Alonso-Núñez An Augustan World History - The 'Historiae Philippicae' of Pompeius Trogus G&R1987

An Augustan World History: The 'Historiae Philippicae' of Pompeius Trogus
Author(s): J. M. Alonso-Núñez
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Greece & Rome, Second Series, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Apr., 1987), pp. 56-72
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/642972 .
Accessed: 10/12/2012 22:20
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Greece &Rome.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.206 on Mon, 10 Dec 2012 22:20:58 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Greece and Rome, Vol. XXXIV, No. 1, April 1987
AN AUGUSTAN WORLD HISTORY:

THE HISTORIAE PHILIPPICAE OF POMPEIUS TROGUS*
By J. M. ALONSO-NUITEZ
The political unification of the Mediterranean world in the last epoch

of the Roman Republic doubtless provided the stimulus for the
composition of world histories. One of these is the only universal
history written in Latin, under the title Historiae Philippicae, by
Pompeius Trogus in the time of Augustus. The original work is lost,
but we have an Epitoma produced around the year A.D. 200 by Ius-
tinus. The prologi, which contain summaries of the original work,
have been preserved, but there is no indication of authorship.
Prior to Pompeius Trogus, Diodorus of Sicily had composed in 40
books a universal history called the Bibliotheca Historica.1 This
covered the history of the world from the earliest times down to his
own age, the last event mentioned being the foundation of a colony of
Roman citizens at Tauromenion after the inhabitants were expelled
by Octavian in 36 B.C., because they had sided with Sextus Pompeius
(16.7.1). The structure of the Bibliotheca Historica of Diodorus is
similar to that of the Historiae Philippicae of Pompeius Trogus: the
first books are devoted to oriental history, and are followed by Greek
and Hellenistic history until the time of Caesar. A contemporary of
Pompeius Trogus, Nicolaus of Damascus, composed a monumental
world history in 144 books,2 going from Ninus, the legendary king of
Assyria, down to the death of Herod the Great (4 B.C.); he followed
a similar structure to that employed by both Diodorus and Trogus.
To the same group of works which have the world as their subject
belongs the Geographikaof Strabo,3 another contemporary of Trogus.
This work represents in the field of geography what the world his-
tories of Diodorus of Sicily, Nicolaus of Damascus, and Pompeius
Trogus do in the field of historiography.
Like the works by Diodorus and Nicolaus the Historiae Philippicae4
of Pompeius Trogus is universal, both from the point of view of time,
as it begins with the first organized world-empire, that of Ninus (a
name which very likely corresponds to Tukulti-Ninurta I (1244-1208
B.C.) during whose reign Assyria became a great power), and con-
tinues until the time of Augustus, and from the point of view of space,
since the work covers the world known to the Romans at the time of
its composition. There are even references to the time before Ninus.
As indicated, the structure of the work is similar to that of the works
by Diodorus and Nicolaus: oriental, Greek, and Hellenistic history
THE HISTORIAE PHILIPPICAE OF POMPEIUS TROGUS 57
until the author's own time. It must be noted that the Historiae Phi-
lippicae is the only world history written in Latin by a pagan. We
must await until the beginning of the fifth century A.D. to find an-
other world history written in Latin: the Historiae adversumpaganos5
of Paulus Orosius, Christian in inspiration and written under very
different political circumstances from those in which Trogus
composed his work. It must also be noted that both authors came
from the western provinces of the Roman Empire: Trogus from Gallia
Narbonensis, Orosius from Gallaecia.6
We have some information about the personality of Pompeius
Trogus in Iustinus, Epitoma 43.5.11-12. After the section on Massalia
he writes: 'In postremo libro Trogus: maiores suos a Vocontiis origi-
nem ducere; avum suum Trogum Pompeium Sertoriano bello
civitatem a Cn. Pompeio percepisse, patruum Mithridatico bello
turmas equitum sub eodem Pompeio duxisse; patrem quoque sub C.
Caesare militasse epistularumque et legationum, simul et annuli
curam habuisse.' He was a Vocontian, whose grandfather had obtained
Roman citizenship from Pompey because of his participation in the
Sertorian War (77-72 B.C.). This grant of citizenship was validated
by the lex Gellia Cornelia of the year 72 B.C. His paternal uncle
commanded a squadron of cavalry (turba equitum) in the Mithridatic
War (66-63 B.C.). It seems that his family changed sides at the right
moment, since, under Caesar, his father was in charge of letters,
legations, and the seal (epistularumque et legationum, simul et anuli
curam habuisse). To explain the fact that a Roman of the third gener-
ation was able to write a world history it should not be forgotten that
Gallia Narbonensis very likely became a Roman province as early as
121 B.C., that the Vocontians had been conquered by Rome in 125/4
B.C., and that Pompeius Trogus belonged to the romanized pro-
vincial elite of southern Gaul. It is possible that the inscription CIL
XII, 1371 could refer to a relative of his. It is remarkable in any case
and shows how deeply romanized that elite was. Since Pompeius
Trogus was born in the south of Gaul, he was interested in the
neighbouring regions, and included sections on Ligurian and Mas-
salian history in book 43 and devoted the forty-fourth and last book
of his work to the Iberian Peninsula, which, incidentally, is the first
general history of Spain. The involvement of his grandfather in the
Sertorian War may help to explain his interest in Spanish matters.
On the other hand, it is very likely that Pornpeius Trogus was writing
for an audience from the western provinces of the Roman Empire.
Romans and Italians of his time were not interested in world history
to the extent of reading such extensive works as the Historiae Phi-
lippicae; and from the language in which Diodorus and Nicolaus wrote
58 THE HISTORIAE PHILIPPICAE OF POMPEIUS TROGUS
it is obvious that they were not seeking readers either among the
inhabitants of the city of Rome or in Italy.
The title of the work, Historiae Philippicae, is intriguing, but has
precedents in Greek historiography. It was employed in the fourth
century B.C. by Theopompus7 as well as by Anaximenes of
Lampsacus.8 A possible explanation for the use of such a title by an
author of the Augustan age is that the main subject of his work is the
rise and decline of the Macedonian monarchy. The majority of the
books of the work are in fact devoted to a narration of these events.
He begins in book 7 with the origins of Macedonia and ends in book
33 with the fall of Perseus and the war against Pseudophilippus. Both
chronological points of reference are clearly stated in the prologi:
'Septimo volumine continentur origines Macedonicae regesque a
conditore gentis Carano usque ad magnum Philippum', i.e., from the
origins until Philip II; the narrative then continues through the other
books until 'Tertio et tricensimo volumine continentur haec. Ut cum
Perse Philippi filio, rege Macedonum, Romani bellum gesserint: ...
Bellum rursus in Macedonia gestum a Romanis cum Pseudophilippo.'
This shows that the history of the Macedonian monarchy comprised
a substantial part of the work: from book 7 to book 33. Six of the 27
books in which Macedonian history is told in relation to other events
are devoted to the res gestae Philippi and to the res gestae Alexandri. If
we understand the title of the work as referring, not to the end of the
Macedonian monarchy, but to the end of the monarchies descending
from Alexander then the work continues until book 40, in which
Pompeius Trogus described the end of the Ptolemaic monarchy:
'Quadragensimo volumine continentur haec ... Ut successit eius
regno soror Cleopatra, quae inligato in amorem suum M. Antonio
belli Actiati fine extincxit regnum Ptolomaeorum.' The number of
books of the work up to this point is 40, like the Histories of Polybius 9
or the Bibliotheca of Diodorus. In that case it would be a history of
the Hellenistic world preceded by oriental and Greek history, to which
the author has added another four books to narrate events which had
a more immediate interest: the Parthians in books 41 and 42, the
Italian, Ligurian, and Massaliotan history in book 43, and the history
of the Iberian Peninsula in book 44. Another approach to the problem
of the title of the work is 1:oconsider Trogus' opinions of Philip II of
Macedonia. In Iustinus, Epitoma 6.9.6-7 we read that with Philip
begins the slavery of Greece. On the other hand, the internal rival-
ries of the Greeks were the cause of Macedonian rule, as is stated at
8.4.7-9. The battle of Chaironeia (338 B.C.) marks the end of the
freedom of Greece, as is stated at 9.3.11: 'Hic dies universae Graeciae
et gloriam dominationis et vetustissimam libertatem finivit.' Moreover
Pompeius Trogus does not have a good opinion of Philip II, as 9.8.4-
10 clearly shows. From the standpoint of the analysis of these texts
the title could be interpreted as a pessimistic one: the end of Greek
freedom and the consequent degeneration of the Macedonian
monarchy. If there is any hint of Rome in all this, it is only a matter
for speculation,'0 and cannot be proved. Another possible explana-
tion of the title might be that Pompeius Trogus intended to write
world history as Theopompus had done in his Philippica, i.e., a history
with plenty of digressions. This explanation is much more in agree-
ment with the second part of the title Totius mundi origines et terrae
situs, where the author anticipates the ethnographic and geographic
components of the work. In the prologi appear the origines of forty
peoples, cities, countries, and kings and five situs, or descriptions of
the geographic locations of towns, regions, and peoples. The origines,
which are in the tradition of the Hellenistic narrative of KTLaELs,
have a precedent in Rome before Trogus in the Origines of Cato.-
Nevertheless, the origines are not the main concern of Pompeius
Trogus, who only speaks about the origins of peoples when the ruling
empires or powers came into contact with them.12 The first to employ
this historiographic technique was Herodotus in his Aoyot.
Pompeius Trogus probably felt the necessity of having a world his-
tory written in Latin for an audience in the provinces of the western
part of the Roman Empire, and this was one of the reasons for com-
posing his work. His standpoint is completely different from that found
in Roman historiography, which is concerned with the history of the
city of Rome. Trogus' subject is not the history of the city of Rome,
but the history of the world. Therefore we find in him information
that does not appear in other Latin authors. If we compare Pompeius
Trogus with his contemporary Livy, we can realize the enormous
difference that there is between the two conceptions of history.
On the other hand, Pompeius Trogus - so far as we can see from
the contents of the prologi and from what has been preserved in the
Epitoma of Justinus - follows a synchronic method according to which
events happening in various parts of the world at the same time are
described simultaneously. The narrative goes from East to West, to
finish with the submission of Spain to Augustus in the year 19 B.C.
Actually in the last paragraph of the work the author refers to the war
which was waged against the Cantabri and Astures from 26 to 19
B.C. and was concluded by Agrippa: 'Nec prius perdomitae pro-
vinciae iugum Hispani accipere poteurunt, quam Caesar Augustus
perdomito orbe victricia ad eos arma transtulit populumque barbarum
ac ferum legibus ad cultiorem vitae usum traductum in formam pro-
vinciae redegit' (44.5.8).
As far as the East is concerned the last event mentioned appears in

