 2), 409 (4. 55. 1), and 408 (4. 56. 4). T h e historian is faced
with the choice of supposing that worthless notices have been foisted
on to the Annalistic record by antiquarians anxious to reconstruct
the early history of Rome from rituals still surviving in their own day
or believing that the Annales did record the appointment of the Latin
praetor when it was Rome's turn to provide one and so did have a
solid kernel. W e shall not attempt to sway his judgement. It will
depend entirely on his character.
4 . 11. subitarios milites: not mentioned outside L. and in L. only at
40. 26. 6, 28. 10, 4 1 . 17. 9 (cf. 41. 10. 3). Probably a Punic W a r
definition retrojected by the Annalist tradition to early times, repentina auxilia, 'irregular supporting troops', is not a technical expres
sion.
5. 1. superante multitudine: cf. Tacitus, Agr. 25. 4 superante numero, 'with
their superiority in numbers' (Vahlen, Opuscula, 1. 150). multifariam,
'in many places' (50. 3, 21. 8. 4, 33. 18. 7, 37. 5. 1).
5. 2. si qua for tuna daret: 'wherever fortune allowed'. T h e absolute use
of dare = 'permit' is rare (5. 27. 2 ; Cicero, de Inv. 1. 25) and only
secure, because of metre, in Galpurnius {Eel. 4. 118). Elsewhere L.
prefers the reflexive fors se dare = 'fortune offered itself (1. 45. 3).
5. 3 . L. Valerius: presumably the consul of 470 (2. 61. 1) for whom see
2. 41. n n., since the consul of 449 would be too young. Perhaps an
Annalistic notice (1, 60. 4 n.).
5. 4 . tumultu: technical; 'a state of emergency'.
iustitium: 3. 6 n,
5. 5. decumana: one of the principal gates of the Roman camp, so
called because the tenth cohort of each legion was situated there.
It lay farthest from the enemy (Polybius 6. 27 with Walbank's note).
Furium legatum: the consul of 472 (2. 56. 1) and iiivir of 467 (3. 1.6).
5. 6. studio persequendi: to be taken with vidit.
multis saepe: 11. 11 n.
5. 8. nulla deinde vi sustineri potuere cum compulsi. . . obsiderentur . . .
venissetque . . . ni T. Quinctius peregrinis copiis cum Latino Hernicoque
814432
401
Dd
3-5.8
464 B.C.
464 B.C.
3 - 5 - 12
458
436
411
399
398
(3.
(4.
(4.
(5(5.
29.
21.
49.
1415.
9)
5)
1)
3)
2)
caelum ardere.
terra concussa motu (4. 21. 5, 35. 40. 7, 40. 59. 7;
Suetonius, Claudius 22; Aul. Gell. 2. 28. 2).
bovem locutam (24. 10. 10, 27. 11. 4, 28. 11. 4,
35. 2 1 . 4 , 41. 13. 2, 21. 13, 43. 13. 3 ; Jul. Obs.
15. 2 7 ? 43> 53; Tacitus, Hist. 1. 86).
carne pluit (24. 10. 7; 39. 46. 5, 56. 6, 42. 20. 5,
43- 13.5; Cicero, deDiv. 2. 58; Jul. Obs. 4, 6, 27,
43> 44)lupos a canibus fugatos (see 21. 46. 2).
crebris motibus terrae (see above).
Tiberis super ripas effusus (see note; cf. 5. 13. 1 n.).
prodigia.
locus in Albano nemore in altitudinem insolitam crevit
(see note).
464 B.C.
3- 5- *4
(cf. 24. 10. 6) and, although it is true that L., influenced doubtless by
Cicero's de Divinatione, is often prepared to advance rational explana
tions for observed phenomena (8. 1,5. 13. 4 ; cf. 5. 14. 2) and although,
too, his reporting of prodigies is conditioned by the time-honoured
place which they held in Roman historiography (Syme, Tacitus,
522-3), yet there are too many passages which demonstrate that the
neglect of prodigies was associated by L. with resultant disaster
to individuals and to the state (27. 23. 4 ; on this point see Stubler,
Die Religiositat des T. Livius, 100 ff.; M . W. L. Laistner, The
Greater Roman Historians, 68 ff.; I. Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy,
46-52). It is therefore preferable to suppose that in the present
passage, as in 21. 62. 1, L. is being delicately non-committal. For
obversata, a technical word, cf. 2. 36. 4; Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 2. 52;
Suetonius, Claudius 37.
5. 15. Antiates mille: their nationality and numbers suggest the hand
of Valerius Antias, and the whole sentence has the air of an after
thought inserted from a variant source, since nothing is said of Antium
in the course of the narrative (4. 11). A mention of the colony in the
Annales may have inspired V.A., recalling perhaps the Spartans at
Marathon, to work up an incident of local interest. 'First at a feast,
last at a fray.' Cf. 27. 20. 3 ; Euripides, H.F. 1173; Plato, Gorgias
447 a 2 with Dodds's note; Plautus, Menaechmi 989; Capt. 870 (Vahlen,
Opuscula, 2. 297),* Tacitus, Hist. 3. 79 (Andresen).
6. 1. L. Aebutius: T.f. T.n, a son of the cos. of 499 (2. 19. 1 n.) and
uncle of Post. Aebutius (4. 11. 1 n.) and M . Aebutius (4. 11. 5).
P. Servilius: Sp.f. P.n., probably therefore a son of the cos. of 476
(2. 51. 4 n.) and father of the dictator of 435 and 418 (4. 21. 10 n.).
KaL Sext.: the evidence for the date of entry into office of the magis
trates up to 390 may be briefly summarized (Mommsen, Rom. Chron.
80 ff.; Leuze, Die Rom. Jahrzahlung, 350-62). T h e traditional date for
the first consulate of 509 was 1 March (D.H. 5. 1) but that date is
apocryphal: it was historically pleasing that the new regime should
commence with the opening of the Religious Year. An erroneous inter
pretation of the regifugium (24 Feb.) may also have contributed
(1. 60. 2 n.). Somewhat more secure is the evidence that from 509-479
the entry-date was 1 September (D.H. 6. 49. 2 ; Lydus, de Mag.
1. 38). In the matter of Cremera it was shown that the divergent
dates of Licinius Macer (13 Feb.) and Valerius Antias (18 July) were
both compatible with an entry into office of the consuls during either
August or September, but that 1 August (Kal. Sext.) is preferable
(2. 51-65 n.)the date specifically given here for 463 and implied for
462 by 3. 8. 3 (n.); cf. D.H. 9. 13, 14, 25. T h a t date will have persisted
until the suspension of the regular constitution by the Decemviri on
404
463 B.C.
3- 6. i
15 M a y 451 (3. 36. 3, 38. 1). Consular government was restored after
more than two years. T h e exact date is uncertain. Leuze argues that
it was 1 September 449, on the grounds that the consular tribunes who
preceded Papirius and Sempronius, consuls in 444 (4. 7. 10-12), had
held office for less than three months (D.H. 11. 62 ; cf. L. 4. 7. 3) and
that P. and S. began a new era on 13 December (D.H. 16. 63).
13 December is itself a more attractive date (but it is not, in fact,
certain that P. and S. held office for a complete year, or even that they
held office at all. In any event 13 December became and remained
the official date down to 402 (4. 37. 3, 43. 8, 50. 8) when the col
lege of military tribunes was compelled to resign and a new system
was inaugurated on 1 October (5. 9. 8). T h e sickness of 392 entailed
a further change. T h e consuls resigned (5. 31. 7) before the end of their
tenure and a new year was begun on 1 July with a college of military
tribunes (5. 32. 1). It is likely that 1 July remained the opening of the
magisterial year at least down to 329 (8. 20. 3). It follows from this
evidence, which was probably entered in the Annales, that there
was no fixed date for entry into office during the early Republic, but
that so long as magistrates held office throughout the year their suc
cessors succeeded on the same day as they had done. When, however,
both consuls died, resigned, or were superseded, the new government
dated the opening of its year from the point where it had taken over.
Thus the Decemviri instituted a new year on 15 May, Valerius and
Horatius probably on 13 December, the military tribunes of 402-1 on
1 October, those of 392 on 1 July. It follows that there can have been
no machinery for electing two suffect consuls to complete a year in the
course of which both consuls or the whole college of military tribunes
had ceased to act through death or other cause and thereby lost the
auspices, so that when Licinius inserts consules suffecti in 444 (4. 7.
10-12) his restoration is anachronistic and false. T h e reason for the
flexibility of date was religious. No makeshift could carry the auspices
over, except temporarily in the person of the interrex. A newly solem
nized year had to be commenced. T h e fixed date was first instituted
as 15 March in 222, and 1 J a n u a r y in 153.
6. 2 - 3 . grave tempus: perhaps a reminiscence of Thucydides' plague
description. Notice especially Thuc. 2. 52. 1. Hellenistic historians
regarded it as a challenge to imitate and better that account (see the
humorous comments of Lucian, Quomodo Historia 15).
morbi: 2. 1 n.
6. 4. Hernici: 4. i o n .
6. 5. ut anno ante: not with veniat, but like ut semper alias with laturos.
veniat ut anno are the first surviving words of the fourth-century codex
Veronensis for which see Mommsen, Ges. Schriften, 7.96-148; W. Jung, de
fide codicis Veronensis (Hanover, 1881); C. Knight, C.Q.8 (1914), 166-80.
405
3-6.6
463 B.C.
463 B.C.
3- 7- 2
7. 2. eorum . . . eorum: for the repetition see examples cited by Shackleton Bailey, Cicero : lad Atticum\ 28.
tecta . . . tumuli: Novak objected that it was the plague, not the im
posing appearance of Rome, which diverted the Volsci a n d Aequi and,
further, that tumuli was a slighting term for the hills of Rome. He,
therefore, proposed reading bustaque, taking tumuli of funeral mounds.
But the TOTTos of a barbarian being deterred by the mere sight of the
city was borrowed from the story of Hannibal (26. 10. 3). Even as
late as the fifth century A.D. the emotions of Alaric and Genseric were
deeply stirred by the prospect of those hills and houses. T h e hills of
Rome are also described as tumuli in 5. 48. 2. Cf. Shackleton Bailey,
Cicero: cad Atticum', 58.
7. 3 . quid: with tererent, 'why were they wasting time?'.
transversisque itineribus: 2. 39. 3 n. Labicanos: 2. 39. 4 n.
tempestas belli: a striking phrase, used again at 31. 10. 6 (cf. Statius,
Theb. 3. 228). Perhaps taken over from Hellenistic historians since it is
a peculiarly Greek metaphor (cf., e.g., Sophocles, Antigone 670).
7. 4 . Romanam urbem: for the usual urbem Romanam, underlining the
duty of the Hernici and Latins to their confederates.
7. 5. Tusculano: valle would need to be understood with Tusculana,
the agreed reading of all manuscripts, including Ver., but the result
makes geographical nonsense. T h e Volsci have marched south-east
from Rome, through the Labicani agri to Tusculum. Continuing in the
same direction they would descend to the pass through which the
Via Latina ran and which was guarded at the east end by the narrows
of Algidus (see m a p ) . This pass must be what L. calls the Alban
valley. If so, the Tusculan valley would have to be a valley leading
down from Tusculum to the pass. There is indeed such a route but
it merely descends the side of the hill and could not be designated
a valley. Tusculano (sc. praedio or agro) must be read. Luterbacher, who
retains Tusculana, makes the Tusculan the valley of the Via Latina and
the Alban a valley running into it from the south-west near Algidus
but the Volsci could not then be said to be descending.
7. 6. M. Valerius: commonly assumed to be a corruption for M\
Valerius (Volusi f. Maximus) the brother of P. Valerius Poplicola, the
dictator of 494, since in the Elogium, quoted on 2. 30. 5, Manius is
named dictator, augur. I t is likely enough that the death of a Valerius, an
augur, was recorded in the Annales under this year but the identifica
tion of the augur with the dictator need be no more than a guess by
the author of the Elogium who in an endeavour to fill out a biography
gathered and combined material from every source. It is, in fact, im
possible that M \ Valerius Maximus who was already an old man
in 494 (D.H. 6. 39. 2) could have survived another thirty years, so
that the testimony of the Elogium can be discounted as an antiquarian
407
3- 7- 6
463 B.C.
463 B.C.
3- 7 - 6
3-8.2
462 B.C.
8. 3. 5, 23. 17, 9. 7. 15, 10. 11. 10), indicating that the populus had
'no claim to be responsible for any part of the creatio at such an
election' (Staveley, Historia 3 (1954), 199), whereas in elections
conducted by consuls or dictators he is liable to employ, in addition to
the technically correct consul creavit, dictator creavit (8. 37. 1, 10. 47. 5 ;
cf. 4. 11. 1 n.), the inexact populus creavit (4. 2. 7, 16. 7, 5. 14. 5, 6. 22. 5),
which mirrors the democratic nature of elections under the late Re
public. In addition to Staveley's article cited above see also Schwegler,
Rom. Gesch. 2. 150 ff.; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 649 ff.; Herzog, Philologus 34 (1876), 503 ; U. Goli, Regnum, 77 ff.; U . von Liibtow, Das Rom.
Volk, 188 ff.; E. Friezer, Mnemosyne 12 (1959), 308. Other interreges are
recorded for 444 (4. 7. io), 420 (4. 43. 9), 413 (4. 51. 1), 390 (5. 17. 4),
and 391 (5. 31. 8). Their names would have figured on the Annales.
Lucretium: for the cognomen see 1. 59. 8 n . ; for his triumph over Aequi
and Volsci see 10. 1-4. His filiation is T.f. T.n., so that he must be the
son of the consul of 508 and 504 (2.9. 1, 16. 2). H e was praefectus urbis
in 461 (24. 2). D.H. adds less credible details which seem to be mere
invention, such as that he defended K. Quinctius (9. 7. 5) and opposed
the Decemvirate (11. 15. 5). See Munzer, R.E., 'Lucretius (28)'.
Veturium: a son of the consul of 494 (2. 28. 1)? For the variant
spelling of his name see 2. 19. 1 n., and, for its evidence as to L.'s
source, 4. 1 n. He celebrated an ovatio (10. 4 n.). See Gundel, R.E.,
'Veturius ( i 8 ) \
8 . 3 . ante diem tertium idus Sextiles: 6. 1 n. P. Servilius must have survived
until near the end of his year of office, but the confusion caused by the
plague delayed the institution of the new year until after 1 August.
8. 4. Hernicis: 4. i o n .
8. 5. procedit: rather that prodit (Ver.) is the regular word to describe
the advance of armies (2. 5. 8, 4. 6. 1; Caesar, B.G. 6. 2 5 ; B.C. 1. 80,
3. 34; Gurtius 7. 3. 19). Such telescoping is a feature of Ver. (cf.
3- 57- 7, 5- 2 3 - r o ) 8. 6. praedonum agmen: incompatible with the large numbers given by
the variant source (Valerius Antias) in 8. 10. The strategy of the
Volsci, amplified with certain confusion by D.H. (68-69; s e e Klotz
256), resembles that of the campaign of the previous year. Tusculum
and the Alban pass were the key to Latium and so long as the Romans
or their allies retained control of it no prolonged threat to Rome could
be maintained.
8. 7. [in] re subita: a causal abl. is required, as at 1. 4 1 . 3 si tua re subita
consilia torpent and 1. 60. 1, not the circumstantial in re kept by Luterbacher and Conway comparing 2. 34. 5, 3. 51. 4, 4. 29. 6. Ver., which
reads res, wrongly adds -s at the end of a word before a succeeding
s- at 3. 30. 5, 35. 7, 38. 4, 4. n . 6, 13. 3, 34. 4, 54. 7, 5. 31. 8; cf.
3-31- i410
462 B.C.
3.8.7
Q. Fabius: cos. 467 (3. 1. 1 n.). D.H. 9. 69. 2 calls him Q,. Furius
but the text is to be regarded as corrupt. Ver. reads praefectus erat
urbis: armata against praeerat urbi: is armata of N. N. is right. When L.
is giving the title of a man he always employs praefectus, as at 9. 6
a praefecto urbis Q. Fabio (1. 59. 12, 60. 4, 3. 3. 36, 24. 2, 29. 4, 4. 36. 5)
but when he describes the appointment, he uses the verb as at 4. 31.
2 Cossus praefuit urbi and 4. 45. 8. So is also is needed. The syntax is
exactly parallel to 1. 24. 6fetialis erat M. Valerius; is . . .fecit.
tuta omnia ac tranquilla fecit: cf. Sallust, CatiL 16. 4.
8 . 8 . exploratis itineribus suis instructum: suis has been taken with itineribus
referring to the subject of the main sentence (hostes)'having ascer
tained the enemy's route in advance 5 or with instructum'having his
men ready in position5 (Doering). The latter is impossible and is not
saved even by Madvig's (cum) suis i. Against the former it must be
urged that the position of suis is disproportionately emphatic and that
the sense is already manifest without it. To delete suis, as was first done
by Duker, leaves instructum unevenly balanced with ad certamen intentum and the same objection holds against Alan's conjecture brevissimis. satis (Sorgel, commended by Wolfflin) makes good sense 'well
drawn up* but is palaeographically less attractive than subsidiis, for
which cf. Tacitus, Annals 2. 80. 6 subsidiis instructi. For instructus et
intentus cf. 1. 15. 2.
8 . 1 0 . The exaggerated figures hardly suit the description of the enemy
band as apraedonum agmen. The detail is evidently, as in 5. 12, supplied
from Valerius Antias, particularly since there is mention of signa
militaria. It is clear from references in the later books that Valerius
took pride in enumerating the number of military standards captured
(cf. 29. 4, 10. 14. 21, 30. 2 et al. and see Walsh, Livy, 127 n. 2).
8. 11. tertia: 8. 6, 8. 9. For the triumph see 10. 1-4.
9-14. The Lex Terentilia and the Trial of K. Quinctius
After having dispensed with the disjointed preliminaries of the book,
L. is now free to turn his attention to the first major episode which
leads up to the Decemvirate. It is symptomatic of his technique that
whereas in Book 2 he underlined the part played by agrarian agitation
in the Struggle of the Orders, now he develops a second issue, the
power of the supreme magistracy, and actually suppresses the mention
of a tribune, Sex. Titius, to whom his sources attributed agrarian
legislation (D.H. 9. 69. 1). The Decemvirate is to occupy the centre
of the stage in Book 3 and the rest of the material must be subordinated
accordingly. There are no strong grounds for doubting the historicity
of Terentilius' motion. His name and proposal would have figured in
the records. It was presumably passed as a plebiscitum by the assembly
of the plebs but, since at this date tribal legislation was not binding on
411
3-9-14
462 B.C.
the whole populus unless it were confirmed by a lex in the comitia centuriata (55. 3 n.), the proposal could not be put into force. It was
subsequently adopted in substantially the same form by the patres in
31. 8 (Staveley, Athenaeum 33 (1955), 23). T h e content has under
gone a subtle metamorphosis. T h e aim of the radical pressure-group
which culminated in the Decemvirate was the codification and publi
cation of the laws, while the strength of the patrician oligarchy lay
in their ability to govern by dypa<f>oi vofioi. This, and nothing else, was
the struggle of the mid-fifth century as it had been a century earlier
in Athens. Terentilius' proposal must, therefore, have been, as M o m m sen saw (Staatsrecht, 2. 702 n. 2), to appoint quinque viri consulari imperio
de legibus scribendis (9. 5) and not, as L. retails it, quinque viri legibus de
imperio consulari scribendis. T h e power and prerogatives of the consuls
could not have been subject to such investigation, whereas the De
cemvirate ultimately was just such a commission legibus scribendis. T h e
text of L. cannot be corrupt or even fortuitous since L. insists on the
nature of the commission elsewhere (9. 2, 24. 9, 31. 7; see Taubler,
Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Decemvirats, 54 n. 86) and it must be
supposed that a deliberate distortion has been carried out either by
L. or by his source. D.H. has no trace of it.
The opening sentence sic res Romana in antiquum statum rediit is obscure
and ambiguous. Was the 'old condition 5 that which prevailed before
the invasions of the Aequi or before the pestilence ? Such a rough re
sumption, coupled with the apparent inconsistency between Lucre
tius' return (10. 1-2) and his actual exploits which involved the defeat
of a mere praedonum agmen (8. 6), suggests a change of source and, as
elsewhere (cf. 2. 32. 2), the change coincides with the citation of a
variant (8. 10). T h e new source is unquestionably Valerius Antias
since Lucretius' triumph is in keeping with the grandiose casualty
figures that Valerius estimated and a renewed interest in Antium
emerges (10. 8). L. follows him without any sign of intermission
through chapter 21. Valerius subscribed to the political reforms of
Sulla which were directed in particular to prevent the possibility of
a single man with a large army being in a position to blackmail the
Senate. The danger re-emerged when in 74 B.G. M . Antonius Greticus
was given the command against the pirates. H e enjoyed imperium
which was equal to that of pro-consular governors in other provinces
but was undefined in area, because his operations involved land as
well as sea campaigns. Cicero calls it imperium infinitum (Verr. 2. 8,
3. 213 with U; see V. Ehrenberg, A.J.P. 74 (1953), 117) but he was
employing the political jargon of the day rather than the official
terminology (Beranger, Melanges Marouzeau, 19-27), and it is the same
catchword, the same fear of the military giant who would become the
military dictator, that is mirrored in L.'s immoderata, infinita potestate
412
3- 9~x4
(g. 4). In other words, Valerius Antias is to be seen as the person
responsible for distorting the proposed Quinquevirate from a legal
committee to a constitutional commission for reasons of contemporary
political propaganda. See also Soltau 100; Burck 14-17; Klotz 25 7 - 9 ;
J . Bleicken, Volkstribunat, 15-16.
Instead of relating the fate of Terentilius' proposals in one continuous
account, L. divides his material into a series of episodes, separated by
extraneous events. In that way the interest is maintained and the
story carried forward. For the same technique see 2. 22-33.
9. 2. C. Terentilius Harsa: the nomen, given as Tepdvnos by D.H.
10. 1. 5, is found on two late inscriptions from Rome (C.I.L. 6. 27151,
36411), but the family may well have emigrated from Praeneste (C.I.L.
i 2 . 2480). T h e cognomen is not found elsewhere; Harsa, rather than
Arsa, a Hebraic name (1 Kings 16. g), would be indicated by the
name Harsidius (C.I.L. 11. 4734) and was the reading of the arche
type. Schulze (357) argues for an Etruscan derivation but the cognomen
will in any case be a third-century addition.
9. 2 - 1 3 . L. presents the case for and against Terentilius' bill in two
short speeches, reported mainly in indirect speech but breaking out at
the end into an effective display of direct rhetoric. T h e speeches, like
the pair in 2. 4-9, appear to be of his own composition since D . H .
knows nothing of any opposition led by Q . Fabius and the arguments
which he attributes to the tribunes and the aristocratic opposition
bear no resemblance to L.'s speeches. As might be expected they
consist exclusively of the rhetorical commonplaces characteristic of
the late Republic. For the contrast between liberae civitati and dominos
cf. Augustus, Res Gestae 1; Tacitus, Hist. 4. 73; for soluti atque effrenati
cf. Cicero, de Rep. 1. 5 3 ; for libidinem ac licentiam cf. Cicero, Verr. 3 . 7 7 ;
for the antithesis between lex and libido see Nisbet on in Pis. 9 4 ; for
minarum atque terroris cf. Cicero, pro Fonteio 34; de Domo 131 ; pro Flacco
19; for insidiatum (to be taken airo KOIVOV with rempublicam) cf. Cicero,
pro Sulla 14; Tacitus, Annals 6. 8. 6; for tempore capto adortum cf. ad
Herenn. 2. 7 occasio . . . idonea . . . ad rem adoriendam. Fabius breaks into
direct speech with a personal appeal to the tribunes. Similar transitions
from or. obi to or. recta, when the speaker turns to address one person
particularly, occur also at 6. 6. 12, 15. 9, 8. 34. 11, 24. 22. 17
(Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 40 n. 1) and mark the peroration. Fabius'
plea is highly antithetical (ad singulorum auxilium, non adperniciem universorum; tribunos plebi.. . non hostes patribus; nobis miserum, invidiosum vobis;
non ius sed invidiam). Together the two speeches form a fine setting for
the political conflict,
9. 4 . immoderata . . .potestate: '(possessed) of unfettered and unlimited
power'.
metus legum: 1. 21. 1.
462 B.C.
413
3- 9-6
462 B.C.
461 B.C.
3- *o. 4
3. io. 6
461 B.C.
K l o t z 258 n. 2) a n d
461 B.C.
3- H-14
first sight the charge is one of impeding the tribunes in the exercise
of their auxilium or, in fact, of violating their sacrosanctity. It cannot
be certainly known under what head such an offence would be classed
but it would appear to be a case of perduellio. Later, however, the
charge is one of parricidium (13. 3). When K. Quinctius absconds and
forfeits his bail, his father L. Quinctius Cincinnatus pays up and is
forced to live veluti relegatus, yet a few months later he is elected cos.
suff. (19. 2). Vadimonium was certainly defined for civil procedure in the
Twelve Tables (Aul. Gell. 16. 10. 8) but in criminal cases it can hardly
have existed at such an early date since it is the outcome of the stale
mate caused when tribunes used their auxilium to prevent the arrest
and detention in prison of criminal offenders. It was developed from
the civil vadimonium. Moreover, since the case was never concluded as
K. Quinctius left Rome before the trial, it cannot have been recorded
in the Annales. T h e prosecution of a patrician by a tribune is incon
ceivable before the Decemvirate (2. 35. 5 n.), and the figure of 3,000
asses (13. 8) is in itself proof of anachronism.
But if we are forced to reject uncompromisingly the whole story,
it is still possible to see how it came into being. T h e legend that Cin
cinnatus was called to high office from a humble retreat is too well
established to be fiction but the authorities differed on the precise
occasion. D.H. (10. 17. 4, 24. 1) reduplicates the story. C. is found
ploughing before his consulship (460) and before his dictatorship
(439; cf. 4 . 1 3 . 14). The anecdote was, therefore, not exactly dated and
Annalists felt themselves free to fit it into history where an opportunity
afforded. But to find an opportunity required devising an explanation
why a m a n of such distinction should have been encountered in such
circumstances. There was a satisfying artistry about a father im
poverishing himself for his son, which was heightened if the son should
have betrayed the country which his father was then called upon to
save. T h e story was then embellished. Concrete examples were re
quired to illustrate and justify the provisions codified in the Twelve
Tables. Both the issues involved in the case of K. Quinctius were
dealt with by the Twelve Tablesthe killing of indemnatus quisque homo
(Salvian, de Gubern. Dei 8. 5. 24) and vadimonium (Aul. Gell., loc. cit.).
It is, therefore, reasonable to suppose that the details of K. Quinctius'
trial were invented by jurists as a case-history to give historical sub
stance to the bald provision of the Twelve Tables. This hypothesis
is supported by the fact that these same issues were talking points in
the second century. Vadimonium was radically overhauled by the Lex
Aebutia at some date after 150 (Aul. Gell., loc. cit.) and caedes civis
indemnati (3. 56. 13, 4. 21. 4) was the subject of Cato the Elder's
speech de Decern Hominibus (Aul. Gell. 13. 25. 12) and became a
flash-point in the Gracchan troubles (Livy, Epit. 61).
814432
417
Ee
3- " - M r
461 B.C.
461 B.C.
3- i i . 6
(6. 20. 7), and therefore oddly assorted with facundiam. A further
awkwardness is that inforo . . . can hardly be taken with addiderat and
must be understood as dependent on facundiam as belli is on decora,
but Ver. evidently read an extra word which is not preserved in the
Nicomachean recension (see O.C.T. apparatus; this part of the
palimpsest is now illegible). Weissenborn proposed inforo (et curia) or
ut nemo (eo tempore). A verb, however, would solve both difficulties:
perhaps exhibuit. facundiam is used only here by L.
non lingua, non manupromptior: 2. 33. 5 n. T h e conventional summary
of the all-round m a n ; cf. Sallust, Jug. 44. 1 (see Gomme on Thucydides 2. 40. 2).
1 1 . 7 . velut. . . suis: so Milo is depicted as standing alone [pro Mil. 67).
procellas sustinebat: cf. pro Mil. 5 tempestates et procellas. . . semper
putavi Miloni esse subeundas.
11. 8. mulcatus: a rare verb, used only twice by Cicero, once in the
pro Milone (37). L. uses it again below (12. 9). T h e scene of anarchy
is strongly reminiscent of the gang warfare of the 50's.
1 1 . 9 . A. Verginius: the gens Verginia, Etruscan in origin and patrician
in sympathy, might seem unlikely to produce a plebeian tr. pi. but the
tradition is sound. Another is recorded in the annals of the early fourth
century (5. 29. 6) and although falsification has played its part in
the history of Verginia, a plebeian Verginius is possible. It is therefore
likely that his name is authentically reported, if one tr. pi. was recorded
each year. It is alleged that he was re-elected for five successive years
(19. 5, 21. 3, 22. 2, 24. 1, 9, 25. 4, 29. 8, 30. 6). See Gundel, R.E.,
'Verginius (3)'.
atrox ingenium accenderat: cf. Tacitus, Annals 4. 60. 3 (Fletcher).
iusto . . . bello: 1. 32. 5 n.
11. 10. pati reum mere: a Ciceronian phrase; cf. pro Rab. Post. 4 3 ;
de Off. 3. 55. See Nisbet on de Domo 141.
invidiaequeflammam. . . suggerere: cf. pro Mil. 98 cum a meis inimicis
faces invidiae meae subiciantur.
11. 11. ibi multa saepe: multa ibi saepe Ver. In the collocation multus is
generally placed next to saepe, either in the order m. s. (Plautus, Capt.
328; Miles 8 8 5 ; Ovid, Fasti 6. 108) or s. m. (Cicero, Verr. 5. 147; de
Officiis 2. 20) but that juxtaposition is not invariable (cf. Plautus,
Poen. 129; Lucretius 5. 1158; Cicero, de Rep. 3. 4 2 ; pro Sestio 109;
Horace, Ep. 2. 1. 219; Propertius 1. 15. 1 with Shackleton Bailey's
note). T h e determining factor in the present passage is that multa
rather than ibi carries the most emphasis and should therefore be
placed first. It was the number of rash words and deeds which damaged
Caeso's reputation, not the occasion on which they occurred.
inconsulte dicta factaque: cf. 2. 37. 6.
11. 13. exspectate dum consul: for a similar fear cf. Cicero's imaginary
419
3- " 13
461 B.C.
461 B.C.
3- 13.
3- 13.8
461 B.C.
461 B.C.
3. 14. 6
that the sentence his artibus . . . elusa est is the natural clausula to a
section,- cf. 29. 9,155. 13, 4. 27. 1, et aL For incommoda voce cf. Plautus,
Casin. 152; for mansuefacio cf. 38. 17. 7 and mansuetum (o the plebs)
in 16. 4.
15. 1. C. Claudius Appi films \ a son of the original founder of the gens
(2. 16. 4 n.) and historically a brother of the Decemvir (^or. 471), but
when annalistic invention distinguished two Ap. Claudii to secure a
good consul and a bad Decemvir, the exact relationship of C. Claudius
became obscured. D.H. follows two sources in naming him the uncle
and the brother of the Decemvir (10. 20) on different occasions.
Like other Claudii he is a true patrician. After his activity against
Herdonius (18. 5) and the death of Valerius, he opposed plebeian
pressure to permit consideration of the proposal legibus scribendis (19. 1),
resisted the Lex Icilia de Aventino publicando, and stood out against the
re-election of Cincinnatus (21. 7). His patrician pride was matched
by his fairness. He could register sufficient disgust at Appius' tyrannical
behaviour to withdraw from Rome to Regillum (35. 9, 40. 2-5, 58. 1)
and yet be the first to come forward in Appius' defence (58. 1-5) and
to attack the radical consuls Valerius and Horatius (63. 8 ff.). See
Miinzer, R.E., 'Claudius (322)'.
P. Valerius: cf. 2. 52. 6.
15-18. Appius Herdonius
P. Valerius in magistratu mortuus est: Tusculanis gratiae actae: Capitolium
purgatum atque histratum. Three facts contain the germ of the whole of
the episode. It is easy to see how the rest of the story evolved. A legend
that a Herdonius once threatened Rome and was thwarted by the
loyalty of the men of Tusculum was evidently a part of the family
legend of the Mamilii (1. 49. 9 n.) which they blended into the history
of Rome in their great days during the third century. No other ex
planation accounts for the duplication of the event under the Tarquins. It was inevitable, too, that if the Capitol required purifying
because of some pollution, the death of the consul P. Valerius must
be connected with it. The association in the consulate of a Valerius,
the democrat, with a Claudius, the patrician, must be a significant
stage in the Struggle of the Orders. So the whole historical setting is
built u p : Herdonius takes advantage of political dissension to seize
the Capitol; the Roman people, immobilized by their internal bicker
ings, are only saved by the intervention of their loyal allies; the de
secration of the Capitol requires special measures.
Such was the development of the story by the beginning of the
first century. L. inherited it but, as a comparison with D.H. reveals,
besides streamlining the narrative, made two notable alterations. In
recent memory the lower classes had been stirred into insurrection by
423
3- ^ 1
460 B.C.
4 6 0 B.C.
3- 15.8
(Seneca, Agam. 917) hat firtnum is the natural epithet (45. 2, 23. 34. 12,
34. 25. 10; Cicero, Verr. 1. 153; de Leg. Agr. 2. 103; ad Att. 1. 19. 6;
ad Fam. 15. 4. 14) and the correction, proposed by Luterbacher, is
attractive, fidum by assimilation of ending after praesidium.
15. 9. se. . . causam: cf. Sallust, CatiL 35. 3 publicam miserorum causam
pro mea consuetudine suscepi (Skard). T h e whole of Herdonius' policy
echoes that propounded by Catiline.
omnia extrema: take concitaturum with Volscos et Aequos, t. with 0. e.
There is no trace of the speech in D . H . Cf. Sallust, CatiL 26. 5.
16. 1. dilucere: 8. 27. 11, 25. 29. 10; first in Varro. Here perhaps
suggested by Cicero, in CatiL 3. 6 cum iam dilucesceret.
16. 2 - 4 . The threat from the Aequi does not feature in the account of
D . H . and may be at least partly inspired by Catiline's negotiations
with the Allobroges.
16. 4. mergentibus malis: 6. 14. 7, 17. 2, 9. 18. 1, 41. 3. 10; Virgil,
Aeneid 6. 429, 615, 11. 28. T h e use oi mergere is not due to poetic
influence (Stacey, Rettore) but to the prevailing diction of the Augus
tan age (Gries, Constancy, 49).
malum . . . quiesse: only here, but Scheller's emendation of the manu
script -que esse, also proposed by Freudenberg, is palmary. Pettersson,
following Ruperti, unsuccessfully defends the received text by suppos
ing an ellipse: malum exoriens (sc. erat) tumque . . . sopitum videbatur.
16. 5. at id: 'but in fact it bore down almost more heavily than any
thing else upon their sinking fortunes' (Foster).
16. 6. concilium . . . legi perferendae: see CQ. 9 (1959), 279.
17. 1. discedere: cf. Sallust, CatiL 36. 2.
se ex curia proripit: cf. Sallust, CatiL 32. 1 deinde (Catilina) se ex curia
domum proripuit.
3- '7- 2
460 B.C.
ductu et auspicio: i. 4 n.
rem publicam eversuri: Cicero, pro Mil. 24; Phil. 10. 12 et al.
non commovit: oratorically it is effective to point out the grotesqueness
that free citizens should be duped by a man who could not even incite
slaves to insurrection but factually it is nonsense, since the slaves have
risen (15. 5). The factual inexactitude is overlooked in the search for
effect, so that Schott's nunc for non is unnecessary.
supra caput: proverbial; cf. Cicero, ad Q.F. 1. 2. 6; Sallust, Catil.
52. 24; Virgil, Aen. 4. 702.
Tractatio: (1) pium
17. 3. Notice the repeated v sounds.
cura tangit: a strongly religious association; cf. Virgil Aen. 12. 933;
Ovid, Heroid. 8. 15.
at vos: 1. 41. 3.
Iuno regina: [regina] Ruperti. L. makes Valerius draw attention to
the plight of the Capitoline Triad, apparently oblivious that the cult
of Iuno regina was only introduced after her evocatio from Veii (5. 22.
3-7) some two generations later. L. has again been carried away by
his oratorical enthusiasm.
17. 4. tantum hostium: 'such a force of enemy*. Note the elaborate
arrangement of words forum curiaque . . . in for 0, in curia with the clauses
deliberately balancing each other in shape and length (rd/couAa; cf.
ad Herenn. 4. 27) e.g. velut cum otium superat, -|- senator sententiam dicit,
-|- [alii] Quirites suffragium ineunt.
velut cum: apparently only here in L., and therefore intended for
special effect (Ennius, Annals 84, 443 V.).
[alii] : if alii is read, it will carry the common meaning: 'others,
that is the ordinary citizens' (5. 35. 1 n.). Here, however, the word is
superfluous and spoils the close parallelism. In view of the common
corruption to which Quirites gives rise (5. 6. 15 n.), it seems wise to
delete it.
(2) dignum
17. 5. deos hominesque: J. F. Gronovius proposed a famous emendation,
cives for deos, arguing that dii male sunt hie advocati cum TO armatos
et currere . . . inepte refer an tur ad deos'. deos hominesque is a formal
cliche (2. 9. 3) which comes facilely to L.'s lips despite its utter in
congruity to the situation.
17. 6. mentem . . . da: cf. Cicero, in Catil. 1. 22.
qua quondam: L. employs a very ancient formula of prayer in which
the worshipper invokes some past action of the god as a precedent for
the present hoped-for action (Fraenkel, Horace, 173, with examples;
Page, Sappho and Alcaeus, 16-17). The reference is to 1. 12. 10.
tu . . tuam . . . tuae: the religious character is maintained by the
sevenfold repetition of tu/tuus, which is not matched elsewhere in L.
426
4 6 0 B.C.
3. 17.6
11. 25.
Conclusio
17. 7-8. The dramatic climax of the speech lay in the invocation of
Romulus. For the practical instructions L. switches to or. obi. and
details them in short, succinct sentences with all the precision of a
military command.
iam: conscium Bayet. Valerius appears to forget that he is consul
and that any measures he might adopt would depend on the sanction
of his consular imperium but Bayet's logic is too Gallic. Valerius' inten
tion is to stress that he would go to any lengths without any respect
for persons to ensure the deliverance of Rome; and if he overstates
his case it is only in keeping with the exaggerations already observed.
17. 9. vim ultimam: 2. 63. 2.
nee . . . tamen: tamen belongs in sense to the second half of the dis
junction : 'the law could not be passed and at the same time the consul
could not proceed to the CapitoP. See Fraenkel, Horace, 332 n. 2.
cessere: 60. 7 n.
17. 10. sermones . . . serere: 2. 2. 4 n., 28. 25. 5, political slang from the
late Republic ('club gossip 5 ); cf. Cicero, ad Att. 2. 18. 2 sermo in circulis . . . est liberior quamfuit.
17. 11. penates publicos privatosque: 22. 1. 6, 25. 18. 10, 45. 24. 12. The
penates publici were the penates of Troy, who had been taken to Rome
from Lavinium where they were first enshrined. They were none
other than Castor and Pollux, enjoying on coins the legend Di Penates
Publici or Di Penates. The official oath of the Republic was in the name
of Juppiter and the di penates. The penates privati, on the other hand,
were the individual penates of private households throughout Rome.
Together they formed a venerated circle to which Roman orators,
especially Cicero, directed emotional appeals. See de Domo 144 with
Nisbet's note; Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 112-3.
17.12. discesserant: 'had made separate rounds of the gates and walls'.
18. 1. et Tusculum: 'to Tusculum also' or 'even to Tusculum'.
18. 2. L. Mamilius: 1. 49. 9 n. The grant of citizenship as a token of
thanks in 29. 6 is sufficiently historical to confirm the truth of the whole
tradition (see Munzer, R.E., 'Mamilius (i)'). The dictatorship at
Tusculum, also mentioned at 6. 26. 4, is paralleled by dictatorships
in other Latin cities such as Aricia and Nomentum. It was probably
replaced in 381 by a college of three aediles when Tusculum passed
finally and completely under Roman sovereignty (de Sanctis, Riv. Fil.
10 (1932), 437; cf. Rosenberg, Der Stoat der Alien Italiker, 72 ff.).
427
3. i8. 2
4 6 0 B.C.
460 B.C.
3- J 9 - 2 1
(19. 4-12 ; 21. 4-7) which are evidently original compositions designed
for this very purpose. Apart from minor details both authors retail
the same basic facts, but little credence can be placed upon them.
T h e record that Cincinnatus was cos. suff. in 460 could be genuine but
the flesh and blood of the narrative consists of highly tendentious
explanations of R o m a n institutions. In particular, the prominence
given to provocatio (20. 7), to the sacramentum (20. 3-6), to the military
origin of the comitia centuriata (20. 6), and to the illegality of a m a n
holding successive consulates, all reflect the quarrels and speculations
of the second century. Such arguments did not interest L. T h e secondcentury annalists had provided him with the materials for a picture
or exemplum of an homo vere Romanus and that was enough for L.
(Burck 22; Klotz 259-60). T h e moral of the whole story of Cincinnatus
lies in 20. 5.
1 9 . 1 . paceparta: for the phrase and order cf. 1. 1 9 . 3 , 5 . r - I >3-45- J 5
Tacitus, Hist. 5. 10 pace per Italiam parta; Suetonius, Aug. 22. Ver.'s
order is to be preferred to N's.
deos manes fraude liber aret\ Valerius had promised that a condition
of plebeian co-operation in the defeat of Herdonius should be that
the Lex Terentilia would be discussed. To go back on that promise
was to implicate the soul of the dead Valerius in afraus. For deos manes
as the equivalent of the soul of one particular person cf. 3. 58. n ,
21, 10. 3 ; Dessau, I.L.S. 880 dis manibus L. Caecilii Rufi\ Aul. Gell.
10. 18. 5. It is a loose and late extension of the original collective
meaning 'powers of the underworld'. See W. F. Otto, Die Manen;
Weinstock, J.R.S. 39 (1949), 166. See 58. n n.
19. 2. Decembri: 6. 1 n.
19. 3 . consilium fet modum]: adhibere modum is common in other authors,
e.g. Cicero, de Officiis 2. 5 5 ; Nepos, Epam. 4. 6 ; Tacitus, Annals 13. 4 4 ;
Suetonius, Nero 37, but does not occur elsewhere in L. It is not a
particularly happy bed-fellow with consilium which has been specifically
mentioned earlier (12. 7) as the quality in which Caeso was most
defective. It is therefore to be regarded as a Nicomachean gloss
(cf. 26. 9, 44. 4, 35. 7, 62. 2, 56. 12, 6 1 . 12, 4. 21. 7, 24. 7, 17. 1,
5 . 4 1 . 4 , 4 4 . 3, 55. 1).
19. 4 - 1 2 . Cincinnatus 5 oration, with its characteristic switch from
indirect to direct speech (1. 57. 7, 2. 7. 9, 3. 9. 11, 48. 3, 5. 21. 2), is
planned according to the formal arrangement of the schools but is
distinguished by a few linguistic highlights which serve to convey the
vehemence of the speaker and the urgency of the occasion.
Exordium: principium ab adversariis
19. 4. perdita domo: a curious expression, meaning not a house of illfame but a home where the rules and conventions of family life have
429
3- 19- 4
460 B.C.
460 B.C.
3. 19. 10
3. 20. 6
460 B.C.
460 B.C.
3-2i. 3
433
Ff
3- 22. I
459 B.C.
regarded him as the brother (40. 8, 41. 4). For the problem of his
military operations see 23. 7 n. See also Miinzer, /?.., 'Cornelius
(256)'. The cognomen Maluginensis is also said to be derived from a
lost home-town of the Gornelii.
census actus: 1. 44. 2 n. lustrum . . . condi: 1. 44. 2 n.
religiosum: 5. 40. 10. The notice, coming ultimately from the
Annales, is probably derived from a different source (see below).
22. 2 - 2 3 . Military Operations during 459
L., abruptly changing his source, narrates in a bald style a series of
military operations without making any attempt to weld them into
a coherent story. The switch is indicated by the unique repetition of
the consul's names (22. 1, 22. 2 ; for 9. 29. 1 see apparatus of O.C.T.),
and the omission of cognomina on the second occasion argues for a
different tradition, which was possibly older but at least kept closer
to the spirit of the original Fasti. It would appear that L. reverts to
Valerius Antias at the beginning of 24 since in 24. 8 the consuls return
triumphantes. There is nothing in L.'s account in 22-23 to justify
a triumph, but it is known from D.H. that one branch of the annalist
tradition mentioned that Antium revolted and was recaptured by the
efforts of the two consuls and the same tale, recorded in the Fasti
Triumphales, is alluded to as a variant in 23. 7. Valerius Antias must
have dealt with that stirring episode of Antian history and it follows
that L. has temporarily abandoned him. The same conclusion ensues
from the duplication of Roman gratitude for the recens Tusculanorum
meritum (23. 1 = 31. 3 (Valerian)) and from the contradiction
between 22. 1 census actus and 24. 10, suggesting as it does the duplica
tion of the same event as a result of its being reported under separate
years in two different authors. See Lachmann, De Fontibus, 59; Soltau
162; Burck 22-23; Klotz 261.
22. 2. principio anni: 4. 1. 1 n.
bellum ingens: sc. imminere or the like. Allen, worried by the ellipse,
proposed ingruens for ingens, which is not, however, attested (cf.
10. 21. n ) . For bellum ingens cf. 9. 32. 1 and for nuntiare bellum 'to
announce a threat of war', cf. 31. 8. 3, 35. 50. 2.
Latini: 4. 10 n.
ut bellum praeverti sinerent: 'allow the war priority'.
22. 3 . Fabio ut. . . duceret datum: a variation on exercitus ducendus datur
(2. 43. 5). There is thus no necessity for (negotium) datum (Allen).
22. 4. exfoedere: 4. 10 n.
22. 6. observari: observare N with socios as subject understood, which
Pettersson rightly would retain, since the phrase is a technical
military command and as such would be given directly in the active:
so, e.g., Sallust, Jugurtha 51. 1.
434
459 B.C.
3. 22. 6
3- 23- 7
459 B.C.
459 B.C.
3- 24. 1
3- 24. io
459 B.C.
24. 10. Aequis: but they renew hostilities in 25. 5. If sufficient trust
could be placed in the evidence for the revolt of Antrum, it would be
tempting to associate the peace not with the Aequi but with the Volsci
Antiates.
census: 22. 1. T h e event must have been reported by different
authors under separate years. For the figures cf. 1. 44. 2 n.
decimum: the twentieth is noticed in 293 (10. 47. 2). T h e fact is
doubtless genuine. As, however, there was as yet no fixed interval
for the ceremony lustrum condere it is impossible to base any conjectures
on it as to the antiquity either of the pontifical records or of the city of
Rome itself.
25. 1. L. Minucius: P.f. M.n., a son of the consul of 492 (2. 34. 1). H e
was a prominent figure in the history of the next twenty years: for
even if his inclusion in the second college of Decemvirs is false (35. 11 n.)
and as a consequence the activities alleged to have been undertaken
by him against the Aequi (41. 10, 42. 5-7) no more than imaginary,
he is indissolubly associated with the fate of Sp. Maelius and his name
perpetuated both by the entry cpraefectusy in the libri lintei for 440 and
439 (4. 12. 8 n., 13. 7-8) and by the statue decreed him by the Senate
for his services in informing against Maelius (4. 16. 2 n.). A prosecution
levelled against him for false testimony in 436 is mythical (4. 21. 3 n.).
L. lists him as the ordinary consul with Nautius but the Capitoline
Fasti for the year record that he -was cos, suff. and that he succeeded
Carven[ who died in office. A garbled version of the same tradition
survives in Diodorus (11. 88. 1) who ascribes to Minucius as cos. ord. the
impossible cognomen Kapovrlavos. T h e late chronographers who de
rive from imperial Fasti also supply the cognomen Atratinus. T h e entry
in the Capitoline Fasti should be restored as [M. Papirius - f. -]n. Carven[tanus] and be regarded as a doublet of 4. 52. 4 n., where the libri
lintei gave M . Papirius Atratinus as the colleague of C. Nautius in the
consulship. See further Hermes 89 (1961), 379 ff
C. Nautius: cos. 475 (2. 52. 6).
25. 2. M. Valerio Manif.: Valeri f. manuscripts. Valeri could be a
corruption for Volusi but there is no evidence of a father and son
Valerius at this date both called Volusus (4. 49. i n . ) . It is a ducto
graphy of Valerio. In restoring the filiation M\f.
rather than
M.f.,
thereby making him the son of the dictator of 494 (2. 30. 5), it is
assumed that he is to be identified as the consul of 456 (31. 1 n.) whose
name is given in its entirety by the Capitoline Fasti as M\f.
Volusi n.
(Volkmann, R.E., 'Valerius (246)'). D.H. (10. 8) in his version of the
trial does not name the quaestors: M . Valerius here may owe some
thing to the interpolations of Valerius Antias. For the trial see 24. 3 n.,
2. 35- 5 n.
438
458 B.C.
3- 25. 2
3- as. 7
458 B.C.
458 B.C.
3- 26. 5
3- 26. 7
458 B.C.
effuse must be adverbial and be taken with affluant (e.g. i. io. 4 against
40.44.12).^
26. 8. navalia: the docks on the left bank of the Tiber in the Campus
Martius (see plan). First mentioned in connexion with the victory
over the Antiates in 338 (8. 14. 12) and perhaps referred to in a line of
Ennius (477 V.), they figure prominently thereafter (references in
Luglij Fontes, 5. 58. 46-58). For the site see Platner-Ashby s.v.;
Weiss, R.E., 'Navalia'; A. Elter, Rh. Mus. 46 (1891), 128.
prata Quinctia: four iugera of land in the ager Vaticanus on the right
bank of the Tiber (Pliny, N.H. 18. 20; Festus 306 L.). It is probable
that the name was old and that the site of Cincinnati^' farm was sub
sequently localized there for etymological reasons to explain the
name. T h e aetion was elaborated, for there is later mention of a Vicus
Raciliani (C.I.L. 6. 975) and a collegium iuvenum Racillanensium (see
Platner-Ashby s.v.).
salute data: 10. 18. 11.
26. 9. quod bene verteret: 1. 28. 1, 3. 35. 8, 62. 5, 7. 39. 13, 10. 18. 14,
35. 14, 29. 22. 5. Elsewhere the pious aside is confined to Plautus (e.g.
Aul. 175, 257, 272; Trin. 502) and Terence (Eun. 390; Phormio 552).
Nero used the formula in his prayers at the opening of the work on the
Corinth canal (Suetonius 37).
satin salve: 1. 58. 7 n., the archaic greeting.
Raciliam: a Latin name (Schulze 443). T h e only other known holder
of it was L. Racilius, tr. pi. in 56.
26. 1 1 . navis: a detail inspired by the two ferries which the ports in
the Aurelian Walls prove to have plied there in later times.
amici, turn: Ver. reads amid tui et turn, which may represent an old
variant in its exemplar but the wrong insertion of et (5. 32. 8, 50. 5)
in that manuscript is an argument against reading amid turn et here.
turn et is not found in the first Pentad.
26. 12. et virum in ipso imperio vehementiorem: I accept Walters' imperium
for imperii but there is no need to follow Doujat in deleting in; see
Gronovius's note.
27. 1. L. Tarquinium: so also D.H. 10. 24. 3. Tarquitium in the Capitoline Fasti (Sigonius) is a pedantic emendation by the compilers
(Degrassi 24 f., 362 f.) under the influence of the fact that, whereas
Tarquinii are virtually unheard of in the late Republic, Tarquitii are
well known, e.g. C. Tarquitius, quaestor in 8 1 ; L. Tarquitius (Cicero,
ad Att. 6. 8. 4).
sed qui cum . . . fecisset: to be retained. A double opposition is implied.
Tarquinius is a patrician but too poor to be a knight, Tarquinius
fought in the ranks but his prowess made him the leading figure in
the army (Mikkola, Konzessivitdt, 45).
44^
458 B.C.
3. 27. 2
27. 2. iustitium: 3. 6 n.
27. 3. duodenis: hardly credible, since in Per. 57 ad septenos vallos is a
severe fatigue, while the usual complement was three or four (Polybius
18. 18. 8). D.H. 10. 24 does not specify the number but Ver. by its
reading:
val[lisque
ante solis[
suggests that with 19 letters as the average for the line duodenis is too
short. I would propose quaternis.
[Martio] in campo : the order of words would be unprecedented. For
the rare in Martio campo cf. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 13; Val. Max. 9. 2. 1.
T h e choice lies between deleting Martio as a gloss (Niebuhr) or re
arranging, as in M. c. (H. J . Muller) or in c. M. (Luterbacher).
2 7 . 6 . itineri. . . proelio: technical; cf. Tacitus, Annals 13.40. 2 ; Curtius
3- 8 - 2 3 quas tempus ipsum poscebat adhortationes: the encouragement is framed
in short, passive sentences that distinguish Latin military style (pbsideri,
clausos esse, incertum esse, verti;cL E. Fraenkel, Eranos 54 (1956), 189-94)
and is couched in archaically colloquial language suitable to the age
(maturato 1. 58. 5 n . ; for adderent gradum 'put on the pace' cf. 10. 20. 10,
26. 9. 5, Plautus, Trin. 1010 adde gradum, adpropera). T h e thoughts
are cliches (Thucydides 7. 69. 2 ) : for puncto . . . verti, a Greek senti
ment, cf Cicero, Phil. 5. 26; Tacitus, Annals 5. 4.
27. 7. pervenire posset: 23. 4 n.
27. 8. iAdcelera>: without the destination expressed is a military
command; cf. Caesar, B.G. 7. 87. 3 accelerat Caesar.
28. 1-10. Notice the careful variation of the structure. T h e initial
reconnoitre is described in long, periodic sentences. As soon as the
time for action comes the operations are related in short sentences
without any connecting particles. L. manages to adapt the rhythm of
his language to the rhythm of the battle.
28. 7. prohibenda: for the infinitive cf. 4. 2. 12, 5. 49. 8, 22. 60. 3.
T h e marvellous circumvallation of the Aequi does not figure in D.H.
10. 24.
28. 8. prior: added to expand and explain ilia (nom. = pugna).
28. 9. ut: where two clauses, the first negative, the second positive, are
introduced by ne, it is usual, as at 46. 9, for the second to be linked to
the first by an adversative et or atque (cf. Curtius 8. 14. 35 ; see Walch,
Emendationes, 227). Allen proposed etfov ut here, but the passage is so
carefully balanced (a proelio / adpreces; hinc . . . hinc) that two indepen
dent clauses (ne . . . ponefent, ut sinerent) suit the rhythm better.
infensus: M a d v i g ; cf. 29. 31. 12, 1. 53. 10 n. T h e incensus of the
443
3- 28. g
458 B.C.
manuscripts would require odio, ira, or the like expressed. See Wolfflin,
Livian. Kritik> 14.
28. 10. iugum: 1. 26. 13 n. L.'s explanation is a rationalization
of a primitive apotropaic rite, examined by S. Eitrem, Symb. Osl. 25
(1947), 39-40 with bibliography.
28. 11. sub hoc iugum: the ace. is invariable with sub after mitto in the
phrase.
29. 2 - 3 . The resignation of Minucius is entirely duplicated from the
case of M. Minucius in 217, described by L. 22. 29. 711. It is intro
duced to account for the fact that there was no primitive record of
Cincinnatus , dictatorship in this year and hence no mention of any
abdication by Minucius. In constitutional theory the dictatorship
would put all the other magistracies into suspension (Mommsen,
Staatsrecht, 1. 249). See Walsh, Livy> 9 0 ; T. A. Dorey, J.R.S. 47 (1957),
92-96 (unreliable).
29.3. coronam auream: the difficulty of the phrase has not been felt, since
at 26. 48. 14, which is usually cited as a parallel, the right reading is
corona <J)aurea. Golden crowns were of three categories: (1) a large
golden crown held by a slave over the triumphator's head (Pliny, N.H.
33. 11; Juvenal 10. 39); these were of very late institution; (2)
golden crowns contributed by allied states as tokens of gratitude and
carried in the triumph (Paulus Festus 504 L.; Aul. Gell. 5. 6. 5-7);
(3) golden crowns dedicated in the temple of Juppiter Gapitolinus out
of the spoil (2. 22. 6, 3. 57. 7, 4. 20. 4, 7. 38. 2, 32. 27. 1, 36. 35. 12,
43. 6. 6, 44. 14. 3). A presentation of a golden crown to the dictator
by the army is unprecedented. It is possible that there was preserved
in the Capitoline Temple a crown of the third category with some
inscription as Quinctius dictator vovit which was misinterpreted by
Valerius Antias as being a gift to Cincinnatus in recognition of his
success whereas it could have been a dedication by the genuine T.
Quinctius Cincinnatus Gapitolinus, dictator of 380, who is known to
have set up at least one inscription on the Capitol (6. 29. 9 tabula . . .
his ferme incisa litteris fuit: 'Iuppiter atque divi omnes hoc dederunt ut T.
Quinctius dictator oppida novem capered).
praefecto: 1. 59. 12 n.
