A Commentary on Livy: Books I-V

on

LIV

BOOKS

R. M. OGI

he retold the traditional the early history of Rom 390 B.C. It aims, by the e of Livy's sources and by recent archaeological disc of modern advances in t Roman religion, law, and to uncover the historical from which the tradition evolved. At the same ti trates Livy's linguistic a usage and discusses the d his text. It is both a ru mentary on the text of source-book for the sto Rome.

Oxford University Press, Amen House, House, London E.C.4 E.C.4 Oxford MELBOURNE GLASGOW NEW YORK TORONTO MELIIOURNE

WELLINGTON

BOMBAY CALCUTTA MADRAS KARACHI LAHORE DACCA :BOMIIAY IB AD AN ACCRA ACCRA CAPE TOWN SALISBURY NAIROBI IBADAN KUALA LUMPUR

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

© Oxford Universiry Pre

PRINTED IN GREAT BR

FRA TRIS DILECTIS

I.

w. o.

Q.VI .INTER ALTA MONTIVM

PACEM Q.VAESIVIT DEVM

THIS commentary owes its beginning to Last, Esq., who incited me to ask some sets out to answer, and it owes its comple D. H. Cameron of Lochiel who gave me then at Errachd, a home among the

mountain backs, misty ridged multitudinous to the n

where it was possible to read and write a The study ofLivy has always travelled a and Ratherius, Petrarch and Macchiave are but a few of the illustrious who have and been moved by it. And ifhe has been the editions of Gronovius and Madvig m monuments of classical scholarship. It is t a new Commentary, even on the first five b been done: so much still remains to do. T versial matters of history, law, and religio inscrutable about his narrative techniqu understanding particularly of early Rom with the research that has been carried years into numerous details of style and lan that the time was opportune to try to co ferent investigations together. The aim of be to make it easier for a reader to appreci after all, was writing nearly two thousand events which were four hundred years and day, so that many things which were obv are obscure to us and many things were this gulf which a Commentary should Inevitably no two readers will ask the sam quence I have had to be content with dis interested me as a reader. I have not, there for the needs of the schoolboy or the und but rather for the use of anyone who wa a systematic history of early Rome: stil Livy himself. It would be impossible in a work of every debt to written sources or personal vii

or giving repeated references throughout appended a selective bibliography to eac The abbreviations used throughout conf used by L'Annee philologique and should be list of works commonly referred to is given publications shows no sign of abating an profit from certain important works such der rom. Republik or A. Momigliano's pape 53 (1963), which reached me after the au

R

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

I SHOULD like to thank my colleague Russell Meiggs, for his sustained enco criticisms; Professor E. D. M. Fraenkel graduate to the love of Latin; the four s much in recent years to promote the Britain-Dr. A. H. McDonald, for introd history and improving a draft of the typ scrutinizing part of the Introduction, Dr. typescript and flooding me with stimula P. G. Walsh for laboriously correcting th saving me from countless errors; Mr. W advice on Roman law; Dr. S. Weinstoc Roman religion; Dr. T. J. Luce for li Licinius Macer; the late Professor D. S. Porson's annotated copy of Livy; the lib Cambridge, for allowing me to consult annotated copies of Livy; the librarian Verona, for permitting me to collate th (Codex Veronensis); the librarian of Florence, for permitting me to collate Director and Staff of the British School the Trustees of the Craven Fund for gen travelling expenses; the Governing Bo Oxford, and Clare College, Cambridge unworried research; Professor Sir Ronal Williams, Professor W. D. M. Paton, Pro Mr. W. S. Barrett, Mr. M. I. Finley, Mr A. N. Bryan-Brown, Mr. C. G. Hardie Jasper Griffin, Mr. G. W. Bowersock fo my pupils, among whom should be men Dr. G. C. Duncan, Mr. Henry Brooke, Macleod, Mr. C. P. Jones, Mr. P. F. D. Barber, for many provocative discussio Oxford University Press for willingly und far outgrown its original limits, and the readers; and Jennifer who typed the w selfishly allowed me to be preoccupied fo xi

ABBREVIATIONS ABBREVIATIONS E. Burck, Die Die Erzählungskunst Erziihlungskunst des des T. Livius Livius (Berlin,

Burck Burck

=

Klotz

Livius u.s. u.s. Vorganger = A. Klotz, Livius Vorgänger (Neue Wege z. Antike, Antike, I94I). 1941). = W. Schulze, .lwv). When not to use him as a source but to brand (9. 18. 6). Irresponsibility did not appeal Only Cicero commanded Livy's admir tested and ridiculed by Sallust, who was. d Suas. 6. 15, 6. 24, 6. 27). Cicero had consi and apart from party, if only because he w He had advocated peace and unity in t radical or revolutionary policies (cf., e.g., d congenial to Livy's temperament. His obit virmagnus ac memorabilisI foit et in cuius laudatore opus foerit (Seneca, Suas. 6. 22). Cicero and to measure other writers by 10. I. 39). He himself shows at all points a of the great orator. Yet even here Livy ca righteous criticism. Cicero, he judges, had deservedly, but with the sole exception of h of the misfortunes that had come his way There is something cold and withdrawn of humour are to be found in the history (3 Livy fails to appreciate the one witticism w sources (45. 39. 15)· And something comp to offer moral judgements on every perso who told the story that a citizen of Cadi Rome to see the great author· (Pliny, E Dialogus 10): Livy or the man himself? T d7Tpayp.oavvTj will have won him few frien that the recitations of his history were spar beingattrat:ted only by Livy's KaA>'OS I/Jvxfjs KopvoiiTos; see G Cichorius, Rom. Studien, 2 spent most of his life in Rome. His pres for c. 2 B.C. (a calculation of the average len that the books dealing with Pompey whic were written then), and c. A.D. 8 when C

I The Manuscript has magnus acer memorabilis b effective (cf. 39. 51. 10); for ac before memorabilis c

4

I. 5. 56; cf. 8. I. 3; see on Style below). T deeper to the provincial and middle-class o at Padua, not Rome. For full summaries of Livy's life see. K Harvard Studies in Class. Phil. 64 (1959), critically reviewed by G. V. Sumner, Aum Mette, Gymnasium, 68 (1961), 269 ff.: see 92 (1961),440 ff. For later mythology abo Studies in the Italian Renaissance, 60 ff.; G. P. Sambiri, Ital. Med. e Uman. 1 (1958), 2 The personal details about Livy are all know more it would not help us to appreci of his history. For Livy was preoccupied affairs of the day or even with antiquaria

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

evidence, it is always at second hand. M absence of any knowledge of Varro's pro engage in original research himself is un Varro had done that for him and conde accessible volumes. Yet there is no sign short digression on the origins of Roman co nothing distinctively Varronian anywhere trary, his account of the sacrifice to Dia sophistication introduced by Varro (I. 45 tribal organization instituted by Servius T searches into the rural tribes (1. 43. 13 n.) Cremera Cn. Fabius and not, as was first pr Fabius (4.43. 1 n.). He is content with Li planation of the ovatio (2. 16.9 n.). He ha whom Varro canvassed as the elder Tarqu example of all is the total given for the G The list could be extended (see notes on 5. that Livy was not concerned to further h anxious to write history and, for that p supply of material was the chief requisite collatio, as Pliny remarked in a similar con As it is probable that at any moment Liv and one only, so it is unlikely that the t generally consulted by him will be very

I Since I do not believe that Livy directly con dealbatae as exposed by the pontijices (Cicero, de Dra Macrobius 3.2. I7) or the edition of them, the An Scaevola, the pontifex maximus (c. I23 B.C.), I hav any account of these documents in the Introducti in the Commentary and to list in the Index those my opinion derive ultimately from the Annales. Fr contrary to prevailing opinion, I believe that a n complete set, survived from the period 509-390 (es much more variegated material than is usually assu and that their editiJ..ov ~ aTpaTtWTtKOrS K

Lucian similarly advocates that speech 7TpoaW7TCfl (Quomodo Historia 58). 20

prose falls into clear four-stress sections li are reminiscences of the phraseology of ba Macaulay wrote of Lake Regillus: 'it is a p confident the author had heard of the fight Be that as it may, .there can be no gainsay which it is studded. Precisely the same trea heroic battles, in the fight over the Sabine single combat of the Curiatii and the Ho against the Etruscans (2.45-46), in the co (4. 2B. 4 ff.), in the exploit of Tampan again there were precedents. Battle-desc literary exercise or €Kcppaats (Cicero, Orat Lucian, Quomodo Historia 19-20, 57; cr. which the boundary between poetry and be very thin. Wherever a linguistic abnormality is obs to ask what purpose it was meant to serve found true that most such phenomena fa categories outlined above. It is this richne lactea ubertas of Quintilian, to which the among Latin historians. Where Livy's in writing is often plain, sometimes inelega 14.4 n., 2. 16. 4n., 17,5 n., lB. 2 n., 21. 6 n 53. In., 3. 26. 2 n., 4. 47. 4n.)-the Patavi On other occasions he will deliberately em Annales (3. 5. 14 n., 10.6 n., 4.30. 7 n.). B resources of his artistry he carries on the s a pageant. 1 It is only in this sense that Livy should

I His use of clausulae is important in this con 65· 7 n·,3· 9·' 12 n., 5· 35· 2 n., 37· 4 n.). In partic is disavowed by Cicero (Orator 217) and Quintil statistical analysis of the narrative sections of the 10·3 per cent., the double spondaic of 29 per cen figures given by Zielinski are 0·6 per cent. and a dactylic rhythm, seen also in his opening senten of words (e.g. the frequentative imperito for impero o for explicavi), reflects his sense of the epic charact oratorical speeches the clausulae more closely a See also the partial analysis by Ullman, Symb. Os

21

in the highest degree, they made copious a subjection, by filling all the interstices o images.... Epitomes have been called the eat out the poetry of it' (A Defence of Poetr

SELECT BIBLIOGR

E. BllRCK, Die Erziihlungskunst des T. Livius (B H. V. Canter A.J.P. 38 (1917), 125-51; 39 ( K. Gries, Constancy in Livy's Latinity (New Yor --A.J.P. 70 (1949), 118ff. R. jUMEAU, R.E.A. 38 (1936),63-68; Rev. Phi W. KROLL, Studien zum Verstiindnis der romisch 351 ff. L. Kuhnast, Die Hauptpunkte der liv. Syntaxe ( M. L. W. LAISTNER, The Greater Roman Histori A. LAMBERT, Die indirekte Rede als kiinstlerische 1946). A. H. McDoNALD, J.R.S. 47 (1957), 155-72. R. M. OGILVIE, The Listener, 3 November 196 O. RIEMANN, Etudes sur la langue et la grammair A. ROSTAGNl, Da Livio a Virgilio (Padova, 194 W. P. SCHELLER, De Hellenistica Historiae Consc S. G. STACEY, Archivf Lat. Lex. 10 (1898), 17 B. L. ULLMAN, T.A.P.A. 73 (1942),25-33. R. ULLMANN, La Technique des discours dans Sall 19 2 7). --Etude sur le style des discours de Tite-Live (O P. G. WALSH, Rh. Mus. 97 (1954), 97-114. - - Livy, His Historical Aims and Methods (Cam K. WITTE, Rh. Mus. 65 (1910),270-305,359-

A general bibliography of recent works cove has been compiled by K. Gries, Class. World 5

For the stemma of the primary manuscrip employed in this edition see: R. M. OGILVIE, C.Q. 7 (1957),68-81. G. BILLANOVICH, Ital. Med. e Uman. 2 (1959),

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

tribune and praetor. Only of L. Cassius Hemina is nothing known. Even Valerius Antias came from a service family (see above, p . 12) and Q . Aelius Tubero belonged to a family distinguished in the public service (Cicero, Brutus 117; Pomponius, Enchiridii 40). L. might, therefore, well feel abashed at venturing into such company. For the general sentiments cf. Martial, Praef, 1. It was more usual to denigrate the incompetence and dishonesty of foregoing authors (5 n.). eorum me . . . meo: the reading of N is sure. The Magnitude of the Undertaking 4 . praeterea: a second reason for bridling at the prospect of writing Roman history. Not merely have so many important men turned their hands to it before but the task is daunting in itself. This view seems unique to L. The Unpalatability of Early History voluptatis: cf. Thucydides 1. 22. 4 ; Tacitus, Annals 2. 88. L.'s allusion to the current fashion for contemporary history (haec nova) may be an oblique reference to Sallust or to his relations with Pollio and Timagenes (see above, p. 4). 5. nostra . . . aetas: notice the hyperbaton which is not poetic (H. J . Miiller) but emphatic. L.'s distaste for his own times could not be more strongly stated. tantisper: 1. 3. 1, 22. 5 but avoided thereafter: 'a wee while'. T h e colloquial character of the word is seen in the fact that Cicero uses it in racy letters (ad Att. 12. 14. 3 ; ad Fam. 9. 2. 4) and in a quotation from Terence (de Fin. 5. 2 8 ; Tusc. Disp. 3. 65) whereas Caesar, Sallust, Virgil, Tacitus, and Lucretius eschew it altogether. It is common in Plautus and Terence. [total ilia mente: there are no good grounds for deleting tota which was read by N : cf. Cicero, pro Cluent. 190; Phil. 10. 23. T h e only matter for doubt is its position. N's order, prisca tota ilia mente, involves a harsh interlacing which cannot be satisfactorily paralleled. Perhaps 7r's emended order (ilia tota), accepted by Weissenborn, H . J . Miiller, Bayet, and Ernout, should be followed. avertam: the novelty of L.'s escapist attitude is disclosed by the care which Curtius, living a generation later, took to rebut it (10. 9, 7 ) : ut ad ordinem a quo me contemplatio publicae felicitatis averterat redeam. curae . . . a vero: the regular claim of historians for which cf. Hecataeus 1 F 1; Thucydides 1. 22. 2 ; Sallust, Hist. fr. 6 M . neque me diversa pars in civilibus armis movit a vero; Catiline 4. 2 ; Tacitus, Annals 1. 1. posset: for the tense cf. 1. 26. 10, 35. 3, 9. 29. 10. The Indifference to Prehistoric History 6. decora: for the thought cf. Thucydides 1. 1. 3. L. does not imply 26

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.

nulla . . . rnaior: cf. Thucydides 1. 1. 3. civitatem: there is no need to delete the word as an interpolation after res publica (Novak); for such repetition of ideas cf. 2. 28. 3, 5. 2. 8, 10. 1. 4. avaritia luxuriaque: Sallust dated the moral crisis at Rome to the destruction of Carthage in 146 B.C. {Catiline 7 - 9 ; Jugurtha 41. 2). His 28

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 v, ex­ plains the point of what follows, for which cf. Augustus' claim in Res Gestae 34. 3. 58