the prologus to book 42: 'Reges Tocharorum Asiani interitusque
Saraucarum.' The empire of the Sacaraucae or Saka-rawaka (which
means 'wandering Scythians') was located in Afghanistan, Pakistan,
and the North-West of India and, thanks to numismatic and epi-
graphic evidence, it is known to have flourished from 57 B.C. - the
year of the beginning of the Vikrama Era - for a period of three
generations. Recently some inscriptions have been found which refer
to the last days of the Indo-Scythians, and one of them can be dated
to the year A.D. 6. It is likely that the fall of the Sacaraucae or Indo-
Scythians, which is mentioned by Trogus in the prologus, took place
not long afterwards. It is possible that Trogus may have given a more
precise chronology in book 42, but as it is lost we can not be certain.
If we accept this hypothesis the work would have been composed
after the year A.D. 613
To date the work we have several points of reference in the Epitoma
of Iustinus. 41.5.8 reads: 'Tertius Parthis rex Priapatius fuit, sed et
ipse Arsaces dictus. Nam sicut supra dictum est, omnes reges suos
hoc nomine, sicuti Romani Caesares Augustosque, cognominavere.'
When referring to the third Parthian king Priapatius (ca. 191-176
B.C.), he says that the Parthians named all their kings 'Arsaces', just
as the Romans called them 'Caesares Augustosque'. This allusion in
the plural to the Roman rulers could be interpreted as meaning that
the work was composed under Tiberius, but it seems more likely
that it is an insertion by Iustinus. At 42.4.16 we read: 'Sed fatum
Parthiae fecit, in qua iam quasi sollemne est reges parricidas haberi,
ut sceleratissimus omnium, et ipse Phrahates nomine, rex statueretur.'
Here he is referring to the murder of Phraates IV by his son Phraates
V in the year 2 B.C. Phraates IV in his turn had murdered his father
Orodes II. Thus the year 2 B.C. is a terminus post quem for dating
the work. 42.5.10-12 reads: 'Post haec finito Hispaniensi bello, cum
in Syriam ad conponendum Orientis statum venisset, metum
Phrahati incussit, ne bellum Parthiae vellet inferre. Itaque tota Parthia
captivi ex Crassiano sive Antoni exercitu recollecti signaque cum his
militaria Augusto remissa. Sed et filii nepotesque Phrahatis obsides
Augusto dati, plusque Caesar magnitudine nominis sui fecit, quam
armis facere alius imperator potuisset.' The release of the prisoners
from the army of Crassus captured in the battle of Carrhae (53 B.C.)
and from the armies of Decidius Saxa and Antony captured in 40 and
36 B.C. respectively, as well as the return of the militaria signa, took
place in the year 20 B.C. The militaria signa were placed in the
penetrale of the temple of Mars Ultor in the year 2 B.C. It is likely
that Trogus saw these militaria signa in Rome. In the Epitoma of
Iustinus the release of prisoners and return of the militaria signa took
place at the same time; this does not correspond to reality, and must
be explained by assuming that Iustinus was shortening the original of
Pompeius Trogus; nevertheless he keeps the chronological succession
of events. This confirms the year 2 B.c. as the terminus post quem.
The sons and grandsons of Phraates IV were given as hostages to
Augustus about the year 10 B.C. This is in any case a terminus post
quem. Augustus 14 mentioned in the Res Gestae (29.2) the return of
the standards, which took place in the year 20 B.C.; Res Gestae 32.2
records the sending of hostages from king Phraates IV to Augustus
about the year 10 B.C. On the other hand, since in the work of
Trogus-Iustinus there is no reference to the battle in the saltus Teu-
toburgiensis (A.D. 9), in which Varus was defeated and which rep-
resents a turning point in Augustus' foreign policy, this date can be
taken as a terminus ante quem. Thus a date between 2 B.C. and A.D.
2 is the most suitable for the composition of the Historiae Philippicae.
Our knowledge of the historical work of Pompeius Trogus is
seriously limited since the original has not been preserved; we only
have the Epitoma produced by Iustinus, which is an anthology rather
than a compendium of the Historiae Philippicae.14 A more precise
idea of the original work is provided by the Prologi, which are
something like the Periochae of Livy: summaries of the contents of
the books.'"
It is not possible to indicate here the sources that Pompeius Trogus
employed for every single book of the Historiae Philippicae. Generally
speaking it can be said that he had a main source for each book, and
that he supplemented his narrative with material derived from
secondary sources. He certainly made use of oral sources as well.16
Concerning the date of composition of the Epitoma by Iustinus,
A.D. 226 could be proposed as the terminus ante quem, because there
is no mention of the Sassanians taking over the rule in Iran from
the Arsacid kings and this is a serious omission in a work in which
the confrontration between Parthia and Rome plays an important
role. The otherwise unknown Iustinus composed the Epitoma of
the Historiae Philippicae, probably because he thought that the
public regarded large-scale works as uninteresting and unfashion-
able.17
The first paragraph of Iustinus' Praefatio clearly reveals Pompeius
Trogus' purpose: ' ... Graecas et totius orbis historias Latino
sermone conposuit, ut, cum nostra Graece, Graeca quoque nostra
lingua legi possent', i.e., to make accessible to the Latins Greek and
world history. It is clear that Trogus had intended to write a universal
history (Praefatio, 2). From what Iustinus says (Praefatio, 3) we see
that Trogus chose and organized his material, and arranged his work
chronologically; we also know that the original had 44 volumes
(Praefatio, 4). From Iustinus we learn (Praefatio, 4) that when in
Rome he produced a 'florumcorpusculum'of the original, implying, as
already stated, that his work is more an anthology than a real epitome;
we also learn that his criteria were to preserve what excited curiosity
and, following a moralizing tendence, preserve any exempla for his
readers. The preface is written as an epistle, in which he says that he
wishes to be corrected by his readers, to display the fruit of his otium
(Praefatio, 5), and, fearing envy, he trusts that the future will appreci-
ate his work (Praefatio, 6).18
The basis of history are chronology and geography, but from the
Epitoma of Iustinus it is impossible to reconstruct any chronological
system for Pompeius Trogus, even if he had any. He gives the im-
pression of having drawn on the chronology offered by his sources.
The Epitoma preserves only a few scattered chronological references.
If we look at his conception of geography we shall observe that his
geographical descriptions are connected with his ethnographic dig-
ressions. His geographical knowledge corresponds to that of his age
and he follows a scheme in which the easternmost people are the
Indians, the southernmost the Egyptians, the northernmost the
Scythians, and the westernmost the Spaniards; at this point Pompeius
Trogus ends his historical narrative.
The actor in history for Pompeius Trogus is mankind, not the city
of Rome. This universal conception has roots in Stoic philosophy.19
Pompeius Trogus describes historical evolution according to the
succession of world empires, but this theory does not originate with
him; he has only adapted it to his own purposes and political thinking.
He begins with the Assyrian Empire, continues with the Median, the
Persian, and the Macedonian Empires, and concludes with the
Roman, and, in opposition to it, the Parthian power sharing with
Rome the rule of the world.20
The first to formulate the succession of world empires was Hero-
dotus, 1.95 and 1.130, who refers to the Assyrian, Median, and
Persian world empires. Such a succession of world empires is also to
be found in the Persika of Ctesias, preserved in the Bibliotheca of
Diodorus 2.1-34. The theory of the succession of world empires ap-
pears the first time in Latin Historiography in the work of the mysteri-
ous Aemilius Sura, author of the lost work De Annis Populi Romani,
of which only the following trace has been preserved in Velleius
Paterculus 1.6.6: 'Assyrii principes omnium gentium rerum potiti
sunt, deinde Medi, postea Persae, deinde Macedones; exinde duobus
regibus Philippo et Antiocho, qui a Macedonibus oriundi erant, haud
multo post Carthaginem subactam devictis, summa imperii ad