29. 4. triumphantem: in the Fasti Triumph.:
L. Quinjctius L.f. L.n. Cincin[n]atus an. CCXCV
dict(ator)] de Aequeis idibus Septembr.
militaria signa: 3. 10 n.
29. 5. carmine triumphali: L. describes a Roman triumph one of whose
most prominent features was the ribald and impromptu singing in
versus quadratus that accompanied the procession. There are numerous
444
458 B.C.
3- 29- 5
references to the custom (4. 20. 2, 53. n , 5. 49. 7, 10. 30. 9; D.H.
2. 34, 7. 72 ; Plutarch, Marcellus 8; Aem. Paullus 34; Appian, Libyc. 66;
Pliny, N.H. 19. 144).
29. 6. Mamilio: not in D.H., but not necessarily a doublet of 18. i o n .
Citizen-rights were a talking-point in the second century (Appian,
B.C. 1. 23) and the precedent of L. Mamilius was cited (cf. Gato
fr. 25 P.). It was part of the oldest historical tradition.
comitia: 2. 41. 11 n.
in exsilium abiit: 13. 8; the preposition is only omitted when it can
be understood airo KOLVOV (Catullus 33. 5; Val. Max. 3. 8. 4). D.H.
follows another tradition which keeps Volscius continuously in the
tribunate with Verginius for five years ending with 457.
29. 7. sexto decimo: the figure was probably inspired by the reflection
that a trinundinum had to elapse between the report of the investigating
magistrates (25. 3) and the vote in the comitia. Gincinnatus5 tenure of
office represents two-thirds of that interval. Gf. 4. 34. 5; 47. 6.
Fabius [QJ ".3. 1. 1 n.
29. 8. crearet: Ver.; for the singular cf. 4. 16. 7.
29. 9. lupos: 5. 14 n.
lustratum: 18. 10.
30-32. Annalistic Notices: the Preliminaries to the Decemvirate
The character and career of Gincinnatus have been depicted. It is
now time to pass on to his opposite, Appius Claudius. In L.'s sources,
however, a considerable quantity of material interposed which L. is
eager to hasten over. His record for this year is both terse and defec
tive. The concision can be judged by D.H.'s treatment of the Lex
Icilia (31. 1) for he devotes several paragraphs to what L. dismisses in
six words. The omissions include the Siccius episode (43. 2 n.) which
figures largely in D.H. (10. 37), and the Lex Aternia Tarpeia (31. 5 n.).
It follows that L. felt obliged to deal with the details in his sources
but had no wish to linger over them. His style is equally impatient.
There are no indications that L. has abandoned Valerius Antias.
Such evidence as there is points to the opposite conclusion. The
allusion to the Tusculani (31. 3) is a doublet of the similar note in
the Licinian 23. 3. L.'s source was late Republican, evidently active
after 80 B.G. (31. 5 n.), and followed the tradition of Piso (30. 7 n.).
How far his facts were reliable is difficult to judge but if, apart from
the embassy to Athens (31. 8 n.), the figures for the fines (31. 6 n.)
and the casualties at Algidus (31. 4)typically Valerian sums both
-are bogus, the remaining core looks impressively authentic.
See Soltau 160; Burck 289; Klotz 263-5.
30. 1. Q. Minucius: P.f. M.n., a brother of the consul of the preceding
year.
445
3. 30. i
457 B.C.
456 B.C.
3-3 1 - *
3-3i. 5
454 B.C.
representatives of two old Roman families which died out after the
fifth century. Romilius affords an obvious parallel. On the other hand
they are always associated as a pair, and always in connexion with
the Lex Aternia Tarpeia, a law regulating the payment of fines
in money instead of cattle (Aul. Gell. 11. i. 2 ; Festus 270 L.; Cicero,
de Rep. 2. 60). The fact that there was another tradition, doubtless
inspired by political motives, which made them extraordinary tribunes
(65. 1) because the law to which they gave their names ought to have
been a popular, i.e. tribunician, measure and not a consular one, gives
rise to the possibility that originally they had no fixed place in the
Fasti or in the orthodox chronology. Like Papirius and Sempronius
of the Ardeatine treaty (4. 7. 10 n.) they were inserted into it later.
Money fines before 430 are difficult to credit. L. himself makes no
allusion to the law.
C. Calvio [Claudio] Cicerone: a surprising name. D.H. (10. 48. 2 52. 5) attributes the prosecution to the plebeian hero, L. Siccius
Dentatus, and has not a breath about Cicero. The legend about
Siccius is ancient (Munzer, R.E., 'Siccius (3)'; Klotz 264; Klio 33
(1940), 173-9). He has all the characteristics of a timeless Roman hero.
Cicero, on the other hand, is an upstart. The earliest recorded Calvius is
M. Calvius A.f., a merchant at Delos in 74 B.C. (B.C.H. 8 (1884), 146 ff.).
The cognomen Cicero was unheard of before a novus homo from Arpinum gave it a certain notoriety in the 8o's. In short, it would seem
that Valerius Antias has substituted, out of compliment to M. Tullius
Cicero, a putative ancestor in the person of C. Calvius Cicero. The
substitution gave a spurious air of antiquity to the name. Claudio is
a less choice dittography for Calvio. A similar objection may be brought
against L. Alienus. Quite apart from the impossibility of an aedile
prosecuting at so early a date (6. 9 n.; it is an anachronism: for the
subsequent jurisdiction of the aediles in historical times see Mommsen,
Staatsrecht, 3. 492), the name Alienus is not to be found before C.
Alienus, subscriptor of Q . Caecilius in the preliminaries of the Verrine
case conducted in 70 B.C. (Div. in Caec. 48).
31. 6. decern milibus: 2. 52. 5 n.
31. 7. consenuerat: 'lapsed', cf. Cicero, de Orat. 1. 247.
aequandae libertatis: 39. 8 n., 56. 9, 67. 9, 4. 5. 1, 38. 50. 8. aequa
libertas was a political slogan of the late Republic (cf. Cicero, de Rep.
l
- 43> 53> 69), with a peculiarly Roman meaning. Unlike the Greek
cXevdepia which was equivalent to equality of political rights (laovofita
and larjyopia), aequa libertas was not so radically democratic, meaning
no more than equality before the law (Cicero, pro Cluentio 146).
libertas was not incompatible with government by a few who possessed
dignitas or auctoritas. It was incompatible with laws of personal excep
tion, privilegia. aequa libertas significantly is used with regard to cor448
454 B.C.
3- 3"- 7
449
eg
3-3i.8
454 B.C.
Berlin, 1909, 17). Munzer, however, has advanced the attractive view
that the statue which Varro saw was none other than the dedication by
Heraclitus and Hermocrates who were sent as delegates from Ephesus
to Rome towards the close of the Mithradatic War in 80 B.C. (C.I.L.
6. 373 = Dessau, I.L.S. 34). It was tempting for antiquarians familiar
with the traditional connexion between Rome and Ephesus as
symbolized in the cult of Diana (1. 45. 2 n.) to antedate such contacts.
To most Romans, however, law meant Solon's laws and it was in
evitable that sooner or later the Twelve Tables should be associated
with Athens. The first suggestion of it may have been made by L.
Aelius Stilo Praeconinus (Suetonius, Gram. 3; E. Ruschenbusch
(Historia 12 (1963), 250 ff.) would attribute it to Servius Sulpicius
Rufus in 55-52 B.C. but the evidence is inconclusive). It is difficult to
believe there is any substratum of truth at all. True, Rome was emer
gent and ambitious, but there were sources of Greek law much nearer
to hand than Athens. One might have expected, if there were relations
between the two cities, that Rome would have played some part in the
events leading up to the colonization of Thurii in 443. But neither
over that matter nor on any other does Rome leave a mark in the
Greek sources (for Thucydides 2. 37. 1 see Gomme's note). There is no
necessary connexion between the Twelve Tables and the reforms of
Ephialtes. The whole episode is a fiction of the early first century.
See further Helbig, Atti Acad. Lincei, 6 (1889), 79 ff.; F. Bosch, de
XII Tabularum lege, Diss. Gottingen, 1893; Berger, R.E., 'tabulae
duodecim'; Volterra, Diritto Romano, 84; Taubler, Untersuchungen zur
Geschichte des Decemvirats, 14-63; G. Ciulei, #7. Sav.-Stift. 64 (1944),
350-4. i L. Ferrero, Storia del Pitagorismo, 129 f., who detects Tarentine
influence.
Sp. Postumius: 2. 42. 5 n. A. Manlius: 2. 54. 1 n.
P. Sulpicius: 10. 5 n. All three names were selected because they
were known to have been Decemvirs (33. 3 n.).
32. 1. P. Curiatio: -f. -n. Fistus Trigeminus according to the Fasti.
He is also listed as a Decemvir in 451 (33. 3). The Curiatii were
legendary (1. 24. 1 n.) but, beyond a tribune of the plebs in 401 (5. 11.
4 n.), no other Curiatii achieve mention until two second-century
moneyers C. Cur{iatius) Trigeminus) and his son C. Cur(iatius) Trig(eminus) f(ilius). The other authorities, however, all conspire on the
same nomen and praenomen (references in Broughton; Munzer, R.E.,
'Curiatius (6)'), except for D.H. who in both places calls him P.
Horatius. Since the list of Decemvirs is to be trusted, we may trust
Curiatius too and regard D.H.'s Horatius as a mere conjecture based
on the rarity of the name Curiatius or a recollection of the feud be
tween the Horatii and Curiatii. See 1. 30. 2 n.
450
453 B.C.
3* 32. 2
3- 33-42
451 B.C.
451 B.C.
3- 33-42
and enshrined the full extent of the disabilities under which they lay.
Discriminations like conubium, which previously had enjoyed merely
the sanction of social convention, now acquired the force of law. No
wonder that they reacted against the Decemvirate and secured by a
second secession substantial improvements under the Valerio-Horatian
laws. It is no accident that archaeologists are agreed that the decisive
break with Etruscan contact came not at the end of the sixth century
but around 450 when Greek imports suddenly cease.1 The process
which was started by setting up the Decemvirate ended with a total
victory for the Roman plebf who established their rights and asserted
the independence not merely of their community but of Rome.
Roman historical tradition dealt somewhat differently with the
facts. It was known that the Decemvirate lasted for more than a year,
so it was natural on Roman principles to think of two Decemvirates.
There may also have been an archaeological indication that pointed
the same way. Although the Twelve Tables are always regarded by
jurists as a single document, the sources consistently speak of the
Ten and the Two (37. 4 ; Cicero, de Rep, 2. 6 3 ; Diodorus 12. 26;
Zonaras 7. 18; one of the Two dealt with conubium) which were said
to have been added subsequently either by the second college or by
Valerius and Horatius. The most reasonable explanation of the pecu
liarity is that the Ten and the Two were preserved on separate in
scriptions. It may even be that the Two were restored after the Gallic
sack, and hence gave the appearance of being more recent.
However that may be, two colleges of Decemvirs were postulated,
a Good and a Bad, and names invented to fill the second. The excesses
of the second college provided a dramatic transition to Valerius and
Horatius. Since the law on conubium was passed by the second college,
the drama was heightened by the introduction and elaboration of the
myth of Verginia (see below on 44 ff.). It provided a fine touch of
tragic irony. The story reached its fully developed shape during the
third century and, like many other Roman legends formulated in that
period, owes something to Greek models. The duration of the whole
Decemvirate, a little over two years, may be influenced by the
activities of the archon Damasias, and the general behaviour of the
second college is reminiscent of the behaviour of the Thirty Tyrants.
The daily rotation of the Decemvirs may be drawn from the same
period (33. 8 n.).
The effect of the process was to crowd out of the picture all the
other reforms for which the Decemvirate is commonly held to be
responsible. Attention was focused exclusively on the tyrannical
character of the Decemvirate and, in particular, on Appius and
1
The evidence is reviewed by A. van Gerkan, Rh. Mus. 100 (1957), 82-97,
R. Bloch, R..L. 37 (1959), u8ff.
453
anc
3- 33-42
451 B.C.
451 B.C.
3- 33-42
3- 33- '
451 B.C.
Chronol. 121 ff.; L. Holzapfel, Rom. Chronol. 18, 28, 63 ff.; G. Costa,
/ Fasti Consolari Romani; Bayet, loc. cit.; A. Momigliano, J.R.S. 35
(1945), 144; Ogilvie, J.R.S, 48 (1958), 43 (the views there expressed are
substantially modified in the present note); G. Perl, Krit. Untersuchungen zu Diodors Rom. Jahrzdhlung, 35 ff. L. gives absolute dates
only for events of the first magnitude.
mutatorforma civitatis: a distortion of the facts, since the Decemvirate
was a'-legal commission, not a formal constitution, but it is in keeping
with the distortion of the terms of the Terentilius proposal (9. 5 n.).
Echoed by the Emperor Claudius (LL.S. 212): quid a consulibus ad
decemviros translatum imperium (commemorem) ?
33. 3. decemviri creati: D.H. 10. 56. 1 gives substantially the same list
except that he gives Veturius the praenomen TITOS, Postumius TIOTTXIOS,
and Sulpicius ZcpovlXios. He also lists P. Horatius for P. Curatius.
Of these differences the last is probably a textual corruption (32. 1 n.).
The case of P. Sulpicius is a confusion due to Valerius Antias (10. 5 n.)
so that the disagreement over this praenomen should not be disturbed
by emendation. TIOTTXIOS looks like a trivialization of ZWptos, which
should be restored in the text of D.H. (cf. 9. 60. 1). In the name of
Veturius the fault lies rather with Livy. The presumption, explicitly
stated by D.H. 10. 56. 2, being that the Decemvirs were all consulars,
since there is no consular L. Veturius, either T., the consul of 462
(8. 2), or C , the consul of 455 (31. 2), is possible. T. is preferable and
the necessary change should be incorporated in the text. While the
lists of D.H. and L. can be made to square and are in general agree
ment with the fragments of the Fasti, Diodorus 12. 23. 1 contains
several minor divergences (P. Claudius, C. Sulpicius, Sp. Veturius)
and one major innovation, Tiros MLVOVKLOS for T. Genucius. The
variations ofpraenomina may result from the fact that in the original
documentary sources only nomina were transcribed. Historians were
at liberty to identify the Decemvirs with any members of the gens
and consequently the sources of Diodorus and of Livy and D.H. could
enjoy considerable latitude, but Perl has shown that both Diodorus
and his copyists have been reckless in their treatment of the material.
It was only by the middle of the first century that a conventional list
had been settled. The case of Minucius for Genucius is more debat
able. The nine other Decemvirs belong to patrician Roman families
and they had all held the consulate (for detailed evidence see 2. 42.
5 n.,; 43. 1 n.; 54. 1 n.; 61. 7 n.; 3. 31. 2 n.; 32. 5 n.) but no Genucius
appears in the Fasti before M. Genucius, who is credited with a
consulship in 445 (the evidence is not above suspicion 54. 1. i n . ) , and
Cn. Genucius, consular tribune in 399 and 396. The Genucii were
otherwise a plebeian family who may have migrated from Etruria to
Rome towards the end of the fifth century under the pressure of the
456
451 B.C.
3- 33- 3
SiKaiocrvvrjs (10. 57. 2). The general sense is that the unanimity of
the ten ensured that the citizens had a fair deal. As the text stands
two interpretations of the relative clause seems possible: (1) esset
hypothetical'which unanimity might sometimes have been
457
3- 33- 8
451 B.C.
dangerous for the common citizens but in fact resulted in fair dealing'
(Bayet). inutilis here carries a very pregnant meaning. (2) M. Breal
(Rev. Phil, 7 (1883), 8 0 tookprivatis in the archaic technical sense =
reis'which unanimity proved on occasions no blessing to criminals'.
While the relative and subjunctive without a causal force can be
paralleled, the meaning claimed for privatis has no authority in L.
Both translations neglect the force of inutilis. There appears to have
been a proverb to the effect that unanimity is often useless: it does not
necessarily produce results. So in the Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum
(1. 5, p. 370. 38) ut mutua eorum conspiratio non habeatur inutilis which is
rendered in Greek by aKapTros . . . cru^pa^i?. The force here will be
that while you might have expected that the unanimity of the Decem
virs would not produce results, in fact it resulted in fair dealing all
round; alternatively, that the unanimity of the government, which
had not always produced results in the past, now did have the desired
effect of promoting fair dealing. The former interpretation requires
est for esset (Doring): keeping esset, we must accept the latter.
33. 10. L. Sestium: P. Sextium nX, Sextium fi. The praenomen in nX is
shown to be worthless by its omission in ft. It is a simple case of the
insertion of p or p = p(roprium nomen) in the manuscripts of L. before
a proper name (2. 15. 1 n.). Since the Sestius concerned is patently
not the Decemvir, we should replace the praenomen L., which had been
supplanted by the note p.; it is preserved in Cicero, de Rep. 2. 61.
As the Verginia myth illustrates the clause on conubium, so the tale of
Sestius is designed as a case to exemplify at least two other of the
provisions of the Twelve Tables, the law quae de capite civis Romani nisi
comitiis centuriatis statui vetaret ( = Tab. 9. 1-2) and the law hominem
mortuum in urbe ne sepelito neve urito (= Tab. 10. 1).
decessitque [ex] iure suo: 46. 3 ; cf. d. officio 27. 10. 1, 36. 22. 2. In such
contexts decedo is only used with ex when the thing relinquished is a
province (cf, e.g., Cicero, Div. in Caec. 2 ; Verr. 1. 52). Harant's ei is
intolerable: ex is a palpable dittography influenced by iudex above.
demptum . . . adiceret: 'that he might add to the liberty of the people
what he subtracted from the power of the magistracy'.
34. 1. cum promptum: 'while men of high and low estate alike were
receiving from them this prompt justice as pure as though it proceeded
from an oracle'. The reference is to the Delphic oracle which was
supposed to have fathered several constitutions, notably the 'Lycurgan'
at Sparta and the Sacred Law of Cyrene, and also to have adjudicated
in various disputes. Details in Parke and Wormell, The Delphic Oracle,
i.85ff.
contionem: L. contrives to give an air of authenticity to the remarks
which follow. The speech opens, as was the formal custom, with a
458
451 B.C.
3- 34- i
prayer (39. 15. 1 ; Pliny, Paneg. 6 3 ; Servius, adAen. 11. 301). Note the
solemn legere leges, the rhetorical commonplace plus pollers multorum
ingenia (as old as Homer, Iliad 10. 224-6), and the colloquial agitarent
sermonibus (5. 15. 5). The implied procedure, which is also narrated
by D.H., whereby bills were displayed and amended by popular
correction before their formal promulgatio at the comitia, is unpre
cedented. See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 393 n. 4.
34. 6. edito: a very old corruption, since it is common to Ver. and N.
edo is a technical term for the promulgation of laws and other publica
tions (see Thes Ling. Lat. s.v. 91. 71 ff.), so that edito legum capite could
be defended as meaning propositis decern tabulis but in that case the
plural correctae viderentur is superfluous. We would require unumquicque
legum caput editum satis correctum videretur. Duker's editos with rumores
is certain. Cf. Caesar, B.C. 3. 29. 3 quae opinio erat edita in vulgus.
in hoc. . . cumulo: the solemnity of the assertion is emphasized by
the hyperbaton between hoc and cumulo which is the longest I have
observed in L. Similar effects are achieved at Praef. 5 and 1. 41.
3(n.)-. .
publici: cf. the definition of publicum ius, quoted by Weissenborn,
from Ulpian, Dig. 1. 1. 1. 2 in sacris, in sacerdotibus, in magistratibus
consistit. omne corpus is used by jurists to denote the complete collection
of laws (F. Wieacker, Textstufen Klassischer Juristen, i960, 124).
34. 7. desiderium: a simplification of the more elaborate proceedings
in D.H. whereby the Decemvirate was continued by a formal S.C.
and popular vote.
34. 8. cedentibus. . .decemviris: the general sense must be that the
plebs did not even demand the restoration of the tribunician auxilium
since the Decemvirs' administration of justice was an effective sub
stitute. The tribunes by their auxilium had safeguarded the right of
appeal: the safeguard was rendered superfluous because the Decemvirs
allowed appeals as a matter of course. Since each Decemvir held the
supreme authority for one day, an appeal from his jurisdiction would
be made to his successorin turn (in vicem). The dative appellationi
(Drakenborch) is needed after cedentibus as at 2. 27. 12 nee cessisset
provocationi consul. The ablative, found in Ver. and N, has been
defended but without adequate support. It can hardly be taken with
cedentibus 'departing from an appeal, i.e. disallowing an appeal' nor is
an abl. after invicem attested ('in turn as appeals were made': see Thes.
Ling. Lat. s.v.). Bayet translates appellatione 'en cas d'appel' but does
not give authority for his rendering.
35. 1. in trinum nundinum: 'the elections were announced for the third
market-day'. A minimum period of three nundinae or eight-day periods
had to elapse between the promulgation of a bill or an election and
459
451 B.C.
3- 35- i
the assembly that voted for it (Mommsen, Staatsrecht^ 3. 375). John,
analysing the history of the phrase in Rh. Mus. 31 (1876), 410 ff.,
points out that this is the first use of trinum nundinum as a neuter noun
= the third market-day, TPLTTJ dyopd (D.H. 9. 41 ; Plutarch, Coriolanus
18) or trinundinus dies (Macrobius 1. 16). In early Latin it occurs as a gen.
plural = trinorum nundinorum 'of three eight-day weeks', as in the S.C.
de Bacchanalibus 22 (=I.L.S. 18) and in Cicero, de Domo 41 and 45
(where see Nisbet). T h e hypostasized neuter, formed on the analogy
of sestertium, occurs after Livy in Quintilian 2. 4. 35. T h e change of
form was accompanied by the change of meaning from a period of
time to a particular terminal day. W. Kroll, R.E., 'Nundinae 5 is
worth consulting for further details. There is no authority for trinum
nundinium read by N under the influence of the late imperial nundinia
(cf, e.g., C.I.L. 8. 4508 (202 A.D.)).
35. 2. contenderant: contenderent (N, Ver.) is wrong in both point of tense
and time.
35. 3 . dimissa : demissa Gronovius. T h e two words are constantly con
fused but neither is used elsewhere with in discrimen. T h e closest
parallel I have found is Plancus' letter in Cicero, ad Fam. 10. 8. 2
cum in eum casum me fortuna demississet. Since at 8. 32. 4 L. prefers
committo, I am inclined to think that the variation of prefix is for
alliterative effect and that in consequence dimissa should be re
tained.
35. 3 - 7 . Goossens argued that the account of Appius 5 canvass owes
something to Greek tragedy, and in particular to the picture of
Agamemnon's devices to secure command and his volte-face after
he had done so in Euripides, LA. 334-400. Tragic effects and re
miniscences are, as would be expected, frequent in L. but here the
parallel is far-fetched. There were enough instances nearer at hand
from Republican history of unscrupulous men who sang one tune
to purchase votes and another in office. T h e language of the whole
passage shows that L. is thinking of the recent not the remote past.
All the phrases belong to the jargon of politics and are found frequently
in Cicero. T h e parallels may be found in speeches with which there
are good grounds for supposing that L. was familiar. For in foro
volitare cf. in Cat. 2. 5; for se plebi venditare cf. Har. Resp. 48; for in
ordinem cogere cf. 51. 13 n. adversaries criminando benevolentiam captare is
the recommendation of the author of the treatise ad Herennium 1. 46
(cf. Sallust, Catil. 38. 1).
35. 4. Duillios Iciliosque: 2. 58. 2 n.
35. 6. fore: A. Hudson Williams (C.Q.o, (1959), 66 ff.) draws attention
to the idiom, found also in Statius, Theb. 1. 494-7 and Val. Flacc.
3. 2, where 'the oblique form of the future indicative is used in a
potential sense to express an assumption'. 'A man of such arrogance
460
451 B.C.
3- 35- 6
5
must have some ulterior motive for his geniality. The idiom is collo
quial (Plautus, Persa 645) and so appropriate to express the halfvoiced misgivings of the other Decemvirs.
35. 8. nemo unquamfeci/sset: claimed by Volkmar as evidence that L.'s
source for the Decemvirate was published after 44 B.C. since he be
lieved that Appius' behaviour mirrored Caesar's high-handed treatmeant of the consular elections after 49 (Suetonius 76. 2-3). But
already in 87 B.C. (Marius et Cinna) . . . se ipsos renuntiaverunt (Livy, EpiL
80) and in 85 L. Cinna et Cn. Papirius Car bo ab se ipsis consules per biennium creati (Livy, Eput. 8 3 ; cf. also de Viris Illustr. 69). Cinna, not
Caesar, was a second Appius and it was natural for a Sullan annalist
to reflect it in his account.
35. 9. per coitionem: contio (codd.) and coitio are constantly confused
in manuscripts. It is hard to see how the Quinctii could lose the
election by a contio. A coitio, however, was the normal method of
rigging elections: see the advice in Cicero, ad Q.F. 3. 1. 16.
35. 11. The second college of Decemvirs is a fabrication elaborated
doubtless at the end of the third century. The fact that Diodorus
(12. 24. 1) preserves only seven names, omitting Fabius, Antonius,
and Duilius, adding Sp. Veturius, and reading IJOTTXLOS for Poetelius,
is not material evidence if Perl is right in arguing that Diodorus, and
his copyists, were frequently negligent in their transmission of names.
Nor is the fact that whereas the first college can be shown to be con
sular and patrician the second contains five plebeians (Oppius,
Duilius, Poetelius, specified by D.H. 10. 58. 4 ; Antonius, Rabuleius)
and five patricians, and only three consulars (Claudius, Minucius,
Fabius), a wholly damaging criticism (4. 3. 17 n.). More to the point
is the character of the names themselves. The provenance of the
Poetelii is unknown, although the name is Etruscan (cf. Paetelius;
Schulze 205), but apart from the tr. pi. of 441 (4. 12. 3-5 n.), they
do not emerge until the fourth century when C. Poetelius Libo Visolus
is consul in 360. The tr. pi. of 441 may be genuine; if so, he supplied
the fabricator of the list with a name. N o historical conditions can be
visualized which could have permitted such a nonentity in fact to
have been elected to a board of legislators. The Oppii are also old,
as the Mons Oppius with the eponymous Opiter Oppius shows (Varro
ap. Festus 476 L.), and may have come to Rome in the regal period
from Praeneste, where the name is frequent in inscriptions, or even
immigrated with the Sabines. Yet the first historical Oppius was tr.
pi. in 215. It is suspicious that no less than three Oppii are concerned
in the events of 450-449, C. Oppius, a member of the spurious college
of the ten tribunes (54. 13), M. Oppius the tribune of the soldiers
(51. 2-10), and Sp. Oppius. When we note that K. Duilius is alleged
to be a Decemvir, and M. Duilius one of the college of the ten tribunes,
461
3-35-
"
450 B.C.
we are forced to the conclusion that it was a family tale among the
Duilii and Oppii of the third century that their ancestors had been
involved in the 'troubles* of the fifth century and it may be con
jectured that historians inserted the names of Duilii and Oppii into
the story accordingly. The Sergii were patrician, closely linked with
the Servilii. They claimed descent from the Trojan Sergestus (Virgil,
Aeneid^. 121: both Hyginus and Varro wrote works de Familiis Troianis)
but, in fact, the hereditary cognomen Fidenas (4. 17. 7 n.) points to the
more mundane view that they originated from that city (Schulze
230). They were established at Rome before the end of the sixth
century (Tribus Sergia; see L. R. Taylor, Voting Districts, 40). They
do not reach the consulate till after 440. Of Rabuleius and Antonius
( Q . Antonius Merenda was consular tribune in 422; see F. Cornelius,
Untersuchungen, 59 ff.) nothing can be asserted, except that they form
odd company for the respected Q,. Fabius, the consul of 467. The
cognomen Merenda ('luncheon'; probably not to be identified with
the Etruscan Merenna) was used by a branch of the Cornelii for the
space of a hundred years from the consul of 274 to the praetor of 194
and is not attested elsewhere. This also suggests 250-200 as the period
of the fabrication. The name Rabuleius is found in a few scattered
inscriptions of late date (Schulze 91) and is Etruscan, but the false
etymology from rabula 'a pettifogger' made him an appropriate
candidate for any anarchical or demagogic body. M. Cornelius is
equally unknown; he may be intended to be the son or the brother of
L. Cornelius, the consul of 459 (see Broughton, 450 B.C., n. 2). The
names, then, are implausible. The principles by which all were chosen
cannot be discerned. Beloch pointed out that three of the patrician
names (Cornelius, Sergius, Fabius) were also the names of tribes,
which would afford a possible explanation for their choice but more
fanciful conjecture is futile. What can be established is that since
only one list can ever have stood in documentary sources connected
with the Twelve Tables, the second college is an invention, and an
invention not earlier than 250 B.C.
Once such a list became established, it was open to later historians
to improve on it by making further suggestive additions. For instance,
Oppius' cognomen may be inspired by Cn. Oppius Cornicinus, the only
other person known to have a comparable cognomen, who was on
Cn. Pompeius Strabo's staff at Asculum in 89 (I.L.S. 8888) and who
played a notable role in the politics of the next thirty years (details
in Munzer, R.E., 'Oppius (28)').
(Diodorus gives Sergius' praenomen as C , but D.H. agrees with
Livy who has M. here but L. at 41. 10. Duilius is called C. both by
Ver. and by N here, but Caeso at 41. 10 and in D.H. 10. 58. 4, while
Rabuleius is M. here, M \ at 4 1 . 9 , Mavios in D.H. 10. 58. 4, 11. 23. 1.
462
450 B.C.
3-35- "
Sigonius was clearly right to restore K. Duilius and M \ Rabuleius
in the present list.)
36. 1. suo . . . vivere ingenio coepit: cf. i. 56. 7. L.'s treatment of Appius'
character is a good example of the RomanStoicpreconception
that a man's character cannot change and that he is at twenty what
he will be at fifty and that what he is at fifty he must have been at
twenty. K. Buchner (Der Aufbau von Sallusts B.J,, Hermes Einzelschr.
9, 1953) has shown how this attitude to character has conditioned
Sallust's arrangement of his material for the life of Jugurtha. It also
explains 'the uniformly dark portrayal of Tiberius by Tacitus'
(G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 44 (1954), 158; cf. Annals 6. 51. 6 and see
E. Dutoit, Mus. Helv. 2 (1945), 39). So for L., because he believed with
Sallust and with Cicero (pro Sulla 77) that 'a man is at any one point
in his life what he always was and always will be', Appius had always
to be crudelissimus et superbissimus, and any apparent contradiction of be
haviour had to be attributed to deception and pretence (35. 6 apparere nihil sinceri esse).
36. 2. impotentibus . . . consiliis: 'despotic plans'.
coquebant: 40. 11. 2 clandestina coda sunt consilia. The metaphor is
Augustan; cf. our 'he's cooking something up'. It is common in later
Latin (e.g. Statius, Theb. 2. 300). Plautus, Miles 208, is an elaborate
joke.
rari aditus: Weissenborn takes aditus as genitive of quality. At 24. 5. 5
Gronovius rightly restored contumeliosa dicta, rari aditus for the reading
of P contumeliosa dictari aditus. rams is not elsewhere predicated of
aditus but facilis, difficilis, and the like are frequent in Cicero. In view
of 24. 5. 5, it is scarcely possible to accept Weissenborn's interpretation
or the rari aditu conjectured in the Delphin edition. It must, however,
be confessed that the resulting change of subject is exceedingly harsh.
Perhaps we should regard rari. . . difficiles as a parenthesis explaining
hand dissimulando superbiam. Weissenborn's interpretation is unsuccess
fully defended by Catterall (T.A.P.A. 69 (1938), 304).
3 6 . 3 . ad Idus Maias: 6. 1 n. The Decemvirs retained power for a further
six months until December.
initio . . . magistratus: see C.Q. 9 (1959), 282.
unusfasces: 1. 50. 3 n. The fasces were to a Roman the normal symbol
of law and order, but they also had more sinister overtones for the
apprehensive imagination. They were the symbol of the Tarquins
(Fraenkel, Horace, 295 n. 2). Tittler, comparing 24. 4. 9, Horace,
Odes 3. 14. 10, and Martial 4. 58 for the corruption, would insert
vices between decemviri and servassent, 'maintained a rota' on the
ground that servo ut = T make sure that' was not found; but cf.
39. 14. 10; Pliny, JV./f. 17. 124.
subito . . . prodiere: Volkmar compares the entrance of Julius Caesar
4^3
3- 36. 3
450 B.C.
with 72 lictors (Dio 43. 19), but Valerius Antias is more likely to have
had some precedent of Sulla in view. The Epitome of Livy says of him
(89; cf. Appian, B.C. 1.100): dictator/actus, quod nemo unquamfecerat, cum
fascibus viginti quattuor processit. As it stands the statement is unin
telligible, since from earliest times the dictators were preceded by
24. fasces (Polybius 3. 87. 8; D.H. 10. 24; Plutarch, Fabius 4), but the
comment suggests an innovation. The figure given by the Epitomator
may be corrupt. In the present situation the Decemvirs all appeared
preceded by lictors and fasces, whereas in the previous year each
Decemvir had held the real fasces in turn, as was constitutionally
proper, while the others had been followed by their twelve lictors in
attendance. This suspension of the principle of alternating the fasces
issignificantlyonly otherwise attested under the second Trium
virate: it was restored by Octavian in 29 B.C. See 2. i . 8 n .
36. 4. sine provocation: 55. 14 n.
36. 5. caedis causam: a political catch-phrase for which Shackleton
Bailey (Cicero: ad Atticum, 11) cites Cicero, ad Fam. 12. 25. 4 ; de
Domo 115; Phil. 3. 30.
out in senatu out in populo: N has in populum, but where L. varies the
construction he prefers apudpopulum (30. 1.5).
etiam: with ceterorum, 'to intimidate the rest of the population as well'.
36. 6. cum . . . tulissent: 'whereas the first Decemvirs had been con
tent that judgements passed by themselves should be corrected by
appeal to one of their colleagues'. Cf. 34. 8.
36. 7. hominum . . . haberet: 'the Decemvirs were all for personalities,
not circumstances, as was natural since for them influence had the
force of right'.
36. 8. iudicia conflabant: political slang; cf. Cicero, Part. Orat. 121;pro
Sex. Roscio 5.
36. 9. foedus clandestinum: regarded by Klotz and Volkmar as a clear
imitation of the so-called First Triumvirate in 59 B.C. Suetonius
alleged that Caesar societatem iniit (9. 2). Such conspiracies or collusions
were not a novel feature of Roman politics. A better example would
be the pact which Sulla made with Cinnain 88 (Plutarch, Sulla 10).
37. 2. The analysis of the patrician attitude to the Decemvirs and
to the plebs has no counterpart in the narrative of D.H., although
a few of the sentiments occur in different contexts (e.g. D.H. 11. 2. 1
they expelled the patricians ols ov /card yvcofirjv r<x TrpaTTo/xeva U7r'
avTtbv ?Jv = nee probare quaefierent).
The whole of the next passage down to 41 is unusually characterized
by rhetorical cliches of the late Republic inserted to suggest the
anarchy and troubles of that period (37. 5 n., 37. 8 n., 39. 7 n., 40.
10 n.).
464
450 B.C.
3- 37- 2-3
465
Hh
3- 37- 7
4 5 0 B.C.
450 B.C.
3- 3. 2
3- 38. io
450 B.C.
caput fieri: cf. 8. 19. 13 capita coniurationis, 9. 26. 7, 10. 1.3, 39. 17. 6.
haec fremunt [plebes]: deleted by Fugner. T h e plural is intolerable
after the singular plebs abnuat and L. relishes the vaguer phrase with
the subject left unexpressed when he speaks of popular murmurings:
cf, e.g., 26. 35. 7, 34. 37. 1.
38. 11. suarum: 'they devoted themselves to their own affairs and
neglected the affairs of state'. For the genitive cf. 36. 7, a case of
'unconscious repetition' (1. 14. 4 n.).
38. 12. pignera capienda: 'to exact fines'. Senators who absented them
selves from meetings of the House without due cause or, subsequently,
leave of absence were liable to a fine. See Aul. Gell 14. 7. 10 ; Cicero,
Phil 1. 12.
The Debate in the Senate
T h e debate was a feature of the Sullan narrative, for it is reproduced
in D.H. 11. 4 ff. in substantially the same form. It was a show-piece,
a carefully contrived agon between opposed speakers. In D.H. Appius
proposed the motion for a levy, Valerius who then sprang to his feet
was prevented from speaking, but Horatius secured a hearing. He
was followed by C. Claudius, M . Cornelius, and L. Cornelius. Finally
Valerius was allowed his say (19-20). L. has simplified the proceedings
by omitting M. Cornelius and by limiting the participation of
Valerius to his first protest. T h e result is a neater and dramatically
more effective scene. It is more than probable that the contents of the
debate owe much to the proceedings of the Senate in 84 B.C. when
Cinna and Carbo summoned a meeting to vote supplies for war but
were foiled by L. Valerius Flaccus, the princeps senatus, qui orationem in
senatu habuit . . . ut legati ad Sullam de pace witterentur (Livy, Epit. 8 3 ;
see also above).
39. 2. L. Valerium Potitum : P.f. P.n., son of the consul of 475 (2. 52. 6)
who died in 460 during the course of his second consulship (18. 8).
T h e cognomen, held by several descendants in the fourth century, is
anachronistic because its meaning (potitus rerum or 'statesman'; see
Cornelius, Untersuchungen, 37 ff.) shows that it was ascribed by tradi
tion to him as the result of the prudent measures of his consulship in
the following year (449; 3. 55 nn.). See Volkmann, R.E., 'Valerius
(304);ordine: 1. 32. 12 n.
de republica: it was open to any senator at a meeting of the Senate
to propose as a matter of priority an emergency motion on the state
of the nation (de republica). Such a motion if accepted took priority
over other business. Historical examples are afforded by 21. 6. 3 (the
embassy of Saguntum), 22. 11. 2, 26. 10. 2 (Hannibal at the Gates);
468
4 5 0 B.C.
3- 39- 2
450 B.C.
3 39- 5
indicate that it is the subject of one clause and the object of the other.
The sense and the form both demand that turn eodem should conceal
the counterpart to tot, one king as opposed to ten privati, so that we
may leave out of consideration all conjectures which do not take
account of that (tumido eodem Brakman; turn eodemque etiam Bayet).
Editors who, having seen that some part of unus is needed, retain
turn or another temporal adverb (in rege tunc uno Konighoff; in rege
et uno quondam Zingerle) must face the objection that a corresponding
adverb is anticipated in the main clause. Others, who argue that turn
conceals uno but retain eodem as well, produce an over-elaborate
phrase to balance in tot privatis, e.g. in uno et rege eodem Novak; in rege
uno et eodem Karsten; in rege et uno eodem Madvig. Sense and palaeo
graphy would be satisfied by in rege unico, 'in the case of one, single
king', a suggestion made to me by Mr. N. C. F. Barber, but the use of
unicus is hard to parallel. I favour in rege uno tandem.
39. 7. libertate . . . dominatione: for the political language cf. 2. 28. 7,
6. 18. 6; Sallust, Jug. 31. 16; Cat. 58. 11. (The text is usually read in
libertate . . . in iniusta, but only the second in has any manuscript
authority at all, being read in TTX but not in /x. Since there is a straight
choice between the two halves of the tradition (cf. C.Q. 9 (1959),
'i 74 ff.), it seems wisest to follow the reading o f / 1 ; in is not required
(see Gronovius's note), it is an easy dittography, and if it were to be
accepted it would be necessary to insert the second in before libertate
against the whole consensus of the manuscripts. So also Luterbacher.)
39. 8. vicissitudinem imperitandi: 4. 5. 1 ff.; a rallying cry borrowed
from the Greek. Cf. Aristotle, Politics 1317b2 eAevOeptas 8e iv [JLCV
TO ev fiepei apxecrOai /cat ap^etv (Wirszubski II n. 1, who comments
that 'a smattering of Greek ideas in the post-Gracchan period is
not surprising').
39. 9. populares . . . optimates: 35. 4, g; 4. 9. 5, 8, 11 ; 5. 24. 9. T h e
distinction is one familiar from Cicero who defines the two groups:
'those who have wished their deeds and words to be pleasing to the
multitude have been held to be populares and those who have conducted
themselves in such a manner that their counsels have met the approval
of all the best men have been held to be optimates' (pro Sestio 96; see
the discussion in L. R. Taylor, Party Politics, 11-14). T h e terms were
constantly bandied about at Rome but denoted little more than the
people who at any one moment happen to be on my side and those
on the other side.
tunc ita habeant: tunc before i is allowable (4. 25. 13) but the tem
poral sequence is wrong. Although the tenses vary between past and
dramatic present in the course of the speech, habeant shows that nunc
(Ruperti) is needed here.
470
450 B.C.
3. 4 0 . 1
3- 40- 8
450 B.C.
VLK7}(jaV
450 B.C.
3-40.
"
praeiudicium that the Decemvirs were not valid and did not possess the
authority to convene a meeting of the Senate, or that they should pass
a s.c. ad prodendum interregem which, as was pointed out, would be the
equivalent of a praeiudicium that the Decemvirs were valid, since if
the s.c. was valid then a fortiori the magistrates who had convened the
session were valid ('magistratus esse qui senatum haberent iudicabant'). Cornelius' argument could be either positive (it was right
that there should be no praeiudicium) or negative (it was not right that
there should be a/?.). Since neminem must be wrong, as it has nothing
to govern or agree with, editors have mainly adopted the former
approach: ceterum nemini non . . . auferri (Rhenanus); nonne enim . . .
auferri (Walters, Bayet). But auferri cannot be used to mean 'be
forestalled, prevented, postponed'. It means 'be removed, stolen'.
Hence etenim . . . haud fieri (Madvig); omnino . , . haud fieri (Seyffert);
differri (Sigonius). But it is far easier to accept the correction fieri for
auferri and adopt negative argument, praeiudiciumfieriis the t.L (5. n .
10; 25 examples in Vocabularium Iurisprudentiae Romanae, s.v. facio,
col. 753). It is crucial to note that M read nemini se not neminem. In
deciding what the archetype read there is a free choice between the
two variants. Accepting M's text I postulate a lacuna for which,
exempli gratia, I would propose nemini (videri pos)se. 'Further, no one
could think it right that when men's minds were preoccupied with
greater anxieties a matter of such importance should be prejudged.'
For praeiudicia in Roman law see Pissard, Les Questions prejudicielles au
droit romain (1907); Beseler, Rev. d'Hist. du Droit 10 (1930), 170; Siber,
Festschrift Wenger, 1 (1944), 46.
40. 12. et iam nunc: continues Cornelius' motion, se = Ap. Claudius.
'That Ap. Claudius should at once prepare himself to explain in
reference to the election which he had held for the appointment of
Decemvirsbeing one himselfwhether they were chosen for one year
or until the missing laws be enacted.' Conway accepts decemvirum (M)
as a genitive plural with unus understood: but decemvir (XTT) has equal
authority and should be read here and at 9. 34. 1, since there is no
parallel for the ellipse in Gudeman's article in the Thes. Ling. Lat.
40. 14. praeverti: 'the levy should take priority over everything else'.
4 1 . 1 . coorti: M adds 'Valerius Horatiusque contra sententiam Maluginensis' which is shown to be a marginal gloss by contra where L.
would use in (2. 17. 2, 43. 4, 56. 14, 4. 3. 3). It was intended as a
chapter heading. It formed part of the commentary written, in late
antiquity, on L., for which see L. Voit, Philologus 91 (1936), 308 ff.;
G. Billanovich, Italia Med. e Uman. 2 (1959), 110-11.
de re publica: 39. 2 n.
imaginariis: the sole occurrence of the word in L. is also its first
473
450 B.C.
3- 4*. i
appearance in Latin. It is generally taken to mean 'fictitious' or
4
putative' in the general sense, found later e.g. in Seneca, Dial. 2. 3. 3,
that the fasces were not real. T h e origin of such a striking word does,
however, call for investigation. As a study of Berger's article 'imaginarius' in R.E. shows, it was employed commonly in the late jurists as
a t.t. for the crime of 'false pretences'imaginaria venditio, emptio, &c.
(Gaius, Inst. 1. 119; Ulpian, Dig. 40. 1. 4. 2, 7). Rather than believe
that L. coined the word, we may suppose that the legal
use was the primitive use which was subsequently extended to
bear a general meaning, and that Valerius is deliberately calling
attention to the illegality of the Decemvirs' conduct. They are privati.
To appear with lictors is to be guilty of false pretences. Cf. the legal
arguments about praeiudicia earlier. (P.J. Pearse (P.C.P.S. 85 (1910), 6)
had already seen the difficulty in the conventional interpretation of
imag. but the connexion which he proposes with imagines seems far
fetched (cf. Juvenal 8. 227; Polybius 6. 53).)
4 1 . 3 . non erit melius: melius erit with the infinitive belongs to the
language of official orders. So also at 48. 3, 5. 30. 6. T h e force of the
expression can be seen, for example, in Ulpian, Dig. 42. 1. 15. 7. For
the Greek aptivov see Bond's commentary on Euripides, Hypsipyle,
P . 85.
lictorem accedere: 2. 55. 4-7 nn.
4 1 . 4. Quiritium: 2. 23. 8 n.
a curiae limine: Volkmer compares the incident of 59 B.C. when
Cato was imprisoned for obstructionism (Suetonius, Julius 20) but
the comparison is misleading. Valerius was not in fact arrested.
complexus: literally as a suppliant (2. 40. 10; Caesar, B.G. 1. 20. 1).
non cui: N read the dittography non quid cui but cui is certain.
Cornelius pretended to be supporting Valerius while he was really
forwarding the interests of Claudius by preventing the wrangle ending
with a public trial of strength.
diremit: 7. 14. 5, 33. 39. 1, 39. 22. 9. dimittit, a variant in M, is not
so used.
4 1 . 7. praeesse exercitibus: it is natural to expect that the two clauses
describe two alternatives. T h e Decemvirs had to decide which of their
number were to stay and which to go. Yet, as they stand, the clauses
supplement one another, since, a fortiori, those who were to command
the armies were to go to the war. (The anaphora excludes the other
possibility that the first quos = 'which of the legions', and the second
= 'which of the Decemvirs'.) Strothius, who first drew attention to
the difficulty, conjectured rebus civilibus which Bayet improved to
urbanis rebus. A simpler correction would be urbi, if the corruption
sprang from the contracted ex'citib. But it is conceivable that exercitibus
is right. L. is hurrying ahead to the story of Verginia and often at the
474
450 B.C.
3- 41- 7
3-43
450 B.C.
450 B.C.
3- 44-49
3- 44-49
450 B.C.
450 B.C.
3- 44-49
3-44-5
450 B.C.
450 B.C.
3- 44- 6
48 [
II
3- 44- 9
450 B.C.
450 B.C.
3- 44- *
who are not sui iuris, where only the paterfamilias was competent to make
the counter-claim ""filium meum esse aio\ Since Verginia was a minor
and not sui iuris, her supporters could not make a claim on her behalf
and so her case went by default. Legally there was no vindicatio in
libertatem because there was no one present competent to make it.
44. 12. rem integram . . . vindicias: L. has confused the issue. Since
there could be no vindicatio in libertatem in the absence of the father,
it is nonsense to request Appius to pronounce vindicias secundum liber
tatem. All they could do was to appeal to his sense of fairness and hope
that he would postpone making any pronouncement until the father
arrived and made his contra vindicatio, whereon Appius would be com
pelled to pronounce in Verginia's favour.
vindicias det: cf. Pomponius, Dig. i. 2. 2. 24.
The 'addictio'
T h e defence has gone by default. It is now for the praetor to
pronounce his judgment which can only be that the adsertor servitutis
is free to remove his property and that in so doing he will be acting
legally. This authorization would take the form of a decree, if we m a y
believe the definition vocantur decreta cum fieri aliquid iubet {praetor). In
making the decree the praetor concludes the proceedings. It is, there
fore, fantastic that L. should suggest that the authorization was only
provisional and temporary until the arrival of the father (45. 3
placere patrem arcessiri). T h e very idea, which is itself contradicted in
45. 5 (n.), betrays L.'s failure to grasp the legal position. W h a t did
happen was that Appius was forced under pressure to withhold his
judgement until the following day.
45. 2. personis: the t.t,
qui: masc. as always in general legal statements which involve men
and women.
in iis . . . cedat: 'in the case of those who were claimed as free, since
anyone was entitled to bring an action, their request was legal: in
the case of one who was under the authority of her father, there was
no one to whom the master should yield ownership'. T h e second
sentence makes the exception to the general rule that anyone can
bring an action in a causa liberalis. W e might expect this to be made
clearer by in aliis (Karsten) for in iis but the language is legalistic.
(Ver. reads adsignare under the influence ofadserantur at the beginning
483
3- 45- 2
450 B.C.
450 B.C.
3-45-
"
ginius has made a match for her with him. Icilius threatens that if
Verginius on his return meekly accepts Appius' decision then he will
have to find another husband for her since he (Icilius) will have
nothing to do with her. (The point is purely rhetorical because, if
Verginia is judged to be a slave, Verginius would no longer be in any
position to make any match for her.) The question therefore is not
that Verginius will have to make a match but that he will have to
make another match. We must insert aliam with Doring, comparing
Cicero, Phil. 2. ggfiliameius . . . aliacondicionequaesita. Palaeographically
sciat (aliam) sibi is easier and linguistically more forceful than filiae
(aliam) (Doring) or cesserit (aliam) (Boot).
vindicantem: Icilius is neither competent nor prompt enough to
enter a vindicatio (see above). The whole sentiment is mere rhetoric.
The double cretic clausula [deseret quam fides) is noteworthy.
46. 2. spirantem: governing tribunatum, 'still making plans for the tri
bunate'. Despite the evidence collected by Heraeus for a genitive
dependent on a noun (Vindiciae Livianae 2, Progr. Offenbach, 1892,
n ; cf. Lofstedt, Syntactica, 1. 215: cf. 6. 27. 9; 22. 25. 10), there re
mains no parallel for quaerere locum and the gen. We should follow
Gronovius and read seditioni; cf. 50. 14.
46. 3 . patrio: 'the name of "father"'. For this use of patrius cf.
Propertius 2. 7. 20 and Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana, 282.
ius . . . dicturum: in the praetor's formula do, dico, addico.
46. 7. sponsoresque daret: since Verginia was not technically a de
fendant Appius cannot be demanding that she give surety to appear
on the following day (Gaius, Inst. 4. 184). Instead, he must be exacting
from Icilius and Numitorius a guarantee (stipulatio) that they will
produce her on the following day. L. uses exceedingly loose, untechnical, and misleading language when he writes: ita vindicatur Verginia
spondentibuspropinquis. There is no connexion with the Greek c'yytfyox?.
46. 8. crastina die: 2. 49. 2 n. Read crastino.
The Speech of Verginius
Delivered in the pathetic vein.
47. 2. circumire: 1. 47. 7 n.
in acie stare: 23. 16. 10, 37. 53. 19, 44. 36. 13; cf. Bell. Hisp. 28. 1;
Cicero, Phil. 11. 24. The standard phrase.
strenue ac fortiter: even Bayet keeps the manuscripts' ferociter, but
strenuus etfortis is the conventional Latin way of describing a soldier of
exemplary record (4. 3. 16 n.), and to introduce ferocitas is to strike
an entirely false note. It would not be calculated to arouse sympathy.
The case for fortiter (Doujat) is demonstrated by Wolfflin, Livian.
Kritik, 22.
485
450 B.C.
3- 47- 2
486
450 B.C.
3- 47- 7
3- 4^. 5
450 B.C.
450 B.C.
3- 49- 6
the sense excellent. 'Many suggestions were voiced and after Oppius
had hesitated, as he agreed (in turn) with their numerous authors on
every side, he eventually gave orders for the Senate to be convened.'
5 0 - 5 4 . 5 . The Second Secession
The Second Secession is as credible as the First (2. 32-33). Whatever
duplications may have been made subsequently, the actual event is
secure. Its roots are too deep in the Roman tradition. Elaboration
can be detected to some extent by considering the site of the secession.
In the oldest accounts the plebs seceded to the plebeian hill, the
Aventine, on the second as on the first occasion (2. 32. 3). So Diodorus
12. 24 and Sallust, Jug. 31. 17; cf. 54. 9 n. But the whole position of
the tribunate was safeguarded by leges sacratae, whose origin it was
natural to connect with the Mons Sacer (Appian, B.C. 1. 1.2). Hence
second-century historians whom Polybius followed made both seces
sions take place on the two hills (cf. Cicero, de Rep. 2. 63). This was
a clumsy manoeuvre which later writers improved by allotting the
First Secession to the Mons Sacer, the Second to the Aventine
(7. 40. 11 (a Licinian passage); Pomponius, Dig. 1. 2. 2. 20, 24;
Festus 422 L.). The improved account became the standard version.
It is to be noted that whereas L. adopts it in the digression 54. 5-15
(54. 9 n.), in the main narrative he prefers the older and clumsier
story that they moved from the Aventine to the Mons Sacer (52. 1).
L.'s treatment is characterized by the frequency of debates, dis
cussions, and harangues. Besides three more extended speeches (50.
4-9 Verginius; 52. 6-9 Valerius and Horatius; 53. 6-1 o the emissaries),
there are numerous short remarks in direct and indirect speech
(5- r4> i5> l6 > 5 1 - 3~5> n> r 2 , 13* 5 2 - 4 53- 3~5> 54- i, 7) whose
overall effect is to convey the impression of bewilderment and con
cern. Rome is divided and perplexed, subjected to a confusion of con
tradictory advice. The issues are presented in the openthe conflict
of liberty and order, libido and pudicitia, minority rights and concordia,
justice and equity. They wait for Quinctius to gather up and resolve
them in his great speech (65-66).
See further Taubler 4 9 - 5 3 ; Burck 4 2 - 4 3 ; U. von Lubtow, Das
Romische Volk, 96-99.
50. 1. Vecilio: not otherwise mentioned. If sound (Algido Doujat),
it must be the name of one of the peaks or spurs of the Algidus range.
As a proper name Vecilius is tolerably common. It may be Etruscan in
origin, perhaps from Falerii (Schulze 561; Gundel, R.E., 'Vecilius').
If so, its application to Algidus looks like later elaboration.
50. 3. strictum . . . telum: two things, the knife and the bloodstained
figure, attract the attention of the camp. But there is nothing remark
able about a drawn knife as there would be about a drawn sword,
489
3- 50- 3
450 B.C.
450 B.C.
3. 50. 10
affected by L. (cf., e.g., 36. 6,5. 4.2). Here it also serves to obviate the
ambiguous repetition of visa . . . visa fuisset, thus ensuring the first
visa (visu Freudenberg; cf. 6. 37. 1, 21. 32. 7) as well as potuerint
(debuerint Doring; oportuerit Madvig) against emendation.
50. 12. et leniter: et {-que) has an adversative force as also at 60. 3,
6.22.7,7.5.2.
50. 15. cepissent: 'occupied' not 'captured'; cf. Cicero, de Rep. 2. 26
50. 16. invidiae se qfferre: cf. Cicero, in Catil. 3. 28.
5 1 . 2. summae rei: awkwardly repeated at 51. 10, 11. See 1. 14. 4 n.
tribunos militum: 4. 7. 1 n.
appellari: appellate N. T h e switch from passive to active after placet
can be paralleled (cf., e.g., 28. 25. 9, 29. 4. 2, 44. 2. 2) but in all these
passages the subject of the action verb can easily be supplied (the
consul, the general, & c ) , whereas here it is difficult to see who is
to call them tribuni militum. T h e Senate ? T h e whole people ? There is
a clear case for the passive. Cf. 13. 8 n.
5 1 . 8. praerogativam: 5. 18. 1 n.
5 1 . 10. Before agmine there are preserved in Ver. the letters . . . enti.
Novak's suggestion that they are no more than an anticipation of
Aventi- which the scribe has failed to delete is impaired by the fact
that at least four and possibly five letters were written before enti.
Mommsen's ingenti agmine cannot be right, since the order is invariably
a.i.; cf. 6. 15. 2, 34. 10. 1; Augustine, Civ. Dei 5. 2 3 ; for the bare
agmine see Fugner, Lexicon, 779. See 5. 41. 5 n. T h e most probable
restoration is frequenti; cf. 27. 15. 18, 32. 12. 9, 44. 43. 1.
M. Oppium: 35. 11 n. Not otherwise known.
Sex. Manilzum: MdXtov according to D.H. 11. 44. 2, i.e. Manlium:
but the Manlii were patricians. No Manilius is known before the
second century (M'. Manilius cos. 149) and the praenomen Sextus is
not used either by the Manilii or the Manlii. H e is, therefore,
imaginary.
5 1 . 1 1 . terunt: 1. 57. 5 n.
51. 12. quo anno iam ante: 55. 1 n.
5 1 . 13. in ordinem: 'to be reduced to the ranks, to be degraded'. Only
here and at 35. 6 in L., an unconscious repetition (1. 14. 4 n.). T h e
metaphor is taken from military language; cf. Pliny, Epist. 1. 23. 1.
se aiebant: se, omitted by Ver., is not strictly needed but the omission
is one to which that manuscript is peculiarly liable; cf. 44. 6, 62. 1,
5. 32. 4, 40. 10, 6. 6. 10.
52. 2. sciturosque . . . nequeant: as the text stands there is no conjunction
to introduce and govern nequeant and a harsh change of subject has
to be presumed between admoniturum and scituros. T h e first difficulty
491
3- 52. 2
450 B.C.
4 5 0 B.C.