F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E

1.7.8

litterarum: Evander is expressly credited not with the invention, which traditionally was due to Cadmus, but only with the use of writing, but R o m a n belief evidently made him responsible for the introduction of the Latin alphabet (Tacitus, Annals 11. 14). T h e earliest Latin inscription (from Praeneste c. 600 B.C.) shows that the alphabet was derived not directly from the Greeks of Cumae, as had been thought, but from Etruria. T h e same conclusion is reached by observ­ ing that the order of the voiced and unvoiced gutturals C and G in the Latin alphabet differs from that in Greek and is explained by the modification of the Greek alphabet made by the Etruscans whose language lacked voiced consonants. Writing being regarded as the greatest of benefactions was naturally attributed to Evander, the Benefactor, although the Latin alphabet in fact only dates from the seventh century. See M . Lejeune, R.E.L. 35 (1957), 88 ff.; L. H . Jeffery, The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece, 4. Carmentae: in Greek always Kapficvrrj, Latin varies between Carmentis (Varro, Virgil, AulusGellius, Servius) and Carmenta (Hyginus, Fab. 277; Solinus 1. 13 ; Origo Gentis Romanae 5. 1.2), both of which signify the same meaning 'she who is full of carmen' (cf. pollenta: sementis; Skrit. Kakati). T h e other ancient etymologies (Ovid, Fasti 1. 620: Plutarch, Q.R. 56) do not bear examination. T h e goddess was one of the oldest R o m a n deities, with her ownjlamen (Cicero, Brutus 56) and festival on 11 and 15 January, but her exact function was in doubt. The ancients regarded her as either a goddess of child-birth (Aul. GelL 16. 16. 4 ; Ovid, Fasti 617 ff.) or of prophecy (Servius, adAen. 8 . 5 1 ; D.H. 1. 31. 1) or of both {Fasti Praenest.; Augustine, Civ. Dei 4. 11), while modern scholars have identified her as a moon-goddess (Pettazzoni), a springnymph (Wissowa, Bayet), or a goddess of beginnings (von Domazewski). The truth is probably that she was a goddess closely connected with the Cermalus region of the Palatine (Clement, Strom. 1. 21) whcse magical powers (carmen) were invoked in child-birth. Hence the embargo ne quod scorteum adhibeatur (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 7. 8 4 ; Fasti Praenest.; Ovid, Fasti 1. 629 ff.) and the prohibition on leather objects which were an omen morticinum. Later generations interpreted the carmina as prophetic rather than magical until she became a goddess of prophecy. Augustine pertinently quotes from Varro the detail fata (?= carmina) nascentibus canunt . . . Carmentes. H e r status as Evander's mother was a late manipulation. In Greek myth that position was held by Nicostrate or, more popularly, Themis (Pausanias 8. 43. 2 ; Strabo 5. 230), a nymph with prophetic powers who had controlled Delphi before the arrival of Apollo. When Evander was transferred to Rome, Carmenta was the natural equivalent of Themis (Servius, ad Aen. 8. 336). See Pagliaro, Studi e Materiali, 21 (1947), 121 ff.; L. L. Tels de Jong, Sur quelques divinites romaines, 21 ff. 59

i.7.8

F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME

fatiloquam: a variant of the technical fatidicus (cf. Cicero, de Nat. Deorum i. 18), used otherwise only by Apuleius, Flor. 15; Ausonius 196. 5°7 . 9 . augustioremque: commonly used in opposition to humanus ( 5 . 4 1 . 8 , 8. 6. 9, 8. 9. 10; Praef. 7) and not applied to persons except Hercules, Romulus ( 1 . 8 . 3), and Decius (8. 9. 10), although applied to sacred places and things (29. 5, 3. 17. 5, 5. 41. 2, 38. 13. 1, 42. 3. 6, 45. 5. 3). This selectivity may be deliberate. Octavius assumed the surname Augustus in 27 B.G. having already been linked with Hercules by Horace {Odes 3. 3. 9-12) and having considered but rejected the name Romulus as possessing unfortunate associations (Suetonius, Augustus 7; Florus 4. 66; Dio 53. 16). In using the adjective augustus of Hercules and Romulus twice in such close proximity, L. may be intending to call Augustus to mind. See L. R. Taylor, C.R. 32 (1918), 158-61; G. M . Hirst, A.J.P. 47 (1926), 347-57. See also 7. 10 n. (aucturum); H. Erkell, Augustus Felicitas Fortuna, 19 ff. 7. 10. nomen patremque ac patriam: recalling the Homeric formula TIV rrodev €t? av8pa)v; irodi roi TTOXIS r)Se rotcrjes; (Odyssey i. 170 et al.). love nate: Evander's greeting is intended to convey a solemnity appropriate to the occasion. Notice the ritual repetition tibi . . . tuo (3. 17. 6 n.) and the impressive future pass. inf. dicatum iri (3. 67. 1 n.). veridicus seems to be a religious technical term (cf. Lucretius 6. 24; Cicero, de Divin. 1. 101). Equally formal is the vocative Hercules (cf. C.LL. 6. 313, 319, 329) instead of the colloquial Hercule. For augere caelestium numerum cf. Virgil, Aeneid 7. 2 1 1 ; Ovid, Amores 3. 9. 6 6 ; Pliny, N.H. 31. 4. interpres deum is sacral (Cicero, de Leg. 2. 20; de Nat. Deorum 2. 12; cf. Virgil, Aeneid 3. 359, 4. 378, 10. 175; Horace, Ars Poetica 3 9 1 ; C.L.E. 1528). aucturum : implying the etymology augustus from augeo (cf. 7. 8 auctoritate). In the same way L. underwrites his interpretation of Feretrius by the repetition of few (10. 6-7) or of Stator by the repetition of sisto (12. 5-8). augustus and augeo are in fact connected, augustus being derived from *augus (cf. Ind. djah; see Walde-Hofmann; E r n o u t Meillet). tibi: at 9. 34. 18 Hercules is expressly stated to have founded the altar, whereas other authorities attribute the foundation to Evander (Tacitus, Annals 15. 41). T h e language here is ambiguous, tibi could be either dat. of agent or dat. commodi. 7. 1 1 . accipere: 5. 55. 2 n. 7. 12. Potitiis ac Pinariis: traditionally the cult of Hercules at the Ara Maxima was in the hands of these two gentes until 312 when corrupt dealings (9. 29. 9 ff.) resulted in their being deprived of their office and visited with divine destruction. It is more likely that on the natural extinction of the two families the gentile cult was taken over 60

ROMULUS

i. 7. 12

by the state (Varro, de Ling, Lat. 6. 5 4 ; [Servius], ad Aen. 8. 270; Macrobius 3. 12. 2). T h e traditional story savours of political mis­ representation. Potitii are not met elsewhere. A Tiburtine provenance cannot be proved and the a t t e m p t to associate them with the Valerii, one branch of w h o m had the cognomen Potitus, is also speculative. V a n Berchem has recently argued that the name is a title, 'the possessed', analogous to the KOLTOXOI of Zeus Ouranios at Baetocaece (Rend. Accad. Pontif. 32 (1959/60), 61-68), b u t s u c h a view is not in line with gentile character of so m u c h early R o m a n religion. T h e Pinarii, on the other hand, survive into classical times but it is significant that neither of the later branches, the Nattae and Scarpi, who provide moneyers, makes any allusions on its coins to the cult of Hercules (Sydenham nos. 382, 390, 1279 ff.) a n d m a t a r i y a l pedigree claimed them as descendants of N u m a (Plutarch, JVuma 21. 3 ; D . H . 2. 76. 5). It follows that the Potitii and the oldest branch of the Pinarii must have died out by the end of the fourth century, and, although we do not know where the gentes originated from, there is nothing to prevent them, like the Fabii, importing their own gentile cult. T h e purported distinctions of role implied in 7. 13 (Potitius as auctor, Pinarius as custos of the cult; cf. Virgil, Aen. 8. 269; Festus 270 L..; Cicero, de Domo 134; C.LL. 6. 313), based on popular etymologies (Servius, ad Aen. 8. 270 Potitios dici quod eorum auctor epulis sacris potitus sit; Pinarius from neivav), deserve no credit. Sources and bibliography in Miinzer, R.E. 'Pinarius'; Ehlers, R.E. 'Potitii'. 7. 13. eorum: has no authority, extis eo sollemnium being read in A only, the result of the dittography eo so-, extis sollemnium in M , and extis sollemnibus in IT. 8. Constitutional Measures As an interlude between Cacus and the R a p e of the Sabine women, L. inserts a short note dealing with three constitutional measures allegedly introduced by Romulus. The Introduction of Magisterial Emblems T h e unanimous tradition in other authors (cf. 8. 3 eorum sententiae; Sallust, Catil. 51. 3 8 ; Diodorus 5. 40. 1; Strabo 5. 220; D . H . 3. 6 1 - 6 2 ; Pliny, N.H. 8. 195; Appian, Lib. 66) recognized an Etruscan origin of the several insignia and historically that tradition must be right (see most recently Lambrechts, Essai sur les magistratures, 26 ff.; against, de Francisci, Studi Etr. 24 (1955), 25 ff.). L. is not likely to have in­ vented such an unconventional doctrine for himself and we should rather attribute it to a source, such as Licinius Macer, who can be shown to have concerned himself with such questions. 61

I. 8. 2

ROMULUS

8. 2. insignibus imperii: 17. 6, 20. 2, 2. 1. 8, 7. 7, 3. 51. 12; cf. 5. 4 1 . 2. lictoribus: a double axe with rods, such as were carried by the lictors, was discovered in Vetulonia, the very city from which Silius Italicus (8. 483-5) asserted that the Romans had derived their fasces (Falchi, Not. Scavi, 1898, 147 ff.). See further 2. 1. 7-2. 2 n. 8. 3 . hoc genus: the manuscripts had et hoc genus, emended by the younger Gronovius, but there is nothing amiss with the text, et hoc genus means 'and all this kind of thing', i.e. the accensi and other officials in attendance on the magistrates as well as the lictors. T h e use, only here in L., is colloquial: cf. Tertullian, Idol. 12 per spectacula et hoc genus; Gaelius, ad Fam. 8. 4. 2 ; Suetonius, Claudius 34. 2. Such stylistic lapses are found where L. is speaking propria persona. It is equally unnecessary to insert et before numerum. sella curulis: originally a seat placed in the royal chariot from which justice was administered. One actual example survives from Caere and others are depicted in Etruscan paintings. See Helbig, Melanges Perrot, 167 ff.; Pellegrini, Studi e Materiali, 1 (1924), 87-118. Under the Republic it became the magisterial throne (cf. also 2. 30. 5 n.). toga praetexta: with purple border, worn by children and magis­ trates. Antiquity was divided between Etruscan ([Servius], ad Aen. 2. 7 8 1 ; Tertullian, de Pali; Photius) and Peloponnesian (Suidas s.v. rrjpevvos; Pollux 7. 61) claims for inventing it but Etruscan monu­ ments which clearly depict it support the former. See Goethert, R.E., 'toga (2)'; Alfoldi, Der Fruhromische Reiteradel, 63 ff. duodecim: 5. 33. 9 n. The Asylum In the Greek world the right of asylum is commonly associated with the right of settlement. At Cos (Herzog, Heilige Gesetze aus Kos, 36) and Cyrene (Latte, Archiv f. Relig.-Wiss. 26 (1928), 4 1 ; cf. Aeschylus, SuppL 609, 963 ff.) provision was expressly made in accor­ dance with the terms of a Delphic oracle for an asylum under the protection of Apollo. Those who sought asylum were subsequently allowed to become citizens. T h e Greek model has obviously in­ fluenced the Roman asylum inter duos lucos (8. 5 n . ) ; Plutarch even speaks of a fiavretov nvdoxprjerrov (Romulus 9). It would seem that there was a very ancient asylum in the dip between the two peaks of the Capitoline hill, dating from a time before the inclusion of the hill within the boundaries of the city. No particular deity presided over it (D.H. 2. 15. 4). T h e attempts to associate it with Veiovis (Ovid, Fasti 3. 430; cf. Vitruvius 4. 8. 4 ; C.I.L. i 2 . 233) or deus Lucoris (Piso ap. Servius, ad Aen. 2. 761) are antiquarian schematizations. I n common with other topographical features it was utilized to provide aetiological material for R o m a n historians and by assimilation to Greek 62

ROMULUS

i. 8. 4

institutions was taken to be an act of policy for increasing the popula­ tion arid ascribed to Romulus (cf. Veil. Pat. i. 8. 5 ; Cicero, de Divin. 2. 40). See Mommsen, Ges. Schriften, 4. 2 2 ; Altheim, History of Roman Religion, 258 ff.; W. S. Watt, C.Q. 43 (1949), 9 - 1 1 ; van Berchem, Mus. Helv. 17 (i960), 29-33. 8. 5. adiciendae: 'in order to add a large number (to the existing population)'. For adicere cf. 1. 36. 7, 10. 8. 3, 38. 1. 6. alliciendae (Ascensius, Kreyssig, Madvig) would wrongly imply a policy of de­ liberate advertisement, of which there is no hint. obscurant atque humilem: alluding to the proverbial expression 7 ? / ^ terrae (cf. Cicero, ad Att. 1. 13. 4 ; ad Fam. 7. 9. 3 ; Persius 6. 59; Petronius 43. 5 ; Minuc. Felix 21. 7; Fronto 98. 4 H o u t ; U J u v . 4. 98). It is to be distinguished from the universal myth that m a n originally rose from the ground and from the Greek yrjyevrjs which denotes stupidity (see Starkie on Aristophanes, Nub. 854). saeptus . . , est: the exact sense of the passage is obscure. Ifsaeptus est be taken together the meaning would be 'which has now been en­ closed at the place where you descend from the capitol inter duos lucos'. Since Cicero {de Divin. 2. 40) implies that the area was open in his day, it is reasonable to believe that it was enclosed as part of the improve­ ments carried out on the Capitoline after 31 B.C.; but descendentibus remains pointless. T h e area was enclosed, irrespective of whether people descended from or ascended to the Capitol. Furthermore, the long separation is against taking saeptus with est. If, on the other hand, saeptus is a participle, est by itself cannot be construed: whether inter duos lucos be taken with est ('the area which has now been enclosed lies inter duos lucos when you descend from the Capitol') or with de­ scendentibus ('the area . . . lies if you descend inter duos lucos'). Of both it may be asked 'Why only for those descending? W h a t happens to the area if you ascend to the Capitol?' L. is clearly locating the asylum and this requires a closer geographical specification, as one would expect from the use of the dative absolute descendentibus: cf. 42. 15. 5 ascendentibus . . . maceria erat ab laeva\ Thucydides 1. 24. 1 ; Mela 2. 1 ; H. Stiirenberg, Relative Ortsbezeichnung, 37-38. T h e asylum would, in fact, lie on one's left as one descended from the Capitol and either sinistra (Jordan, Hermes 9 (1875), 347 n 0 o r a^ ^aeva (H. JMiiller) should be supplied before est. 8. 6. an: the indirect question is introduced by discrimine, so that the comma is best placed not after discrimine but after omnis (cf. 28. 3. 10).

'The Creation of the Senate A Council of Elders (senatus, yepovola) is as old as society and its origins at Rome cannot profitably be investigated. W h a t does bear 63

1.8.7

ROMULUS

examination is the question when the tradition that Romulus founded a Senate of ioo took root (cf. 17. 5, 35. 6 n.). Conventionally the Senate of the early Republic numbered 300 (2. 1. 10 n.) and in deference to Greek models in which the total number of members of the council was directly related to the number of tribes (i.e. the Solonian fiovXrj had 400 members, 100 for each of 4 tribes; wider details in A. H. M . Jones, The Greek City, 176 with n, 40) that figure was regarded as corresponding to 100 members of each of the 3 preServian tribes, the Ramnes, Tities, and Luceres (13. 8 n.). T h e senatorial total is, therefore, analogous to the 300 equites (36. 7 n.) and does not rest on any original evidence. In Romulus 5 time only the first of the tribes existed, so that by a matter of simple logic his Senate can only have consisted of 100 (D.H. 2 . 1 2 ; Festus 454 L . ; Ovid, Fasti 3. 127; Propertius 4 . 1 . 1 4 ; Veil. Pat. 1.8.6; Plutarch, Romulus 13; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 105). This a priori reconstruction could be supported by appeals to the normal size of municipal councils or to the councils of Veii and Cures which also were 100 strong. T h e number 300 does not, however, rest on any documentary evidence, and its artificiality is betrayed by the discrepant accounts of how an original total of 100 was expanded to 300. O n e account presumed a Romulean Senate of 100 augmented by 50 under Titus Tatius and doubled by Tarquinius Priscus (D.H. 2. 47). Other versions agreed that Tarquinius added the final 100 but differed on the question whether the earlier 100 was the result of the Sabine influx (D.H. 2. 57) or the absorp­ tion of Alba. Zonaras (7. 8) knew yet another version. Indeed, if the original Senate consisted of the heads of the principal families, it is incredible that it should have totalled any precise number, let alone the round number 100. D.H.'s principle of selection (90 chosen by the 30 curiae, 9 by the 3 tribes, and 1 by Romulus), which is implied but not stated by L., is strongly democratic in sympathy and may with reason be ascribed to Licinius Macer. See O'Brien Moore, R.E. Suppl. 6, 'Senatus'; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 884 fF. 8. 7. consilium: not concretely 'a council' but abstractly 'guidance 5 . For the pairing with vires cf. 2. 56. 16, 3. 62. 7. Romulus tempered force with discretion. So also Cicero, de Rep. 2. 4. 9-13. The Sabine Synoecism L. now embarks on the most ambitious essay in narrative so far. There was a nexus of stories treating of Rome's relations with her Sabine neighbours, of which the centrepiece was the Rape of the Sabine women. Each of these incidents could be and in origin was self-con­ tained—the Consualia, Thalassio, Tarpeia, the dedication to J u p piter Feretrius, Mettius Curtius—and each of them is discussed in detail in its place below. Historians long before Livy had welded them 64

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. 1—16 Internal: Rape of the Sabine Women. 10. 1—11. 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

F

ROMULUS

i- 9-13

The Orgins of I. ne> Lege?? a: Frc 1 dr. ;> < Lt n^ • Ant.