populum Romanum pervenit. Inter hoc tempus et initium regis Nini
Assyriorum, qui principes rerum potitus, intersunt anni
MDCCCCXCV.' In this extract, which must be dated after the battle
of Magnesia (190 B.C.) and before the outbreak of the Third
Macedonian War (171 B.C.), there appears a succession of world-
empires similar to that later formulated by Pompeius Trogus: Assyria
- Media - Persia - Macedonia - Rome. The only difference is that
Trogus has contrasted the Parthians with Rome. A contemporary of
Trogus, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Antiquitates Romanae 1.2.2-4
and 1.3.1-5 gives the same succession, but without mentioning the
Parthian Empire at all; for Dionysius the Roman Empire represents
the completion of historical evolution, and he does not even mention
the possibility of another empire to match or to succeed the Roman.
The Historiae Philippicae began with the description of the trans-
latio imperii: 'Primo volumine continentur haec. Imperium Assy-
riorum a Nino rege usque ad Sardanapallum: post quem translatum
est per Arbacem ad Medos, usque ad ultimum regem Astyagem. Is a
nepote sua Cyro pulsus regno, et Persae regno potiti.' Ninus, king of
Assyria, was the first to undertake an expansive policy: 'Primus
omnium Ninus, rex Assyriorum, veterem et quasi avitum gentibus
morem nova imperii cupiditate mutavit' (1.1.4). We can observe that
Trogus was aware that to attempt a policy of expansion was the first
characteristic of a world empire, another being to occupy territories:
'Ninus magnitudinem quaesitae dominationis continua possessione
firmavit' (1.1.7). Next (1.1.8) Trogus describes Ninus' way of acting
until he had conquered the Orient: 'Domitis igitur proximis, cum
accessione virium fortior ad alios transiret et proxima quaeque victoria
instrumentum sequentis esset, totius Orientis populos subegit.' In
1.3.6 he mentions the first translatio imperii, from Assyria to Media
by Arbactus after the death of Sardanapalus - the name corresponds
to Assurbanipal (668 - ca. 631 B.C.); in 1.6.16-17 he records the end
of the Median Empire, when Astyages was defeated by Cyrus. Then
the Persians took over and after controlling Asia they waged war
against the Scythians (1.8.1), and under Cambyses added Egypt to
their empire (1.9.1). The Persian Empire ended with the victory of
Alexander over Darius III (10.3.7). In 11.14.6-7 the takeover of world
rule by Alexander after the battle of Gaugamela is mentioned, and in
11.15.10 Trogus says, in words attributed to Darius III, that Alex-
ander was the supreme ruler of the world. In 12.16.5 he even says
that his destiny to rule was predicted on the day of his birth; he also
says (9.8.21) that the foundations of the world empire of Alexander
were laid down by his father Philip. Trogus stresses in 12.7.4 the
universal character of Alexander's empire: 'Post haec Indiam petit, ut