3. 52. 5
amplexi tenetis cf. pro Sulla 59; for ferant desiderium (only here in L.)
cf. Phil. 2. 45, 10. 21. There are many familiar stylistic tricks such as
the repeated quid si. . . quid si, the sharp chiasmus plebs . . . habenda
aut habendiplebis and the antithesis nos . . . patriciis . . . illiplebeiis. There
are many rhetorical commonplaces. The swamping of civilians by
soldiers recalls the opening of the pro Milone. The exaggerated occasune
urbis voltis finire imperium? is matched by similar cliches from Cicero
(e.g. de Domo 96). Above all, tectis iura dicturi recalls dvSpes yap 7T6XL$
(52. 6 n.).
52. 6. tectis: a Greek TOKOS, as befits a people who could take to their
ships when the enemy invaded, going back at least to Alcaeus E 1. 10
(Lobel and Page). Cf. also Herodotus 8. 6 1 ; Thucydides 7. 77. 7;
Sophocles, O.T. 56; Euripides, fr. 828 Nauck. Although used by
historians of Rome (e.g. Appian, B.C. 2. 50; Dio 56. 5. 3) it enjoyed
little vogue in Latin since to a Latin the concepts of urbs and populus
were indistinguishable.
52. 7. aliorumque: who else would there be besides togati to be out
numbered by the lictors ? According to Alschefski and Harant, women,
children, and slaves. But since the main contrast is between civilians
and soldiers, the women and children would be classed as togati, as they
are, for example, in Cicero, pro Rab. Post. 27, or in the tag cedant arma
togae. T o limit togati exclusively to men who wore togas is to miss
the point of the contrast between soldiers and others, viz. civilians =
togatorum aliorum (ed. Frob. 1531). For the intrusion oi-que see 24. 5 n.,
and for the idiomatic aliorum 5. 35. 1 n.
52. 9. novam: 'it was a new and unproved power when they extorted
it from our fathers: now that they have once been captivated by its
charm they will endure still less to be deprived of it, especially since
we for our part do not moderate our orders so that they stand in no
need of help' (after B. O. Foster). Three points call for comment.
dulcedine capti does not survive in prose before this passage (cf. 5. 6. 15
(speech of Ap. Claudius); 5. 33. 2), except in a letter written by
Matius to Cicero (ad Fam. 11. 28. 2). It is used by Cicero in a poetical
fragment (I b 1. 4) and by other poets (e.g. Ovid, Met. 1. 709; Lucan
9. 393), and it must, therefore, have seemed a vigorous phrase to a
Roman, ne nunc for nedum nunc is equally striking (Kiihner-Stegmann
2. 68 Anm. 14). The use is only attested in a letter from Cicero to
Paetus written in 46 B.C. ne iuvenem quidem movit umquam, ne nunc senem.
See Cicero, de Domo 139 with Nisbet's note, nee nos = et(iam) nos non
is affected by L. (6. 15. 7, 23. 18. 4, 38. 23. 3, 34. 32. 9, 37. 20. 8). See
Riemann, Grammaire, 277 ff.
52. 10. videatur: L. misunderstands the impeccably constitutional lan
guage in which his source couched the Decemvirs' reply, si eis videtur
was the request made by the Senate to the magistrates (2. 56. 12 n.).
493
3- 52- i o
450 B.C.
450 B.C.
3- 54- 5
450 B.C.
3- 54- 9
before or does he refer to the version known to Piso which sited the
First Secession, the beginning of the plebeian fight for recognition and
independence, on the Aventine (2. 32. 3) ? T h e pompous language
might suggest the latter (for initia incohastis cf. 39. 23, 5) but the sen
tence is probably to be regarded as an amplification of ita undeprofecti estis
and the mention of the Mons Sacer as the site of the First Secession a few
lines below (54. 12) shows that L. did mean to refer to that event here.
54. 1 1 . pontifice: 54. 5 n.
L. Icilium: 31. 1 n. T h e college of 471 included Sp. Icilius (2.
58. 2 n.).
P. Numitorium: cf. L. Numitorius in 471 (2. 58. 2 n.).
54. 12. C. Sicinium: according to the differing political attitude of
historians 471 also included a C. Sicinius or a Cn. Siccius (2. 58. 2 n.).
In saying primum tribunum plebis creatum L.'s source appears to conflict
with 2. 33. 2 where Sicinius is only co-opted to the college and is not
the founder-member (but for rival versions see note on 2. 32-33). This
C. Sicinius is not mentioned elsewhere.
in saero monte: 2. 33. 3 n.
M. Duilium: for his tribunate and his name see 2. 58. 2 n.
54. 13. spe . . . mentis: the phrase awakens suspicions, since the hopes
were not fulfilled. Nothing else is known of them but a great deal is
heard of their descendants.
M. Titinius: cf. Sext. Titinius tr. pi. in 439 (4. 16. 5 n.), P. Titinius
consular tribune in 400 a n d L, Titinius in 396 (5. 18. 2 n.). T h e
formation of the name from Titus suggests an Etruscan origin for the
family (Schulze 242) and, despite the identification of P. Titinius as
a patrician (5. 12. 10 n.), the family was doubtless plebeian. M .
Titinius was tr. pi. in 193 and praetor in 178, whose career may have
facilitated his ancestor's emergence. See Munzer, R.E., 'Titinius ( i o ) \
M. Pomponius: the Pomponii were an old plebeian family, claiming
descent from N u m a Pompilius (Plutarch, Numa 21. 2 ; Nepos, Atticus
1. 1), but M . Pomponius owes his name more to the consular tribune
of 399 (5. 13. 3 n.) than to history. See Gundel, R.E., 'Pomponius (7)'.
C. Apronius: significantly the only other Apronius known before
the late Republic is the notorious Cn. Apronius, who was aedile
some time before 266 (Val. Max. 6. 6. 5).
Ap. Villius: the Villii only become prominent in the third a n d
second centuries and reach their peak with the author of the Lex
Villia Annalis (180) and P. Villius Tappulus, consul of 199. T h e
praenomen Appius so far from being suspect (P. Sigonius) may be
significant. Appius is not, in any case, exclusively confined to the
Claudii (Doer, Die Rom. Namengebung, 26) but Scullard's demonstra
tion that Tappulus was closely connected with the Claudian faction
in the Second Punic W a r {Roman Politics, 96) may be used to support
496
450 B.C.
3-54- *3
497
Kk
3- 55
449 B.C.
449 B.C.
3- 55- i
3- 55- 5
449 B.C.
55. 5. novam legem: Daube (Forms of Roman Legislation, 27) notes that,
whatever the authenticity of the law, it follows the regular pattern
of legal formulation. In new statutes the prohibition is put first and
has the sanction as, for example, in the Lex Quinctia de aquaedudibus
( = Bruns 113) or Cato, de Re Rust. 144. 3. legulos praebeto. si non praebuerit, quanti conductum erit aut locatum erit, deducetur. In statutes which
merely confirm existing statutes as in the following law on sacrosanctitas, the prohibition is taken for granted and so omitted: only
the sanction is stated.
iusfasque: the meaning is that it would not be an offence against
men or gods for him to be killed. T h e language is suspicious. Although
the Twelve Tables speak of a man being iure caesum, the combination
of ius and fas looks like a late formulation. We should expect
something like parricida ne sit (Festus 424 L.). capitalis noxa is also
modern.
The Law ''qui tribunis . . . nocuisset, eius caput Iovi sacrum esse?
T h e law is a restatement of the oath taken at the time of the First
Secession (2. 3 3 . I ; cf. D . H . 6. 8 9 . 3 e^ayicrros
earw KCLL ra
xPVlJLara
449 B.C.
3- 55- 7
3- 55- 7
449 B.C.
449 B.C.
3- 55- ^
3- 56 59
449 B.C.
449 B.C.
3- 56. 4
seras, non leves tamenpoenas cf. Homer, Iliad 4. 160 ff.; Solon 13. 25 ff.;
Aeschylus, Agam. 5 8 ; Choeph. 3 8 3 ; Euripides, Bacchae 883 with Dodds's
note; Tibullus 1. 9. 4 ; Horace, Odes 3. 2. 31-32.
56. 8. fidem . . . implorantis: 2. 23. 8 n.
Appius' Plea
See Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 35. A good example of subtle
casuistry, planned according to the best patterns, as recommended for
example by ad Herennium 2. 25. Notice the careful antitheses; maiorum
merita, suum studium, suas leges; turn . . . in praesentia; civitatis civem;
invidiam . . . aequitate; dominatio an libertas; inanibus litteris an vere and
the balanced experturum . . . experiri, quod si . . . quod si and quern enim
. . . ? cui . . . non sit? T h e language is as exemplary. For maiorum
merita in rem publicam cf. Cicero, Verr. 2. 122; for aequandarum legum
see 31. 7 n . ; for invidiam pertimuisse cf. in Catil. 1 . 2 9 ; for aequitate et
misericordia cf. pro Mar cello 12; for dominatio an libertas see 39. 7 n.
56. 9. abisset: in 33. 4 the consuls were only designati but the exaggera
tion is legitimate.
56. 10. bona malaque: 'his case's good and bad points 5 .
56. 12. tollendae appellationis: N wrongly interpolates causa, as Duker
had already seen. T h e genitive is governed by foedus as at Val. Max.
7. 4 ext. 3. In what follows, quod for quam and at for ait (cf. 9. 1.8)
505
3- 56- i2
449 B.C.
449 B.C.
3- 57- 9
3- 58. i
449 B.C.
449 B.C.
3.58- "
3- 6o. 8
449 B.C.
60. 8. multa iam dies erat: 'much of the day was spent' cf. 5. 26. 6,
27. 2. 9; Caesar, B.G. 1. 22. 4. T h e expression is military.
tegerent: the Aequan sense of shame is expressed in a rov-os often
employed in such situations; cf. Sallust, Cat. 58. 10.
60. 10. qui erant: sc. educti. turbatis mentibus is dat. after addito. The long
sentence with its involved participial clause, extended apposition, and
abl. abs., culminating in the sharp invadit, conveys the impression of
the sudden moment of attack against a disorganized enemy performing
a complicated series of manoeuvres.
60. 11. victisne cessuri: it is not clear whether the leaders mean that
the Romans have been defeated on previous occasions or that they
are (virtually) defeated now. Perhaps the former which was a common
TO7TOS for encouraging the troops (cf. Thucydides 2. 89. 2, 4. 92. 6,
7. 66. 2 ; Polybius, 3. 64. 4 ; Sallust, Jug. 49. 2).
Exhortation by Valerius
Valerius makes use of four main TOTTOL: ( I ) T h e Romans are
fighting as free men for their freedom. This is the most frequent of all
commonplaces in a 7Ta/3a/ceAeuo-t?.Cf., e.g., Herodotus 5. 2. 1; 6. 109.3 ;
Thucydides 7. 69. 2 ; Xenophon, Anab. 1. 7. 3, 3. 2. 10; Cyrop. 3. 3. 35,
6. 4. 13; Lucan 7. 264-9. (2) Previous defeats have been due to the
failure of the generals, not the soldiers. Cf. Polybius 3. 64, 3. 108. 9.
(3) T h e Romans can be assured of divine goodwill. Cf. Thucydides
7. 69. 3 ; Xenophon, Cyrop. 3. 3. 34, 6. 4. 13; Polybius 10. 1 1 ; Lucan
7. 349 ff. (4) They are fighting for the safety of their children and
homes. Cf. especially Thucydides 7. 69. 2 ; Polybius 3. 109. 7. He adds
one argument (turpe esse contra cives) which had a special relevance to
L.'s own day. T h e speech is reported indirectly, but Valerius breaks
out at the end with a passionate appeal in direct speech addressed to
a particular section. See Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 4 1 .
6 1 . 4. pudicitiae: note the alliterative />'s. inclino is intransitive only
here in L. (cf. 6 1 . 14, 2. 47. 3, 6. 9. 8). T h e phrase looks like military
jargon (Caesar, B.C. 1. 52. 2 ; Jtin. Alex. 16).
6 1 . 5. nolle: 'yet he would not utter an omen which neither Jupiter
nor Mars their Father would suffer to come home to a City founded
with such auspices' (Foster). T o suggest the possibility of defeat was
a bad omen.
6 1 . 7. dicta dedit: so 22. 50. 10; Petronius 61 and Virgil (eight times);
dicta dederat 7. 33. 11, 29. 2. 12. T h e constant word-order disproves
Ver.'s dedit dicta. T h e phrase is epic in character, as Petronius shows,
and is thus appropriate to the tense moment of a great battle (cf. 2.
45-47)advolat: 2. 20. 10. T h e focus is on his destination, not the scene he is
leaving (avolat).
510
449
B.C.
3.61.8
3- 62. 4
449 B.C.
62. 4. iam satis: a colloquialism for which cf., e.g., Terence, Phormio
436 and see Fraenkel, Horace, 242-3.
agite dum: 68. 1, 5. 52. 9, 6. 35. 9, 7. 33. 10, 34. 14, 35. 12. Ver.
also omits dum at 67. 6. Both are instances of haplography.
voluntatis: observe the alliteration, as Horatius storms to his con
clusion.
62. 5. gesturum morem: for the history of'moremgerere see G. W. Williams,
J.R.S. 49 (1959), 28-29. It meant originally 'to regulate one's own
individual behaviour in the interest of another' and was initially con
fined to 'wifely and filial obedience'. It later became colloquial and
popular but since it is used here by L. I think some of the original
associations of the phrase are retained. Unlike Appius Claudius
Horatius was a true father to his troops. As with other semi-archaic
phrases L. puts them into the mouths of his characters and does not
use them directly himself.
62. 6. gloriae: if right, the gen. is analogous to Cicero, pro Plancio 89.
Such variations of construction [gloriae . . . elatum) are not uncommon
in L. Ver. is reported to have victoriae, a negligent anticipation of
victoria (51. i o n . ) , but, as far as its illegible state allows one to judge
today, it seems to have read vi gloriae and that would be possible,
perhaps better; Stroth and Ruperti had already proposed gloriae
(memorial. Both victoria elatus (Caesar, E.G. 5. 47. 4 ; Bell. Alex. 76. 3 ;
Nepos, Pans. 1. 3 ; cf. 2. 51. 1, 21. 48. 8) and gloria elatus (Caesar, B.C.
3. 79. 6; Bell. Hisp. 23. 8 ; Bell. Afr. 22. 2 ; cf. 31. 24. 12) appear to be
military cliches. Ver. also has the more satisfactory transposition nova
nuper which enables veteris and nova to balance one another. T h e inter
laced nuper may have seemed too harsh to the editors of the Nicomachean recension.
Notice again the preoccupation with psychology (gloriae, pudore,
verecundiae).
62. 8. degravabant: 4. 33. 11, 7. 24. 9.
sescenti; 1. 43. 9 n. T h e detail is anachronistic from the time when
every legion had a detachment of 300 cavalry attached to it (8. 8. 14;
22. 36. 3). For the significance of their dismounting see 2. 20. 10 n.
ex(s)iliunt (Ver.) is not used of jumping from horseback.
63. 2. et in: in is omitted by Ver. as at 63. 5, 4. 9. 14, but is required
here as there.
63. 3. providere omnia: the mark of a good general (cf. Sallust, Catil.
60. 4), as it is his duty laudare et increpare merentes (Jug. 100. 3).
6 3 . 5. supplicationes: 5. 23. 3 n. A solemn thanksgiving decreed by the
Senate during which the temples were opened and the cult-statues
displayed on couches while the people offered up their prayers. There
is no doubt that in origin supplicationes were decreed in time of pesti512
449 B.C.
3- 6 3 - 5
lence (7. 7-8) and that the thanksgiving for victories was a com
paratively late development. The present case has several suspicious
features: the vaga popularisque supplicatio ( a clumsy annalistic explana
tion), the meeting of the Senate at the Apollinare where later a temple
of Apollo was vowed pro valetudine populi (4. 25. 3-4 n.), and the coin
cidence of the date of L. Valerius' triumph with that of his descendant
M . Valerius in 312 (Id. Sext.). T h e truth may be as Gage conjectures
(Apollon Romain, 2 fF. with bibliography). The Annales preserved a
record of a supplicatio ad Apollinare but no mention of a triumph. T h e
supplicatio was doubtless for health. Family and national patriotism
demanded that the restorers of Roman democracy should be com
memorated by a triumph and it was easy to convert a supplicatio pro
valetudine into the thanksgiving for victory which usually preceded a
triumph while the reference to the Apollinare could be explained as
the site where the Senate met to consider the request for a triumph
(34. 43. 2, 37. 58. 3, et al.). T h e absence of an official notification of
the triumph meant that if one was held it must have been authorized
in some unprecedented mannera tribunician motion. M . Valerius
supplied the date. See also L. Halkin, La Supplication, 16; P. Grenade,
Origines du Principal 230.
frequens iit: 7. 1; Plautus, Persa 447; Val. M a x . 3. 7. 1. T h e technical
expression is omitted by Ver. influenced by the juxtaposition of diem
supplicationes immediately above. After it the supine supplicatum is
wanted, supplicatumque est is a very old mistake.
63. 9. numquam ante: the sententious invention of precedents recalls
35. 8 (n.)also Valerian. D . H . on the other hand cites a regal
precedent. Constitutionally the power to allow a triumph rested with
the magistrates not the Senate (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 1233) but
their power appears to have been modified by Sulla who gave the
Senate discretionary control (Cicero, de Leg, Man. 62. O n e triumph
of historical times violated all the rulesthat of Pompey in 80 B.C.
(E. Badian, Hermes 83 (1955), 107 ff.). L. significantly says of it quod
nulli contigerat (Epit. 89).
63. 1 1 . triumphatum est: in the Fast. Triumph, the entry r u n s :
L. Valerjius P.f. P.n. Poplicola Potit(us) an. ccciv
consul] de Aequeis idibus Sextil.
D.H. credits both Horatius and Valerius with triumphs (11. 49. 2,
50. 1) and knows nothing of the two-day supplicatio. L.'s version
favours Valerius at the expense of Horatius.
64-65. Tribunician Agitation: The Lex Trebonia
For L. the events of the next few years are of interest as exemplifying
the difficulties of preserving concordia within the state notwithstanding
811432
513
L1
3- 64"65
449 B.C.
the wise provisions which Valerius and Horatius have made. Real
concord requires the co-operation of all parties in the states, dementia
from those who are in a position to be vengeful, moderatio from those
who have opportunities of power, modestia from those who havegrievances to air. Above all, the two main divisions of the community,
the patres and the plebs> are depicted as waiting for a chance to jump
at each other's throats. The power of the plebs lay in the tribunate.
If the patres could hamstring that office, they would render the plebs
powerless. Conversely, the plebs realize that to re-elect year after year
a strong college of tribunes would give them a hold over the other
magistracies. Hence the 'Lex' Trebonia, designed to prevent the
infiltration of the tribunate by co-option but calculated to perpetuate
seditio and discordia.
Such at least is L.'s version. It is clear from the sources that tra
ditionally the issue whether co-option of a patrician to the tribunate
was permissible had at one time been discussed. It recurs in the story
of L. Minucius (4. 16. 4) and in 401 (5. 10. 11 n.). If there is any
substance to that tradition it must be connected with the institution
of the consular tribunate and not with such highly organized political
manoeuvres as L, describes, since patrician membership of the plebeian
tribunate is the obverse of plebeian membership of the patrician
tribunate. The whole tradition may just be legalistic invention based
on the known terms of the provisions regulating the election of
plebeian tribunes (i.e. the Lex Trebonia; cf. Diodorus 12, 25)cer
tainly the stories of Tarpeius, Aternius, and Minucius are fictitious
but it may go back to a contemporary discussion on how Rome was
to have a unified government when religious reasons debarred ple
beians from holding the auspices. Any reconstruction is guesswork.
See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 219; E. Meyer, Kl. Schriften, 1. 337;
Cornelius, Untersuchungen, 62; de Martino, Storia della Costituzione,
294-5The Lex Trebonia was invoked as an argument in the contested
matter of re-election to the tribunate in the Gracchan age. Appian
(B.C. 1. 21) refers to an old law (presumably the Lex Trebonia) that
ten tribunes must be elected and it was argued that 'though as a
general rule re-election was improper, if fewer than ten tribunes were
duly returned, the plebs might fill the vacancies from all including
former tribunes' (A. H. M. Jones, P.C.P.S. 186 (i960), 34-35). The
topicality of the law in the Gracchan and Drusan disturbances accounts
for its prominence, but L. could hardly have written this section in
this form after 23 B.C. when Augustus took the full tribunicia potestas
and from time to time co-opted colleagues (Suetonius, Augustus 27;
Res Gestae 6).
64. 1. consulibus . . . continuarent magistratum: continuare m. can mean 'to
5i4
449 B.C.
3. 64. 1
renew one's own magistracy' (35. 6, 21. 2) or with dat., 'to renew
another person's magistracy' (5. 29. 1). Here the latter is clearly in
tended.
64. 2. iura [tribunorurri] plebis: Ver. adds tribunorum but the limitation
of the complaint to the tribunes weakens the force of the argument.
64. 6. auctores populares sententiae haud popularis nactus: Stroth's emenda
tion is necessary. Valerius and Horatius are popular, Duilius' pro
posal is not. The gen. sententiae haud popularis as always with auctor
(5. 22. 2, 8. 21. 2, 31. 7. 15, 33. 6. 15). Ver.'s dat. (s. k. populari) is
inadequately supported by 2. 54. 7 where the dat. follows closely on
deerat. For auctores nactus cf. 4. 6. 3.
64. 8. prae studiis: 'the other candidates not being able to make up
the requisite number of tribes on account of the eagerness with which
the nine tribunes openly pushed for the office'. T h e sense is that the
other nine existing tribunes except Duilius tried to secure re-election
but that the tribes which voted for them were disqualified by Duilius
with the result that other candidates could not secure a majority.
tribus explerent is technical; cf. Lex Malac. 3 . 7 : Cicero, pro Caecina 29.
64. 10. in quo: 'si...':
the vulgate reading on which Ver. and N agree
is adopted by most editors including Mommsen and Bayet but no
convincing parallel has been adduced for the ellipse. If a verb has
fallen out it is more likely to be scriptum est than sic erat (H. J . Miiller,
Luterbacher). T h e text of the clause is fortunately preserved in a
sound state by Ver. with the exception of uti> given also by N . ut ii
gives the right sense and balances hi and Mi but Housman in a
marginal note suggests that the contracted ut i ( = ii) suits the pseudoarchaic nature of the language better and accounts for the archetype.
'If I shall call for your votes for ten tribunes, if for any reason you shall
elect today less than ten tribunes, then let those whom the elected
tribunes co-opt as their colleagues be as validly tribunes as those
whom you shall this day have chosen to that office.' Linguistic details
betray the whole formula as a second-century fabrication. For si. .
turn cf. 1. 24. 8 ; qui is abl. 'for any reason' (not a primitive form).
65. 1. Tarpeium: the alleged co-option of the consuls of 454 (31. 5 n.) is
inspired by their responsibility for one of the first measures to give
the plebs some legal protection (4. 30. 3 n.).
65. 2. Lars Herminius: I replace Herminius' praenomen which Gassiodorus' L. shows once stood in the text of Livy. {Aapivos Diodorus
12. 27. 1; Adpos D.H. 11. 51. 1; cf. Auct. de Praen. 4.) Lars is frequently
corrupted in transmission. Herminius is presumably related to the
consul of 506 (2. 15. 1 n.), perhaps a grandson. For the Herrrinii
see 2. 10. 6 n.
T. Verginius Caelimontanus: regarded by Munzer and others as a son
5T)
3. 65. 2
448 B.C.
of the consul of 456 (31. 1 n.) but the age-gap is too small. Perhaps
the son of A. Verginius, consul in 469 (2. 63.1 ). T h e Verginii at
some early period divided into two families, one residing on the
Esquiline, the other on the Caelian. Hence his cognomen.
65. 3 . Trebonius: there is evidence to suggest that the Trebonii were
an old family of Etruscan origin from Clusium (Munzer, R.E.,
'Trebonius').
65. 4. usque eo: 23. 19. 4 ; adeo is one of Ver.'s trivializations.
65. 5. M. Geganius Macerinus: 4. 8. 1, 17. 7, 27. 10-12. For the
cognomen cf. Macer. N's Macrinus may be influenced by the emperor
of that name. A son of the consul of 492 (2. 34. 1).
65. 6. otioforis quoque: N's word-order is ruled out by the absence of
any Livian examples of prepositive quoque (Baehrens, Philologus,
SuppL 12 (1912), 387 ff.; Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana, 175).
65. 7. cura pacis: for the sentiment cf. 2. 39. 7.
65. 8. inprimis: 'originally'.
65. 9. nominal 5. 18. 2 n.
6 5 . 1 1 . adeo moderatio: one of L.'s most articulate judgements in which
he gives a coherent framework to the events of these years. Notice
the subtle transition from the impersonal quisque / homines to the per
sonal nobis I iniungimus. The balance between personal ambition (dignitas)
and public order (libertas) was one which the late Republic un
successfully struggled with (Wirszubski, Libertas, 16; cf. 4. 6. 11). T h e
thought is older, going back at least to Thucydides 2. 65. 10; cf.
Xenophon, Cyrop. 8. 2. 2 8 ; Lucian, de Calumnia 11-13. Ver. omits the
preposition a(b) also at 42. 7, 4. 25. 11.
66. 1. Agrippa Furius: his filiation, in the absence of the Capitoline
Fasti, is uncertain. Perhaps a son of the consul of 481 (2. 43. 1).
C f . 5 . 3 2 . 1.
66. 3 . Aequi Volscique: the regular combination (cf. 2. 30. 3, 63. 7,
3. 6. 4, 57. 8, 60. 1, 4, 4. 1.4). T h e only case of A. ac V. (N) is 9. 12
ne Aequi quidem ac Volsci where ne . . . quidem makes all the difference.
66. 4. in ipsos verti: cf. Sallust, Or. Lepid. 19.
occaecatos lupos: this refers to a slogan which enjoyed some currency
between n o and 80. T h e Romans, jealous of their descent from
Romulus and Remus, were proud to be known as lupi but the term
could rebound. Cf. Justin 38. 6. 8 (Mithridates); Veil. Pat. 2. 27. 2
(Pontius). It will be a legacy of Sullan historiography.
67-68. The Speech of Quinctius
Quinctius' speech is the first of L.'s full-scale rhetorical compositions
and it is, in its way, a small masterpiece. After some experimentation
in Books 1 and 2 in shaping his material L. hits on the idea of opening
516
446 B.C.
3. 67-68
and closing a book with a long speech. As often as not the first speech
foreshadows what is to come, the last rounds off the narrative or what
has happened. So Book 4 is opened by Canuleius (3-5), Book 5 opened
by Appius Claudius (3-6), and closed by Camillus (51-54). Quinctius
gathers together and reviews the issues which have been at stake in
the turbulent years before and after the Decemvirate and points the
moral that Rome's future depends upon Concordia and that concordia
can only be achieved by every citizen subordinating his own desires
and ambitions to the needs of Rome. It need hardly be said that such
a message was more relevant to the times of Augustus than of Quin
ctius, and Hellmann does well to draw attention to it (Livius-lnterpretationen, 50-52) but it is in no sense Augustan propaganda. A speech
on similar lines was evidently in D.H. whose text is defective at this
point (Klotz 271), which implies that one stood in the history written
by Valerius Antias.
T h e immaturity of the composition is revealed by its formal correct
ness, by detailed discrepancies from the surrounding narrative which
indicate that it was composed separately (67. 1 n.3 68. 1 n., 68. 7 n.,
68. 10 n.) and have even led scholars to suppose that it is taken from
a different source, and by the large number of passages which
imitate Demosthenes and Cicero. As Dobree observed (Adversaria
Critica, 1. 349) 'omnia e Demosthene adumbravit'. Such similarities
might be put down to a common stock of rhetorical commonplaces
if it were not for L.'s known and demonstrable admiration for the two
great orators. For a general treatment of the speech see R. Ullmann,
La Technique des Discours, 5 6 - 5 8 ; also Soltau 113, 169; Burck 48-50.
For R o m a n knowledge of Demosthenes see P. Perrochat, Les Modeles
grecs de Salluste. T h e Philippics and Olynthiacs were the most popular.
Prooemium: principium a nostra persona et a re
67. 1. Quirites: 5. 6. 15 n.
pudore: the argument resembles Demosthenes, Olynth. 1. 27.
in conspectum vestrum: N has a variant in contionem vestram introduced
from ad contionem in 66. 6, which is the standard phrase (4. 6. 1,
44. 22. 1, 44. 45. 8). For in conspectumprocedere cf. Plautus, Most. 1125.
It is an archaic phrase which sets the tone for Quinctius, severissimus
consul.
traditum iri: 1. 7. 10 n. for the impressively weighty future pass. inf.
vix Hernicis: no engagement between the Hernici and the Aequi
and Volsci has been mentioned, but it may be a purely rhetorical
comparison.
67. 2. ita vivitur: further examination of Ver. shows that it has pre
cisely the same text as N , namely vivitu
atus and not as reported
in the O.C.T. is status rerum est might seem redundant with it but the
517
3- 67. 2
446 B.C.
phrase is unexceptionable linguistically (8. 13. 2)) and the two phrases
do convey two distinct ideas, the atmosphere of Q / s life and the
general situation. T h e text should be kept. For the thought Weissenborn well compares Cicero, in CatiL 1. 31.
67. 3 . viri arma: for the juxtaposition cf. 2. 40. 2 n.
Roma me consule: me Roma consule Ver., but there is no parallel for the
separation of me and consule.
satis honorum, satis superque vitae: a conventional disclaimer for which
cf. Aeschylus, Agamemnon 1314 with Fraenkel's note but the im
mediate source was no doubt Caesar's famous satis diu vel naturae vixi
vel gloriae (ap. Cicero, pro Marcello 25).
Tractatio: (a) dignum
67. 4 . nos consules an vos Quirites: the argument that if the fault rests
with the generals they should be replaced but if it rests with the people
they should reform owes much to Demosthenes, Olynth. 2. 28-31, the
language something to Cicero, in CatiL 1.3.
67. 5. ignaviam . . . virtuti: a variation on Demosthenes, Phil. 1. 11.
67. 6. discordia ordinum et: 2. 44. 8, evidently a Republican common
place but the thought can be traced back e.g. to Demosthenes, Phil.
3. 21. Madvig's emendation of est to et, confirmed subsequently by
Ver., eliminates what would otherwise be an irrelevant generalization
where we expect a specific reason for Aequan optimism. T h e resulting
antithesis between Hits (Clericus) and urbis huius underlines the point
and suggests that the emphatic order urbis huius is preferable to the
normalized huius urbis. According to A. Fischer (De Usu Praenominum,
1908) the incidence of postponed hie is 12:451.
(b) aequum
67. 7. pro deumjidem: An archaic exclamation (Ennius, Sat. 18 V . ;
Terence, Andr. 237) used only here and 44. 38. 10 and avoided by
Sallust and Cicero who prefers p. d. hominumque jidem (cf. Orator 155).
It invariably accompanies a question and introduces a new point.
Quinctius passes to consider whether R o m a n behaviour is reasonable.
For the form of the subsequent argument cf. 4. 4. 2 ; Cicero, in
Pisonem 15.
6 7 . 9 . videbamus iniquum: 'although we saw that it (i.e. the election
of consuls with plebeian leanings) was unfair to the patricians'. There
is as yet no suggestion in L. that plebeians were actually elected to the
consulate, only that men with plebeian sympathies were. According
to L. the first plebeian consul was in 367 (6. 42. 9) although in fact
the presence of plebeian names in the early Fasti suggests that the rigid
exclusion of plebeians only began after the Decemvirate when such
distinctions were for the first time formally fixed. There is no need,
518
446 B.C.
3- 67. 9
3.
68.
446 B.C.
(d) necessarium
68. 7. haerete: 21. 35. 12; cf. Seneca, Contr. 7. 7 - 4 ; Val. Max. 2. 1. 9.
sequitur vos necessitas: cf. Demosthenes, Olynth. 1. 15
'
.
68. 12. antiquos mores: Quinctius recalls to the Romans the majestic
claim of Enniusmoribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque.
69-72. War with the Aequi and Volsci: the Scaptius Affair
Moderatio is not enough. The governed as well as the governing classes
have to exercise restraint (modestia). The final section of Book 3 strikes
a new note which is to become the dominant theme of the following
book. The Decemvirate had taught Rome that libertas could not be
520
446 B.C.
3. 69-72
3- 70
446 B.C.
communicando: 'by sharing his plans and his honours and treating
him as an equal although in fact he was not'.
consilia laudesque make an odd pair (no example quoted by Gudeman
in Thes. Ling. Lat.) and I suspect with H . J . Mliller that another gerund
has dropped out, e.g. participando; cf. 2. 52. 8. See Tacitus, Agr. 8.
70. 2. Sp. Postumio Albo: 4. 25. 5 n.
P. Sulpicium: 10. 5 n.
70. 6. conficerent: 1. 25. 10, a strong word to match Sulpicius' resolu
tion. Cf. Donatus on Terence, Eun. 926 proprie (confeere) convenit gladiatoribus qui gravissimis vulneribus occubuerunt. Used in this sense by the less
sophisticated military writers, e.g. Hirtius, B.G. 8. 23. 5 ; Bell. Alex.
53-3resistere quibus sibi: editors follow the single testimony of A and print
resistere sibi quibus, taking quibus to refer to sibi: 'the Romans who had
forced the massed phalanx of the Aequan infantry to yield'. With
N.'s word-order which allows sibi its natural position (1. 13. 2 n.)
quibus = illos 'the Aequans could not resist whose infantry already
had yielded to them (the Romans)'.
70. 7. haud surdis auribus: 24. 32. 6, 40. 8. 10. 'His words did not fall
on deaf ears.'
impressione una: 2. 30. 13, 4. 28. 6, 8. 9. 3, 25. 37. 13. A military
term; cf. Bell. Afr. 78. 3 ; Hirtius, B.G. 8. 6. 2 ; Vegetius 3. 15.
confodere: another word avoided by Cicero but patronized by
military historians, e.g. Sallust, Catil. 60. 7 ; Nepos, Pel. 5. 4 ; Frontinus
2- 5-3370. 10. Agrippa's exploit is one of those nameless legends so readily
incorporated into history. Frontinus preserves three other instances
of it: Servius Tullius (2. 8. 1), T. Quinctius Capitolinus (2. 8. 2), and
M . Furius Camillus (2. 8. 4). Of the present incident Frontinus
writes: ' signum militare ereptum signifero in hostes Hernicos et
Aequos misit', thus confirming Duker's arrepta.
70. 13. praeda . . . compotem: the abl. (other than animo) only here,
except for Accius 36 R. and a few debased inscriptions which give voto
compos for voti compos. T h e phrase is evidently mock military and as such
522
446 B.C.
3- 70. 13
the text may be sound but the analogy for it must have come from
victoriae compos (9. 43. 14, 29. 10. 8; Veil. Pat. 1. 10. 3, 2. 96. 3 ; Val.
Max. 1. 1. 1). praedaeque ingentis ?
70, 15. The panegyric of Valerius and Horatius sounds excessive and
tendentious. The hand of Valerias Antias may lie behind it.
The Scaptius Affair
The arbitration between Ardea and Aricia cannot be credited
either in general or in detail. A glance at the map shows that the land
in dispute must have comprised part of the later Tribus Scaptia since
the tribe was centred on Velitrae and the town of Scaptia which lay
some 16 miles from Rome (Festus 464 L.). The tribe was not formed
until 332 and no other Scaptius is known before the first century. It
follows that the story that the land really belonged to Rome must
have been propaganda in circulation between 338 when the confisca
tions after the Latin War took place (8. 14. 9) and 332. That it is
mere propaganda is confirmed by Cicero who tells an identical anec
dote about Nola and Neapolis (de Officiis 1. 33). Nor is the treaty with
Ardea in 444 any more secure (4. 7. 10 n.) The only certain detail is
the colonization of Ardea (4. 11. 5 n.). Many reconstructions of how
the history was built up have been advanced as, for example, that the
treaty belongs to a much later date, but was placed in 444 to account
for the troubles and subsequent colonization of Ardea and the Scap
tius Affair inserted to account for the treaty (Sherwin-White). Such
reconstructions do not, however, allow for the fact that the treaty was
a discovery of Licinius Macer's while the Scaptius Affair must be a
much earlier element in the story and is derived, here at least, from
Valerius. The second-century version will have contained Scaptius,
the capture of Ardea by the Volsci, recapture, and colonization. The
only improvement on that was Licinius' addition of the treaty.
That the Scaptius Affair itself is an invention of the late fourth
century is confirmed by a secondary consideration: Scaptius claimed
to have fought at Corioli. If that implies acceptance of the traditional
date for Coriolanus, we know that the Coriolanus saga was taking
shape at very much the same time, the end of the fourth century
(2. 33. 4 nn.). In other words the two anecdotes hang together and
have a roughly contemporary origin.
L.'s treatment balances Scaptius against the consuls. Each side
gives its reasons in answering speeches, presented in or. obi. and ex
pressed in the language of late Republican politics. See also L. R.
Taylor, Voting Districts, 53; Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship, 25-26;
Munzer, R.E., 'Scaptius'.
71. 2. Aricini: 1. 50. 3 n. Ardeates: 1. 57. 1 n.
523
3-71-3
446 B.C.
446 B.C.
3- 72. 4
hoc . . . hoc . . . hoc . . . hoc . . . hoc, delete esse (Gronovius, de Pec. Vet.y
4. 9) or emend to sed (Alschefski) 'Scaptius will be famous by this
memorial'. For clarum . . . imagine cf. 1. 34. 6 nobilem una imagine Numae
esse. (2) If hoc is right the corruption will be deeper. Bayet's lacuna
{(et dignum)) gains nothing and explains nothing, but the text could
be rewritten to give the sense 'this will be a fine death-mask for Scaptius', e.g. claram hoc fore imaginem Scaptio. I have little doubt that the
truth lies with the former. T h e chiastic .Saz/rtzHm X populum should make
both the subject of their sentences, and the antithesis is sharpened by
the simple deletion of esse rather than by its emendation to sed. For the
interpolation of esse cf. 3. 2. 3, 4. 27. 2.
72. 6. Scaptius: to be retained.
525
BOOK 4
BOOK 4 covers nearly fifty years and bridges the period between the
Decemvirate and Rome's first great wars, against Veii and against
the Gauls. Such a long period is unsatisfactory to handle, particularly
since the material at L.'s disposal from the Annales is much fuller
than hitherto. As was his practice, he constructed a series of episodes
which would break across the vertical succession of scrappy and
isolated facts. T h e story of Canuleius is followed by the fate of Sp.
Maelius and the heroism of A. Cornelius Cossus but the latter half
of the book is less coherent and might suggest that L. was overwhelmed
by the wealth of disconnected detail and abandoned the attempt to
unify and co-ordinate it. T h e impression given by chapters 21-61 that
L. has been content simply to retail his sources is confirmed by the
absence of a long speech at the end to round the whole book off, as
Canuleius introduced it. As a substitute he is content to recall various
phrases and passages from Canuleius' speech (56. 11 n.) to achieve
the same purpose. So, too, the theme of modestia which is foreshadowed
in the closing chapters of Book 3 and plays a prominent part in the
first half of Book 4 wanes when the annalistic details begin to crowd
thick and fast. T h e need to compress the history of fifty years into
a single book in order to deal with Veii and the Gauls in the final
book of the first Pentad forced L. to give up more ambitious schemes
of literary presentation. As a result, the book, particularly the second
half of it, although full of historical curiosities, is less exciting than its
predecessor.
T h e refrain is modestiamoderation the necessity for give and take.
T h e agitation over conubium was inspired by the stand-offishness of
the patres; the compromise by which the consular tribunate came into
being but only patricians were elected is a signal example of modestia
(6. 12); the settlement of Ardea was largely the work of Quinctius
whose fairness iura infimis summisque moderando made him a byword
(10. 8) and a splendid contrast to the opportunist and ambitious Sp.
Maelius (13. 4). But moderatio applied in the military sphere as well.
T h e jealousies of generals spell defeat (26. 7), the single-minded
devotion of M a m . Aemilius to the call of his country brings victory
(31. 5). But if generals must exercise self-control to be victorious, it is
equally necessary that the soldiers should be loyal. T h e story of T a m panius is an (exemplum) non virtutis magis quam moderationis (41. 7) while
the fate of C. Sempronius was a stern lesson (44. 9) and that of M .
Postumius deserved and salutary. Co-operation is the only hope.
526
445 B.C.
4. 1-6
4. i-6
445 B.C.
445 B.C.
4. 1. 1
5^9
Mm
4- i . 4
445 B.C.
of rock. A little way down the eastern slope an important seventhsixth-century cemetery has been found (Nordini, Notiz. Scavi, 1934,
169-75). T h e remains on the Acropolis itself are medieval or later,
but the small church of S. Silvestro is likely to have taken the place of
the temple of Diana mentioned by Horace (Odes 1. 21. 6 ; 3. 23. 9 ;
Livy 21. 62. 8) and some Republican sherds have been washed down
the slopes. See also T. Ashby, P.B.S.R. 5 (1910), 424; Tomasetti,
Campagna Romana, 564 ff.; Radke, R.E., ' V e r r u g o \
1.5. conticescerent: recalling the remark first made by Marius (Plutarch
28) and immortalized by Cicero (pro Milone 11 ; cf. Lucan 1. 277)
silent leges inter arma.
1. 6. scivisset [et] : Pettersson retains et and takes vociferatus as an indica
tive not as participle, comparing for the ellipse 3. 14. 6, 9. 10. 2,
10. 12. 9.
445 B.C.
4. 2. 4
4. 2.5
445 B.C.
445 B.C.
4. 2. 12
4.
3- i
445 B.C.
445 B.C.
4- 3-9
that it is 'nicht immer ein Ausruf propter indignitatem alicuius rei' sondern
auch, wie P l a u t , Capt. 454, ein allgemeiner Ausdruck starken Erstaunens'. Here the note of indignation prevails. T h e exclamation is
confined to Plautus and Terence and Cicero's early pro Sex. Roscio
(102) and the sparing use of it by L. (6. 40. 7, 38. 47. 3, 41. 23. 7,
44. 22. 8) suggests that he keeps it for special effect.
non adfastos, non ad commentarios: the allusion again anticipates the
reform of Ap. Claudius Caecus whose secretary Cn. Flavius (9. 46)
was responsible in 304 B.C. for the publication of the Fasti and of the
formulae of legis actiones. (Detailed discussion of these controversial
measures may be found in Schulze, Roman Legal Science, 9 ff; Jolowicz,
Historical Introduction, 8 8 ; see also H. S.Jones, C.A.H. 7. 533-4.) Since
commentarii were procedural handbooks (1. 60. 4 n.) and since the
pontifices were intimately concerned with private law in so far that
questions of legitimacy and inheritance affected the maintenance of
sacra privata, the formulae of legis actiones would have been contained
in the commentarii. For Licinius 5 interest in Flavius see fr. 18 P.
3 . 10. enunquam: 9. 10. 5, 10. 8. 10, 24. 14. 3, 30. 21. 8. An inter
rogative ( = ecquando Paul. Fest. 66 L.), which should be printed as
one word. Its usage (Plautus, e.g. Cist. 8 6 ; Rudens 987, 1117 ; Terence,
Phormio 329; Virgil, Eel. 1. 67, 8. 7) suggests that it was a colloquialism
(Hofmann, Lat. Umgangsprache, 35).
Numam: 1. 18-21 n . ; cf. 1. 17 n.
3. 11. L. deinde Tarquinium: 1. 34. 1-2 n. TT has modo Romanae for R. m.
which induced Conway to delete modo and L. Herrmann to read non
modo (jion) R. (Latomus 6 (1947), 262) but the authority of MA
shows 7r\ order to be eccentric and the examples of non modo for
non modo non, collected by Drakenborch at 25. 26. 11, suffice. Cf.
* 39- 53 . 12. Ser. Tullium: 1. 39. 5 n.
patre nullo: 'whose father was a nobody'.
de T. Tatio: 1. 13.6-8 n. quidenim .. . dicamp is a typically Ciceronian
praeteritio (cf, e.g., pro Milone 75).
3 . 13. eniteret virtus: cf. Cicero, pro Mur. 32; Sallust, Catil. 54. 4.
3 . 14. Claudiam: 2. 16. 4-5 nn.
3 . 16. virfortis ac strenuus: 1. 34. 6, 3. 47. 2 n. the Roman equivalent
of with a significant concentration on military qualities
rather than gifts of person. Cf. Plancus ap. Cicero, ad Fam. 10. 8. 5,
Sallust, Catil. 51. 16; Nepos, Bat. 7. 1. It is possible that in origin it
was a more definite term of Roman public lawthe Foretes and
Sanates of Festus (426, 474 L.).
3 . 17. ad gubernacula . . . accedere: a Ciceronian metaphor (de Inv. 1.4;
de Rep. 1. 11). The whole passage with its emphasis on the virtues of
the novus homo might easily have been penned by Cicero.
535
4-4-
445 B.C.
(c) legitimum
4. 1. at enim: 5. 9. 3 n.
nullane res nova institui debet: the argument that there must always
be a first time for everything is a commonplace and is even employed
by Critognatus in recommending cannibalism (Caesar, B.G. 7. 77. 13).
4. 2. pontijices: 1. 20. 5 n.
augures: 1. 18. 6 n. Canuleius neglects the tradition that the
augurate was as old as Romulus.
census: 1. 43 n.
4. 3 , consules: 1. 60. 4 n.
dictatoris: 2. 18. 4 n.
tribuni plebi, aediles, quaestores: 2, 32. 1 n., 3. 55. 13 n., 2. 41. 11 n.,
3. 69. 8 n.
4. 4. in aeternum urbe condita: cf. 28. 28. 11 (Scipio). Canuleius ends
the first half of his speech with a glorious assertion of Rome's immor
tality. The history of the idea is of interest: latent at the very end of
the Republic (cf. Cicero, pro Marc. 22) it first appears in Tibullus
(2. 5. 23) and Virgil (Aeneid 1. 276-9) and taken in conjunction with
the present passage (cf. 6. 23. 7) must have formed part of Octavian's
early propaganda after Actium. The early evidence is assembled by
M. P. Charlesworth, Harv. TheoL Review 29 (1936), 122-31; see also
Syme, Tacitus, 208 and n. 1; Koch, Religio, 168 and n. 48. The order
is condita in aeternum, crescente in immensum. Does nova imperia allude to
the startling innovations brought about by Augustus' constitutional
settlement in 28-27 B.C. ? (Syme, Harvard Studies in Class, Phil. 64
(1959), 47; against, Walsh, Proc. Afr. Class. Ass., 1961, 26-35).
Tractatio II: (a) dignum
4. 5. pessimo exemplo publico: 3. 72. 2, 4. 13. 1. pessimo exemplo n\.
Klockius conjectured pessimo publico, a familiar phrase (Valde blanditur': Gronovius) but one which is repetitious with summa iniuria plebis
and untrue since the harm was confined to the plebeians. It is as
a precedent for a policy of segregation that it is dangerous to the state
as a whole (cf. Cicero, de Leg. 3. 32 plus exemplo quampeccato nocent).
insignitior: elsewhere contumelia insignis (e.g. Terence, Eun. 771 ;
Cicero, de Leg. Agr. 2. 54; Suetonius, Julius 79).
4. 6. immisceamur: cf. Tacitus, Annals 4. 40. 11. Like intermiscere it
conveys a suggestion of debasement.
4. 7. cooptationem implies that patricians could co-opt families at will
into their body but that is certainly erroneous (Mommsen, Staatsrecht,
3. 30 n. 1). The decision would have rested with the comitia curiata.
The choice of the term may, therefore, reflect legalistic controversies
of the last centuries of the Republic. Or it may simply be mis
understanding by L. himself, to which he is prone. If so, it was seized
536
445 B.C.
4-4- 7
4-5-3
445 B.C.
445 B.C.
4. 6. 2
I would follow Walters but write certamen (Curiatius) respondit. See also
6
4-7-"
444 B.C.
fact false. L. Atilius in 444 and Q . Antonius Merenda in 422 were also
plebeians (7. 1 n.).
T h e political explanation has therefore no respectable antecedents.
It bears every sign of having been fabricated by Licinius himself to
reflect glory on his family and to promote a favourable history of the
plebs. If so, the military explanation is the older. T h a t does not mean
that it need be the more reliable. Licinius may even have divined the
truth with the worst of motives. But the objections against the poli
tical interpretation are decisive. Unless a bar on plebeian access to the
consulate had been instituted by the Decemvirate, the consulate was
already open to plebeians and there are numerous genuinely plebeian
names in the early Fasti. And even if the consulate was barred and
the consular tribunate was intentionally created for plebeians, why
did so remarkably few hold it ?
T h e name tribuni militum indicates that their function was primarily
military and the name must be the starting-point in any consideration
of their significance. And the name survives. When the R o m a n govern
ment was reorganized again in 367/6, the six consular tribunes dis
appear from the Fasti but a difficult note in L. (7. 5. 9) shows that they
remained as elective military commanders, although no longer as
supreme commanders; cum eo anno (362) primum placuisset tribunos militum
ad legiones suffragio fieri. . . secundum in sex locis tenuit. The succession is
clear. By the mid-fifth century Rome was threatened on several fronts,
from Etruria, from the Aequi and the Volsci, from the Sabines, and
at the same time was trying to secure her position by extending her
control over the strategic keys to Latiumthe Tiber, Algidus, and
the coast. Such a policy meant simultaneous operations on several
fronts. In itself it would justify the reorganization and redisposal of
her military resources and it is noteworthy that the first occurrence
of six consular tribunes coincides with the attack on Veii. Corrobora
tory evidence for a reform of the R o m a n army in this period may be
afforded by the substitution of the scutum for the clipeus (see nn. on
1-43)There are only two serious objections to the military interpretation.
If the consular tribunes were appointed for military reasons, why
were dictators created in times of serious war (4. 23. 5, 31. 5, 46. 10,
57. 6, 5. 19. 2, 46. 10) ? Sudden emergencies will always call for the
appointment of a strong man to co-ordinate the defences of the state.
Secondly, it is urged that once the new system had been inaugurated
the periodic reversion to consuls (443-439; 431-427; 413-409, & c ) ,
is inexplicable, especially when many of the years in which consular
tribunes held office were years of peace. Short of believing the Fasti
to be hopelessly unreliable or that there were always two consuls
with one or more assistants if circumstances required, we may rather
540
444 B.C.
4. 7-11
4- 7- i
444 B.C.
vTrdrajv ^tAtap^ot? . . . rpecs (j,cv K TWV rrarpiKLcov rpcts S' K TCJV 8T)(J,O-
TiKtov (i i. 6o) and six was the later maximum (5. 1.2 n.). If it is true
that there were already in existence six tribuni militum, the supreme
authority would be delegated to three or four or all six of them as
circumstances dictated. If, say, four were designated, the other two
would continue as commanders of their detachments but subordinate
to the supreme authority vested in the four.
A. Sempronius Atratinus: A.f, the son of the consul of 497 (2. 21. 1).
Gf. 4. 35. 1 n. For his 'brother' see 7. i o n .
L. Atilius: the gens is plebeian (Klebs, R.E., 'Atilius'). His son was
cons. trib. in 399 (5. 13. 3 n.).
T. Cloelius: N read Caecilius here, but Cluilius is certain at 11. 5
where the cognomen Siculus is added and D.H. 11. 61. 3 calls the cons,
trib. T. KXVXLOS EIKEXOS. T h e omission of the cognomen here leaves it
doubtful whether L. (or Licinius Macer or the libri lintei) intended the
cons. trib. and the iiivir to be identified. If they did, then Cluilius (not
Cloelius) should be restored for Caecilius. T h e Gaecilii were plebeian,
the Gluilii patrician. See Miinzer, R.E., 'Cloelius (12)'. T h e cognomen
Siculus, almost confined to the gens (but cf. I.L.S. 4874 n.), may have
been adopted by a branch of the family who traded with Sicily in
the third century. It is first certainly attested for the Rex Sacrorum
o f 180 B.C.
444 B.C.
4. 7. 3
4.7.11"
444 B.C.
444 B.C.
4- 7- is
545
4-8.4
443 B.C.
443 B.C.
4- 9 - 4
4.
g. 6
443 B.C.
(rf. 3- 6 3- 5)10. 3 . fatentes: as ifiubet eosponere had preceded, but the passive form is
preferred to convey the impression of crisp military orders. T h e closest
analogy is 3. 42. 7also in official language. Walter's esse (jiecesse}
or Walters's parerent both introduce other than purely military tones.
For fatentes victos se esse cf. 30. 35. 1 1 ; Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 3. 14,
5-77hostem infensum: infestum Ver. infestum is much the commoner word
(188 133) and is likely to have replaced infensum by assimilation of
ending after hostem. For h. infensum Virgil, Aeneid 11. 899; Tacitus,
Annals 2. 15. 1.
10. 4 - 5 . Notice the elaborate subordination.
10. 7. consul triumphans: cf. the Fasti Triumph.:
[M. Gegajnius M . [f.-n.] Macerinus ann. cccx
[cos. II] de V[olsceis n]onis Sep.
dearmatum: only here and Apuleius, Met. 5. 30.
548
443 B.C.
4. 10. 8
10. 8. togatus: cf. Cicero, in Catil. 2. 28, 3. 2 3 ; pro Sulla 85. It was
Cicero's preferred way of referring to his consulship (Nicolet, R.fi.L.
38(1960), 236 ff.).
domesticae: Gronovius's correction of domesticam seems inevitable in
view of 6. 30. 9 domestica quies.
10. 9. faciebat: cf. 30. 33. n , 33. 18. 12, 37. 9. 3, 40. n . 1 (Jung).
1 1 . 1 . consules creantur M. Fabius Vibulanus, Postumus Aebutius Cornicen:
Ver. T h e passive is greatly to be preferred to N's consules creant with
accusatives for nominatives, since the subject of creant would have to
be the consuls of the previous year, Quinctius and Geganius. In re
ferring to the election of consuls L. uses the form consul creavit where
one specified consul was the presiding officer (10. 47. 5, 32. 27. 5,
40. 35. 1, 42. 9. 8). T h e plural only occurs in the problematical
45. 44. 1. See Staveley, Historia 3 (1954), 199. Fabius, Q.f. M.n., the
son of the consul of 467 (3. 1. 1); cf. 4. 17. 10, 19. 8, 25. 2, 27. 9, 28. 1.
Aebutius' filiation was probably L.f. T . n., the son of the consul of
463 (3, 6. 1; see Klebs, R.E., 'Aebutius (14)'; for his cognomen see
21. io, 3. 35. n n.).
11. 4. Rutulorum: i.e. inhabitants of the country surrounding Ardea.
11. 5. triumviri: we are not compelled to disbelieve either the notice
or the names. Such special commissions were recorded (the doubts
about the commission of 218 raise a separate problem) and the
archival origin of this commission is established by relatum in tabulas.
Moreover, apart from conventionally consisting of three members
(3. 1.6 n., 5. 24. 4, 8. 16. 13), it was the custom in early times except
when major colonial enterprises were being planned for the board to
contain one consular and two non-consulars. Such was the case in
218 (21. 25. 3 - 5 ; Asconius 3 C , in 200 (31. 49. 6), and in 197 (32.
29. 3-4). Here T . Cluilius Siculus had been consular tribune (7. 1 n.),
M . Aebutius, otherwise unknown, was an elder brother of the current
consul, perhaps, as his name suggests, with Ardeatine connexions, and
Agrippa Menenius was to become consul (13. 6 n.).
11. 6. praeter: confirmed by Ver. where . . . ,/ter survives and by
the idiom (cf. 3. 70. 15); they were unpopular not only with the plebs
(which might have been expected) but with the patres as well, cum
plebem offendissent is almost parenthetical, explaining and repeating
minime populare ministerium.
11. 7. [coloni adscripti]: would imply that they became members of
the colony rather than waited for the storm to die down, but Menenius
is consul in 13. 6. Ver.'s omission of the words proves them to be a
marginal summary (cf. 3. 49. 5 Appiusfugit), although the language is
technically exact (6. 30. 9 et al). If they had joined the colony they
would have avoided a summons (vocationes Cornelissen; cf. Aul. Gell.
549
4- " . 7
442 B.C.
13. 13), not the fuss and bother (vexationes). T h e threat of prosecu
tion is unhistorical.
12-16. Sp. Maelius
T h e story of Sp. Maelius, like the story of Cincinnatus, is an instance
of a timeless legend which grew up at first independently of the
Annales and was then fitted into the framework of dates and facts
at a time when it had already acquired a wealth of circumstantial
detail of its own.
T h e core of the story is the killing of a homo sacer Sp. Maelius by G.
Servilius Ahala. It was the reason for the name Ahala (13. 14 n.) and
the memory of it was kept alive by the Servilii. Equally, as an aetiological myth for the waste land Aequimaelium, it stayed in the
memory of the Roman people. Nor need we doubt the association of
Sp. Maelius' offence with a corn shortage. Such shortages are part of
fifth-century history (2. 9. 6 n.) and were easy to remember. Whether
G, Minucius was always an integral part of the tale is less certain.