-8\ and E, Gjerstad, Opuscida Romana, 3. 79 ff.; ' ,? t J so A. Piganiol, Essai sur les origines ' ee, e.g., L. R. Palmer, The Latin :nt of the material see O . Seel,

{< K

the Sabine Women

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

of a Greek myth—the rape of Demeter's daughter, Kore, by Hades, the fruits of the earth buried underground. Yet in default of other evidence these are no more than guesses. Once the first idea had taken root it could be extended by adding wars which served to account for Rome's absorption of the nearby villages of Antemna, Caeninum, and Grustumerium, and by incorporating one explanation of the archaic wedding-cry Thalassio (9. 12 n.). So with minor idiosyncrasies and much embellishment on Hellenistic principles the story maintained a consistent shape at the hands of historians from Ennius to D.H. It was only the antiquarians who questioned the conventional accounts and advanced heterodox explanations. Varro derived Consus from consilium (Paulus Festus 36 L . ; Augustine, Civ. Dei4. 11) and proposed a wholly different explanation of Thalassio (9. 12 n.). L. follows the historical tradition and shows no awareness of Varronian researches. His concern is to make it psychologically effective (e.g. there is no mention of Roman lust) and stylistically elegant as the first act of the Sabine drama. To this end he shapes it so that the narrative begins and ends with an oration in indirect speech (9. 2 - 4 ; 9. 14-15). Both express reasonable, if sententious, arguments, the first in rhetorical, the second in tragic language. See P. Lambrechts, Ant. Class. 15 (1946), 61-82; P. H. N. G. Stehouwer, £tude sur Ops et Consus (Diss. Utrecht, 1956); J . Gage, Ant. Class. 28 (1959), 255 ff. 9. 1. hominis: 'was likely to last only a single generation as a result of the dearth of women'. conubia: 4. 1. 1 n. 9. 2. legatos: the arguments, not found in D.H., will be original to L. They are Greek in conception, although phrased in oratorical Latin. For the double guarantee of Rome's prosperity (sua virtus ac di) cf. Thucydides 3. 58. 1; 4. 92. 7. The underlying philosophy is developed by Plato (Laws 829 A) and Aristotle (Politics 1323 s 14 ff.). T h e passage was admired by Quintilian who quotes it as an example of 777000x077077-0 «a (9. 2. 37 with deinde for dein, rightly since in L. dein is normally used with a preceding primo (2. 12. 4, 50. 7, 54. 8, 3. 32. 2, 47. 6, 4. 13. 13, 5. 22. 5) and is not found before qu-). For ex infimo nasci (3) cf. Seneca de Bene/. 3. 38. 1; for opes . . . nomen cf. Cicero, pro Murena 33. By contrast the Sabine reply is abrupt and discourteous (9. 5 n.). 9. 3 . virtus ac di: 4. 37. 7 n. 9. 5. rogitantibus: probably dative; cf. 23. 10 quaerentibus. compar: the adjective is of very rare occurrence being used previously by Varro, Menip. fr. 47 and Lucretius 4. 1255. L. has it here and at 28. 42. 20 compar consilium (speech of Q . Fabius), which suggests that in both places its alliterative sound and unliterary associations are meant to characterize the speakers. Here there may be overtones of 67

*• 9- 5

ROMULUS

the inscriptional use of compar as a substantive = 'consort, i.e. hus­ band, wife' (cf., e.g., C.I.L. 3. 1895, 4183 et aL). 9. 6. vocat: omitted by M. Frigell thought that vocat in TTA (vacat in R, D, L) was the corruption of a scribe's note that a word or words was missing at this point, thus corroborating M's omission. He would read Consualia (appellate?) ; Gronoviushad already proposed the punctuation parat . . . sollemnes, Consualia. indict. . . . But M.'s omissions in the earlier chapters of Book 1 are peculiar to itself (cf. the omission ofsibi in 9. 3) and TTA read vocat not vacat. Cf. 29. 14. 14, 36. 36. 4. 9. 8. mortales: 37. 2, 3. 30. 8, 4. 61. 7, 5. 7. 3, 16. 6. T h e force of this variation for multi homines is discussed by Fronto ap. Aul. Gell. 13. 29 (see Gries, Constancy\ 104-7). Not specifically 'poetic', it was favoured by historians for its impressiveness (Claudius Quadrigarius; Sallust, Jugurtha 20. 3 ; Naevius, Bell. Pun. 5 Mo.). Caeninenses: the ancient Caenina, listed by Pliny as one of the vanished cities (N.H. 3. 68), must have been very near Rome since Romulus sacrified there (D.H. 2. 33) and because the survival of sacerdotes Caeninenses among the R o m a n priesthoods implies early absorption by Rome (CI.L. 5. 4059, 9. 4885-6). T h e only other in­ dication of its site is D.H. 1. 16 if the emendation be accepted: Avrefivdras /cat Kaiviviras /cat &LKO\V€OVS. The fact that Fidenae is not mentioned among these primitive neighbours of Rome might suggest that Caenina was situated on the naturally strong site of Castel Giubbileo, and that after Caenina was absorbed by Rome its site was subsequently used by the Veientes for the founding of Fidenae. See also Ashby, P.B.S.R. 3 (1906), 22, 65-66. Crustumini: 38. 4 n., 2. 19. 1 n. There are two clues to its site: the Allia rose Crustuminis montibus (5. 37. 7); the Romans retreating down the Via Salaria from Eretum camped on a hill between Fidenae and C. (3. 42. 3). A study of the Etruscan road system shows that an important road led from Veii by way of the tunnel at Pietra Pertusa to a Tiber crossing about 1 mile north of the Casale Marcigliana. After the crossing the cuttings of the road are clearly visible and show that it continued across country in the direction of Gabii and by­ passed Rome. T h e ascent of the road from the Tiber is made up a valley on the south of a commanding tongue of land which is a typical early site. It is easily defensible, having steep cliffs on three sides and only a narrow neck to the east, and it is strategically placed, dominat­ ing both the Via Salaria and the Tiber crossing. All these indications point to the identification of the site with Crustumerium. T h a t there was an early settlement here is confirmed by the discovery on 21 M a y 1962 of what seemed to be a seventh-century cemetery by the side of the road close to the neck. Detailed investigation of it has unfor­ tunately so far been frustrated. T w o Etruscan bronze statuettes are 68

ROMULUS

1.9.8

housed at Marcigliana itself {Stud. Etr. 23 (1954), 411-15), but their provenance is not specifically recorded. For earlier identification see Ashby, P.B.S.R. 3 (1906), 50-51. It was one of the few settlements near R o m e to merit a legendary origin, being ascribed to Sicilian (Cassius Hemina ap. Servius, ad Aen. 7. 631), Trojan, or Athenian ( D . H . 2. 65) foundation. T h e n a m e is variously spelled. Antemnates: of the three communities, Antemnae, situated at the mouth of the Anio (cf. the false etymology ante amnem in Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 28) alone survived into classical times. It is mentioned as the site of a battle in 82 B.C. and is recorded even by Strabo (5. 230). T h e remains which have been found on the site contain local and Etruscan pottery of the seventh century as well as rough-squared masonry (Blake, Ancient Roman Construction, 104-5; Ashby, op. cit., 14-15). T h e evidence indicates that the settlement, as presumably Caenina and Crustumerium, was absorbed by Rome but at a date at least a century later than that traditionally given. 9, 9» iam: for this use, introducing a further stage of a narrative, cf. 35. 1, 23. 5. 15. Scheibe would read etiam. 9. 12* Thalassi: the anecdote is one of many aetiologies of the marriage-cry Talassio (Martial 1. 36. 6, 3. 93. 2 5 ; Sidon. Apoll. Epist. 1. 5 ; cf. Catullus 6 1 . 134; Plutarch, Q.R. 3 1 ; Romulus 15), alternatively written as Thallasio probably by a false etymological connexion with the Greek ddXafios (cf. Servius, ad Aen. 1. 6 5 1 ; [Virgil], Catal. 12. 9). T h e account given of its origin by L. (so also Servius; Isidore 15. 3. 6) was evidently the ordinary annalistic view but deserves no credence: Thalass(i)us is a name first borne by the notable general of Constantius (Zosimus 2. 4 8 ; cf. also Libanius, Ep. 843). It was perhaps suggested by a similar explanation given of the Greek fYfi4vatos. By contrast with the annalists the antiquarians were prolific in proposals, deriving it from rdXapov 'wool' (Festus 478 L . ; cf. Plutarch, Romulus 15) or talla (Festus 492 L. on the analogy of vnrjv and vfievaios). Sextius Sulla, quoted by Plutarch, made one valuable contribution when he claimed that the word was Sabine, but whether it is an exclamation or the name of a deity is indetermin­ able. For full evidence see R. Schmidt, De Hymenaeo et Talassio (Diss. Kiel, 1886); Richter, Roscher's Mythologie s.v. 9, 13, violati hospitii foedus: Perizonius's conjecture violatum is neces­ sary to avoid the intolerable enallage. T h e parents complained that the laws of hospitality had been outraged. For violate foedus cf. 8. 7. 5, 30. 42. 8; Cicero, pro Sest. 15; pro Balbo 13, 31, 5 5 ; Scaur. 4 2 ; Phil. 13. 4 ; de Rep. 1. 31. For similar corruptions due to assimilation of endings cf. 28. 33. 16, 43. 1, 30. 32. 2. per fas acfidem: the parents are made to take refuge in legal formulae to express their indignation at the treatment of their daughters, per 69

*-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. 1—13. 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

Journ. 50 (1954), 27 ff.; Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 126, 204-5. 10, 1, raptarum parentes: the whole section is rounded off at n . 4 by the repetition a parentibus . . . raptarum, when the scene switches back again to Rome. 10. 1. T. Tatium: a mysterious and colourless figure, traditionally king of the Sabine town of Cures, undistinguished by word or action. T h e lack of firm legend about him suggests that he is a personification of the Sabine element in Rome created to explain the existence of the tribe Tities (13. 8 n.) and the priesthood of sodales Titii (Tacitus, Annals 1. 5 4 ; Hist. 2. 95). Romulus required a rival to overcome and Tatius filled that need. His subsequent career, in which he is sup­ posed to have shared the kingship with Romulus (13.8), was a political invention to supply a regal precedent for the dual consulship and to emphasize the continuity of the constitution. T h e date at which his biography was formed can be approximately placed in the early part of the third century. It is certainly earlier than Ennius (Ann. 109 V.) but betrays by its clumsy construction that it must be later than the canon of seven kings. See Glaser, R.E., 'Tatius (1)'. T h e name Tatius was held by Schulze (97, 425) to be Etruscan, and by Glaser to be formed from the baby-word tate 'father'. Both used the derivation as evidence for the king's unhistoricity. In fact, how­ ever, Tatius is the latinized form of a Sabine name. T h e Sabine con­ nexion was stressed by the coins of the moneyer L. Titurius L.f. Sabinus (88 B.G. ; Sydenham nos. 698-701). T h e fusion of Latins and Sabines acquired a special topicality in the 80's when it was used as propaganda in the Social W a r for the integration of Romans and Italians. L.'s source reflects these conditions. 1 0 . 5 . ducis: his name is given as Acro(n) (I.L.S. 6 4 ; Propertius 4.10. 7). T a n . Faber wished to inset Acronis in the text but it is in L.'s manner to omit superfluous details which might divert attention from the main plot. 10. 6. Iuppiter Feretri: Romulus' dedication is made in solemn and formal terms. The placing of inquit isolates the cult-title whose sig­ nificance is emphasized by the repeated fero . . . ferent (cf. 10. 7 laturos). Notice the alliterative juxtaposition of (Romulus) rex regia and the separation oihaec... arma to enclose the subsidiary words (41. 3 n. ; Praef. 5). T h e language is sacral, being intended to recall the augural formula. For regionibus cf. 18. 7 n . ; for the rare metatus—a word re­ stored by Weinstock at Varro, de Ling. Lat. 7. 8—see Norden, Altrom. Priest. 88, n. 1. For templum see note on 18. 6 ff. 10. 7. bina: L. refers to A. Cornelius Cossus (4. 20. 6 n.) and M . Claudius Marcellus who defeated the Gauls in 222 B.C. (Act. Triumph.; Plutarch, Marcellus 7 - 8 ; Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 4. 4 9 ; Livy, Per. 2 0 ; Virgil, Aeneid 6. 855-9 with Servius 5 commentary). In 29 B.C. M . 72

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

correct interpretation is confirmed by the appearance in the Hersilia story of another from the list of attributes given by Cicero and Servius. In the moment of crisis Hersilia prayed to Nerio Martis (Cn. Gellius ap. Aul. Gell. 13. 23. 13). Nerio Martis probably denoted the strength of M a r s ; cf. the gloss neriosus fortis (cf. Suetonius, Tiberius 1.2). See Otto, R.E. 'Hersilia'; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 55 and n. 3 ; Gage, Ant. Class. 28 (1959), 255 ff; Ernout, Hommages Grenier, 2. 569. 11. 5 - 9 . Tarpeia T h e second act of the internal drama, the story of Tarpeia, is by con­ trast told undramatically and briefly. L. presents it with scholarly pedantry, adding variants (11. 7 seu . ♦ . seu; 11. 9) and exercising criticism (11. 8). The simplicity of the telling is notable: Sp. Tarpeius . . . praeerat. huius fdiam . . . corrumpit Tatius: aquam forte ea turn . . . petitum ierat. The myth of Tarpeia explained the name of the Tarpeian rock. In fact the name is Etruscan and is to be connected with Tarquinius &c. (Schulze 561) but the associations of that rock with the lamentable ends of traitors such as M . Manlius made it fertile ground for a story about an eponymous traitor; for rival aetiologies see Festus 464 L . ; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5 . 4 1 . Two versions were current. In the one given by L. the motive for Tarpeia's treachery was her love of the golden armillae. In the second, given in sundry forms with variations of detail by Simylus {ap. Plutarch, Romulus 18), Antigonus of Carystus, and Propertius (4. 4), the motive was love for the opposing general—a Hel­ lenistic plot recurrent in the treacheries of Komeitho (Apollodorus 2. 4. 7), Skylla (Apollodorus 3. 15. 8), Leukophrye (Parthenius 5), Peisidike (Parthenius 21), Nanis (Parthenius), and Tharbis (Josephus, A.J. 2. 10. 2), all Hellenistic tales. T h e gold-motive is also Hellenistic. In particular it was for gold that Arne betrayed her native Liphnum (Ovid, Met. 7. 465 ff.). Of the two motives gold is perhaps the original. Rumpf, who investigated the nature of the armillae, concluded that they were the golden bracelets carrying a talisman (bullae) often seen on the arms of men in Etruscan paintings and statuary. T h e vogue for these ornaments was the fifth century B.C.: they are not to be seen after the third. The gold-motive became the accepted historical version and, as such, was used by Fabius Pictor and Cincius Alimentus (D.H. 2. 3 8 ; cf. Ovid, Fasti 1. 2 6 1 ; Festus 496 L.). In course of time ana­ chronistic improvements were added (11. 6 nn.). Her infamy was intensified by making her a Vestal Virgin (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 4 1 ; Propertius; Val. Max. 9.6. 1; notice virginem in 11. 6) and the charac­ ter of her father is worked up. T h e quest for novelty provoked a reaction. T h e historian Piso (D.H. 2. 38), influenced by the survival 74