Oceano ultimoque Oriente finiret imperium.' The borders of his
empire should coincide with those of the world. As an expression of
homage to Alexander, embassies from all parts of the world arrived
when he was in Babylonia (12.13.1-2).
Pompeius Trogus describes in 30.3.3 the earthquake which took
place in Rhodes and in other cities of Asia Minor in 198 B.C., the
year before the battle of Cynoscephalae, and at 30.4.4 he says that the
seers interpreted this as a sign that Rome was going to defeat
Macedonia. The importance of the decisive battle of Cynoscephalae
is stressed in the speeches of Philip V and Flamininus before the
battle (30.4.6-14). On the other hand, in 33.1.7 a prodigy announces
the fall of the Macedonian monarchy the day before the battle of
Pydna (168 B.C.). Another earthquake foretells Roman control of
Syria, according to the interpretation given by the soothsayers
(40.2.1). In 40.2.5 the Orient appears under Roman control. Syria
actually became a Roman province in 63 B.C., and Pompeius Trogus
points out that rivalries among the Hellenistic kings facilitated the
Roman conquest. Finally, in 43.3.2, it is stated that the Romans, after
defeating their neighbours, became the masters of the world: 'fini-
timisque populis armis subiectis primo Italiae et mox orbis imperium
quaesitum.' The work concludes with the conquest of Spain and the
completion of a world empire by Augustus.
But Trogus is aware of the importance of the Parthians, to whom
he devoted two books (41 and 42) of his Historiae Philippicae. His
view of them is expressed at 41.1.1, where he says that they share the
rule of the world with the Romans: 'Parthi, penes quos velut divisione
orbis cum Romanis facta nunc Orientis imperium est, Scytharum
exules fuere.' They appear as the world empire in the East while the
Romans are the world power in the West; by a rhetorical device they
are also presented as descendants of the Scythians. On the other hand,
this passage contradicts 11.12.15, where referring to the final struggle
between Persia and Macedonia, he says: 'Ceterum neque mundum
posse duobus solibus regi, nec orbem summa duo regna salvo statu
terrarum habere.' Here Trogus seems to believe that there was room
only for a single world power. His treatment of the opposition between
Parthia and Rome is a sign of his awareness of the political situation;
it shows how much more realistically minded he was than, for in-
stance, Dionysius of Halicarnassus. In 12.4.12 Trogus indicates that
there is a continuity between the Persians and the Parthians by saying
that the latter descend from the Persian noble Andragoras. Moreover
in 11.15.1-2 he had already pointed to a continuity between Persians
and Parthians by saying that Darius III, the last king of the Persians,
died in the country of the Parthians, who in the future will take over
world rule in the Orient; at 41.1.7 he stresses that they defeated the
Romans. In my opinion Trogus intended to show the Parthians as the
moral heirs of the Persians and to emphasize the duality between East
and West. Moreover, in 41.4.6 he draws attention to the figure of
Arsaces I, the founder of the Parthian dynasty in 247 B.C.: 'Erat eo
tempore Arsaces, vir sicut incertae originis, ita virtutis expertae.' As
in the case of the formation of the Macedonian kingdom, where
Trogus points to the virtus of the kings (7.1.4), he also stresses the
virtus of Arsaces, and in 41.5.5 he compares him with Cyrus, Alex-
ander, and Romulus. The rise of the Parthians is also attributed to
virtus in 41.1.6. However, in 41.6.2 he says that Mithridates I (171-
138 B.c.) had risen to great power thanks to fortuna.
We see that Pompeius Trogus was universalistic in outlook, that
for him Rome was an empire like the others, and that though she was
last in the series Rome must face another world power in the East:
the Parthians. The importance given to the Parthians in all these
passages seems to contradict 42.5.10-12, where Trogus alludes to the
release of prisoners and the return of militaria signa, implying the
inferiority of the Parthians to Rome. This lack of consistency may be
explained by assuming an evolution in Trogus' thought during the
different stages of the composition of his work; or it may be a retouch
by Iustinus, in whose epoch the Parthians were a more serious threat
to Rome than they were under Augustus.
As we have seen, Trogus took up the topic of the succession of
world empires: Assyria - Media - Persia - Macedonia and at the end
put Rome in confrontation with Parthia, expressing in this way the
views of his own time. If we compare his attitude towards the Roman
Empire with that of Dionysius of Halicarnassus we see that he was
much more realistic and objective than Dionysius, and that in Trogus
this topic corresponds to a real political situation, while in Dionysius
it is a rhetorical theme. The vision of political circumstances is much
clearer in the work of this historian from southern Gaul than in that
of a cultivated Greek settled in Rome like Dionysius, whose main
concern was friendship and reconcilation between Greeks and
Romans. It should not be forgotten that Trogus' paternal uncle had
served during the Mithridatic War and that therefore it was probably
through him that Pompeius Trogus knew about the reality of political
circumstances in the East.
To explain changes in political circumstances Pompeius Trogus has
introduced the notion of fortuna. In an important passage, when re-
ferring to the triumph of the Romans over the Macedonians after the
battle of Cynoscephalae, he says: 'Sed Macedonas Romana fortuna
vicit' (30.4.16). On this occasion, according to Trogus, it was fortuna