T h e name Minucius was associated with a portions in the south-east
corner of the city, which served as a grain market. Outside the porta
Trigemina there was a column in honour of L. Minucius. If it were not
established that the portions Minucia cannot be older than the third
century, the association of Minucii and Rome's corn supply might
be thought to extend right back to the days of Sp. Maelius. As it is,
there are some grounds for believing that he is the earliest addition
to the story, supplying the information that led Ahala to execute
summary justice. It is significant that in the earliest versions none of the
principals has any official standing (Gincius fr. 6 ; Piso fr. 24). Minucius
merely lays evidence (fnjvvrrjs) that Sp. Maelius seeks to become king.
T h e date of the story remained essentially fluid but it had to be
tied down when consecutive history was written, and respectable
positions had to be discovered (or invented) for the chief characters.
T h e date was determined by the life-history of Servilius Ahala, as
given in the Fasti; precision was supplied by annalistic reference to
annona. L. Minucius had provided one site for Cincinnatus' dictator
ship. He could provide another (Cicero, Cato 56 even places the
ploughing scene here) and at the same time give Ahala an official
capacity as mag. equitum. Gincinnatus cannot have been dictator in
this year: the duration and terms of his appointment conflict with
everything that is known about the early dictatorship. Only Maelius
and Minucius were unplaced. For Maelius the obvious position was
tribune and traces of a tradition that made him tribune survive both
in 15. 6 (tribunatus plebis magis optandus quam sperandus) and in 21. 3
where his double, Sp. Maelius, holds that office for the year 436.
Since the latter passage is not Licinian a rival chronology and inter550
441 B.C.
4. 1216
pretation may lie behind this curious duplication. Unlike the Maelii,
the Minucii were not always plebeian (3. 33. 3 n.). If in later times
they were plebeian, a transitio adplebem must have taken place. As the
family history of the Octavii illustrates (Suetonius, Aug. 2 ; cf. Cicero,
Brutus 62) it was not difficult to invent such an explanation. Minucius
is co-opted as a tr. pi. The sheer incredibility of that invention led to
alternative solutions. The compilers of the libri lintei list him as a
plain praefectus. Whether they meant praefectus urbi or not, Licinius
Macer firmly interprets his office in terms of the contemporary cura
annonae, and with this pleasing fiction he can afford to leave Sp.
Maelius as a privatus.
While the fabrication of details of status and chronology went on,
on the other side the narrative was embellished. The resemblance to
the fate of Sp. Gassius could be exploited to advantage (13. 4 de regno
agitare = 2. 41. 5; 12. 7 neglegentiam consulum = 2. 41. 2). But above
all, recent events at Rome, the programmes and the fortunes of the
Gracchi, offered a model which the annalists were quick to perceive
and utilize (cf., e.g., Ampelius 27. 2). Gracchan touches may be
detected especially in Gincinnatus' speech (15. 1 n.).
One remark has no equivalent in the attentuated account of D.H.
or in any of the sources (Cicero, pro Mil. 72; Lael. 36; in Catil. 1 . 3 ;
de Rep. 2. 4 9 ; Phil. 2. 114; Val. Max. 5. 3. 2 ; Quintilian 5. 9. 13,
13. 24; de Viris Illustr. 17. 5; Plutarch, Brutus 1 . 2 ) : macte virtute. . .
esto liberata re publica (14. 7). The highest realization of the individual
is the preservation of the state. That was L.'s message. He tells the
story dramatically to illustrate that message, contrasting the evil
emotions in Maelius' breast (13. 3-4) with the nobility of the dictator
and his Master of Horse. It leads up to the speech of Gincinnatus
who with a fine mixture of rhetoric and blunt speaking provides the
deed with its historical significance and moral justification.
See Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 199-222; Soltau, Phil. Woch.9
1908, 586 f.; Pais, Ancient Legends, 194-223; Munzer, R.E., 'Sp.
Maelius'; ibid. *L. Minucius Esquilinus Augurinus'; Burck 9 3 - 9 5 ;
Momigliano (16. 2 n.); Meiggs, Roman Ostia, 481.
12. 1. C. Furio: 22. 7, 31. 1. In fact he should be called Q. (Koivros
in Diod. 12. 35. 1) since he was the same as the pontifex maximus of
3. 54. 5 (where see note). The cognomen Pacilus is read by the Capitoline
Fasti for the consul of 251 (cf. C.I.L. 9. 3823 Paciledius) and should
probably be read here too (22. 7, 52. 1) as a by-form of Pacullus
(39. 13. 9 ; I.G.S. 1. 894) formed from an Oscan god-name; cf.
Pacuvius (Schulze 477).
M. Papirio Crasso: Mavios in Diod. 12. 35. 1 (cf. D.H. 5. 14.) but
certainty is unobtainable. The leading member of the Grassus branch
of the Papirii was L.P.G., dictator in 340.
551
4. 12. 2
441 B.C.
440 B.C.
4. 12. 11
4- 13- 5
4 4 0 B.C.
439 B.C.
4. 13. 14
4- i5-
439 B.C.
18. 15 (from
556
439 B.C.
4. 16. 2
43 8 B.C.
in the confidence of religious assurance (18. 6). In this spirit the
forces meet and it is not till then that L. introduces with his favourite
formula (erat turn . . .) the hero, A. Cornelius Cossus (19. 1). His ex
ploits, inspired by loathing for a ruptorfoederis humani violatorque gentium
iuris (19. 3), are narrated to their conclusion, while simultaneous
events on other parts of the field of battle are postponed to an appendix
(19-7-8)Of the truth of it there can be no doubt. The spolia opima and,
doubtless, the corona aurea had existed for generations to see. The
statues of the murdered ambassadors still stood and the Annales re
corded a triumph over the Fidenates (20. 1 n.). The Tolumnii are a
real family at Veii (17. 1 n.); the Cornelii would not lightly have
allowed the memory of such a deed to lapse. Whether Cossus killed
Tolumnius in 437 or in 426 or even as consul in 428 is more dis
putable (see on 20. 5-11). L. took his material from the same source
that provided the second war with Fidenae in 32 ff. and, since 32. 3
where Mam. Aemilius is said to have led the fighting at Nomentum
is inconsistent with 22. 2 where that honour is given to Q,. Servilius,
that source is likely to be Valerius Antias (see also 20. 8 n . ) . A change
of source at this point is indicated by the formal introduction in
horum magistratu and by the citation of a variant (i.e. Valerius Antias)
at 16. 3.
See Delaruelle, Rev. Phil. 37 (1913), 145-61; Burck 96-97; J.R.S.
48 (1958), 41. For references to discussions of the date and authenticity
of the episode see 20. 5 n.
17. 1. Fidenae, colonia Romana: 2. 19. 2 n.
Lartem Tolumnium: a sixth-century dedication at Veii is inscribed
VeWur Tulumne Tresnu ^M^6 Mene Mul[. . . (Nogara, Not. Scavi,
1930, 327 f.) and an Etruscan Tolumnius is met in Virgil, Aeneid
11. 429 (L. A. Holland, A.J.P. 56 (1935), 211). (The claim made by
Santangelo (Latomus 8 (1949), 37) and Ernout (Rev. Phil. 75 (1949),
157) that the third-century dedication also from Veii, L. Tolonio Bed
Menerva, was set up by the same family, is shown by Weinstock to be
untenable in default of other parallels for the change of Etr. -wmw- to
Lat. -on- (Glotta 33 (1954), 306-8).) See also 5. 1.311.
\ac Veientes]: Ver. omits the words, rightly. Although not too much
weight should be put on the fact that Priscian does not quote them
(p. 149 K. Livius in IIII a.u.c. Larte Tolumnio rege Veientium), it is reason
able to ask whom else the Fidenates could have joined if they threw
in their lot with Tolumnius. It is a typical gloss.
17. 2. legatos: 17. 6. A famous statue-group was said to have been
set up to commemorate them, which still survived in Cicero's day
(Phil. 9. 4-5 statuae steterunt usque ad meant memoriam in rostris . . . atqui
et huic (Cn. Octavio) et Tullo Cluvio et L. Roscio et Sp. Antio et C. Fulcinio
4- 17-20. 4
558
438 B.C.
4- i7- 2
qui a Veientium rege caesi sunt . . . mors honorifuit; cf. Pliny, N.H. 34. 23).
It may be inferred that the statues were removed in the rebuilding of
the rostra undertaken by Sulla. The earliest statues of particular men
as opposed to gods seem to have been commemorative, one of the first
being the group of Messenian boys by Callon of Elis (c. 450). A com
memorative group of the murdered ambassadors thus accords both with
the date and with the purpose of such sculpture (E. H . Richardson,
Mem. Am. Acad. Rome 21 (1953), 108) and the names of the ambassa
dors are credible. Four oratores were sent res repetitum before the
fetiales. This fits our four legati. Fulcinius is a widely and early attested
Etruscan name (Schulze 169). It is of no consequence that the Fulcinii
seem to be plebeian. Cloelius Tullus, or better, as Cicero and Pliny
write, Tullus Cloelius (Cluilius), could belong to the family of Cluilii
prominent in this period (7. 1 ; he might even be the same as T.
Cloelius (Siculus); for the praenomen Tullus cf. 2. 35. 7). T h e third
person is in doubt; Pliny calls him Sp. Nautius but the texts of Cicero
print Sp* Antio. Nautius is certainly right. T h e Nautii are active and
distinguished in the fifth century, whereas the Antii do not emerge
until the first (cf. C. Antius, tr. pL 68 B.C.). Ver. had Spuantium against
N.'s Sp. Antium. Mommsen assumed a progressive error resulting from
a simple metathesis (cf. 4. 54. 3 C. Appius for P. Papius). T h e real
puzzle is L. Roscius. T h e Roscii are unknown before the first century
but they stemmed from Lanuvium and Ameria, both very ancient
cities, so that, although surprising, the solitary manifestation of a
Roscius in the fifth century is not impossible.
17. 3. levant quidam: cf. 2. 41. n invenio apud quosdam idquepropius est
fidem (Hellmann, Livius-Inierpretationen, 18). propius est fidem (17. 5)
shows that a variant explanation has been cited and therefore that the
subject of levant cannot be the Fidenates trying to explain away their
guilt (so Mommsen who followed Ver. in omitting quidam) but must be
the rival historians, quidam and similar words are frequently dropped
(cf. 4. 24. 6).
tesserarum: cf. Val. Max. 9. 9. 3 'cum in tesserarum prospero iactu
per iocum conlusori dixisset "occide'' et forte Romanorum legati
intervenissent, satellites eius errore vocis impulsi interficiendo legatos
lusum ad imperium transtulerunt.' W h a t game was Tolumnius play
ing? Not ordinary dice (Becq de Fouquieres), because there is no
trace of any such cry as occide ('amort') in all the ancient references to
dicing (Lamer, R.E., 'lusoria tabula'). But the principle of the Roman
game ludus latrunculi was, like chess, to corner your opponent's piece
and eliminate it. T h e elimination was called 'death', where in English
we would speak of 'capturing' a piece. Cf. Ovid, Ars Amat. 3. 358. The
cry occide would be appropriate for 'capturing' the opponent's piece.
Unfortunately the Roman ludus latrunculi does not seem to have been
559
4- ! 7 . 3
438 B.C.
437 B.C.
4. 17. 8
561
0 0
4- 19- 3
437 B.C.
437 B.C.
4. 20. 2
4. 20. 5-i i
437 B.C.
was not the holder of full imperium (Dio 51. 24. 4), but the reason was
his fear of being overshadowed by Crassus. T h e spolia opima of Cossus
would have provided Grassus with a clear precedent, unless it could
be shown that Gossus was consul and not a mere military tribune.
There were thus vital political motives to influence Augustus' reading
of the inscription and when the temple was rebuilt no doubt the in
scription was visible for all to see.
Thirdly, the passage raises a question about the date and com
position of Book 4. If the arguments given above are right, L. was
given the information by Augustus not earlier than 29 B.C. and a
somewhat later date is indicated by the use of the title Augustus Caesar
which Octavian assumed on 16 J a n u a r y 27 B.C. A date of 27-26 B.C.
might, therefore, be proposed for the composition of the digression,
but the digression was inserted subsequently. This follows not simply
from the fact that L. relates the story of Gossus without any initial
qualms and only poses the difficulties afterwards: the habit of adding
qualifications and doubts after a story is a fixed technique (cf. 10.5. 13,
17. 11, 26. 6 f.). But 32. 4 qui priore bello . . . intulerit is written without
any knowledge of the digression and, similarly, 20. 9 imbelle triennium
presupposes that the narrative of 30 has already been written. If, then,
the digression was written in 27-26 and was inserted into a narrative
that had already been composed, we might be tempted to believe,
with Syme, that the Books 1-5, and Book 4 in particular, had been
written several years earlier. T h e temptation should be resisted. There
are certainly no traces of any other such insertions and no evidence
for Bayet's hypothesis of two 'editions' of the Books 1-5.
Finally, it casts some interesting light on L.'s relations with Augus
tus. L. says that it would be sacrilege not to accept the evidence which
Augustus produced and yet takes no steps to alter his own narrative.
There is no rewriting, no deletion: the sensational discovery is put
in a footnote. L.'s ties with the imperial house were close and personal
(Introduction, p p . 2 ff.) but he remained politically uncommitted. He
could afford to neglect the historical niceties which meant so much to
Augustus and so little to himself.
See Rutgers, Variarum Lectionum Libri Sex (1618), 346; Perizonius,
Anim. Hist, ch. 7; Soltau, Hermes, 29 (1894), 611 ff.; Dessau, Hermes 41
(1906), 142 ff.; Hirschfeld, Kl. Schriften, 398 ff.; Beloch, Rom. Geschichte,
298 ff; Last, C.A.H 7. 507; G. Hirst, A.J.P. 47 (1926), 347 ft".;
Gichorius, Rom. Studien, 263 f.; Klotz, R.E., 'Livius', col. 836; J . D.
Bishop, Latomus 7 (1948), 187 ff.; Syme, Harvard Studies in Class. Phil.
6
4 (1959) , 4 3 - 4 6 .
20. 6. dux: 3. 1. 4 n. Festus 204 L. quotes a reputed law of N u m a :
l
cuius auspicio classe procincta opima spolia capiuntur Iovi Feretrio
darier oporteat'.
564
437 B.C.
4. 20. 6
437 B.C.
4- 20. 8
(7. 10 n.) and no reason is advanced why Licinius should not have felt
the missing year until 435. It is, therefore, necessary to consider also
the fact that 31. 1 (T. Quinctius Poenus ex consulate) implies that Quinctius was consul in the year immediately preceding his consular tri
bunate, but, in L., Quinctius is consul with Cossus in 428 (30. 4)
and another consulate, that of C. Servilius and L. Papirius (30. 12),
intervenes before his consular tribunate. There are no grounds for
disputing the text. Any explanation must rather start from the fact
that L. is using different sources which gave different magistrate lists.
If the source of 31. 1 (Licinius Macer) omitted the consular of C.
Servilius and L. Papirius, Quinctius' consular tribunate would follow
directly on his consulate but in consequence Licinius would have
lost a complete year from his chronology unless he had reduplicated
a year earlier which is precisely what we find. The list may be conjecturally set out as follows:
Licinius Macer
435
L.
434 C.
L.
ulius
Valerius Antias
C. Julius II
L. Verginius
M. Manlius
Q . Sulpicius
J
Verginius
Julius III
Verginius II
429 L. Papirius
Hostus Lucretius
L. Julius
L. Sergius II
428 Hostus Lucretius
A. Cornelius Cossus
L. Sergius II
T. Quinctius Poenus II
427 A. Cornelius Cossus
C. Servilius
T. Quinctius Poenus II
L. Papirius
426 T. Quinctius Poenus
T. Quinctius Poenus
C. Furius
C. Furius
M. Postumius
M. Postumius
A. Cornelius Cossus
A. Cornelius Cossus
The confusion must have arisen from disorder or disarray among
the tabulae dealbatae, which could have been inferred from the uncer
tainty whether there were consuls or consular tribunes in 434 (23. 2 n.)
and from Diodorus' insertion of a college of consuls (L. Quinctius and
A. Sempronius), probably misplaced from 425, between 428 and 427
(Diodorus 12. 77. 1). See also J.R.S. 48 (1958), 45-46.
What light does that solution, if accepted, throw on the corrupt
septimo? If the digression was inserted after the text of 20-30 had been
composed, L. is unlikely to have looked farther afield than his own
history to establish when Cossus' consulship was and since on L.'s
own showing that consulship was in 428, we should read decimo here.
Poeno: 26. 2 n.
20. 9. imbelle triennium: 29. 7-30. 16.
566
437 B.C.
4. 20. 10
4- 2i. 5
435 B.C.
435 B.C.
4. 21. 10
4- 2 2 . 2
435 B.C.
434 B.C.
4. 23. 1
4- 23- 6
434 B.C.
434 B.C.
4. 24. 6
populi as always in Latin (1. 35.6, 3.63. 8, 9. 40. 21, 10. g. 1 ; Suetonius,
Domitian 13 et al.).
Quirites, quam . . . placeant: [quam] . . . placere Ver., a reading known
also to the Nicomachean editors, for M has placeant re. Nobody doubted
Aemilius' distaste for long commands: what might be at issue was the
degree to which he was prepared to carry that distaste i.e. quam . . .
placeant. Ver.'s error arose from an attempt to construe the sentence
after the omission by haplography of quam.
24. 7. tribu moverunt.. . aerarium fecerunt: the censors had two sanctions
to impose on offenders. They could exclude a man from his tribe
and enrol him in the tabulae Caeritum (27 Cicero, Verr. p . 103, Orelli)
thereby depriving him of the right to vote, or after 304, in one of the
four urban tribes, where his vote would be swamped and would count
for nothing (45. 15. 3-4). A man so punished would still be liable for
tributum and military service. Alternatively, the censors could allow
him to retain his tribe but would list him as in a special category of
aerarii, who were evidently compelled to pay extra high taxation, apart
from or in addition to tributum. T h a t the two sanctions were distinct
and not, as Mommsen argued (Staatsrecht, 2. 402-3) on the assumption
that all who did not belong to tribes were aerarii, the same, is shown
by their separate mention (aerarium facere in Varro ap. Non. Marc.
280. 35 L . ; Aul. Gell. 4. 12. 1 ; 4. 20. 11 ; tribu moveri Aul. Gell.
16. 13. 7; 27 Horace, Epist. 1. 6. 62). But most offences merited the
double penalty. Most scholars reject Aemilius' punishment as ana
chronistic, based perhaps on the buffoonery of the year 204 (2g. 37).
But if the censors are genuine it is at least as likely that a record of
their actions would have survived also. See the full discussion by
P. Fraccaro, Athenaeum 11 (ig33), 150-72.
25. 1. contentionibus: N's telescoped contionibus would require the
tribunes to have held continual meetings of the tribal assemblies in
order to stymie the patricians and prevent, the holding of the comitia
centuriata. For although there was no constitutional bar against both
assemblies being held concurrently (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 28g
n. 4), no one would attend the centuriata. Cf. 3. 52. 1, 65. 5, 4. 6. 3.
25. 2. nullum fuit: Bayet adopts nullius (Drakenborch) but Petrarch's
nullum will have come from a /u-source and M itself had the same
reading.
M. Fabius: 11. 1.
M. Folius: the pontifex maximus of 3go (5. 41. 3) whose grandson
was consul in 318 and three times magister equitum. The family is other
wise unknown. T h e name suggests a Sabine rather than an Etruscan
origin (Foslius in the Fasti).
L. Sergius: 17. 7.
573
4- 25- 3
433 B.C.
25. 3 . pestilential 3. 2. 1 n.
aedis Apollini: dedicated in 431 (29. 7), damaged by the Gauls
(cf. Dio fr. 49. 1) and rebuilt in 353 (7. 20. 9). It was situated between
the Circus Flaminius and the Forum Holitorium, outside thepomerium,
because the cult was foreign, and so often served as an extra-pomerial
meeting-place of the Senate. The site has been excavated but no traces
of the earliest construction can be recognized (Golini, Bull. Comn.
Arch 68 (1940), 9-40). The origin of the cult itself is obscure. There
may have been an earlier shrine on the spot (3. 63. 5 n.), but the name,
Apollo Medicus (40. 51. 6), indicates a direct connexion with the
series of plagues which had devastated Latium and the Mediterranean
during the late 430's. It was certainly prescribed by the libri Sibyllini
(25. 3) and the Gumaean provenance of the Sibylline books taken in
conjunction with the expedition to Cumae this year in search of corn,
might suggest that the cult, like that of Demeter, came from Cumae.
A Cumaean Apollo is mentioned several times (Jul. Obsequens 28:
cf. Augustine, Civ. Dei 3. 11; Jul. Obsequens 54; Cicero, de Divin. 1.98)
but seems to have been more prophetic than healing. Etruria and
Sicily have also been canvassed as possible sources. See J. Gage,
VApollon Romain, 19-113; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 221 ff.
25. 4. Etruriam . . . Siciliam: 2. 34. 2 n.
25. 5. L. Pinarius Mamercus: a son of the consul of 472 (2. 56. 1).
The Fasti gave his cognomen as Mamercinus but, as with the Aemilii,
both forms are found. Varro ap. Macrobius 1. 13. 21 cites an antiquissimam legem incisam in columna aerea a L. Pinario et Furio consulibus
which may date from their office.
L. Furius Medullinus: 44. 1 n., 51. 1 n,
Sp. Postumius Albus: 27. 8, 28. 6, 8, a son of the consul of 466 (3. 2. 1).
25. 8. prolatae in annum: a transparent device to get round the awk
wardness that nothing was in fact recorded in the annals for this year.
The Etruscan assembly at the fanum Voltumnae was hardly an item to
be entered in Roman archives.
cautum: 5. 1. 3 n.
The Lex de Ambitu
The Fasti continue to be used as raw material for inventing political
struggles. The paucity of actual facts forced annalists to build an
elaborate superstructure on the apparent oscillation between consuls
and consular tribunes and fit into it any other scraps they could
assemble. The law against whitening clothes must be a misinterpreta
tion of some notice in the annals. The wearing of white clothes by
candidates (hence their name; see Casaubon's note on Theophrastus,
Characters 10. 14) continued uninterrupted and L. himselfparva nunc res
574
432 B.C.
4- 25. n
admits that the law does not sound very credible. Steps to combat the
abuses of ambitus were only taken seriously in the second century (40.
19. 11; Epit. 47) and the first move is precisely dated to 358 (7. 15. 12).
It is more likely that an entrye.g. album proscriptumwhich referred
to the censors' compilation (cf. the later album iudicum, album senatorium) has been distorted to provide historical precedents for action
against canvassing. If that is right it tends to confirm the historicity
of the notice about Mam. Aemilius. For similar distortions cf. 12. 11 n.
L. sets the scene for it by describing secret meetings of positively
Catilinarian sinisterness. For coetus indicere cf. Cicero, in CatiL 1. 6;
for secreta consilia Cicero, ad M. Brutum 2. 3. 5; for ad honorem aditus see
5. 5 n.; for purgare plebem cf., e.g., Cicero, pro Sulla 14, 36, 39; for culpam
. . . vertere cf. Verr. 2. 4 9 ; for obsaeptum . . . iter cf. pro Murena 48; for
respirare cf. pro Milone 47.
25. 11. sordere: { to be slighted'. It is a good touch for plebeians to use
coarse and plebeian language. In this sense sordeo is only found here in
L. and only sparingly in other authors. Thus Plautus (Poen. 1179) and
Horace in an Epistle (1. n . 4). Virgil, significantly, employs it once
in the Eclogues, to achieve a very similar effect (2. 44 sordent tibi
munera nostra).
25. 13. petitionis causa liceret: p. liceret causa N. causa is only separated
from the noun it governs by pronouns (cf. Plautus, Poen. 551).
25. 14. inritatis animis: for Ver.'s haplography cf. 54. 8 n.
26. 1. causa fuit: there was only one cause.
26. 2. T. Quinctius: 30. 4, 31. 1, 44. 1 n., son of the great dictator. His
cognomen Poenus is bizarre. Both Ver. and N agree on it here (cf.
20. 8, 30. 4, 31. 1) so that it is hard to doubt that this was what L.
wrote. Poenus could only be Carthaginian' which would be too
anachronistic even to be ascribed to him retrospectively. Pennus, on
the other hand, a cognomen also of the Julii, would be in line with other
namespennum antiqui acutum dicebant. L. or his source probably con
verted Pennus into the more familiar and trivial Poenus.
et C. Iulius Mento: praenomen is given as rdios by Diodorus 12. 65. 1.
Cnaeus was not employed by the gens lulia. The source of the corrup
tion in N (genus M gneus TTX) can be seen in Ver.'s interpolated genucius
en. The cognomen Mento = 'long-chin' (Arnobius 3. 108). He may be
a cousin of the mag. equitum L. Iulius (26. 11).
26. 3 . lege sacrata: 7. 41. 4, 9. 39. 5 (Etruscan), 10. 38. 3 (Samnite),
36. 38. 1 (Ligurian): cf. 22. 38. 2. L. alludes to what was manifestly
an Italic practice whereby all able men who failed to report for
military service were declared sacer. Fighting was a religious duty.
See F. Altheim, Lex Sacrata, 11-29.
eos: sc. Volsci and Aequi.
575
4. 26. 4
431 B.C.
26. 4. ante: antea Ver., rightly for qaam unqitam antea is invariable
(5- 2 3 - 4> 3- 33- 4> 36. 15. 4) except where alias follows (1. 28. 4,
32.5-8).
26. 6. pravitas: T h e divergence of opinion whether the dictator was
elected for political or military reasons reflects the same dichotomy
that was seen over the consular tribunate (7. 2). Valerius will again
have contained the variant.
26. 7. nee in auctoritate senatus: the process by which Postumius was
chosen reflects the constitutional wrangles of the second century. T h e
dictator was nominated by a consul on assumption of a state of
emergency. W h o decided whether a state of emergency existed was
a matter of dispute. By the third century the Senate had arrogated
to itself the right to determine this (O'Brien Moore, R.E., Suppl.
6. 755) but refractory consuls endeavoured to defy the Senate (8. 12.
g fT.; Per. 19; Suetonius, Tib. 2) and historical 'precedents' such as
the present case were no doubt invented and invoked (cf. 56. 8-57. 6).
See also A. H. MacDonald, J.R.S. 34 (1944), 16. For the general
question of the consuls' relations with the Senate see 1. 17. i - n n.
T h e tribunes had, of course, at no time any right to imprison the
consuls.
The Dictatorship of A. Postumius: the Battle of Algidus
Numerous objections have been marshalled against Postumius'
famous dictatorship. His office of mag. equitum having come under fire
(23. 6 n.), critics have pointed out that while L. and Aulus Gellius
(17. 21. 17) date the dictatorship to 431, Diodorus (12. 64. 1) places
it in the previous year, 432, which suggests that there was no firm
tradition on the date. There is indeed something over-schematic about
it. A run of consular tribunes (434-432) including a Postumius gives
way to a run of consuls (431-27) including a Julius. W h a t more easy
than to devise a bridge which would consist of a dictatorship of a
Postumius with a Julius? Moreover, the key incident about Postumius
is the killing of his son (29. 5-6) which is duplicated with better
authority in the family of the Manlii. But the objections are not even
cumulatively sufficient to disprove the tradition. T h e persistence of
the legend among the Postumii, particularly since the Postumii
Tuberti die out after the fifth century, gives it a strong claim on our
beliefs. Moreover, Nilsson has made an attractive suggestion that the
importance attached to a soldier's not leaving his rank (although L says
praesidio not acie decedit) mirrors the conditions of hoplite warfare where
steady discipline was essential (J.R.S. 18 (1928), 4 fT.; cf. Ed. Meyer,
Kl. Schriften, 2. 272 n. 1). Such tactics, although adopted by Rome as
early as 600 B,G. (see note on 1. 44), underwent revision and modi
fication in the last half of the fifth century. If falsification and inter576
431 B.C.
4. 26. 11
577
pp
4- 27- 3
431 B.C.
' 7'
27. 9. fnoderatu difficilem: moderor of troops 'to manage, control' is only
used elsewhere by Caesar (B.G. 7. 75. 1).
27. 12. fumo: cf. Caesar, B.C. 3. 65. 3 'significatione per castella fumo
facta ut erat superioris temporis consuetude'.
28. 1. lucescebat: 8. 38. 5, the word is revealing. Widely current in
early Latin (Plautus, Amph. 533; Terence, Heaut. 410), it passes from
ordinary use. Cicero has it in only one passage, a letter inscribed
M. Cicero Imp. S.D. M. Catoni giving a formal and not altogether de
preciatory account of his governorship in Cilicia and requesting Cato
to arrange for a supplicatio. We read (ad Fam. 15. 4. 8 ) ; 'a.d. I I I I Id.
Oct., cum advesperasceret, expedito exercitu ita noctu iter feci, ut
a.d. I l l Id. Oct. cum lucesceret in A m a n u m ascenderem'. Weissen
born observes, too, that sub oculis esse is favoured by Caesar, B.G.
5. 16. 1; B.C. 1. 57. 4.
eruptionem . . .fecerat: 3. 5. 9; cf. Caesar, B.G. 2. 33. 2; Bell. Hisp.
28. 3 . Vettius Messius: into the blunt narrative of a military engage
ment is suddenly hurled a heroic figure. His name is authentic enough.
Messius is Oscan, a by-form of Mettius as in Mettius Fufetius ( 1 . 2 3 . 4 ) ,
and Mettius Curtius (1. 12. 2). Vettius is a name in origin native
to Picenum but which is widely distributed over Etruria and the
Sabine country (cf. the Vettii Sabini of the late Republic; see Gundel,
R.E., 'Vettius'). From now on the narrative assumes epic dimensions.
Every phrase which Vettius speaks can be paralleled from Homer.
28. 4. indefensi inulti: the striking parataxis, the repeated in-, the
sense, all recall Homer's aWdAc/xov /cat dWA/aSa (Iliad 9. 35, 41 et al).
in otio . . . segnes: cf. the famous taunt to the Greeks (Iliad 5. 787);
atSc6?, ApyetoL, /ca/c'A6y^a, ctSo? ayrjroL.
578
431 B.C.
4. 28. 4
4.29.5
431 B.C.
TOV
431 B.C.
4. 29. 8
4- 30.
430 B.C.
Licinian lists; cf. 20. 8 n.). But in 35. 2 another truce is made with the
Aequi for three years which equally would have permitted hostilities
in 421. T h e two truces must therefore be doublets, since there is no
mention of the former having lapsed or having been broken in the
interim. T h a t may account for the uncertainty in 42. 10 when war
was renewed with the Aequi.
30. 3 . legem de multarum aestimatione: the earlier Lex Aternia Tarpeia
of 454 B.C., establishing a conversion-rate for fines of 1 ox = 10 sheep
= 100 pounds of bronze (asses), was completely overlooked by L.
although attested by Cicero (de Rep. 2. 60), Aul. Gellius ( n . 1. 2),
and Festus (268 L.,) and although L. himself estimated fines in bronze,
not cattle (but see 2. 52. 5 n., 3. 31. 5 n.). Despite the mysterious
names of the legislators the law is to be accepted. We know from the
explicit testimony of Gaius (Inst. 3. 223) and from a direct quotation
from the laws themselves that the Twelve Tables assessed fines in
bronze (Aul. Gell. 20. 1. 12; Festus 508 L.). W h a t modification did
the Lex Papiria Julia introduce ? Cicero says 'quod censores multis
dicendis vim armentorum a privatis in publicum averterant, levis
aestumatio pecudum . . . constituta est' which suggests that the rate
of conversion was made more favourable for people who wished to
pay fines in money. No specific rates are, however, quoted by any
authorities and it may be preferable to suppose that the law put an
end to the optional payment and laid down that all fines should be
paid for the future in money. See Mommsen, Strafrecht, 51. n. 1;
Hellebrand, R.E., Suppl. 6, 'multa'.
30. 4 . L. Sergius: 17. 7 n.
Hostus Lucretius: the praenomen is given as 'OirLrepos in Diodorus
12. 73. 1, but Hostus (the proper form) is guaranteed by the author
of the work de Praenom. 4.
nihil dignum: Conway's transposition should not be accepted for the
reasons given above on 20. 8.
T. Quinctius: 26. 2.
30. 5. Veientes: the following notes seem to derive from an annalistic
record and may be taken as evidence that the Annales were fuller
and more detailed than many scholars would allow. L. has, of course,
supplied motive and colour but the facts are not such as would be
invented. In particular the passing reference to Ostia is of interest,
since there is no connexion with the corn supply which might have
led to its introduction at a later date (Meiggs, Ostia, 566). If they
are authentic they refute the theory that the capture of Fidenae in
435 is a mere duplication of the war of 426. It was a tense decade
during which Rome was trying to consolidate her grip on Fidenae,
the strategic position controlling both the Tiber and the Anio and
covering the main routes from Etruria.
582
428 B.C.
4- 30- 6
30. 6. qfuissent: they could not give an adequate reason why they had
been absent from Fidenae at the time of the raid and it was presumed
that they had gone to assist the Veientes.
colonorum additus numerus: L. does not make it clear where the colony
was; presumably at Fidenae. Rome put a body of men into the town
in order to secure it. There had traditionally been a regal colonization
which is now supplemented, ager Us bello interemptorum adsignatus would
mean that the land belonging to Fidenates who had been killed when
the city was captured in 435, seven years ago, was assigned to the
new colonists. The interval of time is puzzling because new owners
would have succeeded to the land meanwhile, but the general picture
is clear and convincing. Were the iiiviri, Sergius, Servilius, and
Aemilius, not investigators as L. believes but iiiviri coloniae deducendae ?
They included one consular in L. Sergius (11. 5 n.). It would be a
typical misinterpretation of the Annales.
3 0 . 7 . ingenito: only here in L. (ingenuo Tan. Faber (cf. Lucretius 1.230)),
but it may be intended to suggest the language of pontifical records.
30. 8. volgatique contactu in: 3. 2. 1 n.
30. 11. datum inde negotium aedilibus: if the plebeian aediles are meant,
it might seem at first surprising that they should be given a task of such
widespread importance. The religious excesses and the remedies pre
scribed to meet them are, moreover, closely similar to the famous out
break of religio, that feeling of anxiety which took practical shape in
the performance of (foreign) rites' (Warde Fowler, Roman Essays, 9),
which disturbed the year 213 (25. 1. 6-12). Pais assumed that the one
was a throw-back of the other, but the terms of the instruction look
authentic. The times were critical. Rome's resources were crippled by
a succession of disastrous epidemics. Such conditions are ripe for re
ligious hysteria and the new cult of Apollo provided the means. The
aediles had been entrusted with similar duties of national importance
(3- 55- r 3 n-) If they were responsible for the publication of the
Twelve Tables and for the preservation of senatorial records, they
would be ideally equipped for overseeing the due observance of
religious proprieties. They were, after all, primarily religious officers.
Their mission was not to suppress the newly instituted ritus Graecus,
the cult of Apollo, but to ensure that the worship did not lead to
extravagance and abuse. See Bayet, Histoire . . . de la Religion Romaine,
144 ff.; J. Gage, VApollon Romain, 130-2.
30. 12. C. Servilium: 44. 13 n., 45. 5 n., 47. 7. Whereas the Gapitoline
Fasti know of only one person G. Servilius Structus Ahala, Licinius
Macer or the libri lintei appear to distinguish a G. Servilius Ahala
from a G. Servilius Structus {Prisci Jilius), the son of the dictator who
captured Fidenae. See Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 209 f.; Munzer,
R.E., 'Servilius (37)'.
583
4. 30- !2
427 B.C.
426 B.C.
4-31- 6-34
426 B.C.
4- 3 1 - 9
shown to be a late addition by the use of hostes ponere for castra ponere.
For these notes see G. Billanovich, Italia Med. e Uman. 2 (1959),
110-12.
426 B.C.
4- 33- 4
sense being: 'If you will not use swords, then at least use torches'.
A future tense is demanded in the second half (Catterall, T.A.P.A.
69 (1938), 3io).
33. 6. mota ad imperium: echoed by Tacitus, Hist. 2. n . 1.
33. 7. frenos . . . detrahant: L.'s words et ipse novat imply that he took
this strategem to be an innovation (cf. Florus 1. 5. 3), but Frontinus
credits Tarquinius Priscus with a similar brain-wave (2. 8. 10) and it
is also told of L. Cominius in 325 (8. 30. 6). As any cavalryman could
testify, it would be a singularly futile move. A horse will charge with
the greater verve if he has to pull against a firm rein.1 Another myth
may be suspected, a myth that arose possibly to account for some very
ancient equestrian ceremony such as the Equirria2 or for some training
exercise as in the Ludus Troiae. The novice is regularly taught in
equestrian schools to ride bareback without reins and to direct the
horse by knee-pressure. The lesson imparts poise and control. Young
Romans may have been encouraged to undergo the same ordeal on
the assurance that it had won great battles in the past. Riding through
fire is another recommended discipline.
effreno: cf. Statius, Theb. 4. 657, 716. If the text is right the
word must be intended to sound poetic, but L. also uses effrenatus
(37. 41. 10, 40. 40. 5) and, in the absence of the independent testimony
of Ver., effrenato should be considered here too.
33. 8. pulvis: truly Homer's dust (cf., e.g., Iliad n . 151). For lucem
aufert cf. Ennius, Trag. 182 V.
33. 9. clamor. . . accidit: echoed by Tacitus, Hist. 4. 29. 2.
33. 10. liberi frenis: 'freed from their reins', but the abl. after liber is
hard. In Petronius 124 abruptis ceu liber habenis the abl. is not dependent
on liber but abruptis habenis is abl. abs. The received reading liberis
frenis 'with slack rein' should be restored to the text, despite the
apparent contradiction with 33, 7 where the reins are said to have
been removed, liberis frenis is a cliche that would slip unthinkingly
off the tongue. Cf., however, Tacitus, Hist. 5. 3 velut frenis exsoluti.
Tiberim effusi petunt: Gage (Huit recherches sur les origines, 170-6) has
called attention to the curious frequency with which the story of the
conquered plunging into the Tiber near Fidenae and being swept
down to Rome repeats itself in Roman history (1. 27. n ; 1. 37. 2 ;
5. 38. 8). His more elaborate instances are far-fetched and some of his
inferences e.g. the hypothesis of a ritual descensio Tiberina (cf. Ovid,
Fasti 6. 771-84) intended to perpetuate the memory and prevent
the recurrence of the Allia disastergo beyond the evidence. It is,
1
But Mandarin won the 1962 French Grand Steeplechase without a bridle.
But not the Transvectio Equorum, depictions of which always show the horse
with rein and bit (P. Veyne, R..A. 62 (i960), 100-12; cf. R. Egger, Jahr. Oest.
Arch. Inst. 18 (1915), 116).
2
587
426 B.C.
4. 33- io
triumphans: the Fasti Triumphales are missing for this year and there
is no independent testimony, unless the intriguing entry in the Praenestine Fasti can be invoked {C.I.L. i 2 p. 231). Verrius Flaccus' alter
native explanation for the phenomenon of a second celebration of the
Garmentalia on 15 J a n u a r y runs
HIG DIES DIGITUR INSTITUTU[s AB
SI FIDENAS EO DIE GEPISSET
n.
34. 5. sexto decimo: so also Gincinnatus (3. 29. 7). An arbitrary figure,
two-thirds of a trinundinum, chosen to suggest the expeditious discharge
of his duties. Ver.'s abdicavit is better that abdicat; L. closes a description
given in the historic pres. with a perfect (3. 48. 7-49. 8 ; 2. 45. 13-16;
7. 8. 1-4; 10. 33. 1-5).
34. 6. classi: a misunderstanding of the term used to denote those
eligible by property qualifications to serve in the army and hence,
588
426 B.C.
4. 34. 6
by a transference, the army itself Gellius (6. 13. 1) and Paulus Festus
(100 L.) refer to the distinction between the classici and the infra
classem and Gellius also alludes to the classem procinctam . . . id est exercitum armatum (10. 15. 4). T h e entry classi pugnatum in the Annales
would simply mean that the full citizen army fought at Fidenae.
There is no necessity to infer further that at this date the five-class Ser
vian Constitution was not yet instituted but only a division between
two properties. T h e exact significance of the terms classici and infra
classem was obscure to Cato (fi\ 160 M.) and classis and classici could
equally well stand collectively for the five classes, while infra classem
would be all those who did not have the minimum property qualifica
tion. See Beloch, Rom. Geschichte, 291; Momigliano, Stud. Doc. Hist.
Iuris 4 (1938), 5 1 1 ; A. Bernardi, Athenaeum 30 (1952), 22; Staveley,
Historia 5 (1956), 79.
34. 7. in maius, utfit, celebrantes: the historian's cynicism; cf. Thucydides 1. 10. 3 ; Sallust, Jug. 73. 5.
35-36. Annalistic Notices: Tribunician Agitation
35. 1. A. Sempronium: 44. 1, 47. 8. L. Quinctium: 16. 7.
L. Furium: 44. 1 n.
L. Horatium: MS. M.n., son of the great democrat (3. 39. 3 n.).
35. 2. Veientibus: the truce expires in 58. 1 (tempus exierat) after only
eighteen years have elapsed. It is likely that the expiry-date was
pushed back to allow the necessary preliminaries before the Siege
of Veii which convention demanded should last ten years as the Roman
Siege of Troy, whereas tradition knew of only eight at the most
(Bayet, tome 4, 114 and n. 3 ; J.R.S. 48 (1958), 42). This section must
have come from a different source from 58. 1. Equally the truce
with the Aequi is a doublet of 30. 1 (n.). L. must therefore have
reverted to Licinius Macer, as often, after consulting him for a second
opinion (34. 6).
35. 3 . ludi: 2. 36. 1 n.
35. 4. Ap. Claudius: 36. 5, a son of the Decemvir.
Sp. Naevius Rutulus: this was probably what L. wrote, although
the Naevii are plebeian (35. 6), and the cognomen is never used by
them. T h e passage is Licinian and must therefore be treated on the
assumption that it derives ultimately from the corrupt libri lintei.
Sp. Nautius is presumably intended, a grandson of the consul of 475
(2. 52. 6).
T. Sergius: his realpraenomen was L. (17. 7) as in Diodorus 12. 82. 1.
Sex. lulius: a younger brother of L. Iulius (16. 8).
35. 4. publice consenserant: it is clear from the context that the Romans
have decided, as a matter of public policy, to put on an act of socia589
4. 35- 4
424 B.C.
bility, and therefore the subject of the relative clause must be the
Romans and not the visitors to the Games. But to agree on a common
policy is not, in Latin, venire ad but consentire ad (cf. Cicero, ad Att.
15. 18. 2) and on this point the archetype of the Nicomachean and
non-Nicomachean manuscripts was already corrupta corruption
which arose from the succeeding advenis and gave birth to the muddled
advenis ad. . . of Ver. and advenis . . . adfuit of N. No reconstruction
based on venerant will work.
M . 's dittography must represent a conjectural gloss ofits own because
it does not correspond to anything in Ver. (see C.Q. 7 (1957), 76) and
so does not possess any independent validity as an external tradition. It
made the correction rightly but this should not have led editors, from
Rhenanus to Mommsen and Bayet, to woo its other contributions
(consilio publico).
35. 5. contiones seditiosae: L. conjures up the atmosphere of a stormy
contio of the 60's or 5o's. It is particularly notable for its blunt speak
ing and some of the tone and phraseology may derive from Licinius
Macer. For adspirare, unique here in L., cf., e.g., Cicero, ad Att. 2 . 2 4 . 3 ;
Div. in Caec. 20: the solitary use of a characteristically Ciceronian
word is significant; forpericulum . . . emolumentum cf. 5. 4. 4, 44. 20. 2 ;
for bello inexpiabili cf. Cicero, de Har. Resp. 4 ; PhiL 13. 2, 14. 8; for
expugnatum esse ut cf. Verr. 2. 130. T h e thoughts come equally from the
main stream of the rhetorical schools. T h e idea that the prize must
be commensurate with the effort was enunciated both by Pericles
and by Alcibiades (Thucydides 2. 64, 6. 16), while Dobree {Adv.
Critica, 354) observed that the whole passage from mat caecus . . .
honoribus fieri is inspired by Demosthenes, Olynth. 3. 13. T h e speech
ends on a brutally colloquial note (35. 10 n.).
35. 6. in partem: cf. 7. 22. g. in partem will mean here as elsewhere
v fiepL Tor one's share' and the order of words demands that it
should be taken with revocandam, but, since it is nonsense to claim a
share of a hope, revocandi (Madvig) must be read. W h a t the tribunes
wanted was the hope that they might share the consulate. T h e corrup
tion was caused by assimilation with in partem.
35. 8. ut: after postulandum esse.
3 5 . 9. neminem: 'plebeians will no longer despise themselves when
they are no longer despised by the world at large'. We expect rather
the sense: 'when plebeians cease belittling themselves they will be
taken seriously by others'; that is, with T a n . Faber, neminem [se] . . .
contemptum iri ubi (se*) contemnere desissent, but the fut. pass. inf. would
be intolerable.
35. 10. suggillatos: a vulgar word, lit. 'beat black and blue'. Only
here in L. (cf. 43. 14. 5) but its tone can be heard in passages like
Petronius 128. 2 or Seneca, Epist. 13. 2.
590
4 2 4 B.C.
4- 35- i
4- 37-
423 B.C.
that the city took its name from the Etruscan gens Capia who played
a leading part in its foundation. If so, L. is wrong both in calling
Capys the Samnite leader and in saying that Capua succeeded Volturnum as a name. Like many other Etruscan cities it will have
enjoyed a double name from the beginning.
37. 2. incolas veteres: a parallel situation prevailed at Naples where
the original inhabitants existed as a separate community under the
name Palaeopolitani. For the similar fate which may have befallen
Pompeii see A. Boethius, The Golden House oj'Nero, 44 n. 38.
37-^2. C. Sempronius and Sex. Tampanius
T h e bare facts of C. Sempronius* defeat at Verrugo, of the prosecution
of M. Postumius and T . Quinctius and, perhaps, of the prosecution
of Sempronius could be grounded in fact and witnessed by the Annales,
but the whole story of the battle and of the parts played in it by Sem
pronius and Tampanius belongs, like the story of Cremera, to family
legend. It need not be distrusted on that account. Incidental details
are borrowed from that other clades Semproniana, the defeat of Ti.
Sempronius at the Trebia in 218 B.C. T h e consul's negligence and
foolhardiness, the fatal division of the forces into two groups, the
providential escape of the surrounded detachment, all are fore
shadowed in the later battle (21. 52-54). Furthermore, the dismount
ing of the cavalry to fight on foot is taken from Cannae (22. 49. 3) and
Tampanius' resistance on a small hill is also traditional. Tampanius
and his colleagues in the Tribunate were honoured by a memorial
independently of the annalistic tradition (42. 1).
L. exploits the possibilities of the story. T h e action is confined to
two days, the day of the battle and the day of the return, and the
contrasts between Sempronius and Tampanius and between the de
moralized and the confident Volsci are carefully worked out (37. 6,
37. 11). T h e moral is loyalty to one's superiors (41. 7). See Burck
101-2.
37. 3 . his rebus actis: reads awkwardly after Campanian affairs and
betrays the change of source. It is a mannerism of L. to begin a new
section with hie (1. 1 n.).
idibus Decembribus: 3. 6. 1 n.
37. 7'. fortuna ut saepe alias: L. commonly begins a new episode with
a moralization (2. 2. 2 n . ) : for the thought here cf. Euripides fr.
432 N . ; Electra 80-81 with Denniston's note, et al.
37. 8. incaute inconsulteque: 7. 15. 9, 25. 18. 2, 44. 41. 9, a Livian
pleonasm built on a characteristically military understatement, in
caute 'with gross negligence'; cf. Bell. Alex. 27. 5 ; Caesar, B.G. 7.
27- iapte locato: military phraseology, cf. Frontinus 2. 3. 21.
592
423 B.C.
4- 37- 9
37. 9. segnius saepe iteratus: (clamor) iteratus incerto clamore prodidit cannot
be right (pace Pettersson who would compare 2. 40. 8) but it is less
easy to localize the corruption, incerto clamore is Livian and apposite
(cf. 10. 36. 3 segnis pugna clamore incerto coepit; 21. 31. 12, 37. 29. 4) so
that emendations of clamore (clangore Lipsius; etiam orejac. Gronovius;
clarore Seyffert; tenore Sigonius; languore J . F. Gronovius; pavore Gebhard) or deletion of both words (Gruter) start from the wrong premiss.
Madvig and Housman felt the corruption to lie in segnius saepe iteratus
and asked how a shout could be repeated often more sluggishly.
Housman suggested semper or usque for saepe (for the corruption cf.
Housman, Juvenal, li ff.; Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana, 216) but t h a t
does not face the original problem of clamor clamore prodidit. clamor
iteratus is equally sound (cf. 8. 38. 10). H a r a n t with his flair a n d Stroth
with his innate good sense both saw that the damage could be repaired
at one stroke by assuming that a word or words h a d fallen out.
Neither ut nor quo maiorem quite meet the requirements. Perhaps ita
exercitus, punctuating after iteratus. For the repetition clamor .. . clamore
see Drakenborch on 1.3.9; Weissenborn on 4 . 6 1 . 8 ; Meyer on 2. 18. 2 ;
Poutsma, Mnemosyne 41 (1913), 4 2 0 - 5 ; Pettersson.
37. 10. micare: only here of people, not weapons, by assimilation to
urgere; cf. 44. 34. 8. micant gladii is Epic (cf. Lucan 1. 320).
nutant. . . galeae: a reminiscence of the nodding plumes in the Iliad
(cf, e.g., 3. 337, 11. 42, 15.481, 16. 138). Drakenborch refers to Silius
Italicus' imitation of the same feature in 17. 392 ff.
applicant: 30. 33. 3. In this sense the word is restricted to high-flown
poetry (e.g. Ennius, Trag. 88 V. quo accedam? quo applicem?; Pacuvius,
fr. 370 R . ) . L. uses it to evoke such poetry.
videre: if the Volsci were not causing the slaughter, how could they
be spectators of it? videre is most unexpected, edere was proposed by
Jacobs. Cf. 5. 13. 1 1 , 2 1 . 13, 45. 8, 10. 45. 14 (Gries, Constancy, 30).
38. 2. Sex. Tampanius: all historians, dictionaries, and works of
reference know him as Sex. Tempanius and yet the name is unique
(Mtinzer, R.E., 'Tempanius'). In no literary or epigraphic source
from any classical period or region does anyone else figure with an
even analogous name. T h a t would be surprising in itself, if one
did not stop to ask what authority the form Tempanius rests on. Val.
Max., who twice cites his example (3. 2. 8, 6. 5. 2), does not refer to
him by name and he is not mentioned by any other author. His name
occurs eight times in L. (38. 2, 39. 4, 39. 8, 40. 6 (bis), 4 1 . 1, 9, 42. 1)
but Ver. is nowhere extant. Of the Nicomachean manuscripts M has
T a m p - three times, H four times, and O throughout. Tampanius
should be the original reading of the archetype. As such, it commands
belief. There is a large class of T a m p - names of Etruscan (cf. Ta<j>ane in
814432
593
4- 38. 2
423 B.C.
42 3 B.C.
4. 40.6-41. 7
4. 41- "
42
3 B.C.
422 B.C.
4. 42. 1
vived to witness to the truth. T h e queer tradition that the equites had
m a d e them acting centurions (42. 1) must go back to some substantial
fact.
42. 2. L. Manlius Capitolinus: cf. 5. 31. 2 M. Manlio cut Capitolino
postea fait cognomen. H e was a brother of the consul of 434 (23. 1 n.).
Q.Antonius: 3. 35. 11 n. L. Papirius: 30. 12 n,
42. 3 . L. Hortensius: no other Hortensii are known before the dictator
of 287. Moreover, the name is Italian, not Etruscan, in origin (Schulze
177); cf. the town of Urvinum Hortense in Umbria or the cult of
Juppiter Hortensis in Campania. A later, fourth century arrival of the
Hortensii in Rome must be postulated and L. Hortensius be dismissed
as a pleasing myth to give background to the union of the Sempronii
and Hortensii, comsummated by the marriage of Sempronia, d. of the
consul of 129, with L. Hortensius the father of Cicero's rival (Pais,
Storia, 1. 614). This accounts for the highly rhetorical and contrived
nature of the interchanges between him and his colleagues, which
have the stamp of late Republican oratory (42. 5 n., 42. 6 n.).
42. 5. fidens innocentiae: cf. ad Herennium 2. 8; Cicero, pro Sex. Roscio
73delituisse: cf. Cicero,/?. Red. in Sen. 3.
42. 6. erepturi. . .eversuri: cf. Cicero, pro Quinctio 87; Verr. 1. 114:
Sallust, Or. Lep. 23.
42. 7. parentis . . . loco: 2. 60. 3 n.
42. 8. C. Sempronium nihil motor: the technical formula for abandoning
a prosecution (8. 35. 8, 10. 18. 13, 43. 16. 16). Cf. 3. 54. 3-4 n.
42. 10. Aequis: the Aequi did not engage at all in the war and the
Volsci, so far from winning an ambiguous victory, had considerably
the worse of the fight. T h e clumsiness betrays change to a source
which had a different account of the events, including the participation
of the Aequi (41. 8 n.), and which knew of a different expiry-time of
the Aequan truce (30. 1 n., 35. 2 n.). L. now reverts to Licinius Macer
whom he follows up to 57. 6.
43-47. Annalistic Notices: Military Operations 421-416 B.C.
L. makes only a token attempt to unite a series of essentially disparate
scraps into a coherent whole by repeating at intervals the theme that
the interest of one is the interest of all (43. 11, 44. 5, 44. 9), a theme
summed up by Servilius Ahala at the end of the book (57. 3 ) : quern
enim bonum civem secernere sua a publicis consiliis? L. emphasizes through
out the need for moderatio. See Burck 102-4; Hellmann, LiviusInterpretationen, 74-77.
4 3 . 1. Cn. Fabio Vibulano: the praenomen is given by the Capitoline
Fasti as Num(erius), but N both here a n d at 49. 1, 57. 12, 58. 6, gives
597
421 B.C.
4- 43- i
either en. or its corruption m. and in the last place, where alone it
survives, Ver. also agrees. T h e weight of evidence, therefore, points
to Cn. as having been the praenomen in L. and it should be restored.
It is not accidental that it is also historically more credible. T h e
antiquarians (Auct. de Praen. 6 ; Festus 174 L.) explained the name
Numerius, which was employed by the Fabii Pictores and Buteones
only, as having been accepted by the survivor of Cremera as a condi
tion of marriage with the daughter of a Samnite, Num. Otacilius of
Maleventum. Contact with the Samnites only began in the fourth
century so that the whole explanation is a pious fraud, probably no
older than the researches of Varro, while L. as so often reaches back
to an older tradition. See Munzer, Rom. Adelsparteien, 7 1 ; Doer, Die
JVamenbegung, 32.
dignum memoratu: 25. 1. 5, a variation on the regular dignum memoria
(cf., e.g., Cicero, pro Sestio 14; see Wolfflin, Archiv Lat. Lex. 13 (1904),
191). Strictly a solecism, it is formed by influence of the common
dictu, factu facile, and the like.
4 3 . 2. ovans: 2. 16. 1 n.
4 3 . 3 . duplicando quaestorum numero: 2. 41. 11 n., 3. 24. 3 n., 69. 8 n.
Tacitus (Annals 11. 22) writes that the dual quaestorship was first
made a regular elective magistracy in 446, and continues: dein gliscentibus negotiis duo additi qui Romae curarent. His evidence does not
conflict with L. T h e quaestor was in origin an ad hoc assistant to the
king or consul, in particular for the investigation of parricidium. In the
Twelve Tables the office was recognized and defined as quaestores
parricidii, the addition of parricidii at once limiting their scope and
showing that they were not permanent magistrates but special com
missioners, appointed as need arose. T h e need for assistants to the
consuls in other fields still remained, if anything the greater as Rome's
commitments increased, and a logical consequence of the overhaul of
the Roman constitution by Valerius and Horatius in 449 was the
establishment in 446 of a parallel but separate pair of quaestores%
regular magistrates charged above all with the control of military
expenditure. Twenty-five years is ample time for the tasks of govern
ment to have proliferated to such an extent that a further pair are
required. T h e growth of the quaestorship should be compared with
the gradual rise in the number of consular tribunes from three to six.
Both mirror Rome's expanding horizon. In addition to bibliography
cited on 2. 41. 11 see here de Martino, Storia della Costituzione, 1.231 ff.;
U. Coli, Studi Paoli, 191. T h e agitation for plebeian entry to the
quaestorship, on the other hand, is pure fabrication, in keeping with
the 'political' explanation of the consular tribunate.
4 3 . 4. quaestores duo qui: it is clear that the archetype in this section
was severely damaged or maltreated. An even more intractable corrup598
421 B.C.
4. 43. 4
tion disfigures the text below (43. 5 n.) and the mistaken repetition of
a consulibus after adprobassent hints at deep trouble. T h e present
passage, as it stands, could only be interpreted on the very strained
assumption that qui is the equivalent of ut (so Pettersson), 'Now this
proposal, namely two quaestors in addition to the two urban quaestors
to be assistants to the consuls in war'. T h e apposition and the un
paralleled word-order force the conclusion that some words have
dropped out which expressly stated the nature of the proposal. W h a t
the words were can only be conjectured but conjectures should be
governed by two considerations, the length of line in the archetype
of N (probably 16-18 letters; cf. 4. 25. 4, 5. 46. 4, 53. 1) and the
probability that the words were consecutive. Such considerations
would rule out the supplements of Weissenborn and Conway. Perhaps
the easiest restoration would be praeter duos urbanos (ut alii crearentur)
quaestores duo, ut crearentur is too short.