ROMULUS

i. 1 1 . 5

of a libation ceremony at Tarpeia's tomb, argued that she cannot have been guilty of treachery and therefore that her action was a ruse to disarm the Sabines which miscarried (cf. also Chron. 354). This is the substance of the variant in 11. 9 {sunt qui) and it may be attributed to Valerius Antias. See Pais, Ancient Legends, 96 ff.; S. Reinach, Rev. Arch. 10 (1908), 43 ff.; Mielantz, R.E., ' T a r p e i a ' ; R . Krappe, Rh. Mus. 78 (1929), 249 ff.; Z. Gansiniec, Act. Soc. Arch. Pol. 1 (1949), 37 ff.; A. Rumpf, J.H.S. 71 (1951), 168 ff.; La Penna, Studi Class, e. Orient. 6 (1956), 112-33; Devoto, Stud. Etrusc. 26 (1958), 17-27. 11. 6. arci: implying that the Capitol was already a part of the city (but cf. Tacitus, Annals 12. 24), whereas, in fact, it was not incor­ porated until the seventh century. virginem: although not expressly stated it is implied that she was a Vestal, for it was a daily duty of the Vestals to draw water for cultpurposes (Plutarch, JSfuma 13; see Wissowa, Religion, 160). Her status is anachronistic, if dramatically apt. See 21. 3 n. 1 1 . 8 . additur fabula: 5. 21. 8 n. armillas: the surviving representations of such armlets are Etruscan (see the photograph in Rumpf, op. cit.) but D.H. says that the Sabines learnt appoSlaira from the Etruscans. 12-13. 5. Mettius Curtius L. reverts to the external danger. T h e fourth act of the Sabine drama is taken up with the great battle in the Forum. As the legend of Tarpeia was to account for the name of the Tarpeian rock, so the prominent features of the Forum, the temple of Juppiter Stator and the Lacus Curtius, supplied the material for the present episode. In 296 B.C., during a critical phase of a battle against the Samnites, M . Atilius Regulus vowed a temple to Juppiter Stator (10. 36. 11) which was erected soon after (10. 37. 15). Historically this was the earliest temple to that god; for although L. states that it replaced an earlier Romulean fanum, the dedication-date, 27 J u n e (Ovid, Fasti 6. 793; the notice in Fast. Ant. refers to the second temple of J . S. in the porticus Metelli) cannot be that of a primitive shrine of Juppiter whose temples were always dedicated on the Ides of the month. Thus the whole story of Romulus' vow is pure legend. Whether the legend is older than the early third century or whether the known relationship between Sabines and Samnites suggested its invention as encouraging propaganda for the Romans is uncertain. T h e Lacus Curtius, on the other hand, was a long-standing monu­ ment. A cavity in the ground, caused by lightning or by natural subsidence, it was revered as mundus and regarded as one of the ports of communication with the underworld. Hence coins were thrown into 75

x. 12-13- 5

ROMULUS

it by every Roman annually, a practice later secularized as a vow for the emperor's safety (Suetonius, Augustus 57). Like the stone of Attus Navius (36. 5) and other such features, it was consecrated. The true explanation of the name escapes us but three views were canvassed in antiquity (Varro, de Ling. LaL 5. 148-50). T h e first, the product of late Republican antiquarianism, proposed that it derived its name from the consul of 445, C. Curtius (4. 1. 1 n.), who consecrated the place ex S. C. after it had been struck by lightning. Although this view is specious, it presupposes that a pontifical notice survived in the Annales. If such a notice had survived, it is hard to see why it did not occur in the annalistic narrative but there is no trace of it in L. or D . H . T h e two other views are variations on the same theme. T h e story given by L. (cf. D.H. 2. 4 2 - 5 0 ; Plutarch, Romulus 50), attributing it to the mythical Mettius Curtius, goes back at least to Piso (fr. 6 P.). An alternative (7. 6. 3-5, a Licinian passage) made the eponymous hero a certain M . Curtius who in 362 B.C. performed a devotio of him­ self and disappeared into the cavity (cf. Paulus Festus 42 L . ; Val. Max. 5. 6. 2 ; Augustine, Civ. Dei 5. 18). Piso's story is clearly old. Myths which explain caverns by telling of heroes being swallowed up in the ground are of great antiquity. T h e disappearance of Amphiaraus (Pindar, Nem. 9) is typical. So it is likely that this was the original aetiology, Greek in character, which dated from the fourth century at the latest (12. 2 n.). L. follows the conventional version, as depicted also on a relief now in the Museo Nuovo which decorated a balustrade round the lacus. He may have taken it from Valerius Antias, to whom he will have switched after consulting him for the variant in 11. g. If his telling of the fate of Tarpeia was bald and brief, L. lavishes his art on Mettius Curtius. Macaulay himself exclaimed that it was 'evidently from some poem' but a comparison with the narrative in D.H. shows that the epic and dramatic character is due not to L.'s source but to his technique. Apart from the similarity of situation to Agenor at the gate of Troy (Iliad 21. 537 ff.) and the echoes of epic language frequent in such battle-pieces (12. 2 n., 12. 4 n., 12. 8 n., 12. 10 n., 13. 1 n.) two features are distinctive. T h e intervention of the matrons, just as the battle is being renewed with fresh ferocity (12. 10-13. O J ls a p i e c e of calculated timing absent from D.H. who lamely leaves it until the fighting is over. T h e same concern for dramatic effect is shown when L. omits the consultation of the Senate and people (D.H. 2. 46) and reduces the R o m a n discomfiture from two routs to one. T h e psychology of the parties is strongly brought out (12. 1, 2, 9, 10). Secondly, L. brings the whole episode alive by devising charac­ terizing speeches for three principal participants. In 12. 4-6 (n.) the piety of Romulus, in 12. 8 (n.) the truculence of Mettius Curtius, and 76

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 evyovras . . . \L*XP1 T&V

rfvKGiv avTovs ^'Aaaev. T h e Porta Mugionia, one of the three gates of the early Palatine city, lay on the north side of the hill where the ridge of the Velia joins 77

I. 12. 3

ROMULUS

the Palatine. T h e name is variously spelled (D.H. 2. 50; Nonius 852 L . ; Festus 131 L . ; Solin. 1. 24; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 164) and was anciently derived either a Mugio quodam (Festus) or from the lowing {mugitus) of the cattle which passed daily through it to pas­ ture. See Platner-Ashby s.v. 12. 4. Iuppiter: notice the markedly priestly style of the prayer with the repeated hie . . . hue . . . hinc . . . hie. arceo is used, here as elsewhere, as a technical term of keeping profani at a distance (cf Horace, Odes 3. 1. 1; Ovid, Fasti 6. 482; Virgil, Aeneid 1. 3 1 ; Tacitus, Hist. 5. 8 ; Lucan 5. 139). For praesens of immediate and effective divine aid cf. Virgil, Aeneid 9. 404; Horace, Odes 3. 5. 2 ; Ovid, Met. 7. 178; Cicero, Verr. 4. 107; C.I.L. 6. 545. For deme terrorem cf. Virgil, Aeneid 2. 775. 12. 5. at: to be taken with saltern (cf. Plautus, Merc. 637; Propertius 3. 7. 63 ; Virgil, Aeneid 1. 557) rather than tu. at tu {ego &c.) occurs only in the apodosis of a conditional sentence (cf, e.g., 41. 3 n.). 12. 6. Statori: cf. C.I.L. 3. 895 depulsor. In later times a political inter­ pretation was given of the cult-title, representing Juppiter as the stabilizing providence of the state (Seneca de Bene/. 4. 7. 1; Cicero, in Catil. 1. 3 3 ; C.I.L. 6. 434), but the specific, military function is in general likely to be the earlier. It is rendered by the Greek Urrjcnos or ' OpSwoLos. T h e temple is depicted on the relief from the tomb of the Haterii as Corinthian hexastyle. 12. 7. veluti: N read veluti si, which is to preferred (cf. 1. 56. 12). 12. 8. ab Sabinis princeps: regarded by Walker as mistakenly inserted from 12. 2 but perhaps to be taken as an instance of an 'unconscious repetition 5 (14. 4 n.). vieimus: Mettius' language is coarse and abusive. For hospites . . . hostes cf. 58. 8 n., 4. 32. 12. T h e alliteration is continued with virgines . . . viris. T h e sentiments are doubtless intended to recall Hector's out­ burst against Paris. 12. 10. convalle: a synonym for vallis avoided by Cicero and the other classical prose-writers but affected, for example, by Virgil {Aeneid 6. 139. 6 79)13. 1. turn: the TTepnrereia, taking the form of intervention by the Sabine women, is described in graphic terms: crinibuspassis (7. 40. 12, 26. 9. 7) is the normal state of hysterical women in epic (Virgil, Aeneid 1. 480, 2. 404; notice also two mock-serious passages of Petronius (54, i n ) ) and is not found elsewhere, inter tela volantia from its rhythm sounds like an epic phrase and may be E n n i a n : it is cited from Cato {Inc. Libr. Ret., p. 86 Jordan) and Fronto {de Bello Parth., p . 210 van den Hout). Their appeal for peace is equally emotional. Notice the frequent a n a p h o r a : dirimere . . . dirimere (for the second Gronovius read delenire 78

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 o£se 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

T h e organization of the people into 3 tribes—which L. does not specifically mention (10. 6. 7)—and 30 curiae, based on family, was the oldest political system known at Rome. In an attenuated form the comitia curiata survived down to the last days of the Republic (5. 46. 10 n.). Before the creation of the comitia centuriata and comitia tributa, the curiae and their assembly will have formed the governing body. A memory of that position survived in the magisterial honours accorded to the curio maximus (3. 7. 6 n.). But it is inconceivable that the curiate organization was as old as Romulus, or the eighth century. It should belong to the Etruscan period, the period of transition from a purely pastoral to an urban community thriving on agriculture and trade. Moreover, 30 curiae must either be contemporary with or later than the institution of the 3 tribes, for curiae are a decimal subdivision of the tribes. T h e names of the tribes, which are the same as the names of the 3 'Romulean 5 centuries, Ramn(ens)es, Titi(ens)es, and Luceres, are indubitably Etruscan, as Volnius ap. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 55 argued. They are formed from Etruscan gentile names, lu\re, tide, *ramne (Schulze 218). Thus, although the 3-tribe system is one of the oldest and commonest features of other Indo-European groups, at R o m e it was a conscious creation of the late sixth or early fifth century con­ sequent upon the urbanization of the state. So too the surviving names of the curiae, which are either local (Foriensis, Veliensis) or gentile (Acculeia), imply a late d a t e : the Forum was not inhabited before the Etruscans. In throwing back the origin of these institutions to Romulus the Romans were partly influenced by the normal desire to attribute everything to 'the founder' (cf. the Spartan institutions and 'Lycurgus') and partly by false etymology. Ramnes suggested Romulus, Tities Tatius: only Luceres was a stumbling-block (13. 8 n.). If two of the tribes were called after Romulus and Tatius respectively, the tribal organization must be the result of the fusion of the Romans and Sabines. Ergo, the curiae must also be. One of the curiae was called R a p t a (but cf. Etr. rapine). L. would seem not to be following Valerius Antias here who num­ bered the raped as 527 (fr. 3 P . : J u b a put it as high as 683). T h e usual figure was 30 (Plutarch, Romulus 14). For the centuriae see also 15. 8 n . ; 43. 9 n. See Pelham, Journal of Philology 9 (1880), 266-79; Botsford, Roman Assemblies, 9 fF.; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 87 ff.; Berne, R.E., 'Luceres'; Devoto, Athenaeum 31 (1953), 335 ff. 13. 7. virorumve: -ve is used to convey a subordinate alternative within alternatives; cf. 29. 2, 21. 35. 2, 25. 1. 12, 34. 35. 4. 80

ROMULUS

i. 1 3 . 8

1 3 . 8 . Lucerum: cf. Servius, ad Aen. 5. 560 Lucerum quorum secundum Livium et nomen et causa in occulta sunt. Various conjectures were pre­ valent in antiquity: (1) from a king Lucumo, Lucius, or Lucomedius from Etruria who helped Romulus against Tatius (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 14; Junius ap. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 5 5 ; see also D.H. 2. 37. 2 ) ; (2) from a king Lucerus of Ardea (Paulus Festus 106 L . ) ; (3) from tucus (Plutarch, Romulus 20; de Viris Illustr. 2. 11). L.'s reticence is in part due to his conviction that the third element in the tripartite com­ munity was not Etruscan, as would be entailed by the first conjecture, but Alban (30. 3, 33. 2). Yet if the three tribes are Romulean and Alba was only absorbed by Tullus, the Luceres could not be Alban. 14. 1-3. The Death of Tatius T h e connexion between Lavinium and the death of Tatius is not plausible. It is designed to account for the close religious ties between the two cities (1. 10 n.). L. gives a double motive for Romulus' actions (14. 3 seu . . . seu). T h e first is the older and was known to Ennius (Annales 107 V.). T h e dangers inherent in joint kingship were proverbial (Columella 9. 9. 1; Phaedrus 1. 5. 1). T h e second is rationalistic. This citation of variant motives may betray that L. has here switched from one source to another; the reason for Tatius' mission to Lavinium (ad sollemne sacrificium) was not the reason given by Licinius Macer who with typical anti-clericalism supposed that Tatius set out merely to appease an angry mob (fr. 5 P.). 14. 2. sacrificium: 1. 10 n. Not specified, but presumably taken to be a forerunner of the annual sacrifice to Vesta and the Penates performed by dictators, consuls, and praetors on relinquishing office ([Servius], ad Aen. 2. 296; Macrobius 3. 4. 1 1 ; Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 295 n - 5). 14. 4 - 1 5 . War with Fidenae and Veii T h e career of Romulus traditionally closed with two wars against Rome's nearest rivals, Fidenae and Veii. Neither is historical. Veii did not become a serious power until the fifth century and Fidenae was her bridgehead against Rome. Both cities were to tax the in­ genuity of R o m a n commanders and in particular of that second Romulus, Camillus, in the closing years of the fifth century. Rome's ultimate success in that generation called for an earlier precedent which only Romulus could supply. T h e significant details of the battle are conventional tricks derived from textbooks (14. 7 n., 15. 311.), T h e whole is narrated in a flat style with little invention or em­ bellishment (14. 4 n.). 14. 4. propius: notice ipsis prope portis, prope se, and below (14. 7) the &14432