- not virtus - which decided the political change. This is not very
complimentary towards Rome. Moreover, fortuna has also accom-
panied Rome in the conquest of the Orient: 'Iam enim fortuna
Romana porrigere se ad orientalia regna, non contenta Italiae terminis,
coeperat' (39.5.3). It must also be noted that fortuna helped Romulus
and Remus to survive: 'Sed fortuna origini Romanae prospiciens
pueros lupae alendos obtulit, quae amissis catulis distenta ubera ex-
inanire cupiens nutricem se infantibus praebuit' (43.2.5). It is clear
that Trogus saw the rise of Rome and the subsequent conquest of the
world by the Romans as a consequence not of virtus, but of fortuna,
and from this perspective the work is certainly not pro-Roman. It
should be remembered that in contrast to Rome the rise of Macedonia
was the result of a combination of the virtus of the kings with the
industria of the people, as Trogus clearly says in 7.1.4. And at
13.1.15 there is an indication that the rivalries among the successors
of Alexander were provoked by fortuna. If we compare the way in
which Trogus approaches the rise of Macedonia and his approach to
the rise of Rome it is obvious that his sympathies were for the former,
not for the latter power.21
As is usual in Roman historiography, one of the characteristics of
the work is a tendency to moralize. Trogus develops the theme of
corruption because of luxuria or wealth. For instance, degenerate
customs are responsible for the defeat of the Lydians by Cyrus
(1.7.13), Persian gold corrupts the Greeks (2.14.6), while Alexander
adopts bad customs after the conquest of Persia (12.3.8-12) and conse-
quently is criticized by his army (12.4.1). In contrast to degeneration
caused by wealth Trogus stresses that the Scythians had neither gold
nor silver (9.2.15) and that the Parthians only employed gold and
silver for their weapons (41.2.10). In Trogus' work there also appears
a sort of providentialism: some kind of intervention by the divinity
occurs, to punish man because of the profanation of temples, murder,
treason, war declared without motive, haughtiness, etc.
In close connection with the topic of the succession of world
empires is that of the origins of political life. He states (1.1.1-3) that
political organization began with the monarchy. It seems that in primi-
tive society the virtue of moderatio was the condition for becoming
king. Society had no laws, but was ruled by the arbitria principum.
The world was organized into different kingdoms which did not
attempt a policy of expansion. Ninus was the first to undertake such a
policy (1.1.4) and was thus the founder of the first world empire, the
Assyrian.
Related to the topic of the origins of political life is that of the
THE HIS TORIAE PHILIPPICAE OF POMPEIUS TROGUS 67
origins of civilization (2.1.5-21), in which is included a dispute be-

tween Scythians - the most northerly people - and Egyptians - the
most southerly - about their antiquity (2.1.5). According to the
Egyptians, civilization began in Egypt (2.1.6-9), but the Scythians
thought that they had been the first civilized people (2.1.10-21).
Pompeius Trogus seems to follow the opinion of the Scythians. In
2.6.3-6 there is a further discussion on the origins of civilization in
relation to Athens, and in 3.2.5-12 and 3.3 Trogus presents the
Spartan constitution of Lycurgus as a pattern to follow. Attention
must be paid to the fact that Athens and Sparta are very important
for Trogus, who adopts a pro-Hellenic attitude. He complains about
the moral degeneration of Athens (8.2.8-12), which led to her defeat
by Philip of Macedonia, and he also regrets the loss of the military
virtues of the Spartans at the time of the attack of Cassander (14.5.6-
7). For Trogus (8.1.1) lack of unity brought about the ruin of the
freedom of the Greek cities.
To the prehistory of the world empires belong the Scythians, who
attempted to conquer Asia three times, without themselves being
conquered by anybody else, according to Trogus (2.3.1); at 2.3.5 it is
said that the Romans too did not conquer the Scythians: 'Romanorum
audivere, non sensere arma.' In 2.1.3 the Scythians appear as the
predecessors of the Parthians and Bactrians, and again in 2.3.6 it is
stated that 'Parthicum et Bactrianum imperium ipsi condiderunt'.
The assertion of a Parthian Empire and afterwards of a Bactrian is a
rhetorical device. According to him the first empire would be a
Scythian one, preceding that of Ninus, because in 2.3.18 he states
that Ninus was the first to stop the payment of tribute to the Scy-
thians; but this assertion can not be confirmed historically. In this
context 1.1.6-7 should be noted: here, Trogus says that Vezosis (this
is a degenerate form of the name Sesostris, borne by three pharaohs
of the XII dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.), though it could be a mythical
name as well) and Tanaus, king of the Scythians, had begun conquests
in countries far away from their homes; but, in contrast to Ninus,
they had not sought power, but only glory (1.1.7). Therefore the
Scythian empire cannot be considered a real world-empire in the
political meaning of the word. Yet Trogus is a strong believer in the
advantages of the way of life of primitive peoples, which explains his
admiration for the Scythians. What he says at 2.4.4-33 about the
Amazons is perhaps vaguely inspired by what he had heard concerning
the Samartians. From the criticism of Persian imperialism put into the
mouth of Tamyris, queen of the Scythians (1.8.13), and from the
criticisms formulated by the Scythians against Egyptian expansionism
(2.3.9-11), we can assume that Pompeius Trogus disliked a policy of
expansion. On the other hand, as was normal in antiquity, he ideal-