4 3 . 5. summa ope [ad]nisi sunt: political journalese; Sallust, CatiL 1. 1,
38. 2 ; Jug. 9. 2, 25. 2, 31. 17. For the text see next note.
usi sunt adaeque: T h e sense is clear. T h e people are to be allowed
the same freedom of choice in electing quaestors that they enjoy in
electing consular tribunes. But the text is impossible, adaeque is only
Plautine before L.; usi sunt sc. arbitrio, while linguistically suitable
(cf., e.g., Pomponius, Dig. 43. 16. 12), is the wrong tense. Various
remedies have been prescribed: [usi sunt] adaeque Gruter, Lallemand,
Crevier, Bayet; sissent adaequari Seyffert; ius sissent adaequari H. J.
Miiller; ius esset adaequatum ita Zingerle; ius adaequassent ita Novak; [usi
sunt adaeque] Madvig (Emendationes, 104 'quamquam malis: ita'). It is
not, however, noticed, I think, that in the preceding sentence adnisi
sunt is unexpected for nisi sunt and the singularity is the more out
of keeping when L. is trying to capture the atmosphere of the R e
public where summa ope niti was a cliche (see above). I would suggest
that usi sunt ad is the remains of a marginal or interlinear correc
tion of ad-nisi sunt and that the right reading in the sentence before is
nisi sunt and here ut quemadmodum in tribunis . . . creandis, aeque in quaestoribus liberum esset arbitrium.
43. 6. agrariae legis: 2. 41. 3 n.
4 3 . 7. coire . . . prohibebant: 3. 8. 2 n. T h e tribunes did not have the
right to prevent the patricians assembling to appoint an interrex.
It is a tendentious anticipation of the tribunician vetoing of senatus
consulta de patriciis convocandis. The memory of mere intimidation
would not survive and the picture of a long succession of interregna
is exaggerated (3. 6. 1 n.). We cannot recover the true reason for the
interregnum.
4 3 . 9. Papirius: 30. 12 n. His indignant plea is couched in terms which
any senator might have used during the crisis of 52 B.C. For deorum . . .
599
4- 43- 9
4 2 1 B.C.
curaque cf, e.g., Cicero, pro Milone 8 5 ; for increpet 'arise 5 cf. in Pis.
994 3 . 11. mediis copularent concordiam: 'dans un juste milieu conclure un
accord' (Baillet) but there are misgivings. L. elsewhere employs only
the neuter singular of medius as a substantive (26. 2 1 . 4 medium visum
ut ovans urbem iniret; 31. 13. 6) and the phrase copulate concordiam is
scarcely paralleled by Cicero's conglutinatam concordiam [ad Att.
1. 17. 10). Fronto says amicos amore copulare (54. 2 van den Hout) and
Apuleius iugales ad concordiam copulat (Mund. 30), both, that is, making
the object of copulare people and not the concord in which people are
bound. But the sense is right, and, if the plural mediis can be justified
by the preceding quisque, Fronto's amicitiae copulandae (170. 3) may
justify the rest. Cf. also Cicero, ad Fam. 3. 4. 2.
44. 1. L. Quinctius Cincinnatus tertium: 16. 7 (438), 35. 1 (425). The
Capitoline Fasti, for whatever motive, had a different version from
the libri lintei. T h e entry ]Cincinnatus II points to his brother, T .
Quinctius, who was consular tribune in 426 (31. 1).
Sex. Furius Medullinus iterum: the Capitonine Fasti have [Me]dullinus
III. L. Furius M. had been consular tribune in 432 (25. 5) and 425,
but the combination of a different praenomen and a different number
in L. suggests that the text is right and that the libri lintei knew of two
Furii, Lucius and Sextus.
M. Manlius: either a grandson of the consul of 474 (2. 54. 1 n.) or,
if the latter be identical with the Decemvir, a son. T h e late chronographers give his cognomen as Vulso. See Munzer, R.E., 'Manlius (96)'.
A. Sempronius: 35. 1. For the whole college see Broughton; Degrassi
96.
44. 2. Antisti: T h e conviction of C. Sempronius, if not the amount of
the fine, may well be historical, for the prosecution of Postumia cer
tainly is and the Postumii and the Sempronii, closely linked by
marriage as they were, came under heavy fire during this decade.
T h e attacks may have been motivated by personal jealousies and
family rivalries or may reflect a deeper split in policy between the
aggressive Postumii, who saw that Rome's security lay in the conquest
of Fidenae and the expansion of the frontiers, and the more timorous
Furii and Manlii. However that may be, it is remarkable that an
Antistius should crop up as a prosecutor of C. Sempronius so soon after
another Antistius had resolutely thwarted any prosecution. T h e two
can hardly be unconnected. O n this occasion Antistius' ally is a
brother of another tribune whose name is given in the manuscripts
as Sex. Pollius (see below). He may be related to the equally corrupt
Spurillius of 42. 1 (n.). His other ally, M. Canuleius, is a wraith of a
more distinguished namesake. There is, therefore, some suspicion that
600
420 B.C.
4.44. 2
4- 44- 4
420 B.C.
44. 4. quidnam id rex esset\ quod: there are two difficulties: the subjunc
tive esset and the intrusive quod, id. . . quod cannot mean 'the fact
that (not even a single quaestor had been elected)', as at 5. 21. 7, since
that would require a nominative (tribunus . . . quaestor) and a subjunc
tive in or. obi. (foetus esset). T o delete it would be simple and parallels
are forthcoming (2. 32. 10), but esset has still to be treated. As Gronovius observed, in or. obi. quidnam . . . esse is required, and furere only
governs an ace. and inf. or a quod-c\a.use. We should either read
quidnam . . . esse [quod] or, better, quidnam . . . esset quaerere; cf. 3. 4. 5
quaererent quid rei esset; 3. 50. 4.
non: 'their own services, their father's wrongs, even the love of
exercising a (new) right did not avail to secure the election of even
a single plebeian', ius must be inserted before usurpandi (Karsten),
which otherwise is left undefined. For the expression cf. 3. 5, 3. 71. 7,
5. 12. 9, 27. 8. 9 ; Tacitus, Hist. 4. 2 5 : see Nisbet on Cicero, de Domo
44. 7. de agris dividendis: 2. 41. 3 n.
C. Sempronius: meets the situation with the fortitude and the phraseo
logy of a Cicero defending his part in the Catiline crisis. For invidiae
obici maluit cf, e.g., pro Murena 87; for subiturum . . . tempestatem cf. in
Catil. 2. 15; for in parcendo . . .fiat cf. Verr. 3. 208.
44. 9. nee turn: nee nunc in direct speech, the equivalent of nee iam
(Ruperti). Their latest agrarian proposal showed that they were not
now interested in the welfare of the plebs but only in the downfall of
Sempronius.
44. 10. quindecim: 2. 52. 5 n.
44. 1 1 . Postumia: 2. 42. 11 n. T h e record is pontifical and reliable.
Postumia, the sister of that Postumia who married T. Quinctius
(26. 11), was the victim of the same hostility which assailed C. Sem
pronius and her brother M . Postumius. Plutarch, who also reports
the case (ex Inim. Util. 6), adds that the pontifex maximus was Sp.
Minucius. T h e detail is suspicious, suggesting, as it does, that the bare
record has been worked up in the light of the case of 337 B.C. (8. 15.
7 flf.). T h e reference to ampliatio, the procedure whereby a case was
automatically adjourned for a fresh hearing if more than a certain
proportion of the jury voted Non Liquet, is anachronistic. It was
peculiar to the jurisdiction of the quaestiones, which were only instituted
in 147, and Balsdon has the weight of evidence on his side in
claiming it as an innovation made during C. Gracchus' tribunate
(P.B.S.R 1 (1938), 108-14; but see Tibilletti, Athenaeum 31 (1953),
20 flf.).
For the working of the procedure see Greenidge, Legal Procedure,
499 flf. For the truth of the notice see Munzer, Philologus 92 (1937),
56-67; Koch, Religio, 2-5.
602
420 B.C.
4. 44. 11
4- 45- 8
418 B.C.
418 B.C.
4. 46. 9
4- 47- 7
417 B.C.
47. 7-49. 6. Annalistic Notices: Ap. Claudius
4 1 6 B.C.
4. 48. 1
48. 5. nepos: cf. 48. 6 proavum; the filiation of the Capitoline Fasti
(P.f. Ap.n.) proves that he was thought of as nephew not son of the
consular tribune of 424 (35. 4 n.), while his great-grandfather will be
the formidable consul of 471 (2. 56. 5 n.), but the allusion is to the
activities of the great-great-grandfather (2. 44. 2-6 where see notes).
The error arises from the separation of the Decemvir and the consul
of 471 who historically were identical and not father and son (2. 61.
7 n.). L. here is dependent on a source which did not separate them
and so had only three not four generations for the Claudii.
48. 7. temporum . . . maiestatis: advice which Cicero was always quick
to tender.
607
4-48-
416 B.C.
48. 8. pro fortuna: wrongly taken by Hey (Thes. Ling. Lat. 6. 1176. 47)
to mean 'their sympathies are dictated by chance'; it must mean that
such people have an eye for the main chance, that their sympathies
vary with their fortunes.
48. 11. misso senatu: 'after the adjournment 5 .
48. 13. in . . .Jidem . . . confugere: 'to flee for help', as in Cicero, Div. in
Caec. 11.
48. 15. silentio facto: marking the turning-point of the scene (3. 47.
6n.).
4 8 . 16. proditores . . . consularium: familiar Republican abuse; cf, e.g.,
Cicero, pro Sest. 3 3 ; in Pisonem 24. T h e sentiments form the drift of
Licinius Macer's speech in Sallust.
49. 1. at duo bella: aduo M , arduo v, duo A; at is required to point the
contrast between the attainment of internal peace by the checkmating
of tribunician agitation and the threat of external w a r ; cf. 5. 48. 1,
49. 1.
P. Cornelius: A.f. P.n., a son of an unknown father and grandson of
a P. Cornelius who must have been a brother of M . Cornelius Maluginensis, the Decemvir. But see 56. 2 n.
C. Valerius: 53. 1, 57. 12, 61. 4 ; T h e filiation of the Capitoline Fasti
is L.f. Volusi n., which would make him a cousin of the consul of 456
(3. 31. 1) and the son of an otherwise unknown L. Valerius. Miinzer
rightly doubts the Fasti (de Gent. Vol. 36), identifying him as L.f. P.n.,
a son of the famous consul of 449.
Q. Quinctius: 61. 1, a brother to Lucius and Titus.
49. 2. principum: the Etruscan chiefs, whose farms were flooded; but
the flood that was recorded would have been at Rome since the upper
reaches of the Tiber are not liable to flooding and the records that
were kept later were always of inundations in the vicinity of Rome.
T h e importance of the river in the life of the community turned floods
into prodigies (cf. 7. 3. 2 (361 B.C.); 30. 38. 10-12 (202); 35. 9. 1-6
( ! 93) 5 35- 21. 2-6 (192); Dio 39. 61 (54); 53. 20 (27): see le Gall,
Le Culte du Tibre, 62-66) and, as such, they figured in the Annales.
T h e historians have distorted the fact into a motive.
49. 3 . Bolanis: Bola (or Bolae as L. prefers to call it) was an ancient
community of Latium, said to have been an Alban colony (Virgil,
Aeneid6. 775) and a member of the Alban League (Pliny, N.H. 3. 69)
and mentioned by D. H. in connexion with Coriolanus' campaign
(2. 39. 3 n.). Its site cannot be determined. It must have lain in the
upper Sacco Valley, near Labici and Tolerium (Hulsen, R.E., 'Bola';
T . Ashby, P.B.S.R. 5 (1910), 409). T h e best site is Zagorolo. It was
destroyed by Camillus in 389 when the Aequi were crushed (6. 2.14)
and disappears from history, although at the end of the Republic
608
415 B.C.
4-49-3
609
4- 49- 7
414 B.C.
49. 7. Cn. Cornelio: 56. 2 n., Diodorus gives him the praenomen JTCUO?
(13- 3 8 - 0 L. Valerio: 58. 6, 5. 1. 2, 10. 1, 14. 5, 29. 2 n., 31. 2 ; L.f. P.n., a son
of the consul of 449. Diodorus calls him also rduos but L. is guaranteed
by the Capitoline Fasti.
Q^. Fabio . . . iterum: Q,.f. M.n., a brother of Cn. (43. 1 n.). His
earlier consular tribunate, given by the Fasti, is omitted at 47. 8.
He is called Kalaajv by Diodorus.
M. Postumio Regillensi: A.f. A.n., a son of the consul of 464 (3. 4 . ) ;
for the cognomen see 2. 16. 4 n. There is wide disagreement over his
praenomen. T h e Capitoline Fasti name him P. Diodorus has Tifiepios,
perhaps a corruption from / 7 ( 0 ^ 0 9 ) to 7i. T h e archetype of L. read
m. t. postumio, where ra. could be a dittography after iterum or t. a cor
ruption of the common symbol indicating a proper name (2. 15. 1 n.).
No reliance can be placed on the manuscripts therefore. L. perhaps
wrote M.
49. 10. adducor: L. refers to an alternative version which attributed
the unrest to a short-fall in booty. T h e version is stated more extensively
by Zonaras (7. 20). A plain economic motive is given for the discontent
resembling one view of Camillus' subsequent exile. L.'s version sub
stitutes for it a sharply political account which allows the quaestor
(P. Sextius) to escape with his life (50. 2) and assigns to Postumius
the part of a brutal oppressor, a political bully.
49. 11. M. Sextio : Miinzer is certainly right in believing that he and the
quaestor, P. Sextius, grew out of a single Sextius who was associated
with Postumius in the traditional story (/?."., 'Sextius ( 7 ) ' ; 'Sestius
(5)'). For Sestii and Sextii see 3. 32. 5 n., 33. 10 n. T h e fact that the
quaestorship was not held by a plebeian until 409 (54. 3) should not
tempt editors to abandon the archetype by reading Sestius for Sextius
in 50. 2 and thereby to distinguish the men still further. T h e original
role played by Sextius is not clear, but it is easy to see how the need
for an adversary to counterbalance Postumius would lead historians
to take a rib from the quaestor Sextius' side and create a tribune of
the same name and to clothe him with proposals borrowed from Sp.
Maecilius (the Bola scheme is identical with the Labici scheme out
lined above) and with characteristics from the notorious L. Sextius
( f r . # . 376).
dignum: T a n . Faber's correction is shown to be right by the parallel
of 2. 48. 2 : verum esse habere eos quorum sanguine ac sudore partus sit. Both
passages are Licinian. Cf. Sallust, Or. Macri 18 absit periculum et labos
quibus nulla pars fructus est.
'malum': 'a pox on my soldiers, if they stir', malum as an exclamatory
eurse (cf. Donatus on Terence, Eun. 780), short for malum habebis, is
common enough in authors of all periodsin questions (Shackleton
610
414 B.C.
4. 49. 11
Bailey, Cicero: 'ad Atticum', 46). Here fiet or the like must be under
stood, and the phrase would have sounded to R o m a n ears as an
archaic colloquialism (Hofmann, Latein. Umgangssprache, 32).
49. 12. acer nee infacundus: cf. Cicero's description of L. Bestia, vir et
acer et non indisertus. infacundus is an Augustan synonym for indisertus
first used by L. (7. 4. 6, 10. 19. 6).
49. 13. inquit: Sextius' speech is Ciceronian in style and language,
but it may not be wholly fanciful to detect an unusually high propor
tion of 'loans' from Cicero's speech pro P. Sestio in particular. It would
be in L.'s manner to choose a specific situation to adapt to the require
ments of his narrative.
sedem senectuti vestrae prospiciunt: cf. Sest. 139 aliis otium quaerere; for
quid ut (only here in L . ; to be compared with ut quid = Iva ri, as
Casaubon noted; see Kuhner-Stegmann 1. 786) cf. Sest. 8 4 ; for
adversariis . . . propugnatoribus cf. Sest. 137; for ingemuistis cf. Sest. 146;
for agros . . . stabilire cf. Sest. 143.
49. 14. senectuti: anachronistic. T h e colonies were not veteran colonies
in the Marian or Caesarian sense.
50. 4. sub crate: 1. 51. 9 n.
50. 7. metu quaestionum: 51. 2 n.
5 1 . 1. interrege: the necessity for an interrex often went hand-in-hand
with a switch from consular tribunes to consuls or vice versa (43. 7 n.).
A. Cornelio: Diodorus 13. 43. 1 and Cassiodorus give him the praenomen M. With two branches of the Cornelii Cossi reaching the con
sulate in the same period his filiation is doubtful. H e might be A.f.
P.n., a brother of the consular tribune of 415 P. Cornelius Cossus
(49. 1 n.) or A.f. M.n., a brother of the consul of 409 (54. 1) and of the
consular tribune of 408 P. Cornelius Cossus (56. 2 where see note).
L. Furius: 44. 1 n. It is uncertain whether this consulate marks
the summit of the older (L. or Sext.) Furius' career or is a stage in
the impressive advancement of his son (L.f. Sp.n. according to the
Capitoline Fasti). See Broughton, 412 B.C., n. 1.
5 1 . 2 . quaestione Postumianae caedis: the first special or extraordinary
commission recorded. T h e history and nature of these commissions
is obscure. Strachan-Davidson {Problems, 1. 225 ff.) argued that they
were of distinct kinds:
(1) A commission given by a legislative act of the people to the
consul or chief magistrate to resume the full rights of life and death
inherent in his imperium but curtailed by custom. T h e consul could,
in consequence, act entirely at his discretion without any appeal being
admissible from his jurisdiction, as he did in the cases of L. Hostilius
Tubulus (141 B.C.) and Q . Servilius Caepio (104 B . C ) .
611
4. 5 1 - 2
413 B.C.
413 B.C.
4-51- 7
5 1 . 7. Ferentinum: from the Annates. Ferentinum, later to be a municipium of note, here makes its debut. Situated in Latium adiectum (mod.
Ferentino) it lay outside the orbit of the primitive Latin and R o m a n
world. For details see Hiilsen, R.E., 'Ferentinum'.
51. 8. ipsum agerque: Weissenborn's correction of the manuscript ipse
agerque is admirable. T h e town was handed over to the Hernici (56. 6)
doubtless because the Romans were not numerous enough to assume
such a distant obligation themselves, but, at the same time, were
anxious that it should be in dependable hands.
52-55. Annalistic Notices 412-409 B.C.
No stirring episode, no common trend distinguished the years 412-409.
L. makes the best that he can of them by emphasis, finding in every
event some connexion with the ever-menacing political struggle at
Rome and bringing out at every point the moral lesson that a united
city depends on the give-and-take of each individual and class within
it. See Burck 107; G. Niccolini, Studi Liviani, 83-109.
52. 1. L. Icilius: cf. 2. 58. 2, 3. 44. 3, 54. 11, 63. 8, 65. 9, a son pre
sumably of the Decemvir Ap. Claudius' redoubtable opponent.
Q.Fabio: perhaps the consul of 423, despite the absence of iteration
marks (but see Degrassi 97). He could hardly be the son, and the
possession of identical cognomina (Vivullano in Chr. 354) makes it
difficult to make him a cousin. T h e Capitoline Fasti are unfortunately
defective. T h e cognomen Ambustus is not explained, unless it describes
his complexion ('scorched').
C. Furio Factio \ C.f., a son of the consul of 441 (12. 1 n.).
52. 2. pestilential 3. 2. 1 n., from the Annales.
52. 4. inopia frugum: 2. 9. 6 n.
ut plerumquefit: 21. 4. 1, with inopia frugum, not neglecto cultu. Famine
is the regular accompaniment of pestilence rather than of neglected
agriculture.
M. Papirio Atratino : the only instance of a Papirius being given the
cognomen, peculiar to the Sempronii, Atratinus. T h e reading of the
manuscripts is beyond dispute and at so early a date adoption must
be discounted. T h e late chronographers, drawing ultimately on the
Capitoline Fasti, gave Mugillanus = the consular tribune of 418
(45. 5). If 411 originally had a college of three consular tribunes,
Papirius (Mugillanus), Sempronius (Atratinus), and Nautius, it is
easy to see how as a result of damage or mistake the three could be
compressed into a Papirius Atratinus and Nautius. Some support
may be offered by the floating and misplaced 'consuls' of 444 (4. 7.
10 n.), L. Papirius Mugillanus and L. Sempronius Atratinus, whom
Licinius Macer or the editors of the libri lintei knew from an inscription
and inserted in 444 because they could not be found in the regular
613
4- 52. 4
411 B.C.
Fasti. In reality they are likely to be the first two members of the
college of 411. T h e confusion here is the end-product from the libri
lintei. For Papirius' connexion with Garventum see 53. 3 n.
C. Nautio Rutilo: Unopiog in Diodorus 13. 68. i, and the Gapitoline
Fasti for 419 and 404. But there is no certainty that the libri lintei
identified him with the military tribune of 419 and 404 and C
should be retained. Cf. also 3. 25. 1 n.
52. 5. Etruscum . . . Tiberim . . . Cumas: 2. 9. 6 n.
52. 6. Samnitibus: 37. 1 n.
Siculorum tyrannis: there were no tyrants in Sicily in 411 but Dionysius I was to come to power two years later at Syracuse. T h e later
history of Sicily m a d e it natural to think of the cities as ruled by
tyrants. Apart from its intrinsic probability the notice that Sicily sup
plied corn to Rome in 411 may be believed if seen against a wider
background. Although Syracuse's victory over the Athenian expedi
tion was complete and decisive, matters did not rest there. T h e threat
from Carthage was imminent and Athens was soon to negotiate a
treaty with Carthage. Carthage's other ally was Rome by a treaty
a century old. It was much in Syracuse's interest to woo the alliance
or at least the neutrality of Rome.
Etruriae studio: the enthusiasm displayed by the Etruscans is historical.
They were anxious not to lose the Roman market to Sicily and saw an
opportunity of exploiting the hostility between Rome and the Samnites
who had done so much to destroy the Etruscan position in Campania.
53. 1. M. Aemilio: actually M \ Aemilius Mam.f. M.n. Mamercinus
(consular tribune in 405 (61. 1 M. Aemilius Mamercus), 403 (5. 1. 2,
M . AemiliusMamercusiterum),and40i (5.10.1 M . AemilioMamerco
tertium)). Thepraenomen is given as r&iosMavios by Diodorus (13. 76.1)
and M \ by theCapitoline Fasti. T h e change is so slight and the corrup
tion so common that M J . should be restored in the texts of L. through
out (cf. 3. 7. 6 n . ; cf. the similar problem discussed by Syme, J.R.S. 45
(1955), 26-27).
C. Valerio: 49. 1 n.
53. 2. M. Menenius: nothing else is known of him. Munzer (R.E.,
'Menenius (8)') is reminded of the antagonism between another con
sular Valerius and a Maenius in 483 (D.H. 8. 87. 4) and would dismiss
both as fictitious. But the family is old and prominent in the plebeian
interest (a M . Menenius was tr. pi. in 384). H e may well be genuine
even if his abortive proposals are not.
53. 3 . arcem Carventanam: the exact site cannot be fixed. It is not to be
identified with Rocca Massima (see Ashby, P.B.S.R. 5 (1910), 411,
424) but it lay near to Tusculum and the pass of Algidus. Casuetani
figure among the early Alban people in Pliny (N.H. 3. 69). T h e name
614
4 1 0 B.C.
4-5 3. 3
4- 53- io
410 B.C.
409 B.C.
4- 54- 7
54. 8. inritatis: inflatis Ver. For inritatis animis cf. 1. 17. 4, 8. 32. 16,
23. 44. 5, et aL
55. 1. Hernicumque: 53. 2.
55. 2. tunc enixe: 1. 35. 8 n.
55. 3 . singuli: for the text see C.Q.q (1959), 278,
55. 4. recurrentes in arcem: since the Aequi were palpably in control of
the citadel, the Romans could not have been killed as they forced
their way back in. Ver. rightly reads ad arcem. Some were on their way
back, some were still looting, when they were set upon and killed.
55. 5. adversa civitatis res: adversa res as in Cicero (pro Sulla 57; Tusc.
Disp. 3. 21) is the equivalent of a noun (incommodum) and is followed
by a genitive. A dative only follows when adversa is predicative, i.e. res
est adversa mihi.
55. 8. Verruginem: 1,411. Its loss was not recorded.
56-57. The Dictatorship of P. Cornelius
56. 2. C. Iulius: 61. 1, Sp.f. Vopisci n., according to the Capitoline
Fasti. His father is unknown but must have been a brother of the
consul of 430 (30. 1 n.).
P. Cornelius Cossus: A.f. M.n., to distinguish him from the consular
tribune of 415 (49. i n . ) ; there is no iteration here. A brother of the
consular tribune of 414 (49. 7 n.). His father was the celebrated winner
of the spolia opima and his grandfather the Decemvir, M. Cornelius
Maluginensis. The identity of the dictator P. Cornelius (M.f. L.n.
Rutilus Cossus, according to the Fasti) is perplexing (57. 6, 58. 6).
The filiation suggests that his grandfather was L. Cornelius Malu
ginensis, consul in 459 (3. 22. 1) and brother of the Decemvir. He will,
therefore, be a second cousin both of his namesake the consul of the
present year (408) and of the consul of 415 (49. 1). Such proliferation
is bewildering and only theoretically possible. The filiations given by
the Fasti are largely the work of inspired antiquarianism and rest on
no contemporary documentation. Historically it is likely that there
were in this period three Cornelii Cossi, and three only: (1) P. Cor
nelius Cossus (consular tribune in 415 = 49. 1, 408 = 56. 2, 406 =
58. 6, and 404 = 61. 4 ; dictator in 408 = 57. 6 ) ; (2) Cn. Cornelius
Cossus (consular tribune in 414 = 49. 7, 406 = 58. 6, 404 = 61. 4,
and 401 = 5 . 10. 1); (3) A. (or M.) Cornelius Cossus (consul in
413 = 51. 1). They will have been the three sons of the winner of the
spolia opima. See also 61. 4 n.
C. Servilius Ahala: 57. 12, 5. 8. 1, P.f. Q,.n., a nephew of the consul
of 427 (30. 12) by an unknown father.
56. 3 . intermiscendo: 'contaminating the worthy by mixing in the un
worthy'. For the depreciatory, possibly colloquial, force of the verb
617
4- 56. 3
408 B.C.
408 B.C.
4- 56. 5
4 0 8 B.C.
4- 56- i3
O.C.T. reflects his belief that H was the best manuscript and does not
give a good sense. T h e immediate difficulty is the position of quoque.
As it stands in N, it must be taken with per se, whereas it really quali
fies tribunicia potestas. So far from offering help, the tribunes may be
expected to do everything in their power to promote anarchy. If the
patricians are to achieve anything they will have to take the tribunate
as well. There is no certain case in L. of quoque preceding the word it
qualifies (3. 65. 6 n.). However, Ver.'spotestatemquae tribuniciam hints at
potestatem quoque tribuniciam. A fault in the common archetype of Ver.
and N displaced potestatem in N and reduced quoque to -quae in Ver.
A subsidiary problem is the vestigial word before verecundia in Ver.
Re-examination of the palimpsest leaves no doubt that the visible
letters are . . 1
Mommsen discerned via . . . . but the third not
the second letter is i and his vi atque is ruled out by the non-occurrence
of atque before v in L. T h e only word that fits the traces as they are
now visible is pristina. viverent is out of the question.
57. 1. haec contentio: Rome's troubles are due to personal ambition.
Only Servilius Ahala has the wisdom and the forebearance to sub
ordinate his own interests to the interests of the state and thereby to
illustrate the overriding importance of moderatio (57. 3, 57. 5, 57. 12).
57. 4. belli necessitates: from Thucydides 1. 142. 1 rov 8e noXefiov ol
Kcupol ov fieveroL.
57. 5. senatus consulto: 26. 7 n., the S.C. was not legally required, but
Servilius Ahala hoped to secure moral backing by it.
57. 6. P. Cornelio: 56. 2 n.
58-61. The Preliminaries of the War with Veii
58. 1. indutiarum: 35. 2 n. For the chronology of the war with Veii
see 5. 1. 1 n. Historically the truce cannot have expired in this year
(407). T h e date was pushed back by annalists to allow a full ten years
for the siege (406-396) and an extra year for the preliminaries. T h e
abortive delegation of fetials and the magnanimous gesture of allowing
the Veientes to set their house in order before being presented with
an ultimatum were no more recorded in the Annales than the expiry of
the truce, as Dobree demonstrated by comparing 58. 2 ut ex incommodo
alieno sua occasio peteretur with Demosthenes, Olynth. 1. 16. Licinius
Macer, however, who maintained the twenty-year duration of the
truce (35. 2) must have held out against the Trojanizing tendency of
his fellow historians and dated the expiry of the truce to 405.
fetiales: 1. 32. 6 n.
58. 2. discordia intestina: more political colouring, although the rigid
caste-system of the Etruscan aristocracy did lead to internal unrest,
for instance at Arretium (10. 3. 2, 5. 13), and may have contributed
620
4 0 7 B.C.
4. 58. 2
L. Valerio: 49. 7 n.
58. 7. Lars Tolumnius 117. 1-4. It would be a very arrogant and vulgar
reply that omitted the preposition ex after facesso (6. 17. 8). T h e omis
sion could be caused by haplography.
58. 9. occidione occisa: 2. 51. 9, 3. 10. 11.
ei\ cum periculo retineri: unless Verrugo has been recovered L. can
hardly say that the garrison were butchered and the forts only retained
at peril, et must be corrupt, but in emending et account needs to be
taken of what L. has said. The two garrisons which were liquidated
will be Carventum and Verrugo. retineri, however, as in 56. 4, can
only be used of something which the Romans with difficulty manage
to keep, which disqualifies Harant's Aequum periculo retineri, and also,
since we have heard nothing of any other praesidia, eliminates duo
(SeyfTert), alia (Madvig), or cetera (Schenkl), sc. praesidia, cum periculo
retineri. Neither sua et (Brakman) or arces (Luterbacher) could stand
without further explanation. I would suggest castra; cf. 46. 6 castraque
eo die aegre retenta.
5 8 . 1 2 . coloniarumque: libertatis corresponds to suffragii libere ferendi,
coloniarum to agripublici. As the freedom of the colonies does not enter
into the question, there is nothing to be said for deleting -que with
Madvig and Conway.
58. 13. volnera ac cicatrices: 2. 23. 4 n.
quod dari: qui (sc. sanguis) dari N. Either can be defended (cf. 5. 1.4,
621
4- 58. 13
406 B.C.
28. 25. 2, 32. 17. 9, 41. 16. 8) but the rhetorical symmetry quid loci
ad. . . accipienda, quid sanguinis . . . favours Ver. rogitantes should be
retained; cf. 3. 61. 13, 7. 8. 2, 24. 31. 3.
59. 2. Valerius Antium: the collocation is not accidental. T h e mention of
Antium, Ecetrae (2. 25. 6 n.), and Anxur reveals that the focus of the
war has switched. Algidus is at last sealed to the Volscians who can
only force their way into the coastal plain by a long sweep from the
south-east.
59. 3 . Anxur: situated on a small outcrop of rock between the Pomptine plain and the sea and commanding the (later) Via Appia, the
town was of great strategic importance, as was shown in the late
war. Anxurthe meaning of the name is uncertain ( = dvv vpov
according to Servius, ad Aen. 7. 799) was the Volscian name which
survived in the cult of Juppiter A(n)xoranus (C.I.L. 10. 6483;
Sydenham no. 947) but Tarracina, whether Greek ( = rpaxtmrj, from
the roughness of the place) or, more probably, Etruscan (cf. Tarchu,
Tarquinius, & c ) , was the older name which Anxur only temporarily
replaced for the duration of the Volscian occupation. For the site
was inhabited before the Volscians. Its inhabitants were called TappaKtvnai in the Carthaginian treaty of 509 (Polybius 3. 22. 11 with
Walbank's note). T h e Volscians cannot have reached it before the
campaigns of the 490's associated with the name of Coriolanus. L. has
the plural form Tarracinae here, the singular elsewhere, but the plural
is also used by Athenaeus (6. 224 c) and should not be emended
(Wesenberg). Cf. Bolae and Bola (49. 6).
59. 5. circummissae: a textbook stratagem advocated by Frontinus and
employed by Pericles (3. 9. 5) and Antiochus at Ephesus (3. 9. 10).
59. 7. duo milia: cf. 57. 7. T h e taste for numbers is Valerian.
59. 1 1 . additum: so also Diodorus 14. 16. 5. If there is any truth in the
annalistic account of a protracted siege of Veii, it is reasonable to be
lieve that the troops would have had to be compensated for being
prevented from cultivating their land and winning a livelihood. T h e
pay may only have been ad hoc, dictated by the special circumstances
of the Veii expeditionit was not regular in the fourth centurybut
it makes good sense (Watson, Historia 7 (1958) 113). It may have
taken the form of supplies in kind or specific weight of aes rude.
60. 1. patres vere appellatos: a propagandist rationalization of the
senatorial designation patres; cf. Cicero, de Rep. 2. 14 appellati propter
caritatem patres and see Alfoldi, Mus. Helv. 9 (1952), 207.
60. 2. cam: 'while they were delighted with the advantage that their
estate would be secure at least for the duration of their military
service, their happiness was increased by the fact that the offer was
622
406 B.C.
4. 60. 2
.6i. i
405 B.C.
T. Quinctius: 43. 1.
Q. Quinctius: 49. 1 n., omitted by Diodorus 14. 17. 1, who, however,
states that the total was six.
C. lulius: 56. 2 n.
A. Manlius: A.f. Gn.n. Vulso Gapitolinus, according to the Capitoline Fasti, i.e. a grandson or a great-grandson of the consul of 480
(2. 43. n ) . His father is unknown. See 5. 8. 1, 16. 1.
L. Furius: 5 1 . 1 n. M\ Aemilius: 53. 1 n. Both are omitted by
Diodorus.
6 1 . 2 . fanum Voltumnae: 23. 5 n. For the failure of the Etruscan league
to support Veii see 5. 1.311.
61. 4 . C. Valerium: 49. 1 n. M'. Sergium: 5. 8. 1, L.f. L.n., according to
the Capitoline Fasti. His father ought to be the consul of 437 (17. 7)
but his filiation is C.f. C.n. T h e editors or the cutters of the Fasti may
be in error.
P. Cornelium: 56. 2 n. Cn. Cornelium: 56. 2 n., 58. 6.
K. Fabium: this branch of the Fabii is teasing. In 54. 2 N except for
O E (Claudio F.) read C. Fabio; and exactly the same readings are given
here, and at 5. 10. 1 where there is no mark of iteration; at 5. 24. 1
MA have K. (or Caesonem) Fabium and n Caesonem, all branches of the
tradition agreeing on the iteration iterum. T h e Capitoline Fasti, on the
other hand, had the style K. Fabius M.f. Q.n. Ambustus, consular
tribune in 404, II in 401, III in 395. T h e corruption of the praenomen
in L. is understandable and if A", is to be restored, it must be restored
throughout. For the fact that L.'s sources appear to have overlooked
one of his consular tribunates {iterum in 395 where the Fasti have III)
is to be linked to the parallel phenomenon that in 401 (5. 10. 1) Cn.
Cornelius Cossus is listed as iterum by L. but III by the Fasti. L.'s
source for the lists of eponymous magistrates in 401 and, less certainly,
m
395 w a s Licinius Macer, whereas here he is following Valerius
Antias and one can only assume that Licinius Macer either omitted
partially or wholly the college of 404, in which Cn. Cornelius was
consular tribune II and K. Fabius obtained that office for the first
time, or distinguished Cornelius and Fabius from their homonyms
who were consular tribunes in 401. Only in this way can the double
mistake be accounted for.
Sp. Nautium: 44. 13 n. iterum is also mistaken for he had been con
sular tribune in 419 and 416 (47. 8 iterum). It could be corrupt but
where two separate sources are responsible for the lists of magistrates
it is rash to assume corruption.
61. 7. multi mortales: 1. 9. 8 n.
6 1 . 8 . ni servus arcem . . . prodidisset: another textbook method of taking
a city recommended by ancient strategists.
61. 10. Servius Romanus: the legend of his servile origin and the
624
404 B.C.
4. 61. 10
814432
625
ss
BOOK 5
B O O K 4 pointed political lessonsthe necessity for all parties in the
state, governed as well as government, exercising mutual consideration
(moderatio). Book 5 moves on to a new plane. Rome had a destiny
which had to be safeguarded by proper attention to religion. A
political truce was insufficient without the co-operation of the gods,
and Book 5 illustrates how the fortunes of the city veer as her rulers
observe and neglect their religious duties. The book falls sharply into
two sectionsthe capture of Veii and the capture of Rome (1-32,
35-55). Veii fell because of her own impiety (1. 4-5) and Roman
piety (15. 2, 19. 1 ff., 21. 8). When the Romans, flushed with their
success, allowed themselves to forget their religious obligations and
even expelled Camillus (50. 1), they suffered for it by being defeated
and captured by the Gauls. Their preservation of the sacra patria (40.
7-10 n.), their repentance, and their restoration of Camillus atoned
for their offence. Rome had learnt her lesson. The two halves of the
book are united by their theme. They are also linked by the per
sonality of Camillus, the fatalis dux (19. 2 ; cf. 33. 1 ff.) whose name
betokens a life spent in service of the gods (1. 2 n.) and whose career
mirrors the relationship between worldly success and divine will.
Two further features promote the symmetry of the book. As in Book
3 L. elaborates two long speeches, one at the beginning (3-6) and
one at the end (51-54), which serve to weld the whole together. The
middle is occupied by a digression on the history and geography of
the Etrurian and the Gaul (33-35). L., as Sallust, uses digressions
to prepare the reader for the importance of what follows. Here
the disgression has the extra function of putting in opposite sides
of the scale Rome's two enemies, Veii and Gaul, and contrasting
them.
The Siege of Veiian Historical Introduction
Rome had in early days been a predominantly Etruscan city. Her
constitution and her religion, her culture and her society stemmed
from Etruria. The expulsion of the Tarquins did not mean a break
with her Etruscan inheritance: it was a matter of internal politics.
For a while Rome did have Etruscan enemies to fear, not her neigh
bours or the Tarquins, but the expansionistic cities of the interior
under Porsenna. But it was only a momentary setback. Rome con
solidated herself in Latium (the Latin treaty), and despite occasional
626
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
catastrophes (Cremera) the growing self-confidence and national con
sciousness of the Roman people, which manifested itself in the demo
cratic Revolution of the Decemvirate, inspired a surge of expansion.
Rome embarked on military adventures that carried her far into the
south and east of Latium. She might indeed have achieved a supre
macy in Italy a hundred and fifty years before she eventually did had
not a combination of obstacles set her progress back. T h e spread of
malaria, aggravated by crippling famine-plagues, into Italy and
Latium in the latter half of the century debilitated her manpower and
compelled the abandonment of many strategic settlements. En
couraged perhaps by this blow the infiltrating tribes of Aequi and
Volsci, joined also by Sabines, renewed their attempts to burst into
the plain of Latium and engaged Rome in a struggle for the control
of the passes. T h e situation was a critical one for Rome. With the
failure of her own crops and the mounting expense of her wars she had
to develop her salt trade and to exploit to the full her advantageous
position as a trading centre by road and river in order to be able to
maintain her existence. It is no surprise to find imports from central
Etruria occurring in larger numbers once again and to have records
(e.g. in 412; see 4. 52. 5) of corn being supplied to Rome by inland
Etruscan cities. Such trade was of course greatly to the Etruscan
interest as well, for Rome was admirably placed as a point of distribu
tion for the whole country. Rome and the inland cities of Etniria,
Clusium, Cosa, Populonia, and Caere, stood to gain mutually by
such an understanding. There was only one city whose independence
and prosperity were threatened, and that city was Rome's near neigh
bourVeii. With her salient across the Tiber in the town of Fidenae,
Veii was able to exercise a stranglehold on the river communications
between Rome and the interior. T h e hostility led to war, first the
capture of Fidenae and then, as a natural sequel, the siege of Veii
herself. T h e course of events is consistent and intelligible. It is only
confused by Livy's failure to distinguish between the inhabitants of
Veii and the rest of Etruria. It was only Veii and her immediate
allies (16. 4, 19. 7-8) who joined issue with Rome. T h e other Etrus
cans, as the Caeretan lodging of the sacra publica demonstrates, were
anxious to retain the goodwill and friendship of Rome. They had
economic motives: they may also already have been alarmed at the
advance of the Gauls. If the Gauls had stopped north of the Apen
nines, Rome must have expanded by leaps and bounds in the fourth
century. As it was, the Gallic invasion put the clock back. T h e Latin
League was broken up and R o m e did not recover control of Latium
till 338. In the face of a pact between the tyrants of Syracuse and the
roving hordes of Gauls, Rome clung to the skirts of Etruria with a
nervously phil-Etruscan government of Fabii and Licinii. T h e concept
627
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
of a Roman dominion combining the best of the Latin and the
Etruscan was submerged and forgotten in the great slump of the 38o's
and the 37o's.
T h e whole narrative of Rome's war with Veii was already con
solidated in Etruscan historical sources in the fourth century; for the
mythical war between Aeneas and Mezentius seems to have been
inspired by the historical events at Veii, unless the resemblancesthe
Etruscan king hated for his impiety, supported only by the Falisci
and the Gapenates and finally abandoned by J u n o who is matched
against Aeneas, the ' R o m a n ' duxfatalis (Aeneid 8. 511-12)are wholly
illusory. Since that tale, related at length by Virgil but evidently
familiar in some form even to Lycophron three centuries earlier
(Alexandra 1226 ff.), must have been common currency in the fourth
century, it cannot be doubted that the substantial truth has been
transmitted. Besides, the notices of prodigies and battles (Anxur,
Gapenates) could be checked in pontifical records and the interven
tion of Delphi was susceptible of proof from independent sources. T h e
installation ofJ u n o Regina was as much a landmark in Roman history
as the institution of winter campaigning and volunteer cavalry
(7-4)Great victories have, however, a habit of becoming legends. There
is a frightening similarity of details between the capture of Fidenae
and that of Veiithe sally of incendiaries (7. 2 = 4. 33. 2 n.), the
cuniculus, and the defiant gestures of Servilius Ahala (9. 5-7 = 4. 57.
4 ff.). All the same, Veii was more memorable than Fidenae and the
likelihood that these events did not occur on two occasions should not
be allowed to prejudice the possibility of their having occurred once.
But fact and fiction have converted the cuniculus, an arresting feature
of Veian landscape, into a religious myth, while Gamillus' triumph
assumed heroic proportions and the war against a single Etruscan
city became generalized during the second century as a war against
the whole of Etruria. Roman heroism invited comparison with Greek
and a prolonged siege of a redoubtable opponent could not but evoke
the ten-year siege of Troy. T h e traces are clear in L. (4. 11 n . ; cf.
also 2. 6 n., 7. 2 n., 8. 4, 8. 7). Although familiarity with Trojan
history is presumed from the statuettes of Aeneas and Anchises to have
been current in Veii, the assimilation of the siege of Veii with the siege
of Troy is of a piece with other hellenizing adaptations in Roman
historyTarquinius Superbus or the Fabii at Gremeraand belongs
to the first generation of Roman historians who were writing with an
eye to a Greek audience.
T h e historical truth was thus gradually overlaid with legendary
distortion. T h e form of the story which L. retails belongs to the latest
stage of its embellishment as the chronology will show.
628
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
L. dates the war from 406 (4. 58. 6, 60. 9) to 396 (5. 22. 8) and in
consequence the capture of Rome by the Gauls to 390 (cf. 54. 5 n.).
T h e absolute dates are wrong. Early Greek sources, which synchronize
the capture of Rome with the peace of Antalcidas and the siege of
Rhegium by Dionysius, demonstrate that the city of Rome actually
fell in the summer of 387/6. But the six-year interval between Veii and
Rome is not objectionable. An absolute date of 392-1 for the fall of
Veii makes good sense and may even survive in the doublets pre
served in L. who reduplicates victories over the Tarquinienses in 397
(16. 2 n.) and 388 (6. 4. 8) and campaigns in agro Nepesino in 396
(19. 7-8) and 389 (6. 2. 2 ff.). In either case the latter dates are his
torically preferable. T h e campaigns should be mopping-up opera
tions, like the capture of Falerii, after the main stronghold of Veii had
fallen. T h e four-year discrepancy between the absolute date of 392
and the received date of 396 requires explanation. T h a t R o m a n
chronology should be four years out at this point against the absolute
dates is, of course, disquieting. T h e earlier synchronism with Greek
events (the expulsion of the tyrants, Gremera, the Decemvirate) as
far as they can be checked do seem to be approximately correct and
to provide grounds for supposing that the traditional Roman dates
(509, 471, 450) are right on an absolute reckoning. How did the
Greek and Roman chronologies get out of step? There is ample
evidence of severe dislocation in the Annales for the last half of the
century (cf, e.g., 4. 20. 8 n.) and the loss of several tabulae or confusion
over their arrangement would account for the phenomena. When
Roman scholars came to construct a parallel chronology for Greek and
Roman history, they were aware that the R o m a n chronology was
short by four years. Failing to discern the true cause of the loss, they
redressed it by the insertion of four dictator years, thereby bringing
Roman and Greek dates into line again for the third century. Such
chronological manipulations date from the second century at the
earliest so that L.'s source must at least be as late. But did the siege
really last ten years ? There is an alarming paucity of details. Only
two proper battles are recorded (402, 399). Now the truce with Veii
expired after 20 years in 405 (4. 58. 1 n.), that is in 401 on the true
absolute chronology.
Nothing happens in the first three years of the war in L.'s account
(4. 60. 9, 61. 2-3, 9). T h e first memorable event of any kind takes
place in 403, and it might reasonably be held that 403 (399 on the
absolute chronology') marked the true beginning of the war. Its start
and in turn the expiry of the twenty years' truce were pushed back to
increase the parallelism between Veii and Troy.
L. therefore took the story from a comparatively modern source
which included all the legendary improvements and chronological
629
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
manipulations. T h a t source is distinguished by making Camillus a
consular tribune ( i . 2 n.) whereas he was in fact censor. T h e mistake
results in a flagrant contradiction between 10. i and 14. 5 where
Camillus is designated trib. cons. I I on both occasions. It follows that
L. follows one authority for the opening chapters and switches to a
second source before chapter 14 (12. 10 n.). T h e tradition that there
were eight consular tribunes in 403 is unique and appears to be due
to Licinius Macer (1. 2 n.). We may conclude that at the conclusion
of Book 4 L. reverted to Licinius Macer (cf. 4. 61. 10).
For the development of the tradition see J. Gage, Huit recherches,
73-96; J. Bayet, tome 5, App. 3 ; J. Hubaux, Rome et Veies (cited as
H u b a u x ) ; M. Sordi, / Rapporti Romano-Ceriti (cited as Sordi): for the
Trojan elements see also Zarncke, Commentationes 0. Ribbeck, 277 and
n. 2 ; G. Thouret, Fleck. Jahrb.f. cl. Phil, Suppl. Band, 1880, 136 ff.;
for L.'s sources see Soltau 2 7 3 - 8 3 ; Klotz 279-80; J.R.S. 48 (1958),
40-46; for L.'s composition see also Burck 108 ff. See also R. Werner,
Der Beginn der rom. Republik, 42 ff.
Veii
T h e city occupied an extensive plateau bounded on all sides except
for a narrow neck of land at the north-west gate by the valleys of the
Fosso della Valchetta (Gremera) and the Fosso dei Due Fossi. T h e
plateau itself divides into two main ridges, the southern of which runs
the whole length of the promontory down to a small outcrop, the
Piazza d'Armi, surrounded on three sides by sheer cliffs and defended
on the plateau side by a rock-cut ditch. There was the ancient citadel
(21. 10 n.). The cemeteries lay outside the city. From Villanovan
times Veii was the hub of a network of roads leading to Capena, Nepi,
Tarquinii, Vulci, Rome, and the Tiber mouth (1. 33. 6 n.). Its
strategic position and natural strength encouraged settlement: the
ager Veientanus was large and with the help of extensive cuniculation
rich. Pottery, terracotta, bronze show an unbroken rise in prosperity
from the eighth (1. 15. 1 n.) to the fifth century. At the end of the
fifth century the natural defences were supplemented. T h e tufa was,
where possible, cut back: elsewhere an earthen rampart with a stone
breast-work was constructed according to the varying conditions of
the terrain. These walls must have been built to withstand Rome.
Veii survived her capture, although the size of the surviving settle
ment has not yet been established archaeologically. Except at the
Piazza d'Armi the votive deposits were continuous and the principal
artery of communication from Rome to the north, the Via Veientana,
still ran through the site.
For a full discussion of the archaeology and topography of Veii see
W r ard-Perkins, P.B.S.R. 39 (1961), 25 ff.
630
403 B.C.
5- i-ft
5- ! 2
403 B.C.
403 B.C.
5-2.-3
2. 3 . hoc illud esse: 'that was the point of instituting military pay'.
A variant of the colloquial hoc illud est = r6Sy (TOUT') /cetj/o, 'I told
you so', 'just as I said'. See Page on Euripides, Medea 98 for examples
in Greek and Latin.
donum inimicorum: Casaubon acutely noted that the proverb re
sembles Sophocles, Ajax 664.-5
aAA' e W aXrjdrjs rj fipor&v napoifJiia
exOpajv dScopa ha>pa KOVK omjcnfia,
Cf. also Menander, Sent. 166; Virgil, Aeneid 7. 350, The use of the
proverb is in keeping with the popular tone of the tribunician harangue.
inlitum fore \ Peerlkamp (on Virgil, Aeneid 7. 350) wished to delete
fore, arguing that the gift had been presented in the past and that there
fore its harmful properties should be referred to in the past tense too
(inlitum sc. esse).
2. 4. venisse: cf. Sallust, Or. Macri 19. A radical slogan.
ac domus ac res: the first ac links cedere and invisere, the second domus
and res (cf. 4. 6 n.). For the former Wex read auty Weissenborn nee
but no change is necessary. Cf. 9. 38. 14.
2. 6. hiemem: the description of the discomforts of the besiegers recalls
the plight of the Greeks before Troy as described, e.g., in Aeschylus,
Agamemnon 559 ff.
urbem tutantes: editors do not draw attention to the difficulty of these
words but Jac. Gronovius, who proposed tutantey rightly remarked
'non cives tutantur sed ipse situs\ You cannot protect a city by its position.
A city can, at a pinch, be said to be protected by its position (so Gron.)
or you can protect yourself by the defences and position of a city.
Cf. 32. 4 moenibus armati se tutabantur. Read situque naturali urbis (se}
tutantes and for the loss of se cf. 3. 62. 1, 5. 32. 4, 40. 10, 6. 6. 10.
2.7. nivibus pruinisque obrutum: there may be a passing allusion in these
words to Cicero's contemptuous reference to Catiline's supporters (in
Catil. 2. 23): quo pacto illi pruinas ac nives perferent? Cf. 6. 4. n.
sub pellibus durare: militarily there was a clear distinction between
a semi-permanent bivouac under canvas, for which the technical
term was sub pellibus habere (Caesar, B.G. 3. 29. 2 ; 23. 18. 15, 37. 39. 2)
and a permanent winter-barracks (hiberna) made of wood and stone.
The former was the regular way of quartering troops away from garri
sons on a summer campaign, while the latter served as the quarters
during the winter. Only in very exceptional circumstances were troops
liable to be called upon to sleep under canvas during the winter. The
normal arrangements are described by L. for 215 (23. 46. 9) and
iqo (37. 39. 2) and the usual type of winter quarters (hiberna) is
illustrated by the excavated camps at Numantia. The Romans at Veii
633
5 2. 6
403 B.C.
403 B.C.
5- 3-6
loquar (5. 6) cf. de Har. Resp. 4 1 ; laxamentum dederis (5. 10) cf. pro
Cluentio 8 9 ; sequantur viam consilii (5. 11) cf. in Catil. 4. 9 ; insanabilem
morbum (5. 12; cf. 13. 5) cf. Tusc. Disp. 5. 3 ; si. . . certe (45. 23. 17)
cf. pro Quinct. 6 5 ; mediusJidius cf. Phil. 2. 67 with Denniston's note;
effeminate . . . molles (6. 4) cf. Tusc. Disp. 4. 6 4 ; erubescant (6. 5) cf.
pro Caelio 8; patrocinium mollitiae (6. 5) cf. <fc Leg. Agr. 2. 9 ; optatum . . .
contingere cf. ad Fam. 5. 21. 1 et ai; scelera latere (6. 15) cf. pro Sex.
Roscio 118; for mollitiae inertiaeque (6. 5) cf. Sallust, Catiline 52. 28. For
other conventional elements see 3. 8 n., 4. 4 n., 4. 7 n. See R. Ullmann,
La Technique des Discours, 61.
Prooemium : insinuatio
Appius impugns the motives of the tr. pi.
3 . 2. JZ unquam: see 4. 3. 3 n. for the introductory formula.
3 . 4 . iniuriis vestris: * wrongs suffered by you' not 'wrongs done by
you'. Appius contrasts the present and the past. In the past the
people may have suffered at the hands of the patres but their hardship
elicited much less activity from the tribunes than their present
affluence. Both Madvig and Housman wished to read nostris for vestris,
spoiling the point of the antithesis. For the subjective use of vester cf.
Delz, Thes. Ling. Lat., 'iniuria', 1676. 77 ff. Contrast 1. 59. 1.
3 . 6. opus quaerunt: so also Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 3. 81 'haec Graeci . . .
in singulos libros dispertiunt: opus enim q u a e r u n t . . . et tamen, ut
medici toto corpore curando minimae etiam parti si condoluit medent u r \ artifices, a general term for anyone practising a trade, is here
shown by the context to refer particularly to the doctors; cf. Propertius 2. 1. 5 8 ; Seneca, Dial. 7. 26. 8 ; et al. qui et, read by N
(Ver. is lacking here), has been variously corrected. After the pro
verbial opus quaerunt a simple connexion is expected introducing a
clause which will amplify and explain the laconic allusion of the
proverb. Neither quippe (Buttner, Luterbacher) nor quis et (Brakman,
Bayet) meets that need. Muretus' [qui] et (Gronovius) is better than
Conway's qui [et] because qui and the like are frequently interpolated
and corrupted in N . Here the preceding quaerunt facilitates what is at
any time a simple mistake (inquieti M . Muller).
3. 7. nisi. . . dicitis: omitted by Ver. as a result of homoeoteleuton
after agitis. T h e words are required to introduce the tribunes' supposed
objection which would be too impossibly abrupt otherwise. They are
also characteristically Ciceronian: cf. pro Sex. Roscio 82. Merguet
quotes more than fifty instances of the same idiom from Cicero's
speeches. For similar omissions in Ver. cf. 4. 8, 7. 1, 27. 7.
3 . 8. servis . . . domini: such mute obedience, so untypical of Greek
practice to judge from Aristophanes and Menander, was recommended
by Greek theory (Plato, Laws 6. 777). At Rome slaves did not enjoy
635
5-3-8
4 0 3 B.C.
403 B.C.
5- 4- 3
Tractatio I: Refutatio
(a) aequum
4. 3 . numquam: the alleged reason for the tribunes' opposition to
military pay, that it was unprecedented, disagrees with the narrative
of 4. 60. 3-4 where they are afraid that it will result in new and
oppressive taxes. L. is, however, fond of the Principle of the Dan
gerous Precedent which he uses to effect in Canuleius' speech (4. 4. 1)
and the discrepancy here may be seen as evidence that Claudius'
speech is a freely elaborate composition by L. himself.
4. 4 . opera sine emolumento: an old proverb which in the form 'the
labourer is worthy of his hire 5 is familiar from the New Testa
ment (Luke 10. 7; 1 Tim. 5. 18), but which goes back to classical
times. Mr. A. N . Bryan-Brown reminds me of Aeschines 3. 182-3
TTOXVV TTOVOV V7TO{JLLVaVTS . . . flTTjaCLV 8(tip(LV.
5- 4- 13
4 0 3 B.C.
403 B.C.
5-5- 7
struggle.' All four verbs are independent and of equal weight. For the
polysyndeton cf. 21. 16. 4 ; see Kuhnast, Liv. Syntax, 287.
5. 8. quid: Ver. omits the following quod and reads with N nunc
oblivisci. With that reading the text could only be punctuated quid
periculi differendo bello adimus? nunc oblivisci nos concilia patiuntur and
could only be understood as 'what risk is there, it may be objected, in
prolonging the w a r ? As things are at present the frequent Etruscan
meetings allow us to forget/ Which is nonsense, quite apart from the
grammatical difficulty of quid periculi = quod periculum. Appius' point
is that the frequent negotiations among the Etruscans indicate that
only a slight change of attitude on the part of Veii would result in
Etruria committing herself wholeheartedly to her support. Time is
short. T h e required sense was seen and restored by Petrarch.
5. 12. non hercule dissimilia: L. employs another Ciceronian TOTTOS (in
Catil. 1. 31).