81

G

1.14.4

ROMULUS

repeated ipsis prope portis. Such unconscious repetitions are a feature of L.'s style, particularly when the subject-matter does not call for elaborate writing. Gf. 20. 7 n., 35. 6 n., 49. 9 n., 59. 13 n., 2. 3. 4 n., 42. 11 n., 45. 3 n., 58. 6 n., 3. 9. 6 n., 11. 8 n., 26. 1 n., 38. 11 n., 40. 3 n., 44. 8 n., 47. 4 n., 51. 2 n., 51. 13 n., 4. 58. 9 n., 5. 24. 2 n. See K. Gries, Class. Phil. 46 (1951), 36-37. J a c . Gronovius wished to delete prope se. 14. 6. enim: this reflection, which is not to be found in the correspond­ ing sections of D.H. or Plutarch, is characteristic of L.'s rhetori­ cal moralizing (4. 37. 7 n.). 14. 7. locis circa densa obsita virgulta obscuris: so N, but to this, the most celebrated of all Livian cruces, there are objections, circa cannot be a preposition here and the conjunction of densa and obsita without a connecting particle is not adequately paralleled by 3. 43. 6 where armatum is pregnant or 40. 56. 9. Livian usage establishes that virgulta is only found in the plural (21. 54. 1, 28. 2. 1, 29. 32. 9, 42. 63. 9) and that obsitus should be qualified by an abl. (21. 54. 1 rivus . . . circa obsitus . . . virgultis vepribusque). It follows, with Hertz, that the only commendable emendation of the passage is locis circa densis obsitis vir­ gultis, taking obscuris with insidiis (Amm. Marc. 16. 12. 2 3 ; cf. Cicero, in Catil. 3 . 3 ) : 'he ordered a detachment to lurk in a concealed ambush, the area being overgrown all round with thick bushes'. Against the emendation is the unparalleled array of -is sounds. T h e reading of N is retained by Turnebus, Bekker, Gonway, and Bayet, among others, but cannot be defended. fugae: Frontinus 2. 5 gives a score of examples of the use of this stratagem. 14. 9. quique: N read, with misgiving, the double quique cum ^ . . . Such dittographies are not infrequently found in N, but eo visi erant neither is by itself adequate, visi erant cannot stand without a qualifying adverb in the sense 'were seen' (Madvig, M . Miiller; but cf. 4. 40. 2, 7. 23. 6). cum equis ierant, on the other hand, does not supply the necessary clarification that the cavalry had joined Romulus in the pre­ tended flight, although it has met with wide acceptance (Gronovius, Nannius, Drakenborch, Crevier, Ruperti, Twiss, Kreyssig, Hertz, Frigell). Most of the emendations do violence to the sense: e.g.fusi (Bayet), pulsi (Grunauer), or abire visi (Weissenborn), avehi visi (Walters) erant. T h e Romans had not seemed to ride away: they had ridden away. They had not been routed but had only pretended to be routed, equites erant is possible (Alschefski, H . J . Miiller; cf. 4. 33. 12, 24. 1. 9) but palaeographically more attractive is viri erant (cf. Virgil, Aeneid 7. 682 ; see C.Q. 9 (1959), 277). 15. 1. Fidenates: for later history see 2. 19. 2 n. 82

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

second century. T h e annalistic, making the Celeres into a bodyguard, with its sinister overtones, is in keeping with the tendency of the Sullan annalists to invent precedents for contemporary events. In 88 Sulpicius formed a bodyguard of 600 knights (Plutarch, Marius 35). L.'s source can thus be shown to be no earlier than Sulla. Its identity cannot be ascertained for sure. Only Valerius Antias' account is known (fr. 2 ) : the Celeres were a bodyguard who took their name from their leader Celer. See also Hill, Class. Phil. 33 (1938), 283. 16. The Apotheosis of Romulus T h e earliest legend of Romulus' end allowed him merely to vanish into thin air. This was the orthodox scheme for the death of heroes, particularly Greek heroes. T h e circumstances in which the dis­ appearance occurred were gradually evolved. A review of the army in the Campus Martius was an appropriate occasion, the Caprae Palus an appropriate place. T h e latter in turn suggested by its name a date—Nonae Caprotinae = 7 J u l y ; see also Plutarch, Romulus 27; Solinus 1. 20). T h e thunder and lightning were the expected accompaniment. T h e apotheosis of Romulus under the enigmatic name of Quirinus was fabricated earlier than Ennius (65, 115, 117 V.), and recent attempts to attribute it to the manipulations of Julius Caesar, who was Pontifex Maximus from 63 B.C., and his cousin, Sex. Julius Caesar, who was Flamen Quirinalis in 57 B.C., must fail. Caesar exploited an existing tradition. Quirinus is found not merely by himself (20. 2 n.) but also in J a n u s Quirinus (32. 9 n.), Mars Quirinus (Servius, ad Aen. 1. 292), Juppiter Quirinus (I.L.S. 3036), and Hercules Quirinus. T h e mean­ ing and grammatical status of the name are alike uncertain but current etymology derives it from *co-uiri-no 'the god of the assembly of men' and links it with Quirites and the Quirinal. T h e data indicate a Sabine origin ultimately, but in Roman rite Quirinus is connected with the peaceful activities of the Roman host. Mars Quirinus pre­ sides over the storing of the ancilia while Mars Gradivus is concerned with their stirring. Janus Quirinus governs the conclusion of wars, the return of the army to peace-time conditions, as Servius says (ad Aen. 6. 859): 'Quirinus est Mars qui praeest paci et intra civitatem colitur'. But Quirinus is no mere equivalent in Sabine demonology of the Roman Mars. His function was more extensive, to watch over the whole ordered community, the exercitus, at peace. In this sense the apotheosis of Romulus, the parens urbis, as Quirinus, quite apart from helping to fuse Roman and Sabine cults, was eminently suitable, but it betrays Hellenic influence, above all in the descensio (16. 6 n.). To it was added the separate story ofProculus Julius. It was certainly 84

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 job—impulsu 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

16. 2. suhlimem raptum: the expression otherwise confined to poetry (34. 8 ; cf. Virgil, Aeneid 5. 255, 1. 4 1 5 ; Plautus, Asin. 868; Terence, Andria 861) paves the way for the high-flown language which follows. silentium: 3. 47. 6 n. 16. 3 . deum: the crowds recognize the deity and acclaim him in fittingly religious terms. For deum deo natus see 40. 3 n . ; for pacem exposcunt cf. 3. 7. 7-8 n. parentem solvere iubent represents the ancient formula used for invok­ ing dead ancestors at the Parentalia—salve, parens (cf. Virgil, Aeneid 5. 8 0 ; Silius Ital. 17. 651 ; C.I.L. 6. 6457; Pliny, N.H. 37. 205 salve, parens rerum). Thus Romulus is regarded as physically the father of Rome and as such he is invoked as one of the di genitales (cf. Dio 44. 37. 3). T h e identification with Quirinus exalted that status. For parens urbis cf. Propertius, 4. 10. 17; Val. Max. 5 . 3 . 1. After the saluta­ tion the Romans turn in the proper manner of prayers to entreat salvation (Appel, De Romanorum Precationibus, 122), as in the saecular prayer of 17 B.C. (I.L.S. 5050 quaeso precorque uti . . . semper Latinum nomen tueamini; cf. Plautus, Capt. 976; Men. 1114). T h e terms also are sacral: for volenspropitius cf. Gato, de Re Rust. 134; C.I.L. 6. 32329, 12. 4333; Plautus, Cure. 89 (a parody of a prayer); Livy 7. 26. 4, 24. 21. 10, 24. 38. 8. sospitare 'to keep safe' is an archaic word found in the prayer in Catullus 34. 24 (see Fordyce's n.). 16. A,fuisse: echoed by Tacitus, Annals 3. 29. 2 (see Syme, Tacitus, 734)16. 5. et consilio: all that need be said in defence of et, deleted by the Aldine editors and Bekker, has been said by Ruhnken on Veil. Pat. lm I 7 ' Proculus Julius: with his usual desire not to complicate a story by distracting details L. omits the fact that traditionally Proculus was a farmer (Cicero calls him agrestis) from Alba Longa. An Alban origin may be implied in the praenomen which designates someone born when his father was away (procul; cf. 2. 4 1 . 1, 4. 21. 6 n.). magnae: 'strange, supernatural'; see Shackle ton Bailey, Propertiana, 55. 16. 6-7. inquit: Proculus' speech is highly poetic in tone as befits the recital of such a miraculous event. Notice the dactyllic clausula {resistere posse) with which Romulus' message concludes. Parallels for many of the phrases are only to be found among the poets. For hodierna luce cf Lucretius 3. 1092; Propertius 3. 10. 7; Ovid, Heroid. 9. 167; for caelo, instead of de caelo (Cicero, Har. Resp. 62), delapsus cf. Virgil, Aeneid 7. 620; Ovid, Met. 1. 212; for caelestes, as a pure sub­ stantive = di, cf. Ennius, fr. var. 23 V . ; Catullus 64. 191, 204, 68. 76; for sublimis abiit cf. Virgil, Aeneid 1. 415. ita velle id is found only here in L. and does not seem to be sacral. 86

INTERREGNUM

i. 16. 6-7

T h e epiphany, or technically, KarcufSaoLa, is a wholly Greek con­ cept. A commonplace in Homer (e.g. Odyssey 1. 102; Iliad 24. 121; cf. Aeneid 8. 423) it remained a constant feature of Greek religion (see the details given by P. Burman, Zevs KaTaipdrrjs (1734), passim) but found only a half-hearted acceptance in Roman rite (5. 13. 6 n.). Romulus' descensio is, therefore, a piece of Hellenistic romanticizing. It has, however, been pointed out by Wagenvoort (Studies, 184) that it is presented in R o m a n guise. T h e superstition that one should not look upon the deity is not Greek but R o m a n (contra intueri fas; cf. Seneca, Epist. 115, 4 ; Virgil, Aeneid 1. 327 ff.; Ovid, Fasti 6. 7 AT.) and the message which Romulus gives—rem militarem colant—the standard R o m a n self-justification (Virgil, Aeneid 6. 847-53 with Norden's note). 16. 6. adstitissem: Burman (op. cit. 232) proposed restitissem which is perhaps to be preferred. Proculus, despite his terror, held his ground. 16. 7. sciant: governing nullas . . . posse. 16. 8. mirum quantum: 2. 1. 11 n. fides, the reading of N, should be re­ tained (Frigell, Epilegomena, 32-33). For fides est cf. 3. 10. 6, 43. 6. 17. The Interregnum It was a. fable convenue of R o m a n constitutional history that the power of the kings had been transferred in some form to the consuls. This theory, which does violence both to the facts of the historical process and to every probability about the nature of regnum and imperium re­ spectively, was the outcome of conservative thinking which looked to see a continuous tradition in Roman institutions (3. 33. 1). It had two consequences. Since by the second century the Senate had claimed and to some extent asserted an over-all supervision over the consuls' actions (2. 56. 12 n., 4. 26. 7 n., 4. 43. 7 n.), it followed that the Senate must have had some say in regal times over the choice of the kings. Hence patres auctores fiunt (17. 8 - 9 ) : the Senate are supposed to have been responsible for the selection of a suitable candidate. Equally, however, the basis of the consular imperium in fact rested upon popular election. Therefore the choice of the king must have been ratified by popular vote (46. 1 n., 47. 10). I n this way grew up the accepted version that the kings were elected and power vested in them auctoribus patribus, iussupopuli and it is this version which is exemplified in the present chapter. It has no historical foundation but recalls the political issues of the 8o's (Appian, B.C. 1. 59). Equally anachronistic is the putative origin of the interregnum (3. 8. 2 n.). Although all the authorities agree that the first interregnum occurred after Romulus (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 2 3 ; D.H. 2. 57), this is mere invention to supply a precedent coeval with the state for an 87

i . 17

NUMA

institution which was doubtless first created on the expulsion of the kings and which is first attested for 482 and 462. T h e belief that the original interregnum followed the death of Romulus may be as old as the fourth or third century but it took concrete shape with the anti­ quarian speculations particularly of Sulla's supporters when the interregnum was revived in the 80's after more than a century's gap. Thus on both matters L.'s source is late Republican. L. himself makes no attempt to dress up the material apart from rounding the section off with an authentic-sounding prayer (17. i o n , ) . For recent discussions see U . Coli,Regnum; M . I. Henderson, J.R.S. 47 ( X 9 5 7 ) J 82 ff.; Friezer, Mnemosyne 12 (1959), 301-29. 17. 1. a singulis: Graevius's correction adsingulos is certain. Political issues were fought out at the group level: they had not yet descended to personalities. For the corruption of ad to a{b) cf. 4. 8. 4, 5. 27. 7, 7. 12. 1, 8. 7. 10, 10. 31. 6, and see Fugner, Lexicon, 324. 22-36. For certamen pervenire ad cf. 8. 3. 6. For factionibus certabatur cf. 7. 21. 2 ; note also 4. 9. 2. 17. 5. centum patres: 8. 7 n., 2. 1. 10 n. 17. 10. bonum faustum felixque: the ritual formula of prayer at the beginning of most public and private undertakings (Cicero, de Divin. 1. 102 omnibus rebus agendis 'quod bonum faustum felix fortunatumque esse? praefabantur; L. 1. 28. 7, 54. 8, 8. 25. 10, 24. 16. 10; Dessau, I.L.S. 112, 4060, 4434). It was, for instance, the formula used by the presiding magistrate before an assembly (39. 15. 1), as is intended here. 18-21. The Reign of Numa T h e only historical fact about the second king of Rome, N u m a Pompilius, is his name. Romulus was an eponymous hero, N u m a was remembered. T h e Sabine origin may also be true although Numa is an Etruscan praenomen (CLE. 3335; cf. Numasius and see Schulze 197) and Pompilius is claimed by Schulze as Etruscan (183; cf. E t r , pumple). T h e names may have been etruscanized and then latinized in the course of history. Nothing else about him has any foundation, and it is possible to study the stages by which his legendary bio­ graphy was constructed. At the very heart of Indo-European thought, as Dumezil has fre­ quently illustrated, lies the paired contrast of the warrior-king and the priest-king representing the two poles of human activity. It was, therefore, inevitable that from the start N u m a should have been thought of as the priestly counterpart to Romulus and should have been credited as a second founder (19. 1) with the religious as Romulus had been with the military institutions of the community. But if Numa was a real king who lived c. 700 B.C., he cannot have been responsible for most of the actual institutions with which he is asso88

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

auguration of N u m a when he quotes the ritual for constituting a templum in terris {de Ling. Lat. 7. 8 ) : 'in terris dictum templum locus augurii aut auspicii causa quibusdam conceptis verbis finitus. concipitur verbis non isdem usque q u a q u e ; in arce sic: "tem tescaque metata (me ita codd.) sunto quoad ego caste lingua nuncupavero. ullaber arbos quirquir est quam me sentio dixisse templum tescumque jfesto in sinistrum. ollaner arbos quirquir est q u a m me sentio dixisse templum tescumque jfesto dextrum. inter ea conregione conspicione cortumione utique ea erectissime sensPV As in other cases (24. 4 ff.) L. has made a narrative out of a formula. The augur pro­ ceeds to the arx and sets up for his observations a timber-framed hut (the original meaning of templum; cf. Festus 505 L . ; Vitruvius 4. 2. 5, 7. 5 ; see Weinstock, Mitt. Deutsch. Arch. Inst. 47 (1932), 95-121 who couples Lat. temno, Gr. refivoj). H e then defines his field of observation by reference to certain visible objects such as trees on its edges {fines animo metari,finire; cf. 18, 7, 18. 9,10. 6) and determines the favourable and unfavourable quarters of the field. These are not pre-determined by compass directions as they are in the celestial templum {templum in caelo; cf. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 7. 7) but are relative to the direction which the augur is facing (18. 7 n.). Thus the regiones of 18. 7 correspond to Varro's inter ea conregione conspicione. Thereupon the augur waits for the specified auguries and pronounces accordingly. The whole ritual has the closest analogies with Greek and especially Oriental procedure (18. 7 n., 18. 8 n.) and it must be assumed that it was adopted by the Romans from the Etruscans who in their turn had inherited it from the East. It cannot therefore have been practised at Rome before the Etruscan dynasty. T h e same anachronism is tacitly confessed at 4. 4. 2. See also H . J . Rose, J.R.S. 13 (1923), 82 ff. 18. 6. in lapide: there is no parallel for N's in lapidem: contrast Virgil, Ed. 3. 5 5 ; Gurtius 8. 4. 15; Nepos, Pausanias 4. 4. 18. 7. lituum: the augur's carved staff seems to have been Hittite in origin and to have been taken over by the Etruscans together with other Oriental features of the augural art. litui figure frequently in Hittite monuments and the remains of three have actually been un­ covered at Alaca dating from the period 2300-2000 B.C. (Wainwright, Anat. Studies 9 (1959), 210). regiones: 10. 6 n. L. paraphrases the technical language for which cf. I.L.S. 4907 ollis legib. ollisque regionibus dabo dedicaboque qtias hie hodie palam dixero; Varro, loc. sup. cit. dextras . . . dixit: the sentence was deleted by Regell {jVeue Jahrb. f. Phil. 123 (1881), 618 ff), in which he was followed by H . J . Miiller and Frothingham, on the grounds that the directions here specified are incompatible with those usually specified for the templum in caelo (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 7. 7; Servius, ad Aen. 1. 92, 6. 191, 7. 187). But, 92

NUMA

i. 18. 7

as Varro himself is at pains to make clear, the templum in terra is distinct and not a mere mirror-image of the templum in caelo, so that there is no reason why the same conditions should hold good for both. 18. 8. quo: N read quod which was accepted by the earliest editors. T h e relative quod 'what' does not, however, construe with the super­ lative. Norden recognizing a usage long known in Lucretius (see Lachmann on 5. 1033; cf. 2. 248 quod cernere possis) understood quod as quoad and supposed that it was designed to suggest the sacral atmos­ phere. Otherwise we must emend to quoad (Heerwagen; cf. 2. 25. 4 ) : quo is no more than a trivialization. translato: for a similar action in oriental ceremony cf. Pap. Graec. Mag. I ( 1 9 2 8 ) , lQ rrjv ifievlirqv pafihov rjv €X€CS x€CPL €*r Tfj ^ a t £ ficreveyKov els rrjv ht^iav.