ized primitive people, who, like the Scythians, had not been civi-
lized.
Another characteristic of his political thought is his negative view
of tyranny. This is reflected in 16.5.5-18, when the rule of Clearchus,
tyrant of Heraclea Pontica, is described, in 21.5.3-11 when he speaks
of the behaviour of Dionysius II of Syracuse when he was in exile in
Corinth, and in 22.1, in the portrait of Agathocles.
Another feature of Pompeius Trogus' historical work is that he
emphasizes the importance of certain historical personalities who have
relevance for the history of peoples they ruled. Trogus includes the
traditional tale of the exposure of the child who is predestined to
become king. In the work appear Cyrus, king of the Persians (1.4.2-
14), Sandrocottus, the Indian king whose name corresponds to
Chandragupta (15.4.13-25), Hieron II, king of Syracuse (23.4.3-11),
Mithridates VI Eupator, king of Pontus (37.2), Romulus and Remus
(43.2.4-10), and Habis, the legendary king of Tartessos (44.4.2-10).
The purpose of the tale is to stress the power that the child is going to
have in the future. The fact that the tale is mentioned in connection
with personalities of different peoples is a sign of the universalistic
character of the work.22
In spite of the fact that the work is fairly objective and tends to
describe events down to the unification of the world by Augustus
with impartiality, we may deduce from a series of speeches and
passages as well as from the general conception of the Historiae Phi-
lippicae that it has a certain anti-Roman bias.23 First of all, through-
out the work certain speeches are included, which, though rhetorical
inventions, critizice Roman imperialism. These are the speeches of
the Aetolians (28.2), of Demetrius, king of the Illyrians to Philip V of
Macedonia (29.2.1-6), of Hannibal before Antiochus III (31.5.2-9),
and of Mithridates (38.4-7). Furthermore, when in 16.4 Trogus
speaks of Heraclea Pontica he possibly criticizes the Roman civil wars
and social problems of the second and first century B.C., with allu-
sions to the agrarian problem and to the leaders of the parties of that
period; and in 16.5, while speaking of the tyranny of Clearchus in
Heraclea, he refers in a metaphorical way to events in Roman history
as remote as the monarchy, Tarquinus Superbus, and the death of
Lucretia, but there are also allusions to the wars between Marius and
Sulla, to Catiline, Caesar and his murderers, and to the prolongation
of the tyranny under Augustus. It is clear that Trogus believed in the
Stoic ideal of opposition to tyranny. Moreover, Trogus does not think
that Rome was the absolute ruler of the world, but rather that she
was compelled to share world-dominion with the Parthians (41.1.1),
and the Roman Empire appears at the end of the succession Assyria -
Media - Persia - Macedonia, but without the kind of enthusiastic
panegyric that Dionysius of Halicarnassus provides.24
In contrast to these passages Trogus alludes at 18.2.7-10 and in
31.8.8-9 to the virtues of the ancient Romans; this is very much in
the tradition of Roman historiography, which opposes the virtues of
the ancient Romans to the degeneracy of the present. At 36.4.12 he
points out that the conquest of Asia has corrupted Rome.
Pompeius Trogus does not miss any opportunity to stress the
importance of the Gauls. For instance, in 12.13.1 he says that an
embassy was sent by the Gauls to Alexander when he was in Baby-
lonia. Again at 31.5.9 Hannibal says that only the Gauls and he had
been able to defeat the Romans. The same theme appears in the speech
of the Aetolians (28.2.1-3) and in the speech of Mithridates (38.4.7-
10). The important role which the Gauls play in the Historiae
Philippicae is an indication of the author's patriotism.25 As Pompeius
Trogus was born in southern Gaul he was very conscious of the im-
portance of the western Mediterranean. Therefore he devoted the
whole of book 19 to Carthaginian history, and the Carthaginians play
an important role in his historical narrative. In 29.2.9 he is very con-
scious of the fact that the winner in the struggle between Carthage
and Rome will control Asia. Possibly the mention of a Carthaginian
embassy to Babylonia to greet Alexander (12.13.1) is intended to stress
the importance of the Carthaginians, but from 21.6.1-7 it seems that
they were afraid that Alexander might decide to conquer Carthage,
and they sent Hamilcar Rodanus to spy out Alexander's intentions.
The fact that Trogus includes in the work places as remote as India
or Bactria reflects Rome's commercial relations with them. But the
most important books are the last ones, in which Trogus dealt with
what was of more relevance for him personally, such as the West, or
for the age in which he was living, such as the Parthians. It must be
recalled that the latest events mentioned in the work are, in the West,
the completion of the Roman conquest of Spain by Augustus (44.5.8),
and in the East (putting aside the problematic date of the destruction
of the empire of the Sacaraucae) the assassination of Phraates IV by
Phraates V (42.4.16) and the return of prisoners and militaria signa to
Rome by Phraates IV, as well as the despatch of his sons and
grandsons as hostages to Augustus (42.5.10-12).
He gives his reason for writing on Italian history at 43.1.1-2.
Trogus thought it necessary to say something about the history of
Rome, which is considered the caput totius orbis, but in any case we
can observe that for him the history of Rome is not at the heart of the
work. From what Iustinus said in Praefatio, 1 we gather that it was
not Trogus' intention to write on Roman history. He only narrated in