Tractatio II: Confirmatio
(a) utile
6. 1. parta victoria frui: victoria frui means 'to enjoy the fruits of victory'
not 'to win a victory', parta, which is read by all the manuscripts,
including Ver., except for U, means that the victory has been won
(3. 62. 2), whereas parata ( U ; seeBurman on Petronius 16; cf. Ovid,
Heroid. 8.82) would mean that the victory was ready to be won but not
yet actually won. parta is right. In any case it would be premature to
enjoy the fruits of a victory which is still only parata. Claudius is re
minding the troops that they must win victories as well as enjoy them
afterwards.
6. 2. sicut aestivas aves: for the simile of migrant birds cf. Plato, Laws
952 d-e, where he classifies four types of travellers, including 'summer
business visitors who are like birds of passage taking wing in pursuit
of commerce and flying over the sea to other cities while the season
lasts'.
6. 3 . venandi: the analogy from hunting is old. T h e ancients regularly
advocated hunting as a good form of military training. Cf, e.g.,
Xenophon, Cyneg. 1. 18; Plato, Laws 823 f-824 a ; Aristotle, Politics
i256 b 23~26; Xenophon, Cyrop. 1. 2. 10; Anth. Pal. 14. 17, 6. 188
(Leonidas); Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 2. 161; Columella 1 Praef. 17.
In constrasting the fit huntsmen with the effete citizens Claudius
may also be alluding to Cicero's denunciation of Catiline's supporters
(2. 23), But the educative value of hunting was an element in Augustan
propaganda and is defended by Horace as promoting Romana militia
(Epist. 1. 18. 49 ff.; Sat. 2. 2. 10 ff.). Whether hunting was a pastime
of Romans in the fifth century or not is immaterial. T h e curious will
639
5-6. 3
403 B.C.
find the evidence set out by J. Aymard (Les Chasses Romaines, 25-41)
who shows that it was familiar and popular among the Etruscans
from an early date. What is important is that L. here invokes a literary
cliche, not an historical fact.
6. 4. navale helium: anachronistic, for at this date a Roman fleet was
not even an idle dream (4. 34. 6-7 n.; 5. 28. 1-5 n.; 7. 25-26;
8. 22-23 > s e e Thiel, Roman Seapower before the Second Punic War, 6 ff.).
It is therefore legitimate to suspect another oratorical commonplace,
for which Hesiod (W. D. 684) and Demosthenes (Philip. 1. 31) afford
suggestive, if distant, parallels.
6. 5. iuxta: cf. Tacitus, Agricola 22.
(b) possibile
6. 9. fame sitique: Veii did not so succumb and the inaccuracy may
be taken as a further proof that the whole speech is a free composition
by L. himself, fame sitique is a glib phrase which trips off the tongue
in such contexts (cf. Plautus, Most. 193; Rudens 312; Sallust, Jugurtha
89. 7; Cicero, de Finibus 1. 37, 5. 4 8 ; Tusc. Disp. 5. 98; 7. 35. 8,
28. 15. 4).
Conclusio: amplificatioinsinuatio
6. 14. fustuarium: the comparison between the agitators and the
offenders corresponds to the ninth locus communis of the ad Herennium
(2 49). The punishment was inflicted in the following manner. When
the offender was condemned, the tribune or commanding officer
touched him lightly with his baton (fastis) whereupon the rest of the
soldiers set upon him with sticks and dispatched him. If by any chance
he escaped or survived, he was prohibited from returning home. For
details see Polybius 6. 37. 1 ff. with Walbank's note; Cicero, Phil. 3. 14;
Porphyr. on Horace, Epist. 2. 1. 154; Veil. Pat. 2. 78. 3 ; Tacitus,
Annals 3. 21. 1 ; Mommsen, Strafrecht, 983-4. The antiquity of the
punishment and its etymology are both matters of dispute. Usener
(Rh. Mus. 56 (1901), 16-17) claimed that together with so many
other military institutions its origin was Etruscan but it is perhaps
more likely that it was introduced with the third-century reforms of
the army which laid particular emphasis on steady discipline in the
ranks, fustis, originally the commander's baton, is variously derived
but is perhaps to be connected with gr. dvpaos or Celtic b(h)ustis (see
M. Leumann, Hermes 55 (1920), 107-11; E. Fraenkel, Ind. Forsch. 40
(1922), 97-100; Kurylowicz, Melanges Vendryes, 204; Ernout-Meillet;
Walde-Hofmann).
6. 15. adsuestis, Quirites: Ver. read adsuestis audire, N adsuestis qui
audire. The question is simply whether N's qui is an interpolation
(cf. 10. 6 n.) or whether in the common archetype some other word
640
4 0 3 B.C.
5- 6. 15
64I
Tt
403 B.C.
5- 7- 5
(i) It is implied that the equites had a different census qualification
(the census equester) from the other members of the first class. This is
inconsistent with the provisions of the Servian Constitution set out in
i. 43. 1-2 where equites and pedites of the first class are assessed alike.
A distinct census equester, higher than that of the first class, is first
attested in 76 B.C. (Cicero, pro Q. Roscio 42) and may be presupposed
by the Lex Acilia of C. Gracchus (C.LL. i 2 . 2. 583) but was not in
existence when Polybius wrote 6. 20. 9 (where see Walbank's note).
The mention of the census equester by L. here is therefore a major
anachronism. On the other hand, the anachronism cannot have been
perpetrated by L. himself since under Augustus members of the census
equester were equites equo publico but none of them actually served as
cavalry. T h e title had become purely honorific, while the dis
tinction between equites equo publico and equites suis merentes had been
obliterated by disuse. It may thus be inferred that L.'s source was
writing between 130 and 40 B.C.
(2) The Servian Constitution provided for a cavalry establishment
of 1,800 but did not make any provision for the supplementation of
that number if additional cavalry were required by the military situa
tion. It is certain that in the Punic Wars R o m e depended heavily upon
supernumerary cavalry, members of the first class who were not en
rolled in the eighteen centuries of cavalry but who opted to provide
their own mounts and serve as cavalry in preference to being con
scripted as infantrymen. T h e need for such a voluntary supplementa
tion of the established cavalry must have occurred before the third
century (7. 25, 8; 9. 19. 1 ff.; 29. 1.3 ff.) and there seems no reason
to doubt that it originated during the Siege of Veii. Communications
with the isolated Roman garrisons at Veii would have required con
stant protection by an efficient cavalry escort against the harrassing
attacks of Etruscan skirmishers. T h e memory of such an innovation
would naturally be preserved: it is of a piece with the other military
reforms entailed by a prolonged siege-pay and winter service. The
volunteers, since service was expensive even if paid (7. 12 n.), will
have come from the ranks of the wealthiest members of the first class.
See further Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 258, 499; Gerathewohl, Die
Reiter, 8 ff.; J . B. Mispoulet, Rev. Phil. 8 (1884), 177-86; H . Hill,
Class. PhiL 25 (1930), 244-9; A.J.P. 60 (1939), 357-62 ; Roman Middle
Class, 16-19; E. Gabba, Athenaeum 29 (1951), 255-6; Walbank, loc.
cit.
7 . 7 . se aiunt nunc esse operamque: Ver., N. Ruperti hit on the true inter
pretation *h.e. sicut equites sese obtulerint ad militiam extraordinariam
ut equestrem in bello aciem ordinemque augeant, ita plebeios nunc
quum equitum alacritatem istam viderint, velle pedites esse pedestrique extra ordinem militia fungi q u u m a d h u c Quirites, vacui, otiosi,
642
403 B.C.
5-7-7
5- 7- 12
403 B.C.
402 B.C.
5.8.4
5- 9- 4
4 0 2 B.C.
the orders and it is hard to see the point of hominum. Perhaps ordinum
(Whibley).
9 . 5 . C. Servilius Ahala: his intervention is a duplication of the part which
he plays in 4. 57. 3 and resembles an episode in the life of Q . Servilius
Priscus (4. 26. 9). T h e train of his remarks is not altogether clear.
ad vos is picked up by in vobis animi, minas by in Us iuris, and animi
probably has its usual sense of courage or spirit. T should dearly like
to prove that your threats are as illegal as your behaviour is cowardly
(in that you only dare to speak up when the city is rent by dissensions).'
T h e difficulty lies with the sentence beginning sed nefas est. If it is taken
as rebutting the earlier sentence (i.e. 'but I will not take time now to
prove it because it is wrong to impede senatorial business'), we are
bound to assume that his revelation of the tribunes' malpractices
would be contrary to the Senate's resolutionan assumption which
has no warrant and little probability. It is better to put a strong stop
after esset and take the sentence as a protest put into the mouths of the
tribunes (sed = at enirn). ' "But it's wrong to thwart the Senate" you
say, and imply that you were justified in threatening anyone who tried
to stand in the way of the Senate's resolutions. All right. You stop
trying to exploit the situation and either my colleagues will resign
or I will appoint a dictator.' For the order collegae out. . . aut (ego)
dicam cf Praef. 4.
ne = nae 'to be sure', here as often with a personal pronoun (cf.
Cicero, deFinibus 3. 11: see Kuhner-Stegmann 2. 1. 796). T h e subjunc
tive experirer is conditional: T would gladly make trial of. . .'.
9. 7. terriculis: the word is used once else by L. also in a reported
speech (34. 11. 7). It is a revival of an archaic word employed by
Accius and Afranius, not found in any of the late Republican prose
writers.
10. 1. L. Valerio : 4. 49. 7 n. M . Furio : 1. 2 n. M\ Aemilio : 4. 53. 1 n.
Cn. Cornelio: 4. 58. 6 n., 56. 2 n.
For the iteration of both Cornelius and Fabius see 4. 61. 4 n., where
it is suggested that the discrepancy with the Capitoline Fasti, who list
Cornelius I I I and Fabius II under this year, is to be explained by the
supposition that L. is here following Licinius Macer. Such a supposition
would be in line with the second tribunate ascribed to Camillus (1.2 n.).
K. Fabio: 4. 61. 4 n.
All five were men of an experience and service that contrasted
sharply with the evident youth and incompetence of their predecessors.
If the defeat at Veii is factual, it would be reasonable to suppose that
Rome would call back to office her most distinguished generals.
L. lulius Iullus: 16. 1, L.f. Vopisci n., a son of the consular tribune
of 438 (4. 16. 7 f f . ) .
646
401 B.C.
5- ">. 3
5.
4 0 1 B.C.
io. i i
401 B.C.
5- " 2
5- it- 6
401 B.C.
going back at least to Herodotus (5. 97) and perhaps earlier (cf.
Homer, Iliad 5. 6 3 ; Thucydides 2. 12. 3 with Gomme's n.). It became
almost proverbial also in L a t i n : cf. Cicero,pro Caelio 18.
accusatorem: as L. introduces it, the prosecution seems to be the work
of all three tribunes. Hence accusatores (Giers) but, as elsewhere, L.
has taken over an embryonic speech from his source without completely
adjusting it to its new surroundings. In Licinius Macer it may safely
be assumed that only one accusator spoke at a time. T h e singular
should be kept.
fugam . . . Vergini: note the elaborate triple chiasmus.
11. 7. compecto: 'by mutual agreement'.
11. 10. praeiudicium: 3. 40. 11 n.
collegis: collegiis N ; parallelism with 11 demands collegis (Petrarch)
not collegio (Walters).
11. 1 1 . remotos: 'removed from office' not 'exiled'.
11. 12. confossos: apparently legal slang 'worsted'. Only here in L.,
for effect. Cf. Val. Max. 8. 1 absol. 11 causa quamquam gravissimis
criminibus erat confossa, septies ampliata . . . est.
populi iudicium: anachronistic (2. 35. 5 n.).
11. 14. cum fuga ac pavore trepidum, plenum volnerum: Fugner's trans
position of the manuscript text is certain, fuga and pavor are often
linked together (e.g., 38. 2); volnera and pavor never, so that the correc
tion plenum volnerum ac pavoris (Gronovius, Crevier, Ruperti, Drakenborch) can command little support. No other conjecture {a pavore
Seyffert; cum pavore Madvig) so easily satisfies the linguistic and palaeographical requirements.
11. 15. caput. . . detestatusque: 30. 20. 17, 39. 51. 12.
11. 16. minime . . . arment: the TOTTOS is taken over in full from Demo
sthenes, de Falsa Leg. 80.
admovere: 'lay hands on'. Hence often in erotic contexts, e.g. Propertius 1. 3. 16; Ovid, Ars 3. 134.
12. 1. Martem: cf. Cicero,pro Sestio 12 ;pro Milone 5 6 ; 7. 8. 1, 8. 23. 8,
3 1 - 512. 3. legem agrariam: 2. 41. 3 n.
12. 4. ad exitum rei: ad exitum spei, which is read by the majority of
editors, including Gronovius, Conway, and Bayet, would have to mean
'until all their hopes were finished' and, as a phrase, is unparalleled.
In fact, however, it is only the reading of IT and the archetype had
ad exitum rei which gives excellent sense. T h e tribunes sarcastically
comment on the Roman military success which has been so pro
nounced that no war has reached a definite solution. For the expression
cf, 3. 53. 2 ; Quintilian 4. 2. 41, and for the repetition res... rei, a feature
of L.'s earlier writing, cf. 1. 60. 1, 2. 31. 7, 35. 4, 2. 18. 2 (Pettersson).
650
401 B.C.
5- J 2. 4
militia: the plain abl., for militiae or in militia (2. 58. 4) is found
only here in L . (cf. Varro, Men. 223) and is corrupt. Insert <(m).
12. 5. oppida . . .sunt', 'towns were attacked but not besieged'. For
nee = nee tamen cf. 3. 55. 1. T h e Romans made sudden assaults in the
hope of catching the towns off their guard but did not embark on pro
tracted sieges, of which they had already had their fill at Veii. T h e
natural positions of many of the cities made them in any case virtually
impregnable. T h e sole exception was Anxur which was not only attacked
but, when the initial assault failed, invested. Anxur was in a special
category, being an isolated but key fortress which the Romans had
recently lost to the Volscians. We should therefore put a semicolon,
with Bayet, after situm, thereby making Anxur an exception not to a
rule of neither attacking nor besieging towns (i.e. (jiecy oppugnata
Valla, Ruperti, Madvig) but simply to a disinclination to engage in
sieges.
12. 8-17. Religious Sanctions Taken against Veii (400-397)
Purely political and military measures undertaken against Veii have
failed. T h e Romans attribute their failure to divine displeasure and
take such steps as are open to them to remedy the situation : the lecti
stemium (13. 6 n.), the seer of Veii (15. 4 n.), and the Delphic oracle
(16. 9-11 n.). T h e first and last of these are likely enough to be
authentic facts, even if the circumstances have been doctored to the
extent of relating them directly to the issue of the war with Veii
whereas the character both of the lectistemium and of the consultation of
Delphi suggests that they were motivated not by the protraction of
the Veian War but by a series of wasting plagues. T h e story of the
seer of Veii, on the other hand, belongs to the realm of folk-lore rather
than historical fact. In addition the Annales evidently provided a few
military and pontifical (13. 1, 13. 4, 17. 3) details, from which R o m a n
historians developed a continuous narrative. T h e paucity of facts
about the siege itself favours the belief that it was suspended in con
sequence of the enfeebled state of Rome herself. L. could not allow
this because for him the siege had to last ten whole years and because
he was anxious to create a religious climate which needed only a
fatalis dux in the person of Camillus for Rome to be led to victory.
Accordingly he alternates passages of religious and military narrative
(religious: 13. 4-8, 14. 2-5, 15. 1-12, 16. 8-17. 5; military: 13. 9-13,
14. 6-7, 16. 1-7, 17. 6-10).
There are various pointers that L. now abandons Licinius Macer
in favour of Valerius Antias once again as his source. There is a clear
contradiction between 14. 5 and 10. 1 (Camillus iterum) and between
13. 3 (n.) (centuriae) and 18. 2 (tribubus). Also no amount of textual
surgery will bring the magistrate lists of 12. 10 and 13. 3 into line
651
5. 1 2 . 8
400 B.C.
with 18. 2 or make aetate iam gravis (12. n ) the equivalent oi exactae
aetatis (18. i ) . It might at first sight seem paradoxical to suggest that
L.'s source for the consular tribunate of a plebeian, and a Licinius
at that, should not be Licinius Macer but it is evident that ch. 18 is
more partisanly in favour of P. Licinius than ch. 12 where the main
source hints that Licinius was elected not through any merits of his
own but through the popularity of his kinsman Cn. Cornelius. T h e
exact point of transition cannot be recovered, perhaps at 12. 3, since
12. 3-4repeats the argument of 10. 5-6, or at 12. 8.
See Burck 111-15.
12. 9. unus ex plebe: 18. 5 n. Notice that it is not necessarily implied
here that Licinius was the first consular tribune elected from the
plebeians. Licinius' family is uncertain. He is said to be afrater of Cn.
Cornelius Cossus (10. 1 n.), a relationship confirmed by the garbled
KOCKJOS AiKiwios of Plutarch (Camillus 4. 6; cf. 15. 3 n.) but whether
that means that he was a son of P. Cornelius Cossus adopted by the
Licinii (4. 52. 4 n.) or that he was a half-brother or even a cousin of
Cn. Cornelius is obscure. At all events his relationship with the Cornelii
shows him to be no revolutionary and the subsequent radicalism
attributed to him and his family are supposititious, the product of the
normal sympathies of the Licinii. He would have been a most accept
able candidate to the patres. See Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 1. 9 5 ;
Munzer, Rom. Adelsparteien, 10-13; R.E., 'Licinius (43)'.
usurpandi iuris causa: 4. 44. 4 n.
12. 10. ceteri patricii creati: a deep confusion persists about the college
of this and the following year. Licinius Macer (18. 2 n.) evidently
listed only four in addition to LiciniusL. Titinius, P. Maenius, Cn.
Genucius, L. Atilius. His source may be assumed to have been the libri
lintei and cannot be relied on. T h e Capitoline Fasti give
[P. Man]lius M.f. Cn.n. Vulso
[L. Titinijus L.f. M ' . n, Pansa Saccus
P. Maelius Sp.f. C n . Capitolinus
Sp. Fu[r]ius L.f. Sp.n. Medullinus
L. Poblilius L.f. Voler. n. Philo Vulscus.
It might be expected that L.'s list would tally with the Fasti if L. is
following Valerius: for Valerius is less idiosyncratic than Licinius.
But, in the manuscripts at least, there are striking divergences.
Manilius for Manlius and P. Titinius for L. T. (2. 15. 1 n . : note the
surrounding P's) may be mere errors of transcription but Popilius for
Publilius and L. Furius for Sp. Furius look like genuine variants. T h e
numeration of the consular tribunates of the great L. Furius Medul
linus given both by L. (Val. Ant.) and by the Fasti (4.44. 1 n.) rules out
the possibility that it is he who is masquerading in disguise as a
652
400 B.C.
5. 12. 10
candidate for office this year and if L. Furius Medullinus is the right
reading here he must be another otherwise unknown member of the
family (Munzer, R.E., 'Furius (68)'). Historically it is more likely
that he was Sp. rather than L. since the confusion of two identically
named persons was usually avoided but there is nothing to prove that
L. is not what Valerius Antias and/or Livy wrote. Sigonius emended
Popilius to Publilius. At first sight the cognomen Vulscus would support
the change. The Publilii, as the locality of the tribus Publilia shows,
came from Volscian territory and it is likely that they were of Volscian
origin and migrated to Rome, not, as Schur thought, in the fourth
century but in the early fifth since they provided a notorious tribune in
472 (2. 55. 411.). T h e Popilii, on the other hand, are not represented
in the Fasti before M. Popillius Laenas, consul in 359. O n that evidence,
Publilius might seem to be the right reading here: the name was
vulgarly written as Poplilius (C.I.L. i 2 . 1526; cf. Publicola and Popli-.
cola). But the cognomina are misleading. Philo, added by the Fasti,
is a transparent device to provide a link between the early Publilii
and the Publilii Philones, while Vulscus instead of being an indica
tion of origin is probably no more than a misunderstanding of Volusus.
L. could have written Popilius.
T h e real difficulty lies in the statement ceteri patricii. T h e Titinii
are plebeian (3. 54. 13 n . ; a tr. pi. in 192), so also are the Maelii (4. 12.
1 n.) and the Popilii or Publilii. Only Manlius and Furius qualify as
patricians.
12. 1 1 . nullis: the quaestorship had only been open to plebeians since
420 (4. 43. 12).
12. 12. triplex stipendium: 7. 12 n., but Cornelius had not been con
sular tribune in the year when pay for the cavalry was instituted. The
clear discrepancy is a further proof of change of source at this point.
Valerius Antias must have dated the innovation to 404 (4. 61. 4) or
401 (10. 1), not 4 0 2 .
13. 1. insignis . . .fuerit: prodigies from the Annales (3. 5. 14 n.). For
other prodigies concerning the Tiber see 4. 49. 2 n.
annona: 2. 34. 2 n.
13. 3 . M. Veturius: for the form of the name see 3. 8. 2 n. Ti.f. Sp.N.
Crassus Cicurinus according to the Fasti, which would make him a
nephew of the consular tribune of 417 (4. 47. 7 n . ) . For the whole
college of this year see Beloch, Rom. Geschichte, 252.
plebeios: all five are plebeian, unlike the five patricians in the preced
ing year.
omnes . . . centuriae: 18. 2 n.
M. Pomponium: 3. 54. 13 n., probably the first of the Pomponii to
emerge to distinction. L.f. L.n. Rufus according to the Fasti, but the
653
5- 1 3 - 3
399 B.C.
399 B.C.
5- 13. 5
55
5- 13-6
399 B.C.
399 B.C.
5- 13- 6
Tloaeihcbvu L. clearly implies that there were only three lecti with two
gods apiece. In view of this, and since L. and D.H. must depend
ultimately on the same source identified as Piso by D.H., editors have
transposed the text and written Herculem et Dianam (Wolfflin, Luterbacher, Weissenborn-Muller; cf. 22. 10. 9). If the problem were a
purely religious one, L. or his source might have been influenced by
the fact that Apollo, Latona, and Diana do appear as a triad (Pliny,
N.H. 36. 34; C.I.L. 6. 32) and rearranged the order of the gods as a
result. But the problem is linguistic. This arrangement and linking of
the nouns has no parallel in L. (Kuhnast, Liv. Syntax, 286 ff.). Wolfflin's
transposition should therefore be accepted. T h e variation between
-que, et, and atque is only significant stylistically (Catterall, T.A.P.A.
69 (1938), 301); cf. 6. 22. 5, 8. 37. 6, 9. 38. 8. For detailed discussion
of these obscure points see Pascal, Riv. di FiloL 22 (1894), 2 7 2 ^ 5
Wissowa, Religion, 421 ff.; R.E., 'lectisternium'; Bayet, Les Origines
de VHercule Romain, 260 ff.; W. Hoffman, Philologus, Suppl. 27 (1934),
68 ff.; H. Lyngby, Beitrage z. Topographie des Forum-Boarium-Gebietes,
5 3 - 5 6 ; J . Gage, UApollon Romain, 168 ff.; Latte 242-4.
13. 7. tota urbe: the Bank-Holiday atmosphere, evoked by this de
scription of friendly hospitality throughout Rome, is specially said
by D.H. 12. 9 to have been an addition by Piso (fr. 25 P.). It is false.
O n other occasions lectisternia were not accompanied by such scenes
of general rejoicing with the release of prisoners and the suspension of
crime. Piso took it from Greek models. At the Dionysia and the
Thesmophoria it was customary rovg Seoyxarra? acfrUadat, rov Seafiov
(ZDemosthenes614.
2 3 ; Plutarch, Moralia 303; Athenaeus 14. 640 a;
see Headlam on Herodas 5. 80). Since the lectisternium was a Greek
ritual, it was reasonable to suppose that it would be attended by the
normal Greek holiday. But if the concept was Greek, the picture is
Roman and recalls in particular the scenes during the Saturnalia
(Macrobius 1. 7 passim', Arrian, Epict. 4. 1. 5 8 ; Athenaeus, loc. cit.).
It is worth noticing that L. intensifies the Roman and the religious
character by introducing two extra phenomena of which there is no
trace in Piso. iurgiis ac litibus temperatum is borrowed from the prohibition
814432
657
uu
5. 13- 7
399 B.C.
in force during sacrifices (Cicero, deDivin. i. 102 : cf. Notiz. Scavi, 1928,
392 ne quis litiget neve rixam faciat). vinctis dempta vincula (in Piso the
holiday was for , i.e. slaves) is paralleled by the rules
connected with the house of the Flamen Dialis (Aul. Gell. 10. 15. 8
vinctum si aedes eius (Jlaminis) introierit solvi necessum est et vincula per impluvium in tegulas subduci atque indeforas in viam demitti).
13. 9. antea: 8. 5 ff.
13. 12. Punctuate nee ita multo post iam palantes veluti forte oblati;
populatores Capenatis agri reliquias pugnae absumpsere. oblati denotes the
victims who are attacked, the Gapenates (cf. 15. 4, 9. 31. 7, 10. 19. 16,
40. 55. 4 ) : they are a wandering rabble (palantes; cf. 2. 26. 3, 4. 55. 4)
who form a chance prey for the Roman foragers {veluti forte oblati;
cf. 24. 48. 7). T h e numerous emendations of the sentence ranging
from Grevier's quingenti (for veluti) to Madvig's velut tati forent are
neither necessary nor beneficial. See C.Q. 9 (1959), 283.
14. 1. communicatum: 4. 54. 7.
14. 3 . priore . . . proximo: L. is thinking of consular rather than
calendar years. We are still in the year 399 but L. regards it as closed
{haec eo anno acta) and so can call the insanabilis pernicies (13. 5) an
event of last year {proximo anno) and the exceptional winter (13. 1)
the winter of the year before that {priore anno).
14. 4 . libris fatalibus: 15. 11. T h e term is wider than and inclusive of
the Sibylline books. It would also include the books of Etruscan
discipline.
discrimina . . . confundi: the distinction between plebeian and patri
cian gentes was being blurred by destroying all patrician privilege and
allowing patricians and plebeians to be equally eligible for supreme
office. For the question of plebeian gentes see 2. 1. 10 n.
14. 5. L. Valerium: 4. 49. 7 n.
M. Valerium: 24. 1, M.f. M.n. Lactucinus Maximus according to
the Fasti. His father is unknown unless he is to be credited with the
triumph recorded by the Fasti for 437 (4. 20. 1 n.). For the cognomen
Lactucinus cf. Pliny, JV".//. 19. 59.
M. Furium: 1.211., 10. i n . L. Furium: 4. 51. 1 n.
Q. Servilium: 8. 1 n. Q. Sulpicium: 8. 1 n. Both are given cognomina
but not at 8. 1 which is suggestive of a different source.
The Alban Lake
T h e tunnelling of an outflow for the Alban Lake is a matter of history.
T h e tunnel survives to this day and still functions. T h e entrance is
below Gastel Gandolfo, the outlet at La Mola. T h e total length of the
tunnel is some 8,125 ft., with a height of approximately 5ft. 3 in., and
an average width of 3 ft. 11 in. From La Mola the stream flows above
658
398 B.C.
5- ! 5
ground for some 3 miles before joining the Tiber. Its date, its purpose,
and its connexion with the Siege of Veii require, however, detailed
discussion.
The existing stone-work provides no answer to the question when
the tunnel was constructed. The square arch at the outflow dates from
the first quarter of the first century B.C. but there are extensive stretches
of earlier, undatable masonry (Lugli, Tecnica Edilizia, 358). An attempt
to establish the date of the construction was made (e.g. by de la
Blanchere) by connecting it with the cuniculi built for drainage pur
poses widely throughout Etruria and Latium from the eighth century
onwards. In consequence many scholars hold that L.'s date for the
emissarium is too late and that in reality it was constructed by the
Etruscans in the sixth century. This view contradicts the unanimous
testimony of the ancients (Cicero, de Divin. 1. 100; Diodorus 14. 9 3 ;
D.H. 12. 11-17; Plutarch, Camillus 5 - 6 ; Val. Max. 1. 6. 3), and has
not been established archaeologically. There was no question of drain
ing the Alban Lake. The waters diverted off by the emissarium were
not used for irrigation nor is it easy, despite L.'s abundasset (15. 11 n.),
to believe that there was a need to regulate the level of the lake against
a danger of overflowing. The lake is fed by no springs or streams and
the lowest point in the perimeter is a good 300 ft. above the level of
the inflow of the emissarium. On the other hand, there was a real
danger of seepage through the porous strata into the country lying at
the foot of the crater. Swampy ground meant malaria. It does not
demand too much of the Romans (or the Greek experts at Delphi) to
have realized this and to have undertaken works of public hygiene
as well as of ritualistic piety (the lectisternia) to combat the severe
pestilences with which they were currently afflicted.
In short, the case for an earlier date for the construction of the
emissarium is not proved. 398 (or, absolutely, 394) provides an ad
mirable context. None the less the connexion with the Siege of Veii
at first sight seems bewildering. The Alban Lake lies many miles to
the south of Veii, in territory which had long been Latin and had
never been under the control of Veii. It is, of course, true that the
Romans, like the Athenians, could not have been expected to win a
war when crippled with plague. But the psychological importance
attached to the building of the emissarium suggests a profounder con
nexion. If the Romans really did breach Veii by a cuniculus (19. i o n . )
and if at the same time a tunnel was being dug at Lake Albano, the
successful outcome of two superficially similar operations would in
evitably be linked in the minds of the superstitious.
See Piranesi, Antichitd d9Albano; C. Merkel, Die Ingenieurtechnik,
150-3; de la Blanchere, Daremberg-Saglio, s.v. 'emissarium'; T. Ashby,
P.B.S.R. 5 (1910), 277; A. Celli, Die Malaria, 52; J. Hubaux 121-49;
659
398 B.C.
5- 15
G. Baffioni, Stud. Etruschi 27 (1959), 303 ff.; also Gage, Mel. d'Arch.
etd'Hist. 66 (1954), 39 fT.
15. 1. multa nuntiari: the historic infinitive appears to have been read
by the archetype and, since multa certainly was, the text may be kept.
Luterbacher, however, was attracted by U ' s reading multi nuntiavere
which gives a phrase from the prodigy style (cf. 28. 11. 3, 31. 12. 6,
32. 9. 3 , 4 0 . 19. 2).
altitudinem: the flooding of the Alban Lake was a n ancient myth.
It was alleged to have occurred in the reign of Allodius (D.H. 1. 71. 3)
or Amulius (Dio Cassius = Zonaras 7. 1). It is possible that there
was a superstition that the flooding occurred in cycles, like the Nile
(D.H. 12. I O - I I ) , a n d that such a superstition was exploited to ex
pedite the construction of the emissarium. See Pease on Cicero, de
Divin.
1. 100.
15.3.
398 B.C.
5- '5- 3
5- 15-4
398 B.C.
398 B.C.
5- *5-
10
be kept secret is often emphasized, cf, e.g., Pliny, JVM. 3. 65. I cannot
find any exact parallel for the opposite offence. Cf. 2. 36. 2
1 5 . 1 1 . librisfatalibus: 14. 4 n. It does not require sensitive ears to hear
in what follows the solemn ring of prophecy. The desertion by the
gods of Veii has, as le Bas saw, overtones of the desertion of Troy (cf.
Homer, Iliad 22. 213; Virgil, Aeneidi. 351-2) but it is in the language
especially that the awe-inspiring notes are struck. The present passive
victoriam dari, where a personal subject and an active future might be
expected, is characteristic of the language of prophecy. The events of
the future are envisaged as already taking place, victoria dari itself is
rare, occurring outside L. (cf. 16. 10, 3. 8. 11) only in Ennius, Ann.
88 V. and Coelius Antipater fr. 26 P. In both passages can be
heard the tone of Remembrance Day. Unless L. has misconstrued the
purport of the oracle, abundasset must mean not 'had overflowed', for
that eventuality would have presaged victory for Veii, but 'had flooded,
i.e. risen to a great height' (cf. Frontinus, de Aquaed. 94; Varro, de Re
Rust. 3. 5. 2). The deliberate sacral character of the prophecy may help
to elucidate the baffling ut quando . . . abundasset, turn presented by the
manuscripts. It would seem as if either ut (Duker, Crevier, Madvig,
Conway) or quando (Walters, Bayet) was superfluous, but, as Wittmann (Jahrb. f. Class. Phil. 90 (1863), 250) divined, ponderous
repetitiousness is of the essence in such pastiches (cf. 1. 24. 3 n.).
quando should be taken as indefinite 'at any time' and ut quando = ut
primum quando 'as soon as at any time'. Analogies may be found in
utsemel (6. 32.8) or utsubito (Ovid, Heroides 12. 137), although KiihnerStegmann (2. 364-5) offer no exact parallel for ut quando.
16. 1. L. lulius: 10. 1 n. L. Furius: 4. 51. 1 n. For the corruption of
the praenomen cf. 2. 15. 1 n.
L. Sergius: M'.f. L.n. according to the Fasti, a son of the consular
tribune of 404 (4. 61. 4 n.). For his embassy to Delphi see 28. 2.
A. Postumius: probably to be identified with the consular tribune of
381 (6. 22. 5) and censor of 366 (7. 1. 8). His filiation is nowhere given
by the Fasti which preserve here only . . . Regille]nsis. Together with
his brothers, Sp. (26. 2) and L. (6. 1. 8), he is likely to be a son of the
consular tribune of 426 (4. 31. 1 n.). The cognomen Regillensis borne by
successive generations of Postumii was traditionally supposed to have
been earned by the victor of the Battle of Lake Regillus (2. 19. 3 n.)
but such honorific cognomina are anachronistic. The provenance and
even the tribe of the Postumii are unknown except for the faqt that the
name is not Etruscan (Schulze 215). The cognomen recalls the Inregillensis or Regillanus of the Claudii (2. 16. 4 n.); they may also have
migrated to Rome from the Sabine town of Regillum. See Miinzer,
R.E., 'Postumius (57)'.
663
5- *6. I
397 B.C.
397 B.C.
5- 6- 9 ' 1 1
hello confecto (cf. Caesar, B.C. 3. 18. 4 ; L. 4. 43. 3, 42. 14. 1). T h e Greek
origin of the prophecy is betrayed not merely by cave (cf. Herodotus
7. 148. 3 K(f>a\r)v 7T(f)v\a;o and other passages collected by Fraenkel,
Horace, 117-18) but by the remarkable use of exsUngues. T h e metaphor
of extinguishing water is not Latin. It is used here for the first time
(and only here in L.; cf Aul. Gell. 12. 1.8). In Greek, by contrast,
it is early established (cf. Aeschylus, Agamemnon 958 with Fraenkel's
note). It is, after all, hardly surprising that a reputedly Delphic oracle
should have begun its circulation in Greek and then been translated
into Latin. See Parke-Wormell, Delphic Oracle, 2, no. 440; I. Kajanto,
God and Fate in Livy, 28.
17. 2. intermissum: cf. 1. 4 where the misfortunes of Veii are also
attributed to a nefas caused by the interruption of the game (sollemnia
quae intermitti nefas). T h e parallelism is deliberate.
vitio creatos: improperly constituted magistrates could not properly
conduct religious ceremonies. For interregnum see 3. 8. 2 n. T h e facts
as a whole are archival. For ihtferiae Latinae see 1. 31. 3 n . ; Wissowa,
Religion, 1246.; Latte Religionsgeschichte, 144-6; Sordi 169-70. T h e
cult of Juppiter Latiaris on the Alban mount was of great antiquity
and the list of communities originally participating in it (Pliny, N.H.
3. 69) shows that it did not include the whole of Latium but only those
communities grouped round the mountain. There were notable
absentees among the Latins, such as Lavinium, Ardea, and Tusculum,
who had cults and leagues of their own. Rome herself cannot have been
a founder-member but the disappearance of so many Alban cities
and her own expansion enabled her to exploit her ancestral connexion
with Alba Longa and gradually to take over the cult, until the distinc
tion between Alban and Latin was obscured and Rome supplied the
priests and Varro could speak of the members of the league as Latini
populi quibus ius fuit cum Romanis. T h e slow transformation accounts
for the discrepant dates of its original foundation. Bob. Cicero, pro
Plancio 9. 23 attributes the league to the Prisci Latini and D.H. 4. 49. 1
to Tarquinius Priscus while the actual Fasti (Inscr. Ital. 13, p. 143 ff.)
ascribe the institution of the feriae Latinae to the Decemvirs. Each has
a grain of truth. T h e festival will go back to the earliest inhabitants
of Latium but its organization seems to owe something to Etruscan
influence (Latte, loc. cit.). T h e name feriae Latinae, however, implying
both the participation of all Latins and not Albans only and the
predominance of Rome, must be later. See also 19. 1 n.
17. 6. Voltumnae: 4. 23. 5 n.
17. 7. antea: 1. 4 n.
17. 8. maxime iam in parte: for the historical basis of this assertion see
34. 8 n. T h e manuscripts here read maxime in ea parte Etruriae . . . novos
665
5.
17-8
397 B.C.
accolas Gallos esse to which it has been rightly objected that ea parte
Etruriae must refer either to Veii or to the rest of Etruria. If it refers to
Veii, it is both untrue since the Gauls had not yet penetrated so far
south, and preposterous in that it makes the reason that deterred the
rest of Etruria from helping not that they were themselves menaced
by the Gauls but that they were afraid to advance into a land which
was swarming with Gauls. If, on the other hand, it refers to the rest
of Etruria, it conveys the impression that the Gauls were already dis
seminated throughout the whole of Etruria, including Veii, although
their chief concentration was still in the non-Veientane section. T h a t
is historically false. Various conjectures (invasisse in earn partem . . . invisitatam. novos . . . esse Madvig; proxime enim earn partem . . . esse Anon.
ap. Weissenborn-Miiller; maxima in parte Luterbacher, Conway) and
repunctuations (negare maxime. in ea parte . . . esse Ruperti, Lallemand,
Ross bach; negare; maxime in ea parte Etruriae (sc. negare). gentem . . .
J a c . Gronovius, Weissenborn, Bayet) have been advocated. Of these
Ruperti's is satisfactory. Although the hyper baton nunc . . . maxime
might seem exaggerated, the idiom antea . . . nunc (tamen) maxime is
familiar (4. 3. 3 n.) and appropriate to the context, ea parte will, then,
refer to the rest of Etruria excluding Veii. Conway excises Gallos
without due cause. In over a third of the instances where L. uses
accola it is in conjunction with some part of Gallu
17. 10. coeptae: there is a tendency in Latin for a passive inf. governed
by coepi to attract coepi into the same voice: e.g. whereas earlier authors
would write urbs aedificari coepit, L. writes urbs aedificari coepta (est)
(55. 2; see Lofstedt, Syntactical 2. 123). Here mitescere is logically the
equivalent of a passive (e.g. pacari) and should deter any attempt to
emend coeptae to coepere (Weissenborn, Wolfflin, Luterbacher).
18. The Election of P. Licinius
There are manifest indications that L. owes the highly flattering
account of the older Licinius' withdrawal in favour of his son to the
chronicler of the family, Licinius Macer. One inconsistency in par
ticular may be noted. It is implied by 18. 2 that the college of consular
tribunes for 400 comprised in all five persons who were re-elected in
the present year whereas the list for that year (12. i o n . ) from Valerius
Antias has six names, of which possibly only one overlaps with the
names given here. See also 19. 2 n.
Little faith can be pinned on the story of the younger Licinius'
office. T h e editors of the Capitoline Fasti firmly opted for the elder
(. . . E]squilinus II) and agreed in that with Diodorus (14. 90. 1), while
the names of his colleagues are plainly corrupt. T h e tradition may
have been old, founded on such stories as the desire of Periander
to resign in favour of his son, or it may have been invented to supply
666
396 B.C.
5-i8
a link in the family pedigree between the older Licinius and G. Licinius
Stolo. T h e manner of his substitution for his father is unconstitutional
and it is naive to believe that the latter should have aged so pre
cipitately in the course of three years (Mlinzer, R.E., 'Licinius (43)').
T h e story is also designed to illustrate a point of law (18. 5 n.).
Genucius' death (18. 8) is taken over from the fate of one of his
descendants, the consul ambushed in 362 (7. 6. 9). T h e contents of
the whole chapter are, therefore, to be treated with the greatest reserve.
See Burck 115.
18. 1. praerogativa . . . creant: so the manuscripts; cf. 18. 2 iure vocatis
tribubus; 10. 22. 1 et praerogativae et primo vocatae omnes centuriae consulem
dicebant. U n d e r the late Republic in the comitia centuriata one of the
centuries of the first class was selected by lot to record its vote first.
It was called the centuria praerogativa and its vote was regarded as
ominous (18. 3 n.). How old the custom was is uncertain but 10. 22. 1
(296 B.C.) is evidence that at that date the sex suffragia or six oldest
centuries of equites voted first as of right and were called praerogativae
(1. 43. n n.). T h e change to a single century chosen by lot presumably
was effected by a reform of the comitia in the third century and was
democratic in intention. T h e evidence for there having been six
praerogativae in early times is admittedly slight but seems to have been
part of the Roman constitutional tradition since the system was re
newed when special praerogativae centuriae were allotted in honour of
G. and L. Caesar and Germanicus, as is attested by the Tabula
Hebana (Tibiletti, Principe e Magistrati, 58 n. 2). They may also have
been discussed in a mutilated note of Festus (290 L. 'praerogativae').
10. 22. 1 is also a Licinian passage and it follows that we should
emend the impossible praerogativa ... creant to praerogativae . . . creant and
understand by them the Sex Suffragia. Even if praerogativa . . . creat
(an anachronistic allusion to the procedure after the reform) was the
right reading, L. (or Licinius Macer) would still be describing the
procedure of the comitia centuriata. Why then does he write iure vocatis
tribubus apparently describing an election in the comitia tributa ? In the
reformed comitia the centuries were correlated with tribes and referred
to by the name of the tribe, iuniorum or seniorum; cf. 24. 7. 12, 26. 22. 2,
27. 6. 3. Other examples of the centuries of the reformed comitia
centuriata being called tribes are collected and discussed by Walbank
on Polybius 6. 14. 7 and it is these that must be meant by L.'s use of
tribus here. See also Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 290 n. 3 ; Staveley,
AJ.P- 74 (1953), * * ; J-R.S. 43 (1953). 34; G.Meier, R.E., Suppl. 8,
'praerogativa centuria'; U . Hall, Historia 13 (1964), 279 n. 49.
18. 2. L. Titinium, P. Maenium, Cn. Genucium, L. Atilium: so the manu
scripts but there are two difficulties. We expect the names to tally
with the college of 400 (12. i o n . ) when Licinius was consular tribune
667
5- i8. 2
396 B.C.
396 B.C.
5. 18. 3
5- 19-23
396 B.C.
396 B.C.
5- 19-23
natural conclusion is that the rest of the story is taken from Valerius
Antias: either 19. 1 or 19. 3 would be an easy place for the switch
over to be made. It has been pointed out that the Scipionic elements
would come easily from the pen of an annalist who wished to do
honour to another Cornelius, Sulla.
The ancients at least did not find the treatment unsatisfactory, for
the passage was often imitated in antiquity. Cf, e.g., for 19. 3
Claudian, Bell. Get. 435 ff.; for 20. 4 Tacitus, Hist. 1. 13; for 21. 9
Tacitus, Germania 3 ; for 21. 15 Tacitus, Annals 4. 39. 1.
The principal works to be consulted are: for the legends of Veii,
J. Gage, Huit recherches, 73 ff., 143 ff.; Hubaux; J. Bayet, tome 5,
App. 128 ff.; for Scipionic and later elements in the figure of Camillus,
O. Hirschfeld, KL Schriften, 273 ff.; E. Taubler, Klio 12 (1912),
219 ff.; A. Momigliano, C.Q. 36 (1942), 111-20; for L.'s sources and
treatment, Soltau 175-6; Burck 109. See also Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 297 ff.; P. Burger, Sechzig Jahre aus der alteren Geschichte
Roms; Miinzer, R.E.y Turius (44)'.
19. 1. ludi Latinaeque: 17.211. ludi and feriae amount to the same thing
holidaybut by later convention ludi came to be reserved for the
public games (scaenici, in circo) which became a regular feature of
Roman holidays. In 396, however, such ludi were not a feature of
Roman festivals, so that the distinction between the ludi and the
feriae implied here is anachronistic.
appetebant: only here in L. with ace. of motion towards. The use is
rare elsewhere (Cicero, ad Brut. 1. 2. 1; Apuleius, Met. 4. 8) and sets
a highflown tone for what is to follow; cf. 7. 26. 5.
19. 2 . fatalis dux: so also of Scipio (22. 53. 6, 30. 28. 11). Camillus
stands in the same relationship tofatum as does Aeneas. The expression
and the conception behind it may go back to Ennius.
servandaeque patriae: servare patriam was originally a military citation
(9. 4. 11-13, 21. 46. 10, 22. 14. io, 23. 11. 3 et al.) which gradually
spread into ordinary parlance (Cicero, Phil. 13. 46; pro Sestio 4 1 ;
pro Flacco 103). As a title (conservator patriae was assimilated to the
reverential Greek Gwrrjp and, losing the defining patriae, became a
standard element in the style and title of the emperor (Alfoldi,
Mus. Helv. 9 (1952), 223). Novak's servandamquepatriam (cf. 2. 1. 11) is
unnecessary.
Scipionem: the first of the Scipiones but the Fasti prefer P. Cornelius
Maluginensis (16. 1). Although the Scipiones were a branch of the
Maluginenses, the Fasti are no doubt correct. The appearance of a
Scipio here in such Scipionic surroundings is too tendentious (Miinzer,
R.E., 'Cornelius (328)'). He reappears as consular tribune in 395
(24. 1) and interrex in 391 (31.8) and since Scipiones are attested in the
next generation (consul in 350) we may accept the existence of the
671
5- *9- 2
396 B.C.
396 B.C.
5. 19. 10
could any have been dug there. O n the other hand one of the biggest
and most spectacular surviving cuniculi, carrying water from the Fosso
di Formello to the Fosso Piordo, passes right under the site of the
Roman camp.
19. 11. senae: one hour below ground and five above, or six hours
below ground as a spell (Bayet, Gage, de Selincourt) ? 6. 4. 10 cum in
sex partes divisus . . . senis horis in orbem succederet proelio is decisive for the
former although singulae horae would be expected. T h e escapers in
The Wooden Horse found that it was impossible to dig for more than
an hour at a shift.
20. 2. litteras: Camillus is careful to frame his request in the punc
tiliously correct language of official dispatches (8. 13. 11, 31. 31. 20,
45. 23. 1). An interesting parallel is afforded by Cato's reply to Cicero
when the latter approached the Senate formally for a supplicatio and,
as he hoped, a triumph (adFam. 15. 5. 2).
20. 4-10. The Motions of P. Licinius and Ap. Claudius.
T h e section is an interruption which conflicts sufficiently with the
thread of the narrative, even apart from the suggestive ferunt, to show
that L. has adopted it from a separate account. Mommsen (Rom.
Forschungen, 1. 265; cf. Aul. Gell. 4. 10. 3) drew attention to the oddity
that Licinius was called on to speak first. As a plebeian and a relatively
junior ex-consular tribune he had no entitlement to the position and
his preferment should be ascribed to the family bias of Licinius Macer.
T h e whole debate is intended to provide a motive for Camillus 5
prosecution (32. 8-9 n.). T h e theme of praeda Veientana is assiduously
cultivated.
20. 5. Appius' speech is violent and declamatory, invoking the tricks
and phrases of Republican mob-oratory, si semel (20. 5), used only
here in L., is colloquial (four times in Plautus; cf. Terence, Hecut.
478). inaequalis also is found elsewhere in L. only at 41. 20. 3 but cf.
[Sallust,] Epist. 1.8. 6. For avidas manus (20. 6) cf. Horace, Sat. 2. 3. 151.
fortium bellatorum 'gallant warriors' is a hackneyed platitude (Plautus,
Miles 11; Pseudolus 992; Tacitus, Annals. 1. 67 et aL). Notice also the
assonances (inaequalem, inconsultam; doni. . . domos; praerepturas . . .
praemia . . . praedator) and the remarkable alliteration periculiqae praecipuam petere partem.
20. 6. ut segnior: 'the quicker a man was to seek the lion's share of
danger and hard work, the slower he would be to snatch what he
could for his own enrichment'.
20. 7. Licinius' reply is moderate and conciliatory.
21. The Assault of Veii: Evocatio
Camillus, like a second Ulysses, marshals the resources of war and
814432
673
XX
5-21
396 B.C.
396 B.C.
5-21
5- 2 i . 8
396 B.C.
the removal of the exta for inspection by the haruspices (exta rapere,
prosecare: see below) and if certain conditions or features were observed,
a successful outcome to a war was predicted (31.5. 7, 3 6 . 1 . 3, 42. 3 0 . 9 :
see Thulin, Etr. Discipline 2. 48-49 for further details). T h e annalist
misinterpreted rapere^ taking it literally as 'to snatch' and not tech
nically 'to cut out' and devised the anecdote to suit the meaning. Such
a theft might also be thought to have magical efficacy, as in 41 the
besieged Perugians attempted to kidnap Octavian in the middle of a
sacrifice (Suetonius, Aug. 14. 3 ; see B. Nogara, Gli Etruschi e la loro
civiltd, 198). T h e anecdote accounts for the ritual.
prosecuisset: mistranslated by Plutarch, who cites Livy, as /cara/coXovdrjaavn (? a misreading = prosecutus esset), it is the t.t. for cutting
out the sacrificial entrails; cf. Paulus Festus 69 L. exta rapere may be a
loose equivalent for the same action or denote a preliminary ritual
such as the rapid removal of the entrails from the body; cf. Suetonius,
Aug. 1 semicrudaextaraptafocoprosecuit. In the annalistic version Camillus
may have been responsible in person for seizing the exta (6. 23. 1 1 ;
cf. Sulla in Augustine, de Civ. Dei 2. 24).
adaperto: 25. 30. 10, 45. 39. 17. Elsewhere first in Ovid (Amores
1. 5. 3, 3. 12. 12).
396 B.C.
5. 21. 14
5- 22. I
396 B.C.
ager publicus slaves became worth while as labourers. T h e first slavemarket was in 259. See Clerici, Economia e Finanza, 125 ff.; H . Volkmann, Die Massenversklavungen . . . in der hellenistisch-romischer eit3 36
( = 150) ff.
22. 3. egestae: from egero.
amoliri: L. tells of the removal of J u n o Regina to Rome in suitably
elevated language, amoliri is used three times by Plautus in pompous
tones (cf. Most. 371 = 391 ; Pseud. 856) and once by Sisenna (fr. 74 P.)
but not otherwise in prose before L. T h e tone is continued by the
choice of iuvenali (22. 5) for iuvenili (1. 57. n n.) and the epic fato
urgente (22. 8; cf. Virgil, Aen. 2. 653). For molimentum cf. Sisenna fr. 72;
Caesar, B.G. 1. 34. 3. Notice too that L. describes the approaches
made by the young men to the goddess with phrases which in any
other context would sound sacrilegious (for admovere manus cf. 11. 16 n . ;
attractare cf. Cicero, pro Caelio 20). But cf. Virgil, Aen. 2. 719.
22. 4. iuvenes: cf. 22. 5 certae gentis sacerdos. A dim recollection of the
fact that the Veientane cult was in the hands of a single gens (cf. the
Potitii and Pinarii at Rome) for which a substitute had to be found
when J u n o was removed to Rome. Basanoff and Hubaux explain
the connexion of iuvenes and J u n o by a common etymological root.
22. 5. quidam: Plutarch (Camillus 6), specifically citing Livy (ALOVLOS
Se (fyrjaiv), states that it was Camillus who addressed the goddess. It
clearly ought to have been Camillus, since Camillus is the principal
figure in the story and subsequently appears in the garb ofJuppiter as
a triumphator, but, as Clericus in a good note on this passage ob
served, Plutarch must be quoting from memory and made a natural
confusion (21. 8 n.). This is a more likely explanation than that
Plutarch had a variant text of L. (Basanoff) or that Plutarch was
really quoting from another source but mistakenly calls it Livy
(A. Klotz, Rh. Mus. 90 (1941), 282 ff.).
22. 6. fabulae: 21. 8 n.
adminiculis: Etruscan cult-images were designed to be carried as is
proved by the discovery at Veii of terracotta statue bases with slots
7 cm. in diameter through which wooden poles could be slipped
(E. Stefani, Notiz. Scavi, 1946, 36 ff; M. Renard, Latomus 8 (1949),
i 9 ff.).
22. 7. templum: 31. 3 n.
The Return of Camillus
T h e pageantry of Camillus' return to Rome is divided into five
distinct scenes:
(1) maximum imperatorum suggests the practice whereby a victorious
general was hailed 'imperator' by his troops and retained the appella
tion as a semi-official title till he laid down his imperium on his return
678
396 B.C.
5- 23
3. 23
396 B.C.
horses for his triumph should be judged (Dio 43. 14. 3 ; see Momigliano, C.Q_. 36 (1942), 113 with references). Caesar was staking a
claim to be the heir of Romulus and Camillus. It makes no historical
sense to believe that the whole of the Camillus episode was invented
by some enemy of Caesar's to discredit him. The Camillus legend is
old and Caesar tried to turn it to his account. Now L. is at pains to tone
down the sacrilegious side, blaming Camillus' exile not on the impiety
of the triumph but on the political issue of the spoil. We may see in
this contemporary significance. Octavian too saw himself as a second
Romulus (24. n n.; 1. 7. 9 n.; Suetonius, Aug. 7) and while he did
not make Caesar's mistake of indulging in flashy exhibitionism, he
was anxious to turn the past to his own account. In both 30 and
29 B.C. Octavian was acclaimed Imperator and was voted supplicationes and a triumph. This by itself would not have given rise to com
parisons with Camillus were it not that the scenes which greeted his
adventus both at Brindisi and at Rome were among the most demon
strative ever witnessed (Dio 51. 4. 4-5, 19, 20-21 ; see P. Grenade,
Origines du Principal 254 ff.).
23. 6. Solisque: the mention of the Sun as well as Juppiter as an
object of comparison must post-date the introduction of the Hellenic
mythology about the Sun, i.e. after the beginning of the third century
B.C. (Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 117).
23. 7. Iunoni: 31. 3 n.
Matutae Matris: an ancient Italic goddess (cf. Oscan Maattiis),
whose name shows her to be concerned with maturity and fertility
(Maturus). Her festival, the Matralia, celebrated by free women on
the traditional date of the dedication of the temple (11 June), is
remarkable for the oddity that they prayed not for their own but for
their sisters' children (pueri sororii; see Plutarch, Q.R. 16, 17; Ovid,
Fasti 6. 559). It was Aunts' rather than Mothers' Day. This quaint
custom may be based on a mistaken rationalization of the old prayer
formula which used pueri of the female sex and sororii not as an adj.
from soror but from sororiare (cf. Festus 380 L. sororiare mammae dicuntur
puellarum cum primum tumescunt; cf. 1. 26. 13 n. sororium tigillum). The
primitive cult was courotrophic: the goddess presided over child-birth
and child care, as the highly anatomical statuettes of her plainly
show. Tradition makes Servius Tullius the first founder of the temple
(19. 6; Ovid, Fasti 6. 477 ff.) and Camillus the refounder but the
connexion with Servius Tullius is legendary.
The temple of Mater Matuta was always associated with that of
Fortuna in foro Boario. Both temples were dedicated on the same day
(11 June; Fasti Ant.), both lay in the Forum Boarium, both were
burnt in 213 (24. 47. 15) and restored the following year (25. 7. 6).
Their site has recently been identified. Near the church of S. Omobono,
680
396 B.C.
5- 23- 7
5- 24-30
395 B.C.
materials did not offer much scope. There were scattered facts in the
Annales, details about colonies (24. 4, 29. 3), military operations
(24. 1-2, 28. 5 ff), and prosecutions (29. 6) but nothing coherent.
In compensation L. or his precedessors elaborated a theme which
would provide a connexion for the doings of these years. T h e safety
of Rome depended on h u m a n and divine factors, on Camillus and on
proper relations with the gods (pietas). T h e indispensability of Camillus
is brought into the open by the episode of Falerii (26. 10, 28. 1), the
value of pietas is illustrated by the tale of Lipari islanders and the gift
to Apollo (28. 2-5). The black side of the picture is provided both by
the dire opposition of the tribunes to Camillus, who with a short
sighted disregard for the interest of Rome seize on the issue of the
praeda Veientana and by constant attrition succeed in compassing
Camillus' exile, and by the sacrilegious proposals to transfer the city
of Rome to the site of Veii (24. 5-11, 30. 6). Good and evil are carefully
balanced and the apparent triumph of evil induces a frame of mind
in the reader which expects a disaster of the magnitude and sudden
ness of the battle of the Allia (32. 7).
24. 1. insequens: 395 B.C.
P. Cornelios: for Scipio see 19. 2 n. Cossus, P.f. A.n. (Mtinzer, R.E.,
'Cornelius (i2o) 5 ), is shown by his filiation to be a son of the consular
tribune of 408 (4. 56. 2 n.).
M. Valerium: 14. 5 n.
K. Fabium Ambustum iterum: in the Capitoline Fasti. . . stus III. See
4. 61. 4 n.
L. Furium: 4. 51. 1 n. Q. Servilium: 8. 1 n,
24. 2. sorte: sorti Ver. A rule may be formulated from L.'s usage.
Where the name of the person to whom a province or the like is
assigned is named in the dative next to the ablative of sors the form
sorte is used to avoid ambiguity, i.e. Valerio sorte provincia evenit; cf.
2. 8. 6, 3. 64. 4, 37. 50. 8. Where the person and sors are separated by
the province the form sorti is used, i.e. Valerio provincia sorti evenit; cf.