18. 9. Iuppiter: the prayer is solemnly phrased, uti introduces the actual wish as in ut te di deaeque perduint. Notice the archaizing form of the perfect subjunctive (3. 64. 10 n . ) : adclarare itself does not appear to occur elsewhere in Latin but its meaning 'to reveal, to make clear* is self-evident. 19. 1-4. The Temple of Janus T h e shrine of Janus Geminus, a small rectangular structure with double doors at each end, lay in the forum near the Curia where the Argiletum entered (Ovid, Fasti 1. 258; Seneca, Apoc. 9. 2 ; Dio 83. 13; Servius, ad Aen. 7. 607; for the latest discussion of its site see A. von Gerkan, Gesam. Aufsdtze, 330-2). There were several legends about its origin. Apart from the version given by L. here (Pliny, JV.H. 34. 3 3 ; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 165), Macrobius ( 1 . 9 . 17-18) says that it was already in existence when the Sabines under Titus attacked Rome, while others (Ovid, loc. cit.; Servius, ad Aen. 1. 291) held that it was erected to commemorate the intervention of the god on that occasion. Its peculiar structure has been held to be a survival from a primitive religious crossing of the Argiletum brook which marked the frontier of the earliest Palatine community (L. A. Holland, Janus, 108 ff.), but the ancient testimony which never links Janus with water crossings cannot be disregarded. It is an elaboration of the trilithon or sacral gateway so widely found (cf. the tigillum sororium; a similar pylon figures on a seal from Mycenae). There was no doubt in antiquity as to the function of the god (32. 10 n.). In the popular imagination of the Empire the doors symbolized the passing from war to peace, the beginning or end of hostilities. The tradition that they were closed in 235 (or 2 4 1 : see 19. 3 n.) after the First Punic W a r derives at least from the historian Piso (ap. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 165) and there may well have been an authentic notice of it. It is, however, 93

i. 19. 1-4

NUMA

surprising that there should be no other recorded instance of the doors being shut, for even in the centuries after 241 there were numerous periods of total peace. This may suggest that the practice of closing the doors as a symbol of peace was not in fact generally recognized but was resuscitated either by antiquarians in the closing years of the Republic or by Octavian himself as a propaganda gesture. Some such period of desuetude would also account for the diversity of legends about the founder of the shrine. N u m a attracted cults to him. Octavian closed the temple of Janus in 29 B.C. but L. here refers to him as Caesar Augustus, the appellation which he only received on 16 J a n u a r y 27 B.C. T h e temple of Janus was closed again in 25 B.C. after the Spanish campaigns of the preceding two years (Res Gestae 3). It follows that this section was written between 27 and 25 B.C. or possibly between 29 and 25 B.C. if it be allowed that the title Caesar Augustus could be a subsequent modification: it is quite out of the question to make the whole passage a later insertion or after­ thought, since it gives the theme—pax—for the treatment of Numa's reign. See also Soltau, Hermes 29 (1894), 611 ff.; Deubner, Mitt. Deutsch. Arch. Inst. 36 (1921), 14 ff.; J . Bridge, Class. Journ. 23 (1928), 610 ff.; Syme, Harvard Studies in Class. Phil. 64 (1959), 4 2 - 4 3 ; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 132-3. 19. 1. legibus . . . conderc: N u m a as a second founder of Rome is an old idea; cf. Virgil, Aeneid 6. 810-11 (with Norden's note; from Enni us). Augustus also claimed legibus urbemfundavi (Seneca, Apoc. 10. 2). 19. 2. efferari: 19. 4 n. 19. 3 . T. Manlio: so also Varro, and secondary sources. T . Manlius Torquatus was consul in 235. T h e war was actually concluded in 241, in which year A. Manlius Torquatus was consul. There may have been corruption or omission of praenomina in the original source of the notice. pace terra marique parta: the earliest example of a common slogan. Teace over Land and Sea' was a development of a common Hellenistic title 'Ruler over Land and Sea' which itself had its roots far back in Greek terminology. Pompey is named by Cicero as ruler terra marique (pro Balbo 16). T h e association of universal rule and peace came to be made by the end of the Republic (Appian, B.C. 5. 542 ; I.L.S. 8776) but the new formula prudently exalted Peace at the expense of the individual conqueror. It is, therefore, likely to be an Augustan crea­ tion (cf. Res Gestae 13; Suetonius, Augustus 22). See more fully Momigliano J.R.S. 32 (1942), 62-63. 19. 4. luxuriarent: 22. 2. It was an old Greek view canonized in the Hellenistic period that peace was liable to involve luxury (rpv(f>rj) and hence to precipitate moral decline (Xenophon, Cyr. 3. 1. 26; Plato, 94

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 degrading—efferari 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

the temple of Juppiter Gapitolinus in 509 (Fasti Ant.). T h e terminus post quern should be supplied by the names of the months of which one at least is exclusively Etruscan (Aprilis; from Etr. apru, possibly akin to A<jypoi, A<j>pohirri). It is unlikely that the reform can have been carried out by any king ruling at Rome c. 700 B.C. It belongs to the Etruscanizing period a century later. The reason for attributing it to Numa, apart from his popularity for attracting religious reforms, will be that the name of one of the two new months (Januarius) provides a bridge to the cult of Janus. According to a third tradition (Censorinus 20. 6 ; Macrobius 1. 13. 12), the Decemvirs invented the intercalary system based on the insertion of extra months of 22 and 23 days every alternate year to produce a 4-year cycle of 1,465 days against an actual solar cycle of 1,460. This tradition is not necessarily incompatible with that given by L. here. T h e Decemviral system may, historically, have been designed to improve on an earlier more inaccurate one. Equally irrelevant is the evidence of Macrobius (1. 13. 13) who speaks of a system of intercalation designed to rectify the calendar every 24 years; which led Robortelli to read vicesimo (quoque quarto^ (better quinto) anno in this passage. T h e 24-year cycle was only invented by M e ton in the last half of the fifth century and Macrobius himself admits that it was only adopted after the failure of an earlier system (hoc quoque errore cognito). In fact, there seems to have been no scientific principle of intercalation applied to the calendar in the later Republic before Julius Caesar: it was left to the responsibility or whim of the pontifex maximus. See A. Mommsen, Jahrb. f. Class. Phil. 71 (1855), 249; Bomer's edition of Ovid, Fasti, vol. 1, Einl. 39-44 with bibliography of recent literature; Gjerstad, Legends and Facts, 24 ff. 19. 6. discribit: a necessary correction of describit. T h e corruption is excessively common (Vetter, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v. discribo); cf. 42. 5 n . ; 30. 37. 5; Curtius 3. 3. 10 Persis in totidem dies discriptus est annus. desuntque sex dies: there was no numeral in N, but that must be a mistake, for desunt dies is hardly possible Latin for desunt aliquot dies. If a numeral is to be restored it should be undecim. T h e lunar year has 354 days, the solar 365. undecim could easily be lost between -untquedies. solido: 'the full year'. intercalariis: N read intercalares but intercalarius is the form of the adjective in L. (37. 59. 2, 43. n . 13, 45. 44. 3). Moreover, intercalares would require Conway's change to interponendo. It is better, therefore, to accept Heerwagen's intercalariis than Gronovius's intercalaribus. For the construction cf. 33. 1. vicesimo anno: 'so that after twenty years the lunar and solar calen­ dars should again coincide'. L. is speaking historically. There is no need 96

NUMA

i. 1 9 - 6

to understand vicesimo anno 'every twenty years' (cf. Pliny, N.H. 2. 32 ; Gensorinus 17. 9). 19, 7. nefastos . . .fastosque: cf. Varro, de Ling. Lot. 6. 29, 'dies fasti per quos praetoribus omnia verba sine piaculo licet fari . . .; contrarii horum vocantur dies nefasti, per quos dies nefas fari praetorem: do, dico, addico'. T h e pre-Julian Calendar from Antium shows that the marking of days N and F was as old as the oldest calendar. A similar system is known from Knossos: see the tablet K N V 280. The Flamines T h e institution of regular cults entailed the appointment of regular priests to maintain them. L. implies that such sacerdotal functions had originally been the prerogative of the king but that increasing commitments obliged him to create a deputy or substitute to whom the greater part of these duties could be delegated. Historically this may have been so: the Flamen Dialis wore the dress and enjoyed the perquisites reserved for the king (20. 2 ; cf. 8. 3). Since on the expul­ sion of the kings their remaining sacral duties passed to a specially created rex sacrorum (2. 2. 1 n.), the flaminate must have been an earlier, regal institution. There were in all fifteenflamines each occupied with the cult of a particular deity, but of these only the Dialis, Quirinalis, and Martialis were flamines maiores, subject to a large number of restrictions, particularly severe for the Dialis (details in Aulus Gellius 10. 15; Plutarch, Q.R. 40, 44, 50, 109-13), and re­ sponsible for the performance of the most important sacrifices. No precise date for the institution of the flaminate can be attempted. (Gjerstad, Legends and Facts, 30, argues for a pre-575 date.) For details of their duties and functions see Wissowa, Religion, 5046°.; Rose, Introduction to Plutarch, Q.R. 109-12; Dumezil, La Regalitd Sacra, 416. 20. I. flaminem: modern etymologists compare Anglo-Saxon blotan 'sacrificare' or Ind. brahma and suggest a meaning 'sacrificer'. T h e ancients favoured an aetiological derivation afilo (details in W a l d e Hofmann s.v.) One of the chief duties of the priest was to supervise the sacrificial fire so that, as censor is probably derived from the root -cendere and connected with the fire-ceremony lustrum condere (44. 2 n.), flamen may point to flare from which comes also flamen (neut.) 'a blast'. 20. 2. Quirino: see note on 16 above; 32. 9 n. The Vestal Virgins T h e cult of Vesta was in origin the cult of the hearth of the in­ dividual house. When it became a state-cult it was localized on the king's hearth (2. 2. 1 n.) but with the increasingly secular role per­ formed by the king a separate hearth, the Atrium Vestae, shared also 814432

97

H

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

antiquity of the Salian brotherhood is evidenced both by their wide­ spread distribution throughout Latium (at Lavinium, Alba, Aricia, Anagnia, Tusculum, and T i b u r : evidence in Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 115 n. 3) and by the antiquated character of their armour (20. 4 n.) which is of Bronze Age date and has its closest affinities with Mycenaean armour. In other words, unlike many institutions credited to Numa, it pre-dates rather than post-dates the period of his reign and can legitimately be ascribed to the generation before the unifica­ tion of Rome. T h e great antiquity of the ritual may account for a certain con­ tradiction in its interpretation. In historical times the dance which the Salii performed was certainly a war-dance held in connexion with other military ceremonies before the opening of the campaigning season (1, 9, 23 March) and after it in October. O n the other hand, such armed dances among primitive societies appear invariably to be apotropaic in character (cf., e.g., Ap. Rhod. 1. 1134 ff.) and an eighthcentury bronze urn from Bisenzio on Lake Bolsena depicts a closely analogous dance which is unmistakably magical in character. We may infer that the original Salian ritual was apotropaic and of very great antiquity but that it was converted to a military purpose, presumably under Etruscan systematization. In neither stage is there any ground for linking it with the n a m e of Numa. See further Helbig, Mem. Acad. d. Inscr. 37 (1905), 205 ff.; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 114-16; Bloch, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 70 (1958), 7-3 7; Origins of Rome, 134-41. 20. 4. Marti Gradivo: 5. 52. 7. In historical times M . Gradivus pre­ sided over the inception {ancilia movere) and M . Quirinus over the termination (ancilia condere) of war but the precise way in which this distinction became fixed cannot be recovered, if only because the point of the name Gradivus defies elucidation. T h e ancients invoked gradi, representing the dance-steps of the Salii (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 85 ; Diomedes 476 K . ; but the -a- in Gradivus is long; but cf. Ovid, Met. 6. 427), KpaSalucj, gravis, and gramen. Modern etymologists resign themselves to supposing a foreign, possibly Illyrian or Thracian, origin of the name but it is hard to doubt that it is related to Grabovius which occurs in the Iguvine Tables (1 A 1 1 ; V I B 1) as a cognomen of Mars as well as of Juppiter. Orthodox opinion regards Grabovius as connected with Illyrian rpaflos from a root meaning 'oak, horn-beam 5 (Poultney, The Bronze Tables of Iguvium, 240 with references). Grabto Lat. Grad- is not a possible morphological change but may be the result of false assimilation from the character of the Salian dance (gradus). See also Walde-Hofmann s.v.; Boehm, R.E., 'Gradivus'. tunicaeque pictae: so also D.H. 2. 70; Plutarch, Numa 13. 'He granted them the distinction of an embroidered tunic. 5 99

I. 20. 4

NUMA

aeneum pectori tegumen: apparently not a complete or half-cuirass but a rectangular piece of bronze worn in front to protect the chest (Polybius 6. 23. 14 KapSto(f)vXai). A number of examples have been found in late-eighth-century Etruscan tombs. ancilia: from *am(bi)-caid-sli (Varro, deLing. Lat. 7. 43 fl£ utraqueparte ♦ . . incisa; Festus 117 L.). T h e distinctive figure-of-eight shape implied by their n a m e and recognizable in coins and gems (Furtwangler, Die Antiken Gemmen, pi. xxii, no. 62) recalls the identically shaped bodyshields known from Homer and depicted on Cretan and Mycenaean monuments (see H . L. Lorimer, Homer and the Monuments, 132 ff.). It is likely that the Mycenaean culture, mediated perhaps through Illyria, is the ultimate source of the ancilia; for other pieces of armour worn by the Salii but not described by L. (the apex and xaA/oJ /Lttrpa 7rAarefa) also have counterparts in that culture (see the full survey of material in Helbig, op. cit.; Lorimer 211 ff., 245 ff.). T h e armour is intended for the conditions of 'heroic' fighting and not for hoplite warfare which with the small shield and thrusting sword was introduced by the Etruscans under Greek influence in the seventh century. It follows that the Salians must have reached Rome by the end of the Bronze Age before the Etruscan infiltration of Latium. cum tripudiis sollemnique saltatu: 'with ritual dancing in ternary rhythm'. The Pontificate T h e low place enjoyed by the pontifices in the official order of precedence (Festus 198 L . ; Aul. Gell. 10. 15. 21) and the religious pre-eminence possessed originally by the Flamen Dialis and later shared by the rex sacrorum would be sufficient by themselves to show that the sphere of responsibility allotted to the pontifex (maximus) by N u m a is anachronistic and exaggerated. Their name (pons, facere) points to an activity which was originally important but restricted (33. 6 n . ; 4. 12. 11 n . ; see on the Argei below). They were responsible for roads as well as bridges; for in early times roads are no more than stretches of country between bridges. Since their duties combined religious and practical matters, the pontifices were better placed to keep abreast of the times. New cults were entrusted to them rather than to the famines who were reserved for particular deities. T h e stages by which the pontificate came to assume control of the Roman religious system as the guardian de sacris, de votis, deferiis et de sepulcris et si quid eiusmodi est (Cicero, de Legibus 2. 47) cannot be traced in any detail but the process was effected by the third century (2. 2. 1 n.). Now it is in the late fourth and early third centuries that the plebeian gens Marcia was at its height (see note on 32-34). Their claim to have supplied the first pontifex will have gone hand-in-hand with the back100