book 43 the origins of the Latins, the location of the city of Rome,
and its history down to Tarquinius Priscus (616-579 B.C.).
It should also be noted that Trogus is very proud of the diffusion
of Greek civilization in Gaul, as 43.4.1-2 clearly shows. The Gauls
learnt from the Greeks agriculture, urbanization, and law.26
Trogus' object in including Spain was to complete the description
of the world, and to mention the last step in the unification of the
Mediterranean world by Rome. It also means the end of the historical
process which begins with Ninus in the East and finishes with
Augustus in the West; it represents the completion of the succession
of world empires, which had started with that of Ninus (1.1.4), the
founder of the first world monarchy, while Augustus, the first Roman
Emperor, is the man who completed Rome's conquest of the world.
In spite of a certain bias the work gives the impression of objectivity
and reliability. Trogus has reproduced quite accurately what his
sources said, so far as we can tell from the Epitoma of Justinus; but
it is also clear that Trogus has utilized his material for his own aims.
A typical feature is his interest in natural science; it must not be
forgotten that he composed a work de animalibus. Moreover, the
theories of Hippocrates and Posidonius on the influence of climatic
and geographic conditions upon human behaviour seem to have
played an important role in shaping in him a certain historical de-
terminism. The interest in ethnographic questions and neighbouring
peoples may be explained by Trogus' own provincial origin. The main
handicap in understanding him is the fact that we only have the prologi
and a fifth of the original, preserved by Iustinus in his Epitoma; he
left out what he thought was lacking in interest for the audience of his
own time. It is a pity that we do not have more information from
which to reconstruct the life of Pompeius Trogus, but, in any case,
his historiographical achievement shows how world history was seen
and understood by a man from the West. It reflects the way in which
the Roman Empire could only attract the sympathy of a provincial
like Trogus to a limited degree.27
Pompeius Trogus does not belong to the outstanding figures of
Roman historiography, but his subject, and aim of writing universal
history, deserve respect and admiration, especially since the Historiae
Philippicae is the only world history written in Rome, albeit the author
was, in reality, a Gaul. Tacitus, the greatest historian of the imperial
period, was probably a Gaul as well,28 and this is an indication of the
interest taken in historiography in the provinces of the Empire. After
Trogus the theme of universal history was forgotten in Rome.
Ammianus Marcellinus, the most important historian of Late An-
tiquity, continued Tacitus's work and dealt only with Rome. It is

only after the sack of Rome by the Goths in 410 that Orosius, another
provincial like Trogus, composed a world history.
NOTES
* This paper was read on 13th May 1986 in the seminar on 'Evidence and Problems from
the Roman Empire' organized by Professor Fergus Millar in the University of Oxford. I am
grateful to the audience for their comments. I am also thankful to Mr L. D. Reynolds (Brasenose
College, Oxford), Mr Ph. Bartholomew (Ashmolean Library, Oxford), Dr A. D. H. Bivar
(School of Oriental and African Studies, London), and Dr N. Horsfall (University College
London) for their suggestions and revision of the text.
1. Edited by C. H. Oldfather et alii in The Loeb Classical Library (1933-1967).
2. F. Jacoby, FGrHist II A 324; C 229.
3. Edited by H. L. Jones in The Loeb Classical Library (1917-1933).
4. Edited by O. Seel in Bibliotheca Teubneriana (1972); edition of the Fragmenta by O. Seel
in Bibliotheca Teubneriana (1956). For the text and its transmission see L. D. Reynolds, 'Jus-
tinus', Texts and Transmission:A Survey of the Latin Classics (Oxford, 1983), pp. 197-9. There
is a lexicon by O. Eichert, Vollstdndiges Worterbuch zur philippischen Geschichte des Iustinus
(Hannover, 1882; reprint Hildesheim, 1967).
5. Edited by K. Zangemeister in Bibliotheca Teubneriana (1889).
6. For the idea of world history in antiquity see A. B. Breebaart, 'Weltgeschichte als Thema
der antiken Geschichtsschreibung', Acta Historica Neerlandica 1 (1966), 1-21; M. Budinger,
Die Universalhistorie im Altertume (Wien, 1895); P. Burde, Untersuchungenzur antiken Un-
iversalgeschichtsschreibung, Diss.-Inaug. Erlangen-Nilrnberg, 1972 (Miinchen, 1974); A.
Momigliano, 'The Origins of Universal History', ASNP, Serie III, vol. XII, 2 (1982), 533-60
= Settimo Contributo(Rome, 1984), pp. 77-103; F. Vittinghoff, 'Christliche und nichtchristliche
Anschauungsmodelle', Mensch und Weltgeschichte: zur Geschichte der Universalgeschichts-