4. 37. 6, 29, 20. 4, 31. 6. 1. Therefore sorti should be read here and
sorte in 28. 45. r r . For the war see 8. 4.
vi. . . operibus: 22. 8, an unconscious repetition. See 1. 14. 4 n.
24. 3 . pax: from the Annales, whose character is also conveyed by the
language. Notice the perfect passive depopulatus, only used in com
munique style (e.g. Caesar, B.G. 1. 11. 4, 7. 77. 14), and felix arbor, a
technical expression (cf. Lex ap. Fronto 183.25 van den H o u t ; Cato ap.
Paulus Festus 81 L . ; Aul. Gell. 10. 15. 15; Macrobius 3. 20. 2 ; see
1. 26. 6 n.). T h e felling of the arbores felices was both an economic and
religious blow to the Capenates. For similar reprisals cf. 6. 31. 8 ; Dio
fr. 40, 23 Melber.
24. 4. coloniam in Volscos: Circeii, dated by Diodorus to 393 (14. 102.
682
395 B.C.
5- 24. 4
5- 2 4 . 7-8
395 B.C.
read partiplebis parti senatus habitandos destinabant Veios. For the intrusive
m in the manuscripts cf. 3. 44. 1, 64. 8, 67. 7, 4. 13. 3, 9, 17. 4, 58. 12,
5- 2 3 - 5> 3 1 - 5> 44- i> 5 1 - x> 5 2 - r3> 6 - 4- 9- F o r t h e word-order cf.
39-6.
24. 10. victam . . . victrici: the arguments used by the optimates call to
mind the refusal of some Athenians to quit Athens at the time of
Salamis (Herodotus 8. 41, 55 j and see now the decree of Themistocles:
the parallel between the sack of Athens by the Persians and of R o m e
by the Gauls is developed in later chapters) and the intensity of their
feeling can be seen from their fiery language, in contrast to the
measured terms used by Camillus (25. 4-6). T h e two speeches are
nicely designed to balance one another. For the indignant use of -ne ut
see 4. 2. 12 n . ; for the hysterical citius se morituros (9) cf. 24. 3. 12;
subigere as a synonym for cogere is colloquial (before L. used only by
Plautus, e.g. True. 783 and Sallust, Catil. 51. 18 (speech of Caesar)).
24. 1 1 . T. Sicinium: nothing else is known of him, but his proposal
is in accord with the reputed sympathies of his family (cf. 2. 32. 2 n.,
40. 14 n., 58. 2 n., 3. 54. 12 n.).
Romulo, deifilio: 1. 40. 3 n., in the context of active propaganda
about the removal of the capital of the Empire from Rome (50. 8),
the phrase cannot but have held significant overtones for a R o m a n
audience. Octavian, who toyed with the idea of taking the name
Romulus, was styled divijilius.
2 5 . 4. damnata voti: 'bound, as they were, to discharge their v o w ' :
damnare voti is sacral (7. 28. 4, 10. 37. 16, 27. 45. 8, 39. 9. 4 ; Nepos,
Timol. 5. 3 ; Fronto 95. 20 van den H o u t ; Macrobius 3. 2. 6). Against
the passionate outbursts of plebeians and patricians alike, Camillus
preserves an impassive front, res moventes is the technical term in law
for movables (Aul. Gell. 11. 18. 13; Dig. 33. 10. 2, 39. 5. 3 5 ; see
Wolfflin, Archiv f. Lat. Lex. 10 (1896), 10); cf. the intransitive use of
movere in, e.g., terra movit. As Crevier saw, a colon not a comma is
required after decumae.
25. 7. T h e matter was referred to the pontifices, within whose com
petence fell all matters concerning the performance of vows and
dedications. Their judgement is naturally formulated in legalistic
terms. For quod eius cf. 34. 2 ; for conceptum votum cf. 41. 21. 1 1 ; Macro
bius 1. 10. 21; C.I.L. n . 3081 vootum . . . cuncaptum.
2 5 . 8. pollicitae: sc. sunt. T h e sentence should be punctuated pollicitae
. . . aurum, et omnia ornamenta sua in aerarium detulerunt 'they promised
gold and contributed all their jewels'. There is no need, with Morstadt, to delete et, taking pollicitae as a participle. T h e voluntary
contribution by the matrons and their reward seem to be a doublet
of the similar occasion a few years later. See 50. 7 n.
684
394 B.C.
5- 26-27
5- 26-27
394 B.C.
are recounted in professional language (26. 5 n., 26. 6 n., 26. 8 n.) but
his tone changes abruptly when he deals with the schoolmaster episode.
This, for L., is an exemplum, a specimen virtutis (26. 10), and it is told as a
self-contained unity, mos erat. . . is cum . . . (27. 1-2) marks the new
beginning and can be compared with L.'s method of starting an
incident erat turn . , . is cum . . . (2. 33. 5 n,). T h e situation is then
described in an involved sentence with subordinate clauses leading
up to the confrontation with Camillus (ad Camillum perduxit).
Camillus' reply is elevated in language and content (27. 5 n.) and the
story ends with the gentlemanly behaviour of the Falisci who respect
Camillus' fides sufficiently to be inspired into an equal act of fides
themselves. T h e great stress laid on fides (27. 11, 27. 13 (bis), 27. 15,
28. 1) points the moral of the tale and the whole concludes on a quiet,
almost formal notepace data exercitus Romam reductus.
See Bormann, Arch. Mitteilungen aus Oest.-Ungarn 11 (1887), 103 ff.;
Gage, Huit recherches, 34 f.; H u b a u x 306 ff.; Frederiksen and WardPerkins, P.B.S.R. 25 (1957), 128 ff.
26. 2. L. Furius: 4. 51. 1 n.
C. Aemilius: 32. 1, according to the Capitoline Fasti from 391 B.C.,
Ti.f. Ti.n. (Mamercinus), a grandson of the consul of 470 (2. 61. 1 n.).
Nothing is known of his father.
L. Valerius Publicola: L.f. L.n., a son of the consular tribune of 414 (4.
49. 7 n.). For his subsequent career see Volkman, R.E., 'Valerius (298)'.
Sp. Postumius: to be identified with the censor of 380 (6. 27. 4).
Munzer (R.E., 'Postumius (61)'), arguing from Diodorus* omission
of his name, believes this consular tribunate to have been invented
because constitutional theory required a censor to have held consular
office. Postumius' record (28. 5-13) is, however, too deeply ingrained
in the Annales.
P. Cornelius iterum: no closer identification is provided by any of the
sources. In theory he might be Maluginensis (19. 2 n.), Ccssus, or
Scipio (24. 1 n . ) : see 19. 2 n. T h e collaboration with Camillus points
to Maluginensis. T h e confused KdrXos Ovfjpos in Diodorus (14. 97. 1)
is perhaps a conflation of Aemilius and Valerius. There is no need
with Mommsen (Rom, Forsckungen, 2. 229) to regard the last three
names given by L. and the Fasti as spurious, for Diodorus is waywardly
inaccurate.
26. 3 . elanguit: 1. 46. 7.
2 6 . 5 . asperis confragosisque . . . artis . . . arduis: the adjectives are almost
perfunctory, a familiar characteristic of the military assessment of a
situation (cf. 'bushy-topped trees'); cf. Varro, de Re Rust. 1. 18. 4
confragosus atque arduis clivis; Cicero, pro Sest. 100; Sallust, Catil. 7. 5;
Seneca, Dial. 4. 13. 1; Frontinus 2. 5. 24; Tacitus, Hist. 3. 17; Annals
i5- 38.
686
394 B.C.
5. 26. 6
5.27.5
394 B.C.
Greek attitude to society and war which stems from or was at least
formulated by Plato. In the Republic Plato accepts a Social Contract
explanation of the origin of society (369 B-372 D ) , a belief in societas
pacto humano. He furthermore argues that war is the business of the
whole citizen-body and that women and children should take part in
it as well (466 E) In the pursuit of war there are certain international
conventions to be observed with regard to fellow Greeks but against
barbarians war is total, knowing neither quarter nor mitigation
(470-1). Much of Plato's thinking on these topics was inherited by
Epicurus whose Kvpiai A6at exhibit striking resemblances to Camillus'
w o r d s (e.g. 33 OVK rjv TI /CGL0' iavro SiKaioavvq aAA' V rats /xer' dXArjAcov
GVdTpO<f>aiS
KCL0' OITTJALKOVS
394 B.C.
5. 27. 12
Xwvos dydXfxaTa. The date must be before Cumae, for the Etruscans
never ventured so far afield again. Fragments of the dedication set
up on that occasion survive (Bourguet, B.C.H. 35 (1911), 149 ff.) and
the lettering is dated to c. 500. The respect for Delphi and the ruthless
interception of vessels on the high sea are typical. In 396 the Cartha
ginian Himilco had levied a payment of 30 talents on the island,
without succeeding in cowing the inhabitants (Diodorus 14. 56. 2 ) ;
the Liparians would be anxious both for revenge and for financial
reparation. At first sight therefore a Roman ship was an ideal target.
Rome was still, in the foreigners' eyes, a predominantly Etruscan city
and her treaty relation with Carthage would be recalled. It does
credit to Timasitheus that he discerned the difference. See further,
Ziegler, R.E., 'Lipara'; L. Zagami, Le hole Eolie, 55-58.
28. 1. albi: 23. 5 n.
28. 2. crate?'am: 25. 10, the formal term which is used in good Latin
only of dedicatory bowls (Cicero, Verr. 4. 131: otherwise vulgar) in
814432
689
vy
5.
a8. 2
394 B.C.
394 B.C.
5. 28. 10
5- 29- 6
393 B.C.
393 B.C.
5- 30. 1
B.C.
5- 3^-32
392 B.C.
clearly to preserve the shape of the book with its two main themes,
the capture of Veii and the capture of Rome. T o dilate upon incidental
occurrences would spoil the symmetry (1-32 : 33-55). Hence the com
pressed and annalistic style (cf. eodem anno 31. 3, 5, 32. 6).
T h e ultimate source of the notices, with the same exception of the
trial of Camillus (32. 8), must be the Annales although the person of
M . Caedicius may be rather traditional than monumental (32. 6).
T h e direct source used by L. cannot be determined with certainty.
T h e only significant pointers are the allusion to Manlius' cognomen
(31.2 n.) and the evident anachronism of the trial. T h e latter indicates
a late Sullan date for the source. T h e tendentious slant of 32. 8-9 (n.)
encourages the belief that L. continues to follow Valerius Antias.
Notice the prominence of L. Valerius Potitus (triumph in 31. 4) and
the confidence in numbers (32. 3).
3 1 . 2. L. Valerius: 4. 49. 7 n. T h e election of consuls rather than con
sular tribunes continues the atmosphere of normality which was
rudely shaken by the news of Gallic infiltration and the resignation of
the consul in time to allow a new college of consular tribunes to under
take military operations, if necessary, before the end of the cam
paigning season (32. i n . ) .
M. Manlius: T.f. A.n., according to the Capitoline Fasti, which
makes him a cousin of the consul of 379 (6. 30. 2). T h e earlier history
of the family is unrecorded. L. (and his source) agree with the Fasti
in identifying him as the famous M . Manlius who saved the Capitol
(n. on ch. 47) and was later impeached for tyranny, although Diodorus
evidently distinguished the two (14. 103. 1 AvXos MdXXtos: 14. 116. 6
MdpKos TLS MaXXios v&ot;os avrjp). Diodorus may have for once pre
served a more authentic tradition, because the aetiological explana
tion of the cognomen Capitolinus alluded to by L. is manifestly late.
In reality the Manlii, like the Sestii and the Quinctii, assumed the
cognomen to distinguish one branch of the family which lived on the
Capitol. For fuller details see Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 179-99.
Ver. has the order fuit postea cognomen, but in this expression postea
always precedes/w^ (2. 16. 4, 33. 5, 36. 36. 3 ; Sallust, Jug. 5. 4 ; Hist.
2. 45 M . ) . O n the other hand postea normally occupies second place
(cf., in addition to the above, 2. 13. 1 ; Nepos, Alcib. 3. 2 ; Paulus
Festus 107 L.). T h e word-order of both N and Ver. will be wrong.
Write cui postea Capitolino fuit cognomen.
magnos ludos: 19. 6, 2. 36. 1 n.
3 1 . 3 . aedes Iunonis reginae: the temple was built near the modern
church of S. Sabina but the exact site has not been found. In choosing
the Aventine, outside the pomerium, the Romans were motivated not
by the fact that J u n o was not a Roman goddessshe had her cult on the
Capitol and her worship was widespread throughout Etrusco-Latin
694
392 B.C.
5- 3i-3
5- 3i. 5
392 B.C.
but is deficient in the two later passages. Salp- is given by N here and
by the majority of manuscripts in all three places in 32 except that
M has the dittography sal sappinates in 32. 2 and sappinates once in
32. 4. T h e variation between Sal- and Sap- may go back to the edition
of Symmachus. Since there is no connexion with the Umbrian river
Sapis (Pliny, N.H. 3. 115) or the tribus Sapinia (31. 2. 6, 33. 37. i ) , we
have no external criterion for deciding between the forms. Etruscan
names, however, while showing examples of Sappinius and Sapienus
(Schulze 223) offer no root Salp and, unless L. is himself at fault, the
choice should lie between Ver.'s Sapienates and M's Sappinates. T h e
former is to be preferred since the correction of i to /, with sub
sequent transposition, accounts for the corruption Sapien > Saplen ->
Salpen -> Sappen.
T h e site of the city is equally controversial. T h e most favoured
candidate is Orvieto (Kiepert, Atlas, 1901, pi. x x ; Hlilsen, R.E.,
'Sappinates') but Orvieto is too large and prominent a site for a
people who make only a single appearance in history. Recent excavaby the French school at La Civita, a hill some 4 kilometres south of
Bolsena, have revealed a small but prolonged Etruscan community
which came to an end c. 390 (Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 67 (1955), 49-70).
T h e facts thus make La Civita a possible candidate although without
epigraphic confirmation the identification must remain provisional.
superbia inflati: elati N, accepted by Bayet and Luterbacher; cf.
4. 13. 3 n., 54. 8 n. Despite Ver.'s weakness for iriflatus, the reading is
decidedly superior here. Cf. 45. 31. 3 ; Seneca, JV.Q,. 4 j&ra*/l2 j Apuleius,
Apol. 18; Lactantius, Inst. 6. 24. 24. For the confusion of the words cf.
37. 12. 4 ; Suetonius, Nero 37. 3.
agros Romanos: ager was the land surrounding a city (e.g. ager
Faliscus, ager Veientanus) while the plural agri refers to the individual
fields of farmers. Hence while the phrase ager Romanus occurs thirtyeight times in L., the plural agri Romani is not elsewhere met (3. 6. 7 n . ;
cf. 3. 30. 4 ager Romanorum, 2. 43. 1). Ver. omits Romanos here and it
could easily be due to dittography after ag-ros (cf. 40. 9 n.).
31.6. C. Iulius: 4.56.2 n. The censors had been elected the previous year.
His colleague was L. Papirius Cursor (9. 34. 20). T h e Capitoline Fasti
confirm that Julius died in office, and the notice looks annalistic.
A passage of Festus (500 L.) has been used, e.g. by Beloch, to descredit
the notice but the interval of 15 years defined by Festus refers to the
gap between 393 and 380 (6. 27. 4 ; see R. V. Cram, Haw. Stud. Class.
Phil. 51 (1940), 75-77). M . Cornelius (P.f. M.n. according to the
Fasti) must be a son of the consular tribune of 404 (4. 6 1 . 4 n.) of
whom nothing else is recorded. The reason advanced for the fact
that in historical times no replacements were made if one of the
censors deceased (24. 43. 4, 27. 6. 18) cannot be true but was designed
696
392 B.C.
5- 3 i -
21) 2. 2 3 ; et a/.).
per interregnum: 3. 8. 2 n.
3 1 . 9. incommoda: a reason in line with 4. 7. 2. T h e true cause
may have been either the disorganization caused by the plague or
the news of the impending threat from the Gauls.
32. 1. Kalendis: 3. 6. 1 n. T h e Capitoline Fasti do not record their
early abdication but L.'s version is to be preferred.
L. Lucretius: 29. 2 n. Ser. Sulpicius: 29. 2 n.
M. Aemilius: Ver. adds iterum which must be an anticipation of
C. Aemilius iterum (26. 2 n.) since no other Aemilius is listed in the
immediate past. His filiation is given by the Capitoline Fasti as
M a m . f. M.n., which would make him a younger brother of the
consul of 410 (4. 53. 1 n.) but there is some difference over his
praenomen and hence over his identity. T h e Capitoline Fasti call
him L. Aemilius, identifying him with the consular tribune of
389 (6. 1.8); L., on the other hand, calls him M . Aemilius and starts
the series of consular tribunates held by L. Aemilius in 389. Clearly
there were two separate lines of speculation about him. Nothing else
is known of this M . Aemilius.
L. Furius: 4. 51. 1 n.
Agrippa Furius: Sex.f., according to the Capitoline Fasti and the
same as the consul Furius Agrippa mentioned by Frontinus (2. 8. 2).
The only Sex. Furius known in the previous generation is the consular
tribune of 420 (4. 44. 1 n.) and the age-gap is right. Broughton gives
Agr. Furius the cognomen Fusus but if his filiation is correctly con
jectured he will rather be a Medullinus.
C, Aemilius: 26. 2 n.
32. 2. Volsinienses . . . Sappinates: from the Annales, but the casualty
figures are Valerian.
32. 3 . primo concursu: the word-order of Ver. is superior to c. p. pre
served by N and printed in most editions; cf. 1. 25. 4, 3. 4. 8, 5. 49. 5,
6. 24. 1; Caesar, B.G. 6. 8. 6, 7. 62. 3, a military cliche which is most
unlikely ever to be found in the reverse order.
injugam versa: N, having lost versa by omission, corrected in jugam
to injuga. In this case too Ver. preserves the military expression proper
to the annalistic context; cf. 27. 14. 9 ; BelL Afr. 17. 1 ; Curtius 4.
15. 32; Tacitus, Agricola 3 7 ; Hist. 2. 26, 4. 3 7 ; Pliny, Epist. 6. 16. 18.
32. 5. indutiae: from the Annales. For stipendium cf. 27. 15, Volsinii is
697
5- 32. 5
391 B.C.
next mentioned as at war with Rome in 308 (9. 41. 6) but the setback
to Rome's expansion caused by the Gallic invasion disengaged the
two cities for several generations.
32. 6-7. M. Caedicius
A solitary occasion on which a supernatural voice was heard, with
the immediate consequence of a major defeat for Roman arms, readily
induced the superstitious to venerate the site of the manifestation.
Hence the cult of Aius (cf. aio; Locutius or Loquens is a secondary
epithet to explain Aius). That the occasion was 391 need not be
doubted, since the superstition will have been associated with the
events, like the appearance of Pan before Marathon (Herodotus
6. 105). Aius was classed as a deus indiges (Varro ap. Aul. Gell. 16.17. 2 ;
Cicero, de Div. 1. 101, 2. 69).
M. Caedicius, the man who hears the forecast of disaster (caedes)>
is a later addition (2. 52. 6 n., 5. 45. 7 n.).
The site of the altar subsequently erected to Aius (cf. 50. 5, 52. 11)
at the north corner of the Palatine in infima Nova via (1. 41. 4 n.) has
not been recognized. See Platner-Ashby s.v.; W. F. Otto, Rh. Mus. 64
(1909), 459; Latte, R.E., 'Locutius'; Archiv f Relig.-Wissen. 24 (1926),
244; E. Schwyzer, Rh. Mus. 84 (1935), 116; F. Altheim, History of
Roman Religion, 192 ; Klio 30 (1937), 44-46; Basanoff, Latomusq (1950),
13
ff
'
32. 6. Gallos: according to Cicero the voice was inarticulate and
confused.
32. 8 - 9 . The Trial of Camillus
The trial of Camillus has suffered from much tendentious distortion
and the version given by L. represents one of the latest stages of that
process. I do not doubt that Camillus was in (voluntary) exile at the
time of the Gallic sack and it can be shown that in the earliest strata
of history Camillus did not return in time to be the popular saviour of
the city but the reasons for his absence can only be hazarded.
(1) Pliny, JSf.H. 34. 13 'Camillo . . . obiecit Sp. Carvilius quaestor
quod aerata ostia haberet in domo\ This suggests a trial for peculatus
conducted before a quaestor or quaestors and brought upon appeal
to the comitia centuriata (Cicero, de Domo 86). The procedure is not
incredible. As financial officers the annual quaestors would naturally
be involved at this date as they were later in the similar trial of
T. Quinctius Trogus (Varro, de Ling. Lai. 6. 90-92 citing the commentarii
quaestorum). They will have taken over in financial cases the functions
previously exercised by the quaestores appointed ad hoc (2. 35. 5 n.).
The name Sp. Carvilius, however, proves that tendentious addition
had already been made. Sp. Carvilius is the twin of the tr. pL of 212.
698
391 B.C.
5- 32. 8-9
391 B.C.
5- 33- i-3
both propaganda and justification for contemporary actions. T h e
motive (dulcedine frugum maximeque vini) is conventional and is repeated
apropos of a quite different migration by Justin 43. 3.4. T h e antagonism
between Arruns and Lucumo recurs in the similar story of the sons
of Demaratus (see note on 1. 34). Together with the embassy of the
Fabii (35. 5 n.) all the incidents give rise to the gravest misgivings.
See further Hlilsen, R.E., 'Clusium'; J . Gage, Rev. Hist. ReL 143
(r953)> i 7 - 2 o 8 ; J . Wolski, Historia 5 (1956), 35-39; H. Homeyer,
Historia 9 (1960), 346.
3 3 . 3 . inliciendae: Gage, comparing a rival version of the story in
Pliny {N.H. 12. 5 quod Helicoficumsiccam et uvam oleique ac vinipraemissa
tulisset), and seeing in the person of Helico an aetiological explanation
of the cult ofJuppiter Elicius (cf. Gr. eAif), would read eliciendae here
unnecessarily since the emphasis is on the country of arrival, not on
the country of departure.
isfuerat: ipsefuerat Ver., isfuerat ipse N. Ver.'s reading is right, is ipse
is very strong (3. 5 1 . 3 ; see Mlitzell on Curtius 3. 20. 21) and is never
found divided.
poenae . . . nequirent: poena . . . nequiret Ver. There is nothing to
choose between the singular and plural. Ver. is prone to omit n or m
in the middle of words where it affects the number (4. 27. 3 n.) but
here Lucumo is a single person guilty of a single offence.
33. 4-35. 3. The Gallic Migrations
T h e second external challenge which the newly organized Rome had
to meet was an invasion from Gaul. L.'s account fills the remainder
of the book and counterbalances the narrative of the Fall of Veii
which occupies the first half. T h e two threats, from Etruria and from
Gaul, are the climax of the first five books, showing Rome for the first
time as a stable political community (40. 1-2) and intimating the
prospect of her future imperial greatness (54. 3-5). To underline the
importance of the Gallic invasion from an artistic as well as from an
historical point of view, L. borrows a device from Hellenistic historians
who, rationalizing the practice of Herodotus and Thucydides, intro
duced major campaigns in a foreign country with a 6description of
that country, its chief peculiarities, and the origins and customs of
its inhabitants' (Fraenkel, Horace, 429; Norden, Die germanische Urgeschichte, 1 ff.; K. Triidinger, Studien zur Gesch. der gr.-rom. Ethnographie,
(Basel, 1918)). It would have been pointless to give an ethnographical
digression on R o m e ; so L., instead of describing the invaded country,
describes the invaders and, by touching on Etruria (33. 7-11) as well
as Gaul, bridges the gap between the two halves of the book. It can
be seen from the practice of other historians (e.g. the Africae situs in
Sallust, Jugurtha 17-19 and the Britanniae situs in Tacitus, Agricola
700
5.33.4-35.3
5- 33- 4-35- 3
DIGRESSION ON ETRURIA
5- 33- 5
early date see L. Pareti, Studi minori, 1. 365 ff.). See also 35. 3 n. The
Celtic penetration of north Italy has been the subject of much recent
investigation; see G. A. Mansuelli, Hommages Grenier, 3. 1067 ff.;
R. Chevallier, Latomus 21 (1962), 356 ff.
The synchronization of the foundation of Massilia and the Celtic
emigration with its double distortion of date may be due to Posidonius
(Strabo 4. 179). It was inspired by the Gallic attack on Massilia
shortly before the invasion which led to the capture of Rome (Justin
43. 5. 4-8: see Jullian 1. 253 n. 3).
antequam . . . oppugnarent. . . caperent: the subjunctives emphasize the
causal connexion between the arrival of the Gauls in Italy and their
subsequent attack on Rome (Wackernagel, Vorlesungen, 1. 247).
Etruscan Rule in Italy
33. 7. Tuscorum: Etruscorum Ver. Livy uses either form indiscrimi
nately. Palaeographically Etruscorum is preferable after the preced
ing pugnavere. See Catterall, T.A.P.A. 69 (1938), 300.
ante Romanum imperium late terra marique opes patuere: Cato speaks in
similar terms (fr. 62 P.); cf. [Servius], ad Aen. 10. 145. The memory of
the Etruscan domination of Italy was well maintained. Its detailed
accuracy indicates that it was kept alive by a succession of Etruscan
writers (the Tuscae Historiae mentioned by Varro ap. Censorinus, de
Die Nat. 17. 6) from whom it passed into the mainstream of Roman
history. The expansion from the primitive limits of Etruria, bounded
by the rivers Tiber and Arno, commenced at least in the seventh
century and, in its first phase, was directed southward. The Etruscans
established control over Campania with Capua as their capital and
penetrated as far as Pompeii (J. Heurgon, Recherches . . . de Capoue preromaine; A. Boethius, Gli Etruschi in Pompeii; A. Maiuri, Atti R.
Accad. d* Italia 4 (1944), 121 ff.). Such extensive penetration presupposes
at least temporary control over Latium and Rome (notes on 1. 34,
2. 9-15). The southward expansion was checked by a series of re
versesthe Battle of Aricia (2. 14. 6 n.), the naval defeat at Cumae in
474, and the destruction of the Campanian empire by the Samnites in
423 (4. 37. 1 n.). Increasing difficulties in the south may have been
responsible for the switch of activity to the north. Archaeologically
there appears to be no radical distinction between the Villanovan
culture and the later Etruscan discoveries at Felsina (Bologna), which
might suggest that the Etruscans had been in possession of the area
and the whole Po valley from their first arrival in Italy. The literary
tradition, however, including the mythical foundation of Felsina by
the Perugian Aucno (Servius, ad Aen. 10. 198; cf. Silius Ital. 8. 599;
S Veron. Aeneid 10. 200; the name Uqnus has been identified on a
recent fragment of an Etruscan vase in Rome) speaks with one voice
703
5- 33- 7
DIGRESSION ON E T R U R I A
704
DIGRESSION ON E T R U R I A
5- 33- 8
705
Z Z
5- 33- *o
DIGRESSION ON E T R U R I A
DIGRESSION ON GAUL
5- 34
DIGRESSION ON GAUL
5- 34- i
also been adduced, belongs to a different category altogether, being
a word of a special, academic solemnity (Fraenkel, Horace, 117 n. 2).
Celticum must correspond to the Greek TO KCXTLKOV and betrays thereby
the Greek original of the whole section. Another stylistic feature, the
disproportionate frequency of the resumptive is in comparison with
L.'s normal usage (e.g. it . . . dabant. Ambigatus is fuit; 34. 5 is . . .
excivit; 34. 8 Massilienses erant ii. . . id Galli. . . rati; cf. 34. 3 hie . . .
ostendit; 34. 8 ipsi. . . transcenderunt), in spite of the synoptic nature of
the narrative which lends itself to staccato brevity, may reflect the
typical 6 8e, OVTOS 8e, 17V yap OVTOS found in the loose writing of late
Greek (Norden, Antike Kunstprosa, 1.126 ff.; cf. Timagenes F 5 Jacoby).
34. 2. Ambigatus: only here, but except for the Latin termination,
the name is unimpeachable: prefix ambi- ( = 'around') as in Ambidavus, Ambilatri, Ambiliati, Ambirenus; stem as in Abugato (on
a gold coin of the Bituriges). Others translate it 'King of the World'
(Homeyer, op. cit. n. 34). See J . Rhys, Proc. Brit. Acad., 1905, 114;
Schulze 542.
virtute fortunaque cum sua turn publica: fortuna is not sheer luck, the
Greek wilful or incalculable rvxq, but a providence presiding over
the destinies of individuals (29. 26. 5 ; first in Ennius, Trag. 172 fortuna
Hectoris) and states (1. 46. 5, 2. 40. 13, 3. 7. 1 di praesides ac fortuna
urbis, 6. 30. 4 - 6 ; first in Cicero, in Catil. 1. 15; Sallust, Catil. 4 1 . 3).
This was also a Greek idea (as early as Pindar, Olymp. 12) and its
introduction into Roman thought was a consequence of the dis
semination of Hellenistic ideas. In other contexts L. uses virtus in the
passive sense of the good fortune bestowed by a protecting providence
upon individuals and states, generally as a reward for pietas, in which
connexion it is the virtual equivalent otfelicitas (22. 58. 3, 30. 12. 12,
28. 32. 11). But in the conventional juxtaposition ofvirtus and fortuna
(actively as here or passively as 1. 25. 2, 6. 32. 7, 22. 12. 10, 23. 42. 4,
43. io, 42. 49. 2, &c.) fortuna is not to be thought of as a reward for
virtus, virtus is not the same as pietas and R o m a n religion did not ascribe
to the gods such complete responsibility for events as to disallow the
independent effects of h u m a n excellence or shortcoming. See further
Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy (1957), especially 63-91 ; H . Erkell,
Augustus, Felicitas, Fortuna (Diss. Goteborg, 1952).
adeo frugum hominumque fertilis: if Gaul was so fertile, why did some
have to leave? According to L., because the nation became un
manageably largea unique and incredible reason, not included
even in the exhaustive list compiled by Seneca, adHelviam 7. 4. All the
other sources give the regular reason of land-hunger for the Gallic
migrations (Plutarch, Camillus 15; Caesar, B.G. 6. 24. 1; Appian,
Celtica 2. 2, cf. Livy 39. 54. 5). This, coupled with the sanctity of
forests which would prevent land clearance, the glamour of the Po
708
DIGRESSION ON GAUL
5- 34- 2
5- 3 4 - 5
DIGRESSION ON GAUL
with the Sequani in classical times is stated to have been the Saone
(Strabo 4. 186; Ptolemy 2. 8. 12; cf. Caesar, B.G. 1. 12. 1). Their
name is aspirated by editors; the manuscripts give Aeduos here, but
in 34. 9 H{a)eduorum M7r, Aeduorum A. T h e unaspirated form is invariable
in Greek (AlSovaiot, in Steph. Byz.; AiSovoi or AlSovoi in Strabo 186,
192; Ptolemy 2. 18. 19; Cass. Dio 38. 32 ; see Ihm, R.E., 'Aedui') and
should therefore be accepted here. T h e territory of the Ambarri
(? = Ambi-arari) comprised the area north of Lyons between the
Rhone and the Saone. T h e Garnutes possessed the dioceses of Ghartres,
Orleans, and Blois. At least six branches of the Aulerci are mentioned
(for details see Ihm, R.E., 'Aulerci'; Diehl, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v.) but
there is general agreement that they occupied the region of Maine.
It is implied that Bellovesus' tribes formed a compact group and the
historical situation of the seven named tribes distributes them compactly
over the central region of metropolitan Gaul. Such a distribution only
became settled in the late third century and neither in 600 nor in 390
would the pattern have been the same. L.'s source has selected the
names of the migrants from the ethnic m a p of contemporary Gaul.
See further T . R. Holmes, Caesar's Conquest of Gaul, Geographical Index.
in Tricastinos: exact site disputed and perhaps not determinable,
since the population was liable to shift (Walbank, J.R.S. 46 (1956),
39). T h e evidence is conflicting, but the approximate vicinity is re
presented by the area round Stf Paul-Trois-Chateaux (Desjardins).
They were already settled, according to tradition, in the locality
when Hannibal crossed the Alps. See Scherling, R.E., 'Tricastini';
Sir G. de Beer, Alps and Elephants, 36.
34. 6. de Hercule fabulis credere libet: cf. Timagenes F 2 Jacoby 'Amfitryonis filium Herculem ad Geryonis etTaurisci saevium tyrannorum
perniciem festinasse quorum alter Hispanias, alter Gallias infestabat
superatisque ambobus coisse cum generosis feminis et concepisse
liberos plures et eas partes quibus imperitabant suis nominibus appellasse'. Hercules was a peerless globe-trotter (cf. Lucian, Vera Historia
1. 7) and as the boundaries of the human world were enlarged his
exploits were extended with them and became identified with the
deeds of local heroes. Greek contact, coincident with the foundation
of Massilia, transferred the Geryon labour from Italy (1.7. 3-15 n.) to
Gaul (Diod. 4. 19), and a dim memory of a prehistoric Gallic king
dom, echoed in the story of Ambigatus and the Bituriges (34. 1 n.),
nourished a legend that after founding Alesia Hercules was the pro
genitor of the Gallic race, the dispenser of its laws, and the guardian
of its commerce (Diod. 5. 24). Tacitus {Hist. 3. 42) pays mute testi
mony to the same legend by preserving the name of the Portus Herculis Monoeci ( = Monaco). With the opening-up of Germany he
moved north to take over the mantle of Donar or Thorr (cf. Tacitus,
710
DIGRESSION ON GAUL
5- 34- 6
Germania 3). There was a Herculis castra in the Low Countries. See
Haug, R.E., 'Hercules'; Jullian 2. 120 n. 6, 145.
34. 7. ab Saluumgente: so N, except Salluviorum H (and, by contamina
tion, O E * ) ; in 34. 8 the nonsensical patientibus silvis was corrected by
Valesius to patientibus Saluis (cf. 35. 1 favente Belloveso); in 35. 2 (see
note) N has Salluvii qui, where the corrupt qui (it has no verb to govern)
casts doubt on the reliability of Salluvii. The Latin name for the tribe,
who lived between the Rhone and the Maritime Alps, was Salluvii
(C.LL. i 2 . p. 4 9 ; Amm. Marc. 15. 11. 15; Livy, Per. 60, 61, 73; Pliny,
N.H. 3. 36; Florus 1. 19. 5, 1. 37. 3). The Greek form was UdXves
(Strabo 4. 178, 180, 181, 184-6, 203; Ptolemy 2. 10. 8; Appian,
Celtica 12; Steph. Byz. s.v.) or ZaAAue? according to some manuscripts
in the above passages. An alternative shortened form Sal(l)ues (e.g.
Veil. Pat. 1. 15. 4 ; Jul. Obsequens 90, 92) or Salui (cf. Santones and
Santoni for the variant termination of Gallic names) was based on the
Greek name. It should be replaced throughout in this homogeneous
section (viz. Saluum, Saluis, Salui) but not necessarily at 21. 26. 3.
See Hirschfeld, Kl. Schriften, 11; Homeyer, op. cit. 353-4.
34. 8. Massilienses erant ii navibus a Phocaeaprofecti: two expeditions are
recorded: c. 600 (600/599 Timaeus ap. Ps.-Scymn. 211-14; Solinus
2. 5 2 ; 598 Eusebius, Chron.; 599 Jerome, Chron.; temporibus Tarquinii
regis Justin 43. 3. 4 ; Aristotle ap. Athenaeus 13. 576a; Strabo 4. 179 :
this agrees with the archaeological evidence on which see Blakeway,
B.S.A. 33 (1932-3), 170-208; J.R.S. 25 (1935)5 129-49; P. BoschGimpera, C.Q. 38 (1944), 53-59), and c. 540 1 (after Harpagus' cap
ture of Phocaea: Herodotus 1. 166; Thucydides 1. 13. 6 (see Gomme;
I am convinced by Blakeway's interpretation of these two passages);
Antiochus ap. Strabo 6. 252; Isocrates, Archidam. 97; Pausanias
10. 8. 6; Seneca, ad Helviam 7. 8; Isidore, Origines 15. 1. 6 3 ; Agathias,
Hist. 1. 2). It is probable that Massilia was founded, partly for trading
purposes, by Phocaea c. 600 and that the colony was reinforced by
fugitives c. 540 after their Pyrrhic victory over the Carthaginians
during an attempt to colonize Corsica. Timagenes dealt with
the subject (F 2 Jacoby), but we have no idea what absolute date
or synchronization Timagenes gave to the event. Some confusion is
evident in L. All the interlocking indications of time (33. 5 n.) are
consistent with the original colonization c. 600, whereas his language
[navibus a Phocaea profecti) suggests that he has the more dramatic
escape from Harpagus in mind. For a full examination of the evidence
1
The date is usually given as 546 but this is too early. It was the final stage of
Harpagus* crushing of Pactyas' revolt. We know from Babylonian records that
Gyrus captured Babylon in 539/8 and Herodotus says that Pactyas waited until
Gyrus had departed for Babylon before revolting, which can hardly be earlier than
54*-
711
5. 34- 8
DIGRESSION ON GAUL
DIGRESSION ON GAUL
5- 34- 9
and Celts in the latter half of the fifth century is strikingly confirmed
by the grave-stelai from Felsina (c. 500), depicting combats between
cavalry or hoplites and ill-armed foreigners. There is an evident
parallel with Hannibal's victory in 218 B.C. See Walbank on Polybius
2. 34. 10; Nissen, //. Land, 2. 180 ff.; Homeyer, op. cit. 3 5 3 ; Mansuelli,
op. cit. 1072-3.
agrum Insubrium appellari. . . cognominem Insubribus, pago Aeduorum: no
such Gallic clients of the Aedui are known. T h e n a m e in Celtic means
Very wild* (Holder, Alt-celt, Sprach. s.v.; Philipp, R.E., 'Insubres')
from which Jullian (1. 291, n. 6) conjectured that it was a war-name
chosen by the migrating tribes. The mention of the Insubres has been
used (e.g. by Hirschfeld) as evidence that L. is following Nepos, him
self an Insubrian (Pliny, Ep. 4. 28. 1).
cognominem: Gk. 7TWW(JLOV, a geographical caique. See Norden on
Virgil, Aen. 6. 378 ff.; Ogilvie, Eranos 55 (1957), 201 ; J.R.S. 48 (1958),
43 n. 49. 77-A read cognomine but a noun would have to be nomine
(Nipperdey).
Mediolanium: a Celtic name, recurring throughout Gaul and Britain
(see R.E., s.v. ( i ) - ( 6 ) ; A. Longnon, Revue celtique 8 (1887), 375-8),
of uncertain etymology: the prefix medio- is Eng. 'mid-'. A late popular
etymology analysed it as lanigero de sue nomen (Sid. Apoll. Epist. 7. 17.
2. 20; Claudian, Nupt. Hon. Aug. 183; Isidore, Origines 15. 1. 57). T h e
Greek form appears to have been McSioXdvtov (Strabo 5 . 2 1 3 ; Ptolemy 3.
1. 3 3 ; and to be restored with some manuscripts in Polybius 2. 34) but
was contracted to MeSioXavov under Latin influence (cf. Plutarch, Marcellus 7), the Latin form being regularly Mediolanum (Pliny saep.; Tacitus,
Hist. 1. 70; Suetonius, Augustus 20). L. here (and 34. 46. 1) follows
the Greek model. See Mommsen, C.I.L. 5. pp. 6 3 3 - 4 ; Hirschfeld 12.
35. 1. alia subinde manus Cenomanorum: the four other successive waves
of migrants are to be taken as occupying the intervening 200 years. In
general the account agrees with Polybius 2. 17, except that Polybius
adds Adoi and Hvapes while omitting the Salui and differs from L.'s
order. T h e Adoi are generally identified with the Laevi (35. 2 n . ;
see Walbank on Polybius 2. 17. 4), who elsewhere are firmly described
as Ligurian, not Celtic; but it is more likely that Polybius either wrote
or certainly meant the Salui. T h e variation of order is not significant,
for the whole sequence of Gallic invasions is not based on contem
porary traditions but, at best, on a late rationalization from the
presence of separate racial groups in Cisalpine Gaul, and the sequence
will be governed by the order in which antiquarians considered the
groups and by a general principle such as that the farthest advance
into Italy will have been made by the latest arrivals.
Cenomanorum: 'another band consisting of C . \ Germanorum M S S .
7T3
5- 35- i
D I G R E S S I O N ON GAUL
D I G R E S S I O N ON GAUL
5- 35- 2
Poenino deinde Boii Lingonesque transgressi: cf. 21. 38. 6. The Pennine
(Gr. St. Bernard) is regarded as a pass or route, not a mountain,
hence the ablative. The provenance of the Boii and their capital
Gorgobina (Caesar, B.G. 7. 9. 6) is disputed. They evidently abutted
the territory of the Aedui in the vicinity of Avaricum since they
supplied Caesar with corn during the siege of that city (B.G. 7. 9.
12-13). If they lived on the east bank of the river Allier, their associa
tion with the Lingones who lived immediately to the north near the
head-waters of the Marne and the Saone would be natural. See T. R.
Holmes 426-30; Ruge, R.E., 'Boii ( i ) ' ; Walbank on Polybius 2. 17. 7.
Umbros agro pellunt: an Italic people related to the Sabellians who
had already been displaced by the Etruscan expansion of the sixth and
fifth centuries and confined to the central Apennines. The Iguvine
tablets remain the principal evidence for their language. See Walbank
on Polybius 2. 16. 3 ; Nissen, It. Land. 1. 502-8.
35. 3 . recentissimi: implies that they were new-comers (cf. also Ps.Scylax 3. 82) but they are named in 34. 5 (n.) among the earliest
migrants. On general grounds it is likely that the Senones, who were
the van of the expansion, should have been among the early settlers
and this is confirmed by Celtic tombs at Casola Valsenio in Picenum
which contain Attic Black Figure ware, acquired presumably from
Spina, datable not later than 490 B.C. (Arias, Notiz. Scavi, 1953,
218 ff.). It is possible that there were two waves of Senones but an
easier explanation of the doublet lies to hand. Polybius (2. 17. 7)
says that the Senones occupied the extremity of the Celtic expansion
ra reXevrata npos OaXdrTrj. If this or a similar Greek phrase occurred
in L.'s source, he may well have mistranslated it, giving rcXevraios a
temporal rather than a topographical force. There is indeed no good
evidence that the captors of Rome in 390 were called Senones. The
earliest versions of the Gallic catastrophe (Theopompus ap. Pliny,
N.H. 3 . 5 7 ; Heraclides ap. Plutarch, Camillas 22; Aristotle ap. Plutarch;
cf. Polybius 2. 22. 4) do not specifically name the Celtic tribe. The
later version, which identified them with the Senones (Diod. 14. 113. 3 ;
Strabo 4. 194; Plutarch; Appian, Celtica n ) , may well be a throw
back from the conquest of the Senones in 283 B.C. See Mommsen,
Rom. Forsch. 2. 300; J. Wolski, Historia 5 (1956), 32-35; Mansuelli,
op. cit. 1075-7.
ab Utente Jlumine usque ad Aesim: mod. Montone and Esino, i.e. from
Ravenna to Sinigaglia.
idparum cerium est: 33. 4 n.
35. 4-55. The Fight Against the Gauls
The second half of the book, treating of Rome's adventures with the
Gauls, is presented as a continuous narrative (41. 3 n., 46. n n.).
715
5- 35- 4-55
391 B.C.
391 B.C.
5- 36. 1
5- 3738
390 B.C.
390 B.C.
5- 37- 2
cf.
also 55. 2, 55. 3 : see the latest discussion by Wolski). It is, however,
certain that the part played by fortune in the battle of Allia was not
invented by L. but was a long-standing attempt to save Roman pride.
Cf. Cannae (23. 24. 6, 23. 22. 1).
38. 5. omnium: Gronovius's certain correction ofhominum.
38. 8. defugit: lit. 'fled d o w n ' ; the word is elsewhere only found in
this sense in 'Itala', Ios. 10. 27 and Arnobius, Nat. 4. 5. They fled
down-stream (cf. 37. 7 defluens).
5 39-43- 5
390 B.C.
390 B.C.
5-39-3
39. 3 . perdita re: the singular is colloquial (Terence, Enn. 258) and,
as such, is appropriate in the mouth of barbarians.
39. 4 . crederet: N read crederent but if nemo is right the subject must be
the singular nemo. T h e corruption is, however, deeper. As the text
stands there is an anacoluthon between Romani who must be the sur
viving inhabitants of Rome and comploraii omnes who are the missing
casualties and, since the scene is set at Rome, the anacoluthon can
scarcely be justified. T h e text of complorati. . . impleverunt is guaranteed
by the significant repetition in 22. 55. 3 against such drastic changes
as that proposed by Sigonius. T h e trouble must lie with crederent and
I suspect that the termination has been affected by the preceding
-erant. T h e neatest solution is that of Heerwagen who would read
credere et but the hist. inf. linked by et to an aorist is artificial and cannot
easily be paralleled. I would consider either credebat. complorati (for
the limitation of Romani by nemo cf. 37. 38. 4 regii. . . aliquot interfecti
sunt) or neminem . . . credidere et (for the pleonasm neminem quemquam
cf. Kuhnast, Liv. Syntax, 202; Riemann, Etudes, 133 ff.; for the varia
tion -ere et -erunt cf. 38. 10 petiere et. . . confugerunt), Welz replaced quam
Romam by cum but that does not meet the logical objection that
Romani and complorati are not identical.
39. 5. stupefecit: elsewhere in early prose only Cicero, de Orat. 3. 53
which is a quotation. A strong word to match the disaster (Accius,
four times in Virgil, Ovid).
39. 6 - 7 . Some doubt surrounds the precise words in which the
Romans' anticipations are framed. It is clear that there are three
views: (1) primo adventu, (2) deinde sub occasum solis, (3) turn in noctem,
signalized by the temporal pronouns. With the first two a verb has
to be understood such as Gallos invasuros esse, while in the third the verb
is expressed (dilatum consilium esse). T h e first two are also qualified
by clauses introduced by quia with the ind. although the whole passage,
being the views of the Romans, is in or. obi. The ind. must be used to
distinguish actually observed phenomena (the Gauls had come up
to the city: there were only a few hours' daylight left) from inferred
intention which are given in the first case by a parenthesis (mansuros
enim . . .foret) and in the third by the clause quo . . . inferrent.
T h e difficulty is concerned with the words given by the manuscripts
as ante noctem rati se (om. Ver.) invasuros. T h e structure of the passage
shows that these words must give the grounds for supposing t h a t the
Gauls would attack before nightfall, based on the observation that
there was only a little daylight left. This rules out N's reading since
the subject of rati se would have to be the Gauls but Ver.'s rati (omit
ting se) is no easier: it could only be construed as a nom. pendens, for the
subject of the main sentence is not the Romans but omne tempus.
Luterbacher's escape from the predicament was to read ratis (sc.
614432
721
3A
5-39-6-7
390 B.C.
Romanis) as a self-contained abl. abs. (cf 4. 44. 7, 60. 1), but a verb
of thinking is not called for at all since the entire sentence is itself in
or. obi. Walters's enim [rati se] gives admirable sense, balancing mansuros
enim, but is palaeographically incredible, while Bayet's satius, if palaeographically attractive, is linguistically impossible (Shackleton Bailey,
Propertiana, 132). Both demands are satisfied by certe, which is also
commended by G. W. Williams (J.R.S. 45 (1955), 229): see further
Cd-5
(I9 1 1 )* H39. 8. continens: 'hard upon the long-drawn-out anxiety came the
disaster itself.
39. 9. placuit: the scene of separation together with the arguments used
in its support {solacia) is a feature of the conventional description of
a beleaguered city which stems from Thucydides (cf. 2. 6. 4, 78. 3 ;
notice TO axpelov). Equally the emotional outbursts attendant on such
separations were elaborated by Hellenistic historians who took as
their model the picture of the Athenian withdrawal in Thucydides
7. 7539. 1 1 . flaminem sacerdotesque Vestales: flaminem sacerdotesque et Vestales
Ver. T w o problems arise: (1) Who is referred to by the singular, unqualified^mm^m? (2) Can sacerdotesbe an attribute of Vestales or did L.
mean, as the reading of Ver. suggests, to distinguish the Vestals from
the other bodies of priests and include both among the fugitives on the
Capitol? O n the first point we should compare 40. 7 where the
Flamen Quirinalis and the Vestal Virgins are working hand in glove.
In writing flaminem without further definition L. is probably guilty
of over-simplification of his sources. We should not delete the word
(Ruperti, Mommsen). Secondly, over the choice between Ver.'s and
N's reading, it must be noted that the story is centred solely on the
Flamen Quirinalis and the Vestals and in none of the sources is
mention made of other priests and that Ver. is prone to insert et after
-que; cf. 4. 14. 4, 5. 40. 7. For sacerdotes Vestales Weissenborn compares
Aul. Gell. 1. 12. 14, 10. 15. 3 1 ; cf. Livy 5. 40. 10, 50. 3.
cultum eorum: sc. sacrorum but the Romans did not have a cult of
sacra: sacra were one form of the cult of the gods. Ver.'s cultum
deorum is to be preferred. For the expression cf. Varro, de Deorum
Cultu; Livy 1. 21. 2, 5. 46. 3 ; Cicero, Tusc. 1. 64; Florus 1. 2. 2.
39. 12. periturae: Stacey, in company with Luterbacher and H . J .
Muller, read peritura with urbe (cf. Sallust, Jug. 35. 10) claiming the
phrase as poetic and Ennian. But periturae is the unanimous testimony
of the manuscripts and peritura would be otiose after imminenti ruinae
urbis. Cf. Seneca, Epist. 104. 11; Austin on Virgil, Aen. 2. 646.
39. 13. quo id aequiore: Jung, elaborating Ver.'s reading, proposed
quod id iniquiore animo 'because the people were taking it (the disaster)
harder than was right' (cf. 34. 2. 14, 44. 35. 4) but the idiomatic quo
722
390 B.C.
5-39. 13
iartv
5. 40. 7- J o
390 B.C.
3 9 0 B.C.
5. 40. 9
5-4i. 2
390 B.C.
390 B.C.
5. 42-43. 5
5. 43- 6-46
390 B.C.
390 B.C.
5- 44- i
5- 44- 7
390 B.C.
4 5 . 1. aequis iniquisque: 'friend and foe alike believed'; for the phrase
cf. 2. 32. 7, 44. 4. 6 ; Plautus, Amph. 173; Propertius 2. 3. 50; Seneca,
Medea 195.
corpora curant \ 3. 2. 10 n.
primo silentio noctis: 7. 12. 1. N's primae s. n. is not found.
4 5 . 2. intuta: an historian's word (9. 41. 1 1 ; elsewhere only in Sallust,
Or. Phil. 17, and Tacitus, e.g. Hist. 1. 33. 2 et al.).
45. 3 . incursione . . .facta: Ver. has excurstone ab oppidanisfacta, omitting
inpalatos. excursione is the choicer word (3. 38. 5, 24. 29. 4) and is more
apposite since we are concerned with the Antiate sally from their city
rather than with the inroad on the Gauls, in palatos is a typical
Nicomachean gloss introduced after exc. had been corrupted to inc. to
explain the objective of the assault. T h e source of the corruption
lies in incursiones facerent below.
45. 4. quadringentensimum: 54. 5 n.
invisitatOy inaudito: cf. 4. 33. 1, 5. 37. 2. T h e asyndeton of nearsynonyms is solemn (cf. 27. 43. 7, 40. 28. 2) and is here particularly
appropriate since it is almost sacral and the words bear a special
emphasis (G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 45 (1955), 228).
45. 6. miseratio: the play of emotions is conventional; cf. Sallust,
Or. Lep. 5 ; Quintilian 4. 2. 112.
45. 7. Q. Caedicio: 32. 6-7 n. T h e personage is a throw-back from the
third century; cf. the exploits of Q . Caedicius, trib. mil. in 258 (Cato
fr. 83 P.). T h e story is modelled on the events of 212 when the soldiers
in Spain appointed L. Marcius their general (25. 37. 6 ; see Mommsen,
Staatsrecht, 1. 692 n. 1). Nothing else is known of Caedicius: for
further speculations see BasanofF, Latomus 9 (1950) 13 ff.
45. 8. ad Salinas: the Salinae, or salt warehouses, were close to the
Porta Trigemina (Plautus, Capt. 90; 24. 47. 15). Their sally would
have brought the Romans based on Veii to the very outskirts of the
city, but the detail is not credible.
46. 1-3. C. Fabius Dorsuo
T h e legend of C. Fabius has its origin in cult. It is the story which
accounted for a particular ritual procession conducted by the gens
Fabia on the Quirinal. T h e connexion of the Fabii with the Quirinal
is not otherwise attested, although it is presumed by the topography
730
390 B.C.
5- 4& 1-3
of 2. 49. 3-7, when the Fabii set out for Cremera, nor can any historical
Fabius be shown to have had his house on the hill. There is, therefore,
at first sight some temptation to accept the version given by Gassius
Hemina (fr. 19 P.) that Fabius went to tend a cult of Vesta, but
Gassius' obsessive interest in Vesta makes his version suspect (cf. frr.
7, 12, 32) and the probable connexion between Luperci Fabiani
( 1 . 5 . 1-2 n.) and the Quirinal might confirm the association of that
gens with the hill. For other gentile cults see Altheim, History of
Roman Religion, 137-44; s e e a ^ s o Otto, R.E., T a u n u s ' ; Wissowa,
Religion, 559 ff.
46. 2. statum: from sistere, cf. 23. 35. 3.
C. Fabius Dorsuo: the praenomen is given as G. by Livy here and at
52. 3. Val. Max. 1. 1. 11 also calls him G. Dio, the only other author
to cite the praenomen, calls him KalotDv (fr. 24. 6) which is more pointed.
T h e cognomen is also variously given: Dorsuo by L. here and for the
consul of 345 (7. 28. 1); Dorso by Gassius (Aopaojv), by Fast. Hyd.,
and by Chr. Pasch. for the consul of 345 and by Veil. Pat. 1. 14. 7 for the
consul of 273. Dorsuo is the better formation: it will describe some
physical peculiarity about his back (cf. Sura). Gf. C.I.L. 14. 3236
(Praeneste) L. Samiari{os) M.f Dosuo.
Gabino cinctu: so Ver. No participle is required, cf. Sallust, Jug.
33. 1. Editors have been led astray by 8. 9. 9, 10. 7. 3 ; Val. Max.
1. 1. 11 Gabino ritu cinctus (cf. C.I.L. 11. 1420. 25) but the text is sound.
T h e Gabine dress was a method of wearing the toga which left the
arms free and unimpeded. It was worn by celebrants on numerous
religious occasions, e.g. at the Ambarvalia (Lucan 1. 596) or at the
opening of the temple of Janus (Virgil, Aeneid 7. 612) but no common
factor can be traced to explain its use. T h e ancients held that it was
originally the dress worn for battle (Festus 251 L . ; Servius, ad Aen. 7.
612) but this is no more than a guess from the term procinctus and from
the ancient enmity with Gabii. It is more likely that it was the traditional
dress worn by Gabine priests which was taken over for certain R o m a n
cults when Gabii merged with Rome at the end of the sixth century
(1. 54. i o n . ; see Mau, R.E., 'cinctus'). There may have been a special
connexion between the original community and cults on the Quirinal
and the cinctus Gabinus: cf. Virgil, Aeneid 7. 612 ipse Quirinali trabea
cinctuque Gabino.
terrorem: 'unmoved by shouts or threats'.
46. 3 . religione: the superstition of the Gauls was proverbial; cf.
Caesar, B.G. 6. 16. 1.
46. 4. (jtumerus) etiam viresque: so Ver., instead of the simple etiam vires
of N. T h e two nouns are wanted, and are found together at 25. 27. 8,
28. 16. 13. For similar omission in N cf. 4. 25. 4, 5. 53. 1.
ex Latio : the detail, if in any way it represents an authentic tradition,
731
5- 46. 4
390 B.C.
390 B.C.
5. 46. 9
5-47
390 B.C.
47. M. Manlius and the Geese
390 B.C.
5- 47- 2
5- 48-50
390 B.C.
48-50. The Withdrawal of the Gauls
Legend and fiction are again blended in the narrative of events which
precedes Camillus' great speech and covers the withdrawal of the
Gauls. In the welter of confused anecdotes the surest legend is the
ransom paid to persuade the Gauls to leave. In its earliest form (Polybius 2. 18. 3) the Gauls heard news of an invasion by the Veneti in
their rear and accordingly retreated home unharmed. There is no
mention of Camillus, no mention of an avenging defeat. T h e ransom
is assumed but not stated. A rival tradition, followed by Timaeus,
which may well be true, held that the Gauls had been defeated and the
ransom recovered, not by the Romans but by the Caeretans in Sabine
country (Diodorus 14. 117. 7 ev rip Tpavaltp 7rehito\ Strabo 5. 220).
T h e first change was to substitute the Romans for the Caeretans,
a change that may have been inspired by the Livii Drusi in the early
third century (Suetonius, Tib. 3. 2). Later developments brought
Camillus into the picture (Diodorus 14. 117; Servius, ad Aen. 6. 8 2 5 ;
cf. Polybius 2. 22). T h e Romans entered into negotiations with the
Gauls and paid the ransom, but as the Gauls were withdrawing
northwards Camillus came up on them and recovered the gold in a
decisive engagement. T h e site of the battle is disputed (49. 6 n.),
Pisaurum according to Servius, OveduKiov according to Diodorus.