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

See Samter, Archiv f. Relig.-Wissen. 21 (1922), 317; Usener, Rh. Mus. 60 (1921), i f f ; M . A. Rubins, Mem. Amer. Ac. Rome 10 (1932), frj-jBomer, Archivf. Relig.-Wissen. 33 (1936), 270ff.; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 78-79. 2 1 . 1. proximo: the vulgate reading retained by Wex (cf. Horace, Odes 1. 12. 52) could only be defended as an abl. of circumstance but the parallel passage of Ovid (Fasti 1. 251 proque metu populum sine vipudor ipse regebai) demands the presence of pro while the lack of adjec­ tives qualifying fides ac iusiurandum may be invoked to confirm that no adjective is to be expected qualifying legum ac poenarum metu (for a similar balance cf. 4. 23. 1 n.). T h e most satisfactory emendation is, therefore, Novak's pro: the corruption may be explained by the similarity of the contractions for pro and proximus (Gappelli 257, 299). The Shrine of Egeria T h e importance of water for any community is illustrated by the devotion accorded from the earliest times to springs and wells. In the pre-Julian calendar which dates back to the beginnings of organized religion at Rome an offering was made to the Gamenae on 13 August (Fasti Ant.). A spring which continued to flow in the height of summer when most water-supplies had dried up was properly treated with special veneration. T h e etymology of Gamenae is wholly uncertain (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 7. 2 8 ; Macrobius 2. 3. 4) but in origin, at least, they were no more than spring-deities. At a much later date the site of their source was named the vallis Egeriae a n d the area connected with an alien goddess Egeria. Egeria was a spring-goddess of Aricia (Virgil, Aeneid 7. 763; Ovid, Fasti 3. 2 6 1 ; Strabo 5. 240; E Juvenal 3. 17), whose name was evidently derived from the gens Egeria which supplied at least two prominent figures in early Latium (34. 2 n . ; Festus 128 L . ; Gato fr. 58 P.). Now the connexion between Rome and Aricia and in particular the importation of Aricine cults to Rome is certainly no earlier than the reign of Servius Tullus (see note on 45, below) and, therefore, the association of Egeria with the Gamenae must also belong to that period. Once the association had been made it was easy to invent circum­ stances that would co-ordinate them with the historically earlier activities of Numa. There is no warrant for believing with Pais that N u m a is no more than the personification of a water-god (cf. Numicius) and that his connexion with water-cults (Fontus, J u t u r n a , Egeria, Gamenae) is only explicable on that assumption. T h e Vestals drew water from the streams of the Gamenae (Plutarch, Numa 13) and the Vestals were a creation of Numa. O n e etymology of Gamenae linked them with prophecy (carmina) so that it was natural to suppose that N u m a had consulted them in devising his religious system. A Greek 102

NUMA

i. 21. 3

equivalent was forthcoming in the spring Hippocrene frequented by the Muses which invited the identification of the Gamenae and the Muses (Livius Andron. Odyss. fr. i). T h e final touch was to explain the aura of Pythagoreanism which came to surround.Numa's name and to depict the shrine in terms which were more commonly used to describe the Orphico-Pythagorean concept of paradise—grove, cool water, shadow, quiet, pleasant scent, flower-filled meadow, altar: [ P l a t o ] , ^ . * ^ ^ ^ 371 c ; Lucian, VeraHist. 2.5ff.; see A. Turyn, T.A.P.A. 78 (1942), 308). It lay at the southern extremity of the Caelian Hill. See Platner-Ashby s.v. 'Gamenae 5 ; Waszink, Class, et Med. 17 (1956), 139 ff.; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 77. 2 1 . 3 . lucus erat. . . quo . . . eum lucum: L. employs a formal pattern of descriptive technique commonly used in epic to begin a story (Virgil, Aeneid 1. 159 ff.; 441 ff.; 4. 480 ff. with Austin's n o t e ; 5. 124 ff.; 7. 563 f.; Propertius 4. 4. 3 ff.; see Fraenkel, de Med. et Nov. Com. QuaesL Sel. (Diss. Gottingen, 1912), 46 ff.; G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 47 (1957), 246). T h e pattern goes back to Homer. L.'s use of it serves to isolate the Egeria episode and highlight its importance. The Shrines of Fides T h e most important of the anachronisms foisted on Numa is the cult of Fides (D.H. 2. 75. 3 ; Plutarch, Numa 16. 1; Florus 1. 2. 3 : Agathocles (F. Gr. Hist. 472 F 5 Jacoby) even wished to put it as far back as Aeneas). T h e conceptual character of her name, unlike Ops or Salus, rules out any early date and indeed it is recorded that A. Atilius Galatinus (consul in 258 and 254) was responsible for build­ ing her temple (Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 2. 61). There were, however, earlier gods who had surveillance over oaths. T h e complex Semo Sancus Dius Fidius may represent the fusion of a Sabine earth-god (cf. semen; see Propertius 4. 9. 74; Ovid, Fasti 6. 217-18) with a Latin sky-god, each of whom had separately guaranteed oaths: to swear by earth and/or sky is one of the commonest sanctions. See 54. 10 n., 2. 12-13. 5 n. Thus the historians who ascribed a cult of Fides to Numa may have recognized that Dius Fidius was one of the old cults. Their motive for naming the cult that of Fides was to stress the importance of that concept in the domestic society and international relations of their own times (250-150 B.C.): fides is the guarantee of iusiurandum (Ennius, trag. 403 V.). See Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 126-7, 237, 273; P. Boyance, Hornmages Grenier, 1. 329 ff. 21. 4 . soli: the space in M E shows that N was uncertain where soli could or should go and betrays it as being a marginal stray (ex sollemne). It is therefore superfluous to attempt emendation (solus Seeley; Sollae Hayley; populi Muretus; simul Sigonius, Brakman; in 103

I. 21. 4

NUMA

Capitolio Harder), soli is retained by Rossbach and Bayet among others, but no suggestion is advanced for its meaning. ad id sacrarium: there is a slight ellipse, id sacrarium meaning 'the chapel reserved for that ritual'; cf. 20. 5, 30. 4. Peerlkamp (note on Virgil, Aeneid 1. 292), feeling the difficulty, wished to insert et sacrarium after instituit. flamines: a double inaccuracy. L. uses jlamines loosely according to the practice of his time as a synonym for sacerdotes: there was no flamen attached to the cult either of Fides or of Dius Fidius. H e also appears to imply that the privilege of riding in a carriage was confined to the priests of Fides but it was a universal prerogative of priests (Tacitus, Annals 12. 4 2 ; [Servius], ad Aen. 8. 552). involuta: cf. Servius, ad Aen. 1. 292, 8. 636. See the story of G. Mucius in 2. 12. 1-16. The Argei O n e of the most perplexing of Roman religious ceremonies con­ cerns the Argei (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 4 5 - 5 4 ; 7. 4 4 ; Plutarch, Q.R. 32, 86; Paulus Festus 14 L . ; D.H. 1. 38. 3 ; Ovid, Fasti 5. 6 2 1 ; Macrobius 1. 11. 47). They are named on two dates. O n 16-17 March there is a notice itur ad Argeos, presumably a procession to the 27 Argeorum sacella which Varro lists in order throughout the 4 regions of the city. O n 14 May 27 rush puppets called Argei were dropped from the Pons Sublicius into the Tiber by the Vestal Virgins. T h e significance of the ritual depends at least partly on its antiquity. It has been argued that the number 27 is a favourite of Sibylline rites and hence that the ceremony cannot be ancient. This would seem to be supported by the fact that the ceremonies do not figure in the old Republican religious calendar. From this stand-point Wissowa argued that the ceremony was parallel to the live-burial of representatives of Rome's mortal enemies, Greek and Gaul, practised in the third century (22. 57.)—and that it dated from the same epoch. Argei stood for ApyetoL, the name under which the Greeks were known. T h e negative arguments for a late date are not, however, foolproof and there are grave morphological objections to equating Argei and Argives. Nor does the theory account for the M a r c h ritual. In the present state of knowledge it is more satisfactory to accept Latte's explanation. H e holds that the rush puppets are taken in procession and placed in the sacella at the beginning of the year in order to attract uncleanness throughout the city. They were then disposed of by the purest of priests, the Vestals, in the extinguishing waters of the Tiber. T h e ceremony would in that event be a primitive one, dating back at the least to the period when the New Year began on 1 March. In neither case are there any grounds for connecting the Argei with Numa. 104

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 ferocitas—ferocior 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 century—the 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 material—topographical 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 kings—one fetial formula to Tullus, the other to 105

I. 22-31

TULLUS HOST1LIUS

Ancus Marcius, the deditio formula to Tarquinius Priscus. Religious instititutions were similarly pillaged to provide historical matter. Interested research was able to supply the Salii (27. 7 n.), the sororium tigillum (26. 13 n.), and the shrines of Pallor and Pavor. L., therefore, inherited a fully developed story from an author who was writing some time after 100 B.C. (30. 2 n., 31. 8 n.). It is significant that the fetial in 24. 6 is named M . Valerius. Valerius Antias suggests himself as a possible source and we know from Cicero (de Invent. 2. 78 ff.) that the predicament of Horatia was a favourite topic in the schools c. 86 B.C. It is doubtful whether the source can be more precisely determined. It has been noted that 24. 4 nee ullius vetustior foederis memoria est contradicts 23. 7, and that 30. 7 pacta cum Romulo fides ignores the agreement concluded between Tullus and the Veientes. From this it might be argued that the Valerian section is confined to 24-31 as would be supported by the citation of variants at 24. 1 and 3 1 . 4 . If L. took over the material ready assembled, he did much to it. It can be seen from comparison with D . H . that his literary and psychological interests led him to adapt and reshape extensively. Where D.H.'s version is homogeneous and continuous, L. divides the reign into four acts (22-23, 24-26. 1, 26. 2-14, 27-29). He eschews the empty rhetoric in which D.H. indulges, making one speech (23. 7-9) do the work of seven. In his battle-descriptions he concentrates on the attitudes of the combatants (25. 1-2) and gives dramatically effective if schematic narratives (notice, e.g., the Trepnrcrcia in 23. 6), stressing the human at the expense of the divine agencies so pro­ minent in D.H. Above all he imparts realism to the history through the words which he gives the characters to speak. T h e Fetial formula, which is paraphrased by D.H., is the clearest instance of this but there is much icharacterizing' language in 23. 7-9 (nn.), and 28. 4-6 (nn.). It helps to unify the story and to bring out the theme of the ferocitas of Tullus. See Burck 149 ff.; Soltau, Woch. Klass. Phil. 25 (1908), 1269 ff; Aly, Livius u. Ennius, 36; Glaser, R.E. 'Tullus Hostilius'; H . Peytrand, Rev. Univers., 1939, 32-33 ; M . van den Bruwaene, Latomus 11 (1952), 154 ff.; also articles cited on individual passages below. 22. 1. interregnum: 3. 8. 2 n. For the Hostilii see 12. 2 n. Tullum Hostilium: for Tull(i)us see 39. 1 n . ; Tullus is Latin or Volscian and was used originally as nomen or praenomen (cf. Tul(lus) Tullius from Tibur) and later as a cognomen (cf. the Volcacii Tulli). The name, being that of a later plebeian gens, will hardly have been invented. populus . . . iussit: see note on ch. 17. 22. 2. ferocior: the key-word of the section cf. 23. 4, 10, 25. 1, 7, 11, 27. 10, 31. 6. 106

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

assumes as a fact that the projected parley is an empty ruse rather than states it as a possible contingency. We would have to emend to tamen si vana adferantur (Vossius), or tametsi vana afferri rebatur (Tan. Faber) or tamen si vana afferebantur (Wachendorf). But in aciem educit need not describe Tullus' precautions in the event of the negotiations breaking down. Like the following exeunt contra et Albania it merely describes the arrival of the armies at the scene of the negotiations. Parleys are traditionally conducted between the lines. In that case tametsi may be retained. Tullus knew that Fufetius' message in which he said that he had a proposition of interest to the Romans was vain {vana); for Tullus held the upper hand. The Alban king, Cluilius, was d e a d : Tullus had advanced with a superior force into Alban territory. Nevertheless he did not reject Fufetius' overtures. With Mikkola {Konzessivitat, 99) I would retain the text of the M S S . instructi: structi (N) is retained by Alschefski, Weissenborn, and Bayet but never found as a synonym for instructi (Sabellicus: see Gitlbauer, Zeitschr.f. d. Oesterr. Gymn. 29 (1878), 919 AT.). 23. 7. infix: 28. 4, 3. 71. 6. infit, used only by the poets before Apuleius (Ennius, Ann. 394 V . ; Plautus, Asin. 343, et at.; Lucretius; Virgil), save in three passages of L., introduces what must be intended to be characterizing speeches. Such overtones are not hard to detect. Fufetius advances two arguments: the real cause of the war is cupido imperii but both sides should avoid exhausting their resources and so falling a prey to the Etruscans (cf. Sallust, Jugurtha 79. 4 : an adapta­ tion of the arguments used by Nicias inThucydides 6. 10 against the Sicilian expedition). For 23. 8 monitum velim, an idiom rare in Cicero and in classical prose, cf. Plautus, Capt. 53, 309; for 23. 9 si nos di amant cf. Plautus, Epid. 515; Miles 293, 5 7 1 ; Poen. 659; for the bold in aleam ire cf. Seneca, de Clement. 1. 1. 7. et ego: the remarkable position of ego, interrupting the three causes of war, is accounted for by the double emphasis in the sentence, the stress laid on the alleged grievances {iniurias . . .) and the contrast between the two leaders {ego . . . te). audisse videor: see Shackleton Bailey, Cicero, cAd Atticum\ 66. 23. 8. quo propior: A has propior es Volscis. T h e Volsci have not yet appeared in history and do not do so for another 130 years (1. 53), nor is there any rival tradition which dates their emergence early, but no conjecture based on es is conceivable since es was not read by the archetype. Volscis is probably an anticipation of the succeeding scis, corrupted from vel or v.l. scis (cf. 1. 45. 2 iam turn vel tantum) We are left with quo propior, hoc magis scis which may be compared with Tacitus, Ann. 1. 34. 1 sed Germanicus quanto summae spei propior, tanto impensius pro Tiberio niti. {Volscis seel. Voss, Conway; Tuscis Strothius; Veiis J a c . Gronovius; propiores vos estis Bayet.) 108