schreibung,ed. by A. Randa (Salzburg, 1969), pp. 19-40.
7. F. Jacoby, FGrHist II B 115.
8. F. Jacoby, FGrHist II A 72.
9. Edited by W. R. Paton in The Loeb Classical Library (1922-1927).
10. For the title of the work see A. Momigliano, 'La valutazione di Filippo il Macedone in
Giustino', Rendiconti Reale Istituto Lombardo di Scienze e Lettere, vol. 66, fasc. 11-15, 1933,
983-96 = Quarto Contributo(Rome, 1969), pp. 225-38, and more recently R. Urban, 'Historiae
Philippicae bei Pompeius Trogus: Versuch einer Deutung', Historia 31 (1982), 82-96. On the
problems of titles of works see also N. Horsfall, 'Some problems of titulature in Roman Literary
History', BICS 28 (1981), 103-14, esp. pp. 105-6.
11. Peter, HRRel 12 (Leipzig, 1914), 55-97.
12. In relation to this problem see E. J. Bickerman, 'Origines gentium', CPh 47 (1952), 65-
81; see now T. J. Cornell, 'Griinder', RAC XII (1983), col. 1107-45.
13. On this point see A. D. H. Bivar, 'The Azes Era and the Indravarma casket', South
Asian Archaeology 1979, ed. by H. HArtel, 369-76. According to Bivar the Vikrama Era is the
same as the Azes Era. The inscription providing a date for the destruction of the Indo-Scythians
is on the Indravarna casket. The Azes Era was established to commemorate the victory of the
Indo-Scythians over the Indo-Greeks.
14. For this question see R. B. Steele, 'Pompeius Trogus and lustinus', AJPh 38 (1917),
19-41.
15. On this problem see P. A. Brunt, 'On Historical Fragments and Epitomes', CQ 30
(1980), 477-94; see also M. Galdi, L'epitome nella letteratura latina (Napoli, 1922), esp. pp. 94-
123. I. Opelt, 'Epitome', RAC V (1962), col. 944-73 is very useful.
16. For these questions see L. Ferrero, Struttura e metodo dell' Epitome di Giustino (Torino,
1957), G. Forni, Valore storico e fonte di Pompeo Trogo (Urbino, 1958), and G. Forni and G.
Angeli Bertinelli, 'Pompeo Trogo come fonte di storia', ANRW II, 30, pp. 1298-362.
72 THE HIS TORIAE PHILIPPICAE OF POMPEIUS TROGUS
17. For this point see A. Momigliano, 'The Historians of the Classical World and their
Audiences: Some Suggestions', ASNP, Serie III, vol. VIII, 1 (1978), 59-75 = Sesto Contributo
(Rome, 1980), pp. 361-76.
18. For these aspects see 0. Seel, Die Praefatio des Pompeius Trogus (Erlangen, 1955).
19. For Trogus' historiographic achievement see 0. Seel, Eine rimische Weltgeschichte:
Studien zum Text der Epitome des Iustinus und zur Historik des Pompeius Trogus (Niirnberg,
1972) and 0. Seel, 'Jber Pompeius Trogus und das Problem der Universalgeschichte', ANRW
II, 30, pp. 1363-423.
20. For the concept of world-empires consult Alonso-Niffiez, 'Die Abfolge der Weltreiche
bei Polybios und Dionysios von Halikarnassos', Historia 32 (1983), 411-26; Alonso-Nfiiez, 'Die
Weltreichssukzession bei Strabo', Zeitschrift fiir Religions- und Geistesgeschichte36 (1984), 53-
54; Alonso-Niffiez, 'Appian and the World Empires', Athenaeum 62 (1984), 640-4; R. Drews,
'Assyria in Classical Universal Histories', Historia 14 (1965), 129-38; D. Flusser, 'The Four
Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel', Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972), 148-
75; B. Gatz, Weltalter, goldene Zeit und sinnverwandte Vorstellungen (Hildesheim, 1967); W.
Goez, Translatio Imperii (Tiibingen, 1958); E. J. J. Kocken, De theorie van de overdracht der
wereldheerschappijtot op Innocentius III (Nijmegen, 1935); D. Mendels, 'The Five Empires: a
Note on a Propagandistic Topos', AJPh 102 (1981), 330-7, and H. Tadmor, 'Addenda', AJPh
102 (1981), 338-9; A. Momigliano, 'Daniele e la teoria greca delle successione degli imperi',
RAL 35 (1980), 157-62 = Settimo Contributo(Rome, 1984), pp. 297-304; J. Swain, 'The Theory
of Four Monarchies', CPh 35 (1940), 1-21; C. Trieber, 'Die Idee der vier Weltreiche', Hermes
27 (1892), 321-44, and G. W. Trompf, The Idea of Historical Recurrence in Western Thought
from Antiquity to Reformation (Berkeley, 1979).
21. For this question see A. Momigliano, 'Livio, Plutarco e Giustino su virtui e fortuna dei
Romani', Athenaeum 12 (1934), 45-56 = Terzo Contributo (Rome, 1966), pp. 499-511.
22. On this theme see G. Binder, Die Aussetzung des K6nigskindes Kyros und Romulus
(Meisenheim am Glan, 1964). See also the review of this book by 0. Murray, CR 17 (1967),
329-32.
23. For the general context see Alonso-Ndifiez, 'L'opposizione contro l'imperialism romano
e contro il Principato nella storiografia del tempo di Augusto', RSA 12 (1982), 131-41.
24. For the relations of Rome with other peoples see F. Millar, The Roman Empire and its
Neighbours (London, 19812).
25. For this point see R. Urban, 'Gallisches Bewusstsein und Romkritik bei Pompeius
Trogus', ANRW II, 30, pp. 1424-43.
26. For this sort of problem see A. Momigliano, Alien Wisdom (Cambridge, 1975), esp. pp.
50-73.
27. For reflections on the character of ancient historiography see S. Mazzarino, Il pensiero
storico classico (Bari, 1966), vols. 1-3 and the brilliant articles by A. Momigliano, 'Time in
Ancient Historiography', H&T Beiheft 6 (1966), 1-23 = Quarto Contributo (Rome, 1969), pp.
13-41 and 'Tradition and the Classical Historian', H&T 11 (1972), 279-93 = Quinto Con-
tributo (Rome, 1975), pp. 13-31.
28. R. Syme, Tacitus II (Oxford, 1958), pp. 611-24, esp. pp. 622-3, has even suggested that
Tacitus was born in Vasio (today Vaison-la-Romaine), where Trogus was born.

Alonso-Núñez An Augustan World History - The 'Historiae Philippicae' of Pompeius Trogus G&R1987

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Alonso-Núñez An Augustan World History - The 'Historiae Philippicae' of Pompeius Trogus G&R1987

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Augustan World History: The 'Historiae Philippicae' of Pompeius Trogus

AN AUGUSTAN WORLD HISTORY:

The political unification of the Mediterranean world in the last epoch

As far as the East is concerned the last event mentioned appears in

multo post Carthaginem subactam devictis, summa imperii ad

universal character of Alexander's empire: 'Post haec Indiam petit, ut

vicit' (30.4.16). On this occasion, according to Trogus, it was fortuna

origins of civilization (2.1.5-21), in which is included a dispute be-

expansion. On the other hand, as was normal in antiquity, he ideal-

not Trogus' intention to write on Roman history. He only narrated in

tiquity, continued Tacitus's work and dealt only with Rome. It is

Anschauungsmodelle', Mensch und Weltgeschichte: zur Geschichte der Universalgeschichts-

You might also like