T h e version followed by L. improves the tale still more. Plague forces
the Gauls, not the Romans, to open negotiations and Camillus arrives
not after the ransom has been paid and the Gauls have departed but
at the very climax of the scene. T w o details enable us to fix the date
of the source with precision. It must be before 52 B.C. (48. 8 n.), and is
likely to be related to the work of Q . Claudius Quadrigarius (48. 8 n.).
Other less reliable threads have been interwoven. Topographical
speculation provided the legend of the busta Gallica (48. 3 n.) notwith
standing that the mention of pestilence and heat contradicted the
traditional chronology which dated the Gallic occupation of Rome from
July to February. Religious antiquarianism added the ludi Capitolini,
(50. 4 n.), and the foundation of the temple of Aius Locutius (50. 5 n.).
Above all, the curious story of bread being thrown to the hungry
Gauls is a myth to explain the cult of Juppiter Pistor (Val. Max.
7.4. 3 ; Lactantius, Inst. 1. 20. 33 ; Ovid, Fasti 6. 350 with Frazer's n . ; see
Ehlers, R.E., 'pistor (2)': the altar was on the Capitol but in reality the
cult may have been of a thunder-god (pinsere)). T h e same spirit of
antiquarianism supplied the remaining detailsthe rewards paid to
Caere (50. 3 n.) and the matrons (50. 7 n.).
W h a t was in historical truth a Roman humiliation has become
for L. a R o m a n victory, a victory which more than counterbalances
the clades Alliensis (49. 5-6). He presents it in a highly dramatic fashion.
736
390 B.C.
5. 48-50
737
3B
5.48. 5
390 B.C.
390 B.C.
5- 49- 3
5- 50. 2
390 B.C.
390 B.C.
5- 50. 4
5- 51-54
390 B.C.
390 B.C.
5- 51-54
of Augustus. L. was too young and too obscure. Not a personal con
fession of a religious faith. L. shared the cultured caution of his con
temporaries. But an appeal for peace, for the defence of civilization
as he knew it with its tradition and ceremony, its custom and grandeur,
for concord and, above all, for the preservation of Rome.
Only in so far as Augustus shared the same aims can the speech
be said to be Augustan in outlook or in sympathy (54. 7 n.),.
In style it is consciously Ciceronian. In just such terms Cicero
might have reflected upon Rome on his return from exile. This is
not to say that L. has borrowed directly from Cicero but merely that
he has been well schooled in the same discipline. I add below a list
of phrases which have parallels in Cicero:
For 51. 1-2 contentiones . . . dimicatio cf. ad Fam. 2. 6. 5 ; for 5 1 . 2
quoad vita suppetat cf. de Leg. Agr. 2. 100; for 5 1 . 8 tenarum orbi documento
cf. Verr. 4. 82 ; for 51. 10 caeci avaritia cf. pro Quinctio 83; for 52. 1 ecquid
sentitis cf. in Pis. 9 4 ; for e naufragiis emergentes (a common metaphor)
cf. Or. Fr. B. 13. 6; for 52. $forsitan aliquis dicat cf. pro Sulla 84; for
52. 6 ne . . . generatim . . . percenseam cf. in Pis. 86; for 52. 8 quid. . .
intersit cf. Verr. 5. 7 5 ; for 52. 9 recordamini cf. Phil. 2. 28, 5. 2, 13. 5 ; for
53. 1 res ipsa cogit cf. de Leg. Agr. 3. 10; for incendiis ruinisque cf. pro
Sestio 121; for 53. 2 stante incolumi urbe cf. in Catil. 2. 2 ; for 53. 4 gloriosa
posteris cf. post Red. in Sen. 25; for turpis . . . gloriosa cf. de Fin. 2. 97; for
53 5 hoc necessitatis imposuisse cf. pro Sulla 35; for 53. 7 scelera . . .
dedecora cf. in Pis. 32; foi 54. 3 natus educatusque (1. 29. 4) cf. Verr. 3. 60.
Cf. also 51. 5 n., 52. 7 n., 54. 3 nn., 54. 6 n.
M a n y of the arguments used are equally commonplace: in particular
the comparison with the casa Romuli (53. 8 n.) and the concluding
laudes Romae (54. 2-7). It is also significant to observe the clausulae
which in this speech correspond more closely than elsewhere to the
practice of Cicero. Cf. e.g. 52. 8 ff.
See further the brief but thorough summary in Fraenkel, Horace,
268 n. 1 ; and, among other recent works, Burck 134-6; Klingner,
Livius; Ullmann, La Technique des discours, 63-65; Altheim, History
of Roman Religion, 4 2 0 - 2 ; Syme, Roman Revolution, 305; Hubaux 74-88;
Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy, 31-32.
5 1 . 1-2. Prooemium: principium a nostra persona
T h e trope of the consolations of exile is fully developed by Cicero
in the Tusculan Disputations (5. 107 ff.; cf. also ad Fam. 4. 4. 4, 7. 3. 4).
It was conventional to assert that no man could be in exile if he was
a m o n g good men (de Fin. 5. 54).
5 1 . 1. contentiones: Ver. inserts h(a)e but cf. 4. 59. 5, 3. 67. 4. hae
would have no reference.
si miliens: a conjecture first made by Ruddiman's friend MacKenzie.
743
5-5i. i
390 B.C.
45.8.7).
51. 9. terra: the abl. not the dative (or locative) is found with celo; see
Elsperger, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v. 'celo', col. 768. 61-75.
51. 10. belli decus: 1. 42. 5 n.
(b) pium
52. 1. monumental of actions, cf. 26. 41. 11, 37. 6. 6.
ecquid sentitis: 3. 11. 12, 4. 3 8.
744
390 B.C.
5- 52. 2
52. 2, inaugurate: 1. 6. 4 n.
52. 3. quam par vestrum factum est: so the manuscripts. There is no
expressed antecedent for quod. . . conspectum est and an ellipse is barely
tolerable (Pettersson compares 5. 19. 6, 26. 7, 6. 4. 5, but none is an
exact parallel). Hence vestro (Gronovius; also Lallemand, Bayet), i.e.
quam par vestro facto idfactum est, but in such comparisons it is the term
which is to be unfavourably compared which is put in the nominative
(28, 42. 20). 'Your action is hardly to be compared with the noble
example of G. Fabius.' Gronovius proposed adding isti, Drakenborch
followed by Reiz and Weissenborn ei, either before or after est, but the
point would be made more forcefully and the corruption more readily
explained by vestrum factum (illifacU)) est.
sollemne . . . obiit: 'performed the rites', a religious term; cf
Cicero, de Leg. 2. 19.
52. 6. in Iovis epulo: 13. 6 n.; Camillus lists all the age-old ceremonies
which can only be performed in Rome itself, and which it would be
sacrilege to abandon. The Fasti have the entry epulum Iovis twice,
under 13 November, during the later ludiplebeii, and under 13 Septem
ber, the foundation-date of the Capitoline temple, in the middle of the
ludi Romani (27. 36. 9). The image of Juppiter was displayed and
offerings of food laid on a couch (pulvinar) before it. The ceremony,
being part of the Romanus ritus, is of the greatest antiquity, as its
intimate association with the foundation of the Capitoline temple
might suggest. See Wissowa, Religion, 120 ff.
52. 7. Vestae: 1. 20. 3 n. For the significance for the Augustan age
of L.'s remarks about the aeterni ignes see Koch, Religio, 163-5.
signo: the Palladium, a statue of an armed goddess, said to have
been brought from Troy and to be preserved with other sacra in the
shrine of the Vestals. About the antiquity of the tradition there can
be no question, although there was much speculation as to how the
statue reached Rome: according to some authors it was brought by
Diomede (Cassius Hemina fr. 7 P.), according to others by Aeneas
himself (D. H. 1. 69). These doubts, coupled with the cloak of secrecy
which excluded everyone except the pontifex maximus and the Vestals
from the shrine, led certain ancient scholars to deny the existence of
the Palladium (D.H. 2. 66; Plutarch, Camillus 20) but it was an essen
tial part of Rome's claim to her Trojan past, as it was with other
cities (Argos, Athens, Sparta). It is possible that the actual cult-image
which existed in the late Republic and which is illustrated on the
coins of Galba (Mattingly-Sydenham 1. 206. 72) was a manufacture
of Sullan times, sent from Troy by C. Flavius Fimbria after his success
ful campaign against Mithridates in 85 (Servius, ad Aen. 2. 166;
other texts in Greenidge and Clay, ed. Gray, 183-5). It would, how
ever, be quite wrong to think that the Roman belief in the Palladium
745
5- 52. 7
3 9 0 B.C.
only dated from that period too. It was much older, but L. is being
anachronistic when he calls the Palladium a pignus imperii (26. 27. 14;
Servius, loc. cit. illic imperiumfore ubi et Palladium; Cicero, pro Scaur0 48).
Varro had recognized seven pignora quae imperium Romanum tenent
([Servius], ad Aen. 7. 188; see K. Gross, Neue Deutsche Forschungen 1
( T 935)J 3 2 ff"0 D U t t n e concept is not as old as Camillus. Like the
legend of the Sabine cow (1. 45. 2 n.) or of Olenus, it belongs at the
very earliest to the propaganda of the third century when Rome was
waking to her international responsibilities. See Ziehen, R.E., Talladion'; Bomer, Rom und Troia, 61 ff.; Austin on Virg. Aen, 2. 163.
ancilibus: 1. 20. 4 n.
Mars . . .pater: 1. 20. 4 n.
52. 8. Laviniique: 1. 14. 2 n.
religiosum: 13. 8.
52. 10. memores: i.e. recent actions of the Romans in introducing new
cults as and when divinely prescribed might suggest that they had
not lost their old religious faith.
dedicata: applied metonymically to the goddess, rather than her
temple. The usage, which is only here in L., is found in Cicero, de
Domo n o and 136 and in Horace, Odes 1. 31. 1.
52. 12. sed ab: Ver.'s reading which gives the effective antithesis non
voluntate . . . sed metu is to be preferred to N's si ab which would have to
be understood 'if we were restrained from quitting Rome only by
fear and by enemy action'.
52. 13. quid tandem: Seyffert and Hertz, regarding quid tandem as a
self-contained question (54. 1; Cicero, Verr. 3. 180; de Domo 24)
punctuated with a question-mark after tandem and took de sacerdotibus
with the following sentence; but nonne must begin the new sentence
and for quid tandem de cf. pro Sex. Roscio 118.
noctem unam: is this a different prohibition from the familiar de lecto
trinoctium continuum non decubat (Aul. Gell. 10. 15. 14; Plutarch, Q.R.
40; Tacitus, Annals 3. 71; see Wissowa, Religion, 505 n. 5) ? The editor
responsible for the variant text in TTA (see the O.C.T. apparatus)
evidently thought not, for he wrote ultra trinoctum unam for noctem unam.
And he was right, for we know no other evidence for regulations about
leaving thepomerium rather than leaving his bed. The whole taboo, as
Filhol has recently demonstrated (Hommages a L. Herrmann, 359-68,
with bibliography), stems from the religious significance of the perfect
marriage between the flamen Dialis and his wife and is therefore the
model for the most primitive and rigorous type of marriage (by usus)
which could only be broken by an interruption which in the Twelve
Tables became canonized in law as the rule trinoctium abesse.
L. is either ignorant or simplifying. For the Flamen Dialis see
1. 20. 1.
746
390 B.C.
5- 52. 16
(c) legitimum
5 2 . 1 6 . curiata: even by Camillus' time the comitia curiata was probably
circumscribed in function to the passing of the lex de imperio. See
46. 11 n.
centuriata: the comitia centuriata was in origin the army on parade
(1. 43. 1 nn.) and, therefore, met outside the pomerium (Aul. Gell.
15. 27. 4). Camillus' argument is therefore very weak if he is main
taining that the city of Rome, which is the one place in which the
assembly could not meet, is the only place where the Romans could
properly have assemblies.
Tractatio II: (a) necessarium
Camillus now turns to the positive arguments for remaining in
Rome.
53. 1. at enim . . .posse: preserved only by Ver.
53. 3 . vos: ' y u believe that even if the emigration was inadvisable
then, it is inescapable now; I, on the contraryand do not be sur
prised till you understand my meaningam convinced that even if
it was right to consider going while Rome still stood, to abandon her
ruins now would be grievously wrong'.
incolumi [tota] urbe: Ver. omits tota rightly; cf. 3. 47. 2.
(b) gloriosum
53. 8. casa: there were two straw huts with thatched roofs called
casae Romuli, one on the south-west corner of the Palatine and one,
referred to here, on the Capitol (Virgil, Aeneid 8. 654; D.H. 1. 79;
Plutarch, Romulus 20; Dio 48. 43, 54. 29; Vitruvius 2. 1. 5; Seneca,
Contr. 2. 1. 5); venerated relics of the old village communities, they
were jealously preserved and were restored in the traditional style
whenever damaged. Their great antiquity is shown by their resem
blance to primitive hut-urns. The contrast between primitive simplicity
as symbolized in the casa Romuli and decadent civilization was a
rhetorical trope in vogue in the last years of the Republic and in the
early Empire (cf. Seneca, loc. cit.) and the sentimental appeal to
rustic virtues was an all-too-familiar theme (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 2 - 4 ;
cf., e.g., Propertius 4. 1; Ovid, Fasti 1. 199 ff.; Virgil's Georgics of
course appeals to the same spirit of escapism). See Platner-Ashby
s.v. 'Casa Romuli'; A. Boethius, The Golden House of Nero, 15 ff.
53. 9. maiores: 2. 1. 4 n.
silvas paludesque: the hills of Rome were wooded in prehistoric times
and the intervening ground required the cloacae to drain it before it
became habitable. But for the Romans this picture of woods and
swamps was doubtless a mere inference from surviving namese.g.
747
5- 53- 9
390 B.C.
the asylum inter duos lucos (1. 8. 5 n.) and the lucus Petelinus (6. 20. 11 ff.)
or the Caprae palus (1. 16. 1 n.) and the Lacus Curtius (1. 13. 5 n.).
Capitolio<atque>arce: the standard phrase (Wesenberg; see Fugner,
Lexicon, 1345. 26-36). Capitolium arc(em)que is occasionally found
(2. 49. 7, 6. 14. 4, 15. i i , 16. 2 ) ; Capitolium, arx never.
(c) commodum et utile
Camillus moves to his conclusion with a powerful eulogy of the
natural advantages of the site of Rome. Such eulogies were a common
feature of Greek rhetoric. In very similar terms Xenophon celebrates
Athens (Vectigalia 1), praising her climate, her soil, her strategic
position as a centre of trade whether by land or sea. T h e same points
are made by Ephorus about Boeotia (Strabo 9. 400). L. might there
fore have been expected to include such arguments here but his im
mediate model is perhaps closer at hand. Much of Camillus' nostalgia
echoes Cicero's laments (ad Fam. 2. 11. 1, 12. 2, 13. 3) and Cicero
wrote in his de Republica (2. 5 ff.) an eloquent tribute to Rome's
natural situation. So close are the resemblances in detail between
Cicero's and Camillus' words that it is difficult not to believe that
Cicero has directly inspired L.
54. 1. quid tandem?: introducing the new section.
aut. . . -ve: 1. 18. 3 n.
54. 2 . matrem: 1. 56. 12 n.
superficie: a variation of the commonplace . Cf.
Tacitus, Hist. 1. 84. superficies is the structure as a whole and is merely
further defined by tignis: they are not two separate building materials,
cf. Dig. 41. 3. 23 cum aedes ex duabus rebus constant, ex solo et superficie.
54. 3 . equidem fatebor \ must be taken together and not separated as in
the O . C . T . ; cf., e.g., Tacitus, Dial. 21. 1. It follows that a strong stop,
a colon, must be put after iuvat. Camillus is prefacing his avowed
nostalgia for Rome. *I will make a confession to you, although to do
so involves painful memories.' H e then proceeds to qualify this by
saying 'it is my intention merely to recall my own suffering and not to
blame you for causing it'. T h e received text is lucidly vindicated against
change by G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 45 (1955), 228.
colles campique: cf. Sallust, Jugurtha 50. 6.
macerent desiderio: cf. Afranius fr. 352 R.
5 4 . 4 . vicinum: the structure of the sentence is not immediately apparent.
(1) colles, flumen introduce a list of advantages in apposition to
locum and strictly governed by elegerunt, in which event the list will be
continued by mare (so N) vicinum and regionem Italiae mediam (Madvig),
and be rounded off with the restatement (locum elegerunt) ad incrementum
urbis natum unice locum. Against this it must be urged that expositum should
748
390 B.C.
5- 54- 4
naturally qualify locum and not mare (cf. Cicero, Verr. i. 93 exposita ad
praedandum Pamphylia; Mela 2. 76; Tacitus, Histories 1. 11. 3).
(2) As in the O.C.T., saluberrimos . . . accipiantur is a parenthesis
explaining locum, mart (Bauer, Alschefski) vicinum nee expositum agrees
with locum, as also does regionum Italiae medium *a place close to the sea
but not dangerously close, and situated in the middle of the regions of
Italy'. Against this second interpretation it may be urged that regionum
Italiae medium is not Latin (what are the regiones Italiae ?) and that the
parenthesis is awkward and artificial: having started a list of advan
tages we expect it to be continued, expositum may with equal pro
priety be applied to mare (cf. Seneca, Dial. 12. 9. 7 in omnes tempestates
exp. mari; Mela 3. 39) and for the force of medium cf. 10. 2. 15. O n
balance, therefore, the first alternative is preferable.
54. 5. trecentensimus sexagensimus quintus: the number has mystical
rather than chronological significance. Elsewhere L. mentions 360
(40. 1) and 400 years (45. 4) but both are only round numbers. Accord
ing to the chronology used in 4. 7. 1 and the number of intervening
magistrate years, the date ought to be 364, as was given by Varro and
other chronographers (D.H. 1. 74; Pliny, N.H. 53. 16). Bayet (tome
5. 104-7) believes that L. has borrowed the figure of 365 from a
separate work which gave a long chronology (245 years for the kings,
120 for the libera civitas) but in a rhetorical speech such chronological
nicety is out of place. We know that in A.D. 398 a substantial body of
opinion believed that a great cycle in the history of Rome was drawing
to an end in the 365th year after the Crucifixion (Augustine, de Civ. Dei
18. 5 3 ; Claudian, Inv. c. Eutrop. 1. 1-7, 2. 1 ff.) and in their
foreboding recalled Camillus (Claudian, Bellum Geticum 430 ff.;
Elog. Stil. 2. 390 ff.). It is, then, likely that in dating the capture of
Rome to A.U.G. 365, L. is here influenced by the superstitious concept
of a magnus annus, the period that is m a d e up of as many years as a
year is of days. Until Julius Caesar the R o m a n calendar recognized
years of 355 (or with intercalation 377/8) days but the true length
of the solar year of 365 days was certainly realized (Censorinus, de Die
Natali 19) and only conservative prejudice prevented it being adopted
for the calendar. T h e mystical number 365 was probably but not
necessarily an innovation by L. himself. See H u b a u x 60-88.
cum: 'yet not to speak of single enemiesnot the united strength
of the powerful townships of the Aequi and Volsci, not the combined
might of the armies and navies of Etruria, whose vast domains occupy
the breadth of Italy from sea to sea, has ever been a match for you in war'
(de Selincourt).
Conclusio: amplificatio
54. 6. quae, malum, ratio: H u b a u x comments that Camillus speaks
749
5- 54- ^
390 B.C.
390 B.C.
5-55
390 B.C.
5- 55- i
55. 1. opportune emissa: missa Ver. but emittere vocem is standard, cf.
51. 7 et aL Ver. wrongly omits initial e at 3. 63^ 6.
Hostilia: 1. 30. 2 n. It probably perished in the fire; see above.
5 5 . 2. accipere se omen: Plutarch, with a biographer's licence, attri
butes the words not to a passing centurion but to Camillus himself.
It was a form of divination to pick up a chance word or remark and
to accept it in a sense other than that intended by the speaker who
casually uttered it. Such remarks, in Greek /cA^So^e?, were held once
accepted to be irrecoverable. See the discussion by Fraenkel on
Aeschylus, Agamemnon 1653 and the examples collected by Riess, R.E.,
'omen' and Pease on Cicero, de Div. 1. 103.
55. 3 . tegula: cf. Diod. 14. 116 S^/iooxa? KepafilSas ixoptfyovv at \i>*XPl
rod vvv TToXiTiKal KOXQVVTCLL. An inscription from Sparta speaks of
nXivOoi Sa/xdoxat (LG. 5 ( 1 ) 880), but allusions to tegulae publicae are
lacking, materiae caedendae (21. 27. 5, 45. 29. 14) is also official language;
cf. Cato, de Re Rust. 37. 5 ; Caesar, B.G. 3. 29. 1; B.C. 1. 36. 5 ; Ulpian,
Dig. 19. 1. 17. 6.
praedibus . . . perfecturos: for these terms cf. Lex Urson. 75 ( = LL.S.
6087; 44 B.C.) ne quis in oppido aedificium . . . disturbato nisi si praedes II
vir{um) arbitratu dederit se reraedificaturum; LexMalac. 62 ( = LL.S. 6089);
Lex Munic. Tarent. (= LL.S. 6086: after 87 B.C.).
55. 4. dirigendi: derigendi (Zingerle) is perhaps the better form for this
meaning. Cf. the distinction drawn by Isidore, Diff. 1. 153 derigimus
quae curva sunt, dirigimus cum aliquo tendimus. The facts are assembled
by Dittmann, Thes. Ling. Lat.y *dirigo\
55. 5. ut: hardly right, for causa ut is always used with a sense of
purpose (6. 31. 7, 33. 1 . 5 ) : 'the reason for the delay was so that
the enemy should be drawn into battle'. No purpose is intended here.
Perizonius read quod; H a r a n t more simply perferred cur; cf. 7. 9. 2
and further references in Thes. Ling. Lat.y 'caussa', coll. 675-7.
CORRIGENDUM
p. 83, line 22. For Romulus' read R e m u s '
752
INDEX I
PERSONS
L. Accius, 218.
P. Accoleius Lariscolus, 50, 182.
M. Acutius, 646.
Postumus Aebutius Cornicen (cos.
442 B . C ) , 549.
L. Aebutius Helva (cos. 463 B.C.), 404.
M. Aebutius Helva, 549.
T, Aebutius Helva (cos. 499 B . C ) , 284,
286.
P. Aelius (quaestor 409 B.C.), 616.
Sex. Aelius Paetus, 449.
L. Aelius Tubero, 16.
Q. Aelius Tubero, 16-17.
Q . Aelius Tubero (cos. 11 B . C ) , 16.
Mam. Aemilius (mil. trib. 438 B . C ) ,
557 573 588.
C. Aemilius Mamercinus (mil. tr. 394
B . C ) , 686.
L. Aemilius Mamercinus (mil. tr. 389
B . C ) , 697.
M \ Aemilius Mamercinus (cos. 410
B . C ) , 614.
M. Aemilius Mamercinus (mil. tr. 391
B . C ) , 697.
Ti. Aemilius Mamercus (cos. 470 B.C.),
386.
Aeneas, 33, 39-4 579 6 2 8 , 671.
Agamemnon, 579.
Agrippa (Silvius), 45.
M. Agrippa {aed. 33 B . C ) , 214.
L. Albinius, 723, 724.
L. Albinius Paterculus, 311, 313.
Alexander Polyhistor, 44.
L. Alienus, 448.
Allodius, 660.
Ambigatus, 708.
Amulius, 660.
Annii, 327.
T. Annius, 327.
Antalcidas, peace of, 629.
Antenor, 36.
L. Antestius Gragulus, 596.
Ti. Antistius (tr. pi. 422 B . C ) , 596,
Ascanius, 42.
M Asellius (tr. pi. 422 B . C ) , 596.
G. Asinius Pollio, 3.
A. Aternius, 447-8, 521, 648.
A. Atilius Galatinus (cos. 258 B . C ) , 103.
L. Atilius Priscus (mil. tr. 399 B.a.),
654Atys Silvius, 44.
Aucno, 703.
Augustus, 2 ff., 563-4, 676, 680, 684,
739 743 750.
Bellovesus, 709.
Brennus, 719.
Cacus, 55-58.
Gaedicii, 370.
L. Gaedicius, 370.
M. Gaedicius, 698.
Q . Gaedicius, 730.
L. Galpurnius Piso (cos. 133 B . C ) , 125,
213.
600-1.
291.
G
754
INDEX I
M. Curtius, 76.
Mettius Curtius, 76.
C. Curtius Philo (?cos. 445 B.C.), 76,
529L. Decius (tr. pi. 415 B . C ) , 609.
Deldo, 563.
Demaratus, 141.
Dibmede, 579.
Dionysius I of Syracuse, 614, 629.
(cos. 447
PERSONS
Proculus Geganius Macerinus (cos.
440 B . C ) , 552.
T. Geganius Macerinus (cos. 492
B . C ) , 256.
Genucia gens, 369, 456-7.
Cn. Genucius (tr. pi. 473 B . C ) , 372-3.
T. Genucius (tr. pi. 476 B . C ) , 368-9.
Cn. Genucius Augurinus (mil. tr. 399
B . C ) , 654.
M. Genucius Augurinus (cos. 44 B . C ) ,
528.
Harpagus, 711.
Heraclitus, 449.
Heraclitus of Ephesus, 450.
Ap. Herdonius, 423.
Turnus Herdonius, 199-200.
Lars Herminius (cos. 448 B . C ) , 515.
T. Herminius Aquilinus, 259.
Hermocrates, 450.
Hermodorus, 449.
Hersilia, 73.
Himilco, 689.
Hipparchus, son of Gharmus, 239.
Hippolytus, 193.
Horatia, 114 f.
Horatius Codes, 258-9; statue, 260.
P. Horatius, 109, 114, 116.
M. Horatius Barbatus (cos. 449 B . C ) ,
469.
M. Horatius Pulvillus (cos. 509 B . C ) ,
232, 253.
M. Horatius Pulvillus (cos. 457 B C ) ,
446.
L. Hortensius (tr. pi. 422 B . C ) , 597,
601.
L. Hortensius, 597.
Hostus Hostilius, 77.
'lullus Hostilius, 105-6, 124.
L. Icilius (tr. pi. 456 B.C.), 447.
L. Icilius (tr. pi. 412 B . C ) , 613, 616.
Sp. Icilius (tr. pi. 470 B . C ) , 383.
Inuus, 53.
Julia gens, 123.
Proculus Julius, 84-85.
C.Julius lullus (cos. 482 B . C ) , 350.
C.Julius lullus (mil. tr. 408 B.C.), 617,
696.
L. Julius lullus (mil. trib. 438 B . C ) ,
T 557
L.Julius lullus (mil. tr. 403 B . C ) , 631.
L.Julius lullus (mil. tr. 401 B . C ) , 646.
Vopiscus Julius lullus (?cos. 473 B . C ) ,
371.
C.Julius Mento (cos. 431 B . C ) , 575.
Junia gens, 311.
C.Junius (tr. pi. 423 B . C ) , 594.
L. Junius Brutus, 216, 217, 232.
755
756
INDEX I
L. Numitorius, 382.
P. Numitorius, 484, 495.
Onomarchus, 660.
Oppia, 349.
Oppia gens, 349,461.
G. Oppius, 461.
M. Oppius, 461, 491.
Sp. Oppius, 461.
Gn. Oppius Gornicinus, 462.
Orgetorix, 504.
Num. Otacilius, 598.
Papiria gens, 147, 238, 615, 725.
M. Papirius Atratinus (? cos. 411
B . C ) , 613-14,615.
M. Papirius Grassus (cos. 441 B . C ) ,
551L. Papirius Cursor (censor 393 B . C ) ,
696.
L. Papirius Mugillanus (? cos. sufF.
444 B.C.), 543.
L. Papirius Mugillanus (cos. 427 B.C.),
5 8 4- . .
M. Papirius Mugillanus (mil. tr. 418
B . C ) , 726.
Q . Petilius Spurinus (praetor 181
B . C ) , 89-90.
G. Papius (tr. pi. 65 B . C ) , 616.
G. Papius (quaestor 409 B . C ) , 616.
Pinarii, 60-61.
L. Pinarius Mamercus (mil. trib. 432
B . C ) , 574.
Poetelii, 461.
? Sex. Pollius (tr.pl. 420 B . C ) , 600-1.
Polydamas, 579.
Pompeius Trogus, 702.
Sex. Pompeius Fostlus, 49.
Numa Pompilius, 88-90, 98-99, 101,
102, 103.
? Sex. Pompilius
600-1.
PERSONS
A. Postumius Albinus (cos. 99 B.C.),
609.
A. Postumius Albinus (mon. c. 96
B.C.), 286.
757
423
suff.
591,
591,
218
B.C.), 592.
758
INDEX I
1O4 fF.
Sp. Tullius, 160.
Ulysses, 579.
Uqnus, 703.
Valeria, 334.
Valeria gens, 250, 321.
Valerius Antias, 12-16, 402.
M'. Valerius (? diet. 501 B.C.), 282.
M. Valerius, 286.
M. Valerius (cos. 505 B.C.), 272, 286,
408.
M. Valerius (aug. 463 B.C.), 408.
P. Valerius, 286.
M'. Valerius Maximus (diet. 494 B.C.),
250, 3 6 , 407M. Valerius Maximus (quaestor 45O
B.C.), 438.
M. Valerius Maximus (mil. tr. 398
B.C.), 658.
M. Valerius Maximus Corvus (cos.
300 B.C.), 232.
PERSONS
T. Veturius Gcminus (cos. 462 B.C.),
410, 456.
C. Vetusius Cicurinus (cos. 499 B.C.),
284.
Ap. Villius (tr. pi. 449 B.C.), 496.
P. Villius Tappulus (cos. 199 B.C.), 496.
Vindicius, 241 ff.
759
G. Viscellius (?) Ruga, 311.
C. Visellius Aculeo, 242.
Vitellia gens, 242, 243.
Volumnia gens, 415.
P. Volumnius Amintinus (cos. 461
B.C.), 415.
Vulca, 213.
INDEX II
Gapitulum, 331.
Capua, 580, 591-2, 703.
Carnutes, 710.
Carthage, 580, 614, 674, 689, 711.
Carventum, 614-15, 618, 621.
Casuetani, 614.
Celtae, 707; see also Gauls.
Cenomani, 713.
Girceii, 215, 331, 681, 682-3.
Clusium, 234, 255, 627, 705, 699-700,
714.
Gnidus, 689.
Collatia, 154, 222.
Golumen, 435.
Cora, 276, 280, 627.
Corbio, 287, 331, 332.
Corfinium, 742.
Gorioli, 319, 331, 523.
Gorniculum, 154.
Corsica, 711.
Cortona, 705.
Cremera, 359 ff., 630.
Crustumerium, 68, 284-5.
Cumae, 234, 255, 256, 269 ff., 291, 321,
37! 502, 574 580, 654, 689, 704.
Cures, 79.
Delphi, 458, 664-5; consultation by
Tarquinius Superbus, 216; consulta
tion in 398 B.C., 655, 660-1; offering
by Romans, 689 ff.; supposed source
of lectisterniciy 655.
Dicaearchia, 291.
Ecetrae, 302, 331, 625.
Eneti, 36.
Ephesus, 181-2, 450.
Ere turn, 440.
Etruria, 255, 626 ff, 703 ff.
Euganei, 35.
Falerii, 628, 641, 644, 674, 685-6.
Felsina, 703, 713.
Ferentinae lucus, 200, 280, 329.
Ferentinum, 613, 625.
Feroniae lucus, see Lucus Feroniae.
Ficana, 136.
Ficulea, 155.
Fidenae, 81, 119, 275, 284, 364, 559-60,
569-70, 582-3, 585, 600, 627.
Gabii, 205-6, 209, 731.
PLACES AND
Gauls, 627, 666, 697, 699 ff., 702, 704,
708-15, 716, 719, 720, 727, 728-9,
731* 736, 737Henna, 321, 502.
Hercynei Saltus, 709.
Hermunduli, 135-6.
Hernici, 207, 280, 337, 339-40, 371,
388, 394, 400, 407 5 r 7Illyria, 706.
Inregillum, 274.
Insubres, 713.
Labici, 331, 333, 407, 439, 605-7, 608,
664.
Laevi, 713, 714.
Lanuvium, 283, 439. 578.
Laurentes, 39.
Laurolavinium, 39.
Lavinium, 39, 240-1, 331.
Leontini, 580.
Libui, 714.
Liguria, 714.
Lingones, 715.
Lipari, 660, 689 ff., 704.
Longula, 318, 331.
Lucus Feroniae, 124, 440.
Malitiosa silva, 124.
Mantua, 705.
Massilia, 182, 660, 702, 711-12.
Mediolanium, 712, 713.
Medullia, 155.
Melpum, 712.
Mugilla, 331, 332.
Nepi, 629, 630, 644, 672.
Nomentum, 155, 586.
Norba, 280, 322.
Numicus, R., 41.
Ortona, 350, 625.
Ostia, 138, 139-40, 321, 582.
Pedum, 331, 333.
Perugia, 705.
Phocaea, 711.
Pisaurum, 736.
Poeninum, 715.
Politorium, 136.
Polusca, 318-19, 331.
(Suessa) Pometia, 164, 276, 280, 302.
Populonia, 627, 705.
Praeneste, 285, 359.
Prisci Latini, 45.
Raeti, 706.
PEOPLES
761
762
INDEX
II
INDEX
III
GENERAL
{Including Roman topography)
accensi, 170.
addictio, 4 8 3 .
A d m u r c i a e , 137.
aediles, 406, 5 0 3 , 5 8 3 , 604.
aequare libertatem, R e p u b l i c a n slogan,
448.
A e q u i m a e l i u m , 536.
aerarium, 5 2 1 , 6 1 6 .
aerarium facere, 5 7 3 .
aes equestre, 171, 6 4 3 .
aes grave, 6 2 3 .
aes hordearium, 172. 6 4 3 .
aes rude, 6 2 3 .
aes signatum, 6 2 3 .
age for military service, 508.
ager publicus, 340, 606, 607.
a g r a r i a n laws, 338, 340.
Aius Locutius, 6 9 8 , 7 4 1 .
alter, m e a n i n g of, 4 5 5 .
ampliatio, 602.
ancilia, 100.
A n n a l e s , 6 n. 1, 256, 529, 5 4 3 , 566,
574 577, 6 2 9> 692, 6 9 5 ; m a t e r i a l
from the A n n a l e s , 124, 177-8, 181,
248, 2 5 6 - 7 , 257, 2 7 1 , 275, 279, 282,
284, 285, 294, 302, 3 1 1 , 315, 316,
320, 3 2 1 , 325, 336, 347, 349 350,
359, 367, 3 7 i , 3 8 1 , 3 8 3 , 387, 393,
394, 397, 398, 4 0 1 , 4 0 3 , 404, 405,
407, 4 0 8 , 4 1 1 , 415, 4 2 3 , 434, 436,
445, 446, 4 5 1 , 4 9 5 , 527, 542, 544,
552, 558, 572, 5 8 1 , 582, 5 8 3 , 584,
585, 589, 592, 602, 604, 605, 608,
6 1 3 , 616, 6 2 5 , 6 4 5 , 6 5 1 , 6 5 3 , 664,
682, 689, 690, 694, 697.
annona, 256, 3 2 1 , 552.
antistes, 184.
Apollinare, 513.
Apollo, 5 1 3 ; associated with L a t o n a ,
6 5 6 ; t e m p l e , 574, 5 8 3 , 6 5 5 .
Argei, 104, 258.
armillae, 74, 75.
a r m o u r , hoplite, i n t r o d u c e d , 167, 540,
576.
A r t e m i s , t e m p l e of, at Ephesus, 181.
aspersions on p a r e n t a g e , 161.
Asylum, 6 2 - 6 3 .
A t h e n a , cost of s t a t u e of, 212.
A t r i u m libertatis, 546.
audacia, as a political t e r m , 375.
augurs, 408.
auspices, 5 3 1 - 2 , 5 4 1 , 584.
magis
764
INDEX
clientela, 4 7 9 - 8 0 .
cloaca maxima, 2 1 4 ; cf. 747.
Cluilia fossa, 107, 3 3 1 .
C l u s t u m i n a (tribe), 284, 292.
C o d e x Veronensis, inserts s at e n d of
w o r d s , 4 1 0 ; inserts n, 4 7 9 ; inserts
c, 4 2 2 ; inserts -que, 437, 6 9 5 , 7 3 0 ;
omits et, 4 2 2 ; omits se, 4 9 1 , 5 1 1 , 7 2 5 ;
omits initial e, 7 5 2 ; omits final m,
4 2 8 ; interpolates syllables, 4 6 7 ;
shares n o glosses with N , 7 4 4 ;
affects inflates, 5 5 3 , 616, 6 9 6 ; tele
scopes, 410, 4 8 1 , 5 7 3 ; trivializes, 406,
480, 5 1 1 , 5 1 6 ; c o r r u p t s b y assimila
tion, 4 8 4 ; w o r d - o r d e r , 419, 4 2 1 , 430,
437, 467> 475, 476, 5!o> 5*2, 516,
5 J 8 , 5 J 9> 554 57<>> 572, 5 9 1 , 6 4 3 ,
694, 6 9 7 , 729coercitio, 615.
cognomina, 319, 560, 5 6 3 , 569, 6 1 5 . 6 6 3 .
coinage, R o m a n , 6 2 3 .
collegium mercatorum, 304.
colonies, size of, 6 8 3 .
comitia centuriata, 1 7 2 - 5 , 325, 3 8 1 , 497,
667, 6 9 8 , 733, 747.
comitia curiata, 4 0 8 - 9 , 733, 747.
comitia tributa, 310, 3 8 1 , 3 8 5 - 6 , 497,
667, 6 9 2 ; quasi-comitia of a m i n o r i t y
of tribes, 6 0 4 .
C o m i t i u m , 151, 482.
commentarii, 2 3 1 , 535.
conclamatio, 594,
C o n c o r d i a , 346.
condicionem quaerere, 484.
conditor alter, as title, 739.
coniuratio, 362.
consecratio bonorum, 3 4 3 , 500.
consilium domesticum, 328.
consilium . . . virtus, 5 1 1 .
Consualia, 6 6 , 724.
consulship, 2 3 0 - 1 , 5 1 8 - 1 9 , 527.
conubium, 4 5 3 , 477, 5 2 7 - 8 , 537.
co-option of tribunes, 514.
corona aurea, 444, 558.
corona Etrusca, 2 7 3 .
cuniculi, 570, 628, 659, 672.
C u r i a Hostilia, 123.
curiae: R o m u l u s ' creation of,
80;
ceremonies, 117; powers, 4 0 8 - 9 .
curio maximus, 6 0 8 - 9 .
C u r t i u s Lacus, 7 5 - 7 6 , 79.
C y p r i u s vicus, 192.
d a t e of e n t r y into office, 4 0 4 - 5 , 410.
Decernvirate, the, 412, 449 fF., 4 5 1 - 4 ,
4 5 5 , 456, 5 2 1 ; second D e c e m v i r a t e ,
461 ff., 477, 499.
decemviri stlitibus iudicandis, 5 0 1 .
decimation, 385.
d e d i c a t i o n , of temples, 254.
III
deditio, 153-4, 6 8 8 .
deprecatio, 326.
descensio Tiberina, 152, 587.
desertion, military, 579.
deversoria, 202.
devotio, 674, 725.
di manes, 429.
di parentes, see Penates.
di praesdies, 406.
D i a n a Nemorensis, 182, 193, 200, 6 5 7 .
D i a n a , o n A v e n t i n e , 1 8 1 - 3 , 440, 450.
D i a n i u m , 193.
dice, a n c i e n t g a m e s w i t h , 5 5 9 - 6 0 .
dictatorship, 281 fF., 309, 576, 728, 738.
dies Alliensis, 360, 717.
dies Cremerensis, 366.
Diespiter, 112.
Dioscuri, 286, 287, 2 8 8 - 9 .
Dius Fidius, 103.
doliola, 7 2 3 - 4 .
duplicarii, 384.
iiviri aedi dedicandae, 348.
iiviriperduellionis, 114, 3 2 3 - 6 , 339, 3 4 4 .. 5, 369, 370.
iiviri sacris faciundis, 655.
earthquakes, 415.
economic depression at R o m e after
500 B.C., 2 9 3 - 4 , 4 9 7 - 8 , 572.
Egeria, 102.
e m p i r e , a n c i e n t a t t i t u d e to, 6 8 8 - 9 .
E q u i r r i a , 587.
equites, 152; n u m b e r of, 6 4 2 ; dis
m o u n t e d , 286, 288, 5 9 2 ; a t Veii, 6 4 3 ;
census equester, 642.
ergastula, 299.
Esquiline, the, 179.
evocatio, 674 FT., 6 7 7 .
exile, consolations of, 7 4 3 .
exoratio, 674.
fabula, m e a n i n g of, 675.
falsus testis, 326.
familia, 344.
fasces, 62, 2 3 5 - 6 , 2 5 1 , 2 8 1 , 374, 4 6 3 - 4 .
F a u n u s , see Silvanus.
Feriae L a t i n a e , 125, 665.
fetiales, 110-12, 127 fF., 440, 584.
Ficus, see N a v i a , F i c u s ; R u m i n a l i s ,
Ficus.
fidem Quiritium implorare. 300,
Fides, 103.
fines, 369, 4 4 8 , 582, 692, 699.
flamen Dialis, 724, 746.
flamen Quirinalis, 722, 724.
flamines, 97, 722.
F l a m i n i a , P r a t a , 497.
F l a m i n i u s , Circus, 497.
formula census, 546.
fortuna c o n t r a s t e d with virtus, 708.
GENERAL
For tuna inforo Boario, 680.
Fortuna Muliebris, 336.
Fossa, see Cluilia fossa; Quiritium fossa.
fur manifestos, 486.
fustuarium, 640.
Gabinus cinctus, 731.
gaesatae, 716.
geese, 734.
gentes, plebian and Etruscan, 293, 310;
maiores and minores, 147-8, 236;
sacra, 532.
Graecus ritus, 583, 655.
Greek: episodes adapted from Greek
mythology and history:
Alba Longa, 118, 120-1.
Ancus Marcius, 127, 146,
Asylum, 62-63.
Bellovesus, 707.
Camenae, 103.
Consualia, 66.
Coriolanus, 315, 326, 334.
Corioli, 320.
Cremera, 359 ff.
Decemvirate, 453, 457.
Demaratus, 141.
Evander, 52.
Falerii, 688-9.
Hercules and Cacus, 55.
Horatii and Curiatii, 112.
M. Horatius, 254.
L.Junius Brutus, 218.
Lucretia, 219, 221.
Agr. Menenius, 312.
C. Mucius, 262.
Numa, 89, 103.
Numitor, 47.
Pallor and Pavor, 118.
Rome, capture of, 684, 720, 726.
Romulus, 46, 53, 64, 84.
Tanaquil, 144.
Tarpeia, 74-75.
Sex. Tarquinius, 195, 205.
L. Tarquinius Collatinus, 239.
L. Tarquinius Priscus, 143, 151, 161,
162-3.
L. Tarquinius Superbus, 195, 197,
212, 216, 217.
Thalassio, 69.
Lars Tolumnius, 560.
Servius Tullius, 186, 194, 197.
P. Valerius Publicola, 250.
Veii and Troy, 589,620,628,637,663.
Virbius, 193-4.
battle of Regillus, 286 ff., 289.
battle of 509 B.C., 250.
battle of 495 B.C., 302.
battle of 480 B.C., 354.
765
766
INDEX
Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex
252.
III
767
GENERAL
praeda, 346-7; disposal of, 414, 588.
praefectus annonae, 552.
praefectus urbis, 229, 411.
praeire, 567-8.
praeiudicium, 472.
praetor maximus, 231.
princeps civitatis, 392.
proconsul, 399.
prodigies, public and private, 217, 248,
349,403,415.
provinces, allocation of, 395.
provocation 252, 282, 300, 373, 432, 499.
Publilia (tribe), 653.
Pudicitia Plebeia, 487.
Puteal Libonis, 482.
quaestiones, procedure in, 595, 602;
origin of, 611-12; Manilia, 612;
Postumiana, 611-12.
quaestores, 252, 323-6, 329, 344-5, 437,
598, 616, 698.
Quietis, fanum, 595.
Quinctra prata, 442.
Quirinal, the, 178, 364, 730.
Quirinus, 73, 84, 132, 724; aedes, 568;
Hora Quirini, 73.
Qui rites, 79.
Quiritium fossa, 139.
Ramnes, 80; see tribes.
regia, 216.
rerum repetition 127, 130.
rex sacrorum, 237-8.
right-hand, burnt for perjury, 262.
Rome, earliest settlement, 31-32:
Etruscan, 140-1; Roma quadrata, 751;
sacked by Gauls, 719-20, 751;
rebuilt, 751; eternal, 536, 745;
Romae laudes, 748; disease at, 394-5;
prophecies of fall, 520, 662, 679, 749;
see also 'economic depression'.
rostra, 378.
Ruminalis, ficus, 49.
sacer, 500, 501, 502.
Sacer Mons, 489.
sacra, 532, 723, 745 f.
sacramentum, consular, 226; military,
355.362,431,636.
sacrosanctity, 500, 615.
Salii, 98-99, 167-8.
Salinae, 730.
salt-trade, 138, 257, 359.
sanguinea hasta, 135.
Sapinia (tribe), 696.
Saturn, 290.
Saturnalia, 657.
Scaptia (tribe), 523.
Sceleratus Vicus, 194.
schools at Rome, 480-1, 687.
3 O 6 > 333,
335.
35^,
380,
39 2 ,
768
I N D E X III
INDEX IV
814439
3D
INDEX V
LATIN
ad arma, 424.
adaeque, 599.
adclarare, 9 3 .
adeste . . . adeste, 3 7 5 .
aequo Marte, 337.
agitate aures, 389.
alienigenae, 416.
amoliri, 6 7 8 .
apisci, 534arae focique, 692.
arma viri, 334.
at enimvero, 6 4 5 .
at saltem, 78.
augere caelestium numerum, 60.
augustus, 60.
aurora prima, 5 8 .
foflf locatus, 348.
00720 ammo m , 163.
bonum, faustum, felixque, 88.
cadit ira, 335.
cadit spes, 249.
cadunt animi, 389.
cedere nocti, 509.
Celticum, 707.
ciere bellum, 719.
ciere pugnam, 77.
clamor et concursus, 191.
coemptionalis senis, 524.
cognominis, 713.
commilitones, 375.
compar, 67.
compos patriae, 131.
compos praeda, 5 2 2 - 3 .
comprimere, 4 8 .
condicere, 133.
conficere, 522.
confodire, 522.
consciscere, 134.
consentire ( = adsentiri), 134.
convallis, 78.
corio, satisfieri de, 322.
cottidie magis, 420.
crastino die, 377.
cratera, 689.
culpa, 4 8 .
curare corpora, 397.
cuspis, 562.
damnare voti, 6 8 4 .
dare impetum, 287.
decus . . . praesidium, 165-6.
defigere with a b l . , 113.
defluere, 288.
dehinc, 226.
delenimentum, 612.
deme terrorem, 78.
demortuus, 6 9 7 .
deorum benignitate, virtute militum,
describere, discribere, 165.
dicta dedit, 510.
dicto audiens esse, 163, 636.
discedite, 379.
ductu et auspicio, 392.
dum . . . ne, 4 3 3 .
ng.
effrenus, 587.
egens, 249.
ergo ego, 335egregia stirpe, 116.
evidens, 744.
e x c i t u s somno, 5 8 .
expetere, 107.
exposcere pacem, 409.
expugnare, 224.
exsequi, 226.
exsignare, 101.
exsudare, 553.
facesse hinc, 190.
fas (as a n invocation), 130.
fatiloquus, 6 0 .
fecisse videri, 3 7 3 .
felix (of the d e a d ) , 509.
felix arfor, 682.
FERRO, IGNI, quacumque vi possim, 227.
ferro via facienda est, 579.
fidem sequi, 306.
forsan, 486.
fortes bellatores, 6 7 3 .
fortes et felices, 3 6 3 .
fremitus, 389.
fulgent gladii, 113.
fundere etfugare, 307.
gerere rem gladiis, 307.
globus, 357.
gravare, 57.
hodieque = etiam hodie, 6 3 8 .
hodierna luce, 86.
hosticus, 707.
iam satis, 512.
imaginarius, 4 7 4 .
imperitare, n o .
imus, infimus, 184.
LATIN
incensus or infensus ira, 208.
incertus animi, 58.
increpare, 113.
indidem, 687.
indiges, 42.
infensus and infestusy 357, 548.
infit, 108.
infortunium, 202.
ingerere, 389.
ingruere, 675.
inopinatus and necopinatus, 440.
inter tela volantia, 78.
intermiscere, 617.
interpres deum, 60.
intonare, 487.
intutus, 730.
ius fasque, 41.
lacrimae obortae, 224.
liberi (of a single child), 479.
lucescere, 578.
matte, 265.
malum, 610.
meliusest,474.
meminisse horret animus, 329.
metari, 72.
miris modis, 221.
molesbelli,278.
moles mali, 718.
morem gerere, 512.
multa caedes, 579.
multi mortales, 68.
mults saepe, 419.
ne = nae, 646.
ne nunc = nedum nunc, 493.
-ne ut, 532-3.
nectitur dolus, 53-54.
nedum u/, 422.
nimio plus, 329.
numen movere, 210.
ob, 735occidione occidere, 368.
operae est, 662.
operae pretium est audirey 441.
ordines ducere, 375.
os praebere, 591.
otiumterere,221.
pace loquor, 430.
pernox, 690.
perstringit horror, 113.
popule (vocative), i n .
praeceps in volnus abire, 356.
praeda, 302.
praesens, 78.
praestare, 377.
pro deumfidem,518.
procedit, 352.
proceres, 357.
prognatus, 160.
proloqui, 533.
prosecare, 676.
pudet deorum hominumque, 430.
purus, 134.
qua . . . qua, 323.
-que et, 168.
quid ita, 341.
quid si non, 537-8.
quisque = quisquis, 109-10.
quod quoad, 93.
quin = qui-ne (with indicative),
quomodo di volunt, 159.
rapere exta, 676.
rara acies, 357.
redire ad se, 163.
regiones, 92.
reportare for referre, 406.
resupinare, 562.
Romane, cave, 664.
salve parens, 86.
satinsalve,224.
scirelicet,158.
sequius est, 329.
si dis placety 534.
si sciensfallo,355,
sisemel,673.
siris, 131.
somnis, in, 328.
sonitus flammae, 727.
sordere, 575.
sospitare, 86.
spoliari et virgas expediri, 375.
strenuus et fortis, 485, 535.
sublimis abire, 144.
sublimem rapere, 86.
sublustris, 735.
suggillari, 590.
tantisper, 26.
terra marique, 94.
terriculay 646.
tetricus, 91.
turbatores belli, 274.
tuta omnia, 223.
ufcwa (pass.), 739.
unatenore,348.
uf adsolet, 664.
ut fere fit, 188.
f quando, 663.
B*(i) (introducing a prayer), 93.
vacuum . . . facere} 188.
772
vadere, 58.
velitis iubeatis, 187.
veridicusy 60.
vestigia, 224.
victoria dari, 663.
videlicet, 237.
INDEX V
vi viamfaciunt, 594.
viden, videsne, 158.
vinctus somno, 729.
vir, 224.
wcare in partem praedae, 675.
volens propitius, 86.
INDEX VI
A U T H O R S AND PASSAGES
(a) Literary
A n o n . , de Viris Illustribus 14. 6 : 366.
A p p i a n , B.C. 1. 2 1 : 514.
Asconius, in Mil. 31-32 C l a r k : 4 1 8 .
Caesar, B.G. 1. 1. 1: 707.
L . C a l p u r n i u s Piso, fr. 25 P . : 657.
C a t o fr. 58 P . : 280.
Cicero:
pro Balbo 3 2 : 714.
5 3 : 320.
de Domo 1: 385.
1 2 3 - 5 : 343Phil. 9. 4 - 5 : 5 5 8 - 9 .
Tusc. Disp. 3. 8 1 : 6 3 5 .
de Rep. 2. 4 0 : 170.
2. 6 0 : 338.
ad Fam. 9. 2 1 . 2 : 546.
ad Q.F. 1. 1 . 4 : 162.
L. Cincius A l i m e n t u s :
ap. Festus 276 L . : 3 9 9 - 4 0 0 .
ap. A u l . Gell. 16. 4 . 1: 135.
Q . C l a u d i u s Q u a d r i g a r i u s ap. A u l .
Gell. 9. 1 3 : 3 2 3 .
D i o d o r u s Siculus:
n . 6 8 . 7 : 309.
n . 6 8 . 8 : 382.
11. 88. 1: 4 3 8 .
12. 2 3 . 1: 456.
12. 3 1 . 1: 580.
12. 76. 4 : 580.
14. 97. 1: 6 8 6 .
14. 102: 6 9 3 .
14. 117: 736.
Dionysius of H a l i c a r n a s s u s :
3. 29. 7 : 122, 606.
3- 5 6 : 1534. 3 0 : 189.
4. 4 5 . 4 : 2 0 1 .
4. 7 1 : 227.
5. 6 1 : 280, 322.
6. 9 5 : 3176. 9 2 : 320.
7. 6 8 : 328.
8. I 4 ~ 3 6 : 3 3 1 8. 8 9 . 4 : 349.
8. 9 1 . 1: 350.
9- 2 : 350.
9. 6 9 . 2 : 4 1 1 .
10. 2. 4 : 416.
10. 26. 2 : 350.
11. 16. 4 : 472.
12. 9 : 6 5 7 .
E n n i u s 196 V . : 738.
E
~ p i c u r u s , K. A. 3 3 : 6 8 8 .
Festus:
160 L . :
166 L . :
180 L . :
208 L . :
216 L . :
380 L . :
426 L . :
500 L . :
296,
317
339,
476,
28
680,
535,
696,
H o m e r , Iliad:
3. 15 ff.: 286.
4. 220 ff.: 357.
11. 252 ff.: 579.
15- 1-2: 357Horace:
Odes, 3. 30. 8 - 9 : 520.
Sat. 1. 2.^37: 352.
Epist. 1. 5. 4 - 6 : 580.
Justin:
20. 52. 4 - 8 : 702.
24. 4 : 702.
Livy:
7 - 5 - 9 : 540.
10. 22. 1: 3 9 1 .
10. 37. 14: 278.
2 1 . 26. 3 : 7 1 1 .
22. 1. 2 0 : 290.
22. 6. 3 : 562.
24. 5- 5 : 4 6 3 26. 4 8 . 14: 444.
27. 11. 2 : 139.
29. 2. n : 3 9 1 .
30. 1. 9 : 3 9 1 .
30. 10. 12: 3 6 1 .
32. 17. 8 : 307.
33. 8. 6 : 184.
33. 37. 6 : 714.
Lucretius:
1. 2 8 9 : 466.
3. 4 5 1 - 4 : 6 6 8 .
Ovid:
Amores 3. 14: 225.
Fasti 2. 200 ff.: 363 ff.
2. 2 2 3 - 4 : 365.
2. 8 1 1 : 223.
Pausanias, 10. 16. 7 : 689
774
Petronius:
Sat. 124: 587.
Eleg. 28: 486.
Plato:
Phaedo 60 b: 637.
Laws 952 e: 639:
Plautus:
Amph. 212 ff.: 389.
258-9: 154.
Rudens 631: 329.
1269 ff.: I33-4Pliny, N.H.:
18. 15: 556.
33. 45: 172.
34. 13: 698.
Polybius:
2. 17.4: 713.
INDEX
VI
Terence:
Heaut. 281-4: 222.
Phormio 231-3: 119.
Theocritus, Idyll. 15. 28-29: 188.
Thucydides:
1. 13. 6: 711.
2. 7. 2: 580.
6. 104. 2: 712.
Timagenes F 2 Jacoby: 710, 711, 712.
Valerius Antias ap. Pliny, N.H. 28. 15:
211.
Valerius Maximus:
5-8. 2:339.
9 - 9 - 3 : 559Varro, de Ling. Lat.:
5. 81: 541.
5-83: 39 1 6. 7: 218.
7. 2 : 218.
14.3236: 731.
Dessau, I.L.S.:
129: 210.
4318:210.
7-8:92.
7. 105: 296.
Virgil, Aeneid:
2. 241 ff: 675.
2. 486 ff.: 120.
8. 72-73: 260.
9. 186 ff: 263.
9. 590 ff: 354.
1-literary
Oscan Law of Bantia: 176.
. / / . 3 5 ( 1 9 1 1 ) , 149:689.
B.G.U. 611: 386.
Notiz. Scaviy 1928, 392: 658.
Studi e Materiali, 30 (1959), logff.: 289.
Studi Etruscki, 21 (1950), 147 ff.: 704.
Weege, Vase. Camp. Inscr. Ital. 22: 591.
0/ R. s. CONWAY and
Books VI-X. Edited 0/ c. F. WALTERS a
Books XXI-XXV. Edited 0/ c. F. WALTE
H.
Ill.
K. JOHN
A. H. MC
THE GEOGRAPHIC BA
M. CAR Y
FOREIGN CLIENTELAE
By
E. BADIAN
GAIUS: A BIOGR
By
A. M. HONOR
OXFORD UNIVER