TULLUS HOSTILIUS

i . 2 3 . 10

2 3 . 10. fortuna: 37. 52. 12. 24-25. The Battle of the Champions T o decide the issues of war by a contest of champions is a widespread custom found among peoples of many climates and cultures (cf. Homer, Iliad 3. 66 ff.; Herodotus 1. 82, 5. 1. 2 ; Pausanias 5. 4. 1; Tacitus, Germania 10; Plutarch, Alexander 3 1 ; 1 Samuel 17) and in particular the fight of the one against the three can be paralleled from numerous sagas. Robert the Bruce killed the three treacherous travellers in single combat (Scott, Tales of a Grandfather, 1. 77). But the closest parallel is the Irish legend of Cuchulain who not merely killed his three opponents but, like Horatius, had to be reintegrated with civil society by a special ceremony. Horatius passed through the sororium tigillum in order to be cleansed of his impurities; Cuchulain is plunged into three successive vats in order to cool his violence. We may recognize here the R o m a n form of a very ancient legend, a legend perhaps as old as the earliest roots of the stock from which the Irish and Romans sprang. But there is no need to subscribe to Macaulay's judgement that 'no doubt it came from some old national ballad 3 . T h e legend was certainly prized by the family of the Curiatii (3. 32. 1 n . : notice the cognomen Trigeminus) and is likely to have enjoyed a wide currency. In the telling of the story L. follows the preliminary setting, which is full of legal-sounding phrases (24. 3 n., 24. 7-9 nn.), with a vivid description of the battle as seen by the spectators rather than by the combatants. T h e contrast between the two chapters is deliberate and the whole is rounded off by a topographical notice. See Mlinzer, R.E., 'Curiatius' and 'Horatius'; E . J . Urch, Class. Journal 25 (1930), 4 4 5 ; G. Dumezil, Horace et les Curiaces. 24. 1. forte . . . turn . . . erant: for this method of beginning a new episode see 2. 33. 5 n. error: none of the extant sources (D.H. 3. 13. 4 ; Zonaras 7. 6; Columella 3. 8. 1; U Bob. Cicero, Mil., p. 277 Or.) made the Curiatii Roman though traces of that tradition can be detected (3. 32. 1 n.). L. ignores the additional refinement that the Horatii and Curiatii were cousins, their mothers being twin-daughters of an Alban Sicinius (D.H., loc. cit.). Licinius Macer, whose interest in the Sicinii can be documented, may be responsible. trahunt: historical jargon, cf Sallust, Jugurtha 9 3 . 1 ; Tacitus, Annals 14. 14. 24. 2. ibi imperium: 45. 3 n. 24. 3 . his legibus: the terms of the treaty are mock-archaic. L. is pretending to paraphrase an original decree, cuiusque, as given by the manuscripts, is found in early Latin in legal and religious contexts 109

i. 24. 3

TULLUS HOSTILIUS

in an indefinite sense, the equivalent of quisquis or quicumque (cf., e.g., Plautus, Capt. 797-8: see G. W. Williams's discussion of Horace, Odes 1. 32. 15-16, in C.R. 8 (1958), 208-9). Similarly the use of imperitare for imperare is solemn and high-sound­ ing (1. 2. 3, 17. 6, 22. 4, 3. 39. 8, 4. 5. 5). Even in Plautus it had a 'lofty ring' (Fraenkel, Horace, 191 n. 5), occurring only twice, in paratragic passages {Pseud. 703; Capt. 244), and its use in Lucretius 3. 1028 and Horace, Sat. 1. 6. 4 echoes Ennius (cf. also Accius, fr. 586). The Fetial Formula The history of the fetiales is outlined in 32. 5 n. below, but whereas the procedure for declaring war lapsed when Rome became involved in transmarine hostilities, the fetiales seem to have long maintained their role as treaty-makers. They are attested as having concluded the peace with Carthage in 201 (30. 43. 9) and the ceremony is often depicted on coins of the late second century B.G. (Sydenham nos. 69, 527, 619). But Polybius in his account of the third Carthaginian treaty (3. 25. 6 with Walbank's n o t e : 279 B.G.) seems to have had only a confused understanding of the detailed institution because he was misled into identifying the fetial sacrifice of the pig by a flint (silex) with an entirely separate oath lovem lapidem (Paulus Festus 102 L.). It may, therefore, be that in the middle of the century the exact formulae were not common knowledge and that they had to be resuscitated by a later generation. The texts given by L. are an archaizing reconstruc­ tion. Such formulae will first have been published in manuals of constitutional procedure and then been incorporated by annalists into their histories (notice accepimus in 24. 4, and 38. 1) with names and circumstances supplied to fit. It is a quite extraneous addition to the story of the Horatii. See Samter, R.E., 'Fetiales'; Bayet, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 52 (1935), 29 ff.; J . van Ooteghem, L.E.C 23 (1955), 3^-1^ 24. A.fetialis: the etymology of the word is unresolved. Ancient grammarians connected it with foedus (Servius, ad Aen. 1. 62), fides (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 86), or ferire (Paulus Festus 81 L.). Modern scholars favour a derivation from a root *dhe (cLfas,fari, OefjucrTrjs) or associate it with Juppiter Feretrius (10. 6 n.) where the fetiales kept their ritual instruments. T h e college consisted of twenty members, two of whom would serve on a particular mission (9. 5. 4), one as the verbenarius (Pliny, N.H. 22. 5 ; Varro ap. Nonius, p. 848 L.), carrying the sacred grasses from the citadel, the other as the pater patratus in priestly dress, carrying the sceptre per quod iurarent and the flint. T h e latter was the principal emissary. 110

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 €GTixovTO ( 3 . 3 4 1 ) *

25. 2. consederant: as in Iliad 3. 326. For the anxious concern as to the outcome among both spectators and contestants cf. Thuc. 7. 71. 1-6.

animo incenduntur: Seeley and Conway accept the manuscripts but the metaphor of men under tension (erecti suspensique) being kindled in mind is unendurable. Gebhard's change to intenduntur is minimal and restores the mot juste for keen attention to a spectacle (cf. 2. 37. 5, 112

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 mel£e 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

1

I. 26

TULLUS HOSTILIUS 26. Perduellio

The hero victorious over men but brought low by a woman is a perennial theme of myth. The specifically Roman variation on the story is its use as a vehicle for illustrating an archaic legal procedure— the trial for perduellio. We do not know how old the connexion of Horatius and perduellio is nor can we safely erect ambitious frameworks of legal systems on so uncertain a precedent from regal times, but it is possible to give a brief summary, perduellio was high treason, a crime committed by a Roman when in any way he acted in a manner hostile to his country. The sources give no precise definition of per­ duellio any more than they do of the attendant crime of maiestas. It was left to the court to determine whether the accusation was properly laid or not. Such imprecision is usual in all cases of this kind. The officer can be dismissed for 'conduct unbefitting a gentleman', perduellio was, therefore, from the start the concern of the state. Whereas in other matters the prosecution and punishment were in the hands of the agnati (2. 35. 5 n.), trials for perduellio were set in motion and managed by the state. The iiviri perduellionis thus differed in a funda­ mental respect from the quaestores parricidii. The quaestores resembled an arbitration tribunal whose duty was simply to pronounce on culpability. The iiviri were state-prosecutors appointed by and in the name of the king (or, for the institution is more probably Republican, the people), who conducted the case and gave sentence. It is to be presumed therefore that since the powers of the iiviri emanated from the populus, the final decision always, at least in theory, rested with the people. In other words provocation or the right to have one's own case heard and decided by the people, was an integral part of the procedure for perduellio but not for quaestorial offences. Perduellio is old. As a system it was obsolete by the first century. When it was revived for the trial of C. Rabirius in 63, many of the details of procedure and terminology were already obscure to Cicero and his colleagues. In that respect Cicero's speech pro C. Rabirio is the best commentary on this chapter. The lex horrendi carminis> un­ impeachable as it is in point of drafting, is not in language an archaic document (see also 26. 6 n.). It is a second-century 'restoration'. But was Horatius properly charged with perduellio at all ? Jolowicz and others have taken exception to the whole passage because they argue that Horatius' crime was parricidium, not perduellio: he killed his sister. Other scholars, like Pagliaro, proceed from the same premise to identify the iiviri and quaestores. All this is to overlook the fact that Horatia was herself a criminal. She was guilty of proditio, she had mourned for an enemy (26. 4 n.). It follows that she was accusanda and damnanda, so that when Horatius killed her he was guilty not so 114

TULLUS HOSTILIUS

i. 26

much of parricidium as of forestalling the due processes of the law by executing a criminal who had not yet been sentenced to death. His offence was not parricidium but caedes civis indemnati which was a matter that concerned the state as a whole and so came into the category of perduellio. It was not a straightforward instance nor does L. help to clarify the issues, but its very complexity was perhaps the reason why it was m a d e the paradigm case of perduellio. While extracting the full legal and antiquarian flavour from the episode L. tells it dramatically. T h e stages of the procedure became the stages of the story and the characterization is vividly maintained. Horatius' coarse rejoinder to his sister (26. 4 n.) is balanced by his father's pathetic appeal on his behalf (26. 9 n.). T h e literature on perduellio is extensive and the case is discussed in most legal handbooks: for reference see Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 616 ff; W. Oldfather, T.A.P.A. 39 (1908), 49 ff; Jolowicz, His­ torical Introduction, 49, 323 ff.; C. Brecht, Perduellio, especially 125 ff; D. Daube, J.R.S. 31 (1941), 182-4; M . Kaser, Altrom. Ius, 54 ff; U. von Liibtow, Das Rbmische Volk, 262-3; J . Bleicken, £eit. Sav.-Stift. 76 (1959), 324 ff.; A. Pagliaro, Studi L. Castiglioni, 2. 714 ff. 26. 4 . abi hinc cum: 6. 40. 12. Elsewhere only in Terence, Andria 317. sic hostem recalls 7. 2 sic deinde quicumque alius transiliet moenia mea and is common as an expression of defiance in early Latin (cf. Plautus, Asin. 841). It is perhaps influenced by the Homeric a*£ airoXoiro. Beneath the archaically colloquial language is the vestige of a very ancient law which forbade the mourning of an enemy (Ulpian, Dig. 3. 2. n . 3 non solent lugeri . . . hostes vel perduellionis damnati; M a r c , Dig. 11. 7. 3 5 ; Suetonius, Tiberius 6 1 : see Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 1189 n. 3). 26. 6. lex horrendi carminis: in early Latin a carmen was a pattern of words generally formulaic but not necessarily in metre given a special solemnity by its delivery or its character (Norden, Kunstprosa, 160). T h e form of the law preserves an interesting feature. The first clause is couched in the subjunctive (iudicent), the other clauses in the im­ perative (certato, obnubito, suspendito, verberato). The distinction is be­ tween the language of a decree (by Senate, magistrates, or others) and the language of a statute. T h e iiviri are appointed by decree but their instructions are the subject of statute (see Daube, Forms of Roman Legislation, 4 0 - 4 1 ; cf, e.g., 38. 9. 10). The clause si... certato is regarded by Pagliaro as a later addition on inadequate grounds (see above). For the archaic ceremony caput obnubito see 4. 12. 11 n. arbores infelices are trees quae neque seruntur unquam neque fructum ferunt (Pliny, N.H. 16. 108) and were regarded as being in tutela inferum deorum (Macrobius 3. 20. 3 ; Livy 36. 37. 1). They were appropriate instruments for the death of malefactors but since no execution had been performed for 115

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

historically baseless and is founded on two well-known military strata­ gems (27.8nn.), is told in L.'s best battle-style. T h e preliminary setback, caused not by Roman shortcomings but allied treachery, is reversed in a 7T€pi7T€T€ia (27. 9). It affords the opportunity for the introduction of an old R o m a n institution, the Salii (27. 7). T h e scene between Tullus and Fufetius ending in the latter's death is based on a very old legend (28. 10 n.) and is presented morally as the exception which proves the rule of Roman clemency (28. 11 in aliis gloriari licet nulli gentium mitiores placuisse poenas) and artistically as an indictment evoca­ tive of former times and behaviour (28. 4 n.) T h e final scene, the Albae nepcris, is narrated in language recalling the great epic set-pieces on which it is modelled. All this is peculiar to L. D.H.'s treatment is Hellenistic (cf. 3. 29. 1 olfjuoyal). H e dilates on the detailed punish­ ment of Fufetius—a trivial and unseemly occurrence—but misses the psychological and literary potentialities inherent in the fall of Alba which is summarily disposed of in a few sentences (3. 31. 1-2). 27. 1. invidia . . . coepit: the new section is opened with a generaliza­ tion; cf. 2. 2. 2 n. 27. 2. ex edicto: 'to declare war' is indicere not edicere bellum but ex indicto which Duker and Bauer would read here is never found (cf. 33. 28. 4), whereas ex edicto is used in a quite general sense 'by pro­ clamation' (Hey, Thes. Ling. Lat., 'edico', 72. 79 ff.). 27. 3 . Fidenates: 14. 4 n. 27. 4. conftuentes'. 4. 17. 12. T h e general dispositions recall these of the later battle and may be a throw-back therefrom. Notice especially the jettisoning of arms and men into the Tiber. 27. 5. hi et in acie: the force of et is that the Veientes lacked the confidence to commit themselves irretrievably to the contest* They kept their position on the river bank where lay their escape-route both before and after the line of battle was formed. It should not be deleted (Weissenborn, Madvig). 27. 7. Salios: 20. 4 n. Shrines of Pallor and Pavor are nowhere else directly attested and in the corresponding section of D.H. (3. 32. 4) Tullus VOWS Kpovov

T€ /cat 'Pea? KaraaTrjaecrOai SrjfjLOTeXeis ioprds.

Pallor and Pavor are the Homeric Jef^o? and r a 6 (1955), 31-46. 32. 5. G ^ : sc. ab Anco Marcio; cf. 42. 4. N u m a is the founder of re­ ligious practices, Servius Tullius of constitutional institutions, Tullus Hostilius of international relations. So Ancus Marcius is characterized by bellicae caerimoniae. This was a late development facilitated by the great mass of new material released at the end of the second century which could be anchored to specific personalities and attached to definite events. There was originally no firm tradition as to who did found the fetial procedure but it suited the character of Ancus Marcius as Roman historians wanted to portray him. Hence the earliest writers gave discrepant accounts: Cicero (de Rep. 2.31) attributes it to Tullus Hostilius (in which he is following perhaps the earliest versions of Fabius Pictor and Polybius before the rediscovery of the actual ceremonies), while another early historian (? Gn. Gellius.: cf. D.H. 2. 72; Plutarch, Numa 11) referred it to N u m a . Aequicolis: or Aequi; both forms of the name are met, although Aequicoli outlived Aequi after the nation itself had disappeared (Pliny, N.H. 3. 106; Liber Coloniarum, p . 225; cf. mod. il Cicolano). Perhaps 814432

129

K

*-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. Jilo—lanae 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

iuste pie que: 32. 12 n. 32. 7. si. . . fam: 24. 8 n., the syntactical framework ottestationes. T h e rest of the language is in an appropriately pseudo-legalistic vein, e.g. dedier, the archaic form of the inf. passive, exposco, illos (cf. E. Norden, Altrdm. Priesterbiich., 59 ff.), compotem patriae ('a full member of my country', a phrase confined to execrations, so in Plautus, Captivi 622 at ita me rex deorum atque hominum faxit patriae compotem, where at ita me sets the t o n e ; cf. Cicero, ad Att. 3. 15. 4), siris (if the formula was primitive, the form would have been sirs or sers; cf. Carmen Fratr. ArvaL 4-7 and numquam would have been ne . . . unquam: cf. Plautus, Trin. 520 ff. and Norden, op. cit. 131 n. 3). After dedier wX add/?.r. in various forms. Bayet follows earlier editions in reading dedier populi Romani mihi which will not construe even as a pseudo-legalism, for populi Romani could only be a genitive after homines and res, but the objects and people under dispute do not belong to the Roman people. The homines are Romans who have escaped R o m a n jurisdiction: the res are the property of individual Romans. T h e letters p.r. are doubtless a corruption of the note which stands in M dedier f dari. 32. 8. suprascandit: only here in Latin, and so perhaps borrowed direct from the fetial procedure. carminis: 26. 6 n. 32. 9. tribus et triginta: D . H . 2. 72 says 30 days (cf. 22. 5) and this is the interval prescribed in the legis actio per condictionem. Moreover, [Servius] {ad Aen. 9. 52) states that the casting of the spear, not the testatio, took place on the 33rd day. L. (or rather Licinius Macer and so ultimately the second-century antiquarian authority who grafted the newly phrased formulae on to the remnants of the procedure as it remained in his own day) has again been confused by later develop­ ments by which the pause between the testatio and the indictio belli (for consulting the Senate) was omitted because of the difficulties of travel between Rome and overseas enemies such as Carthage. This also accounts for L. writing bellum ita indicit. T h e indictio belli was properly the spear-throwing not the testatio, but by historical times the spearthrowing had ceased to be a significant part of the ceremony and there was no longer a gap between the testatio and the announcement of war. T h e legati were empowered to carry out both on the same occasion without further consultation. See McDonald and Walbank, art. cit., 194 n. 41. The Testatio et tu, lane Quirine: Iuno Quirine is read by the manuscripts but et tu shows that only one other divinity was mentioned by name. Juppiter, J u n o , and Quirinus would be impossible bedfellows. J a n u s Quirinus, as a deity, is indeed attested (Res Gestae 13; 131

i. 32. 9

ANGUS MARGIUS

Horace, Odes 4. 15. 9; Suetonius, Aug. 22; Macrobius 1. g. 16) and is at least not an Augustan invention, for he is cited in a law of ' N u m a ' (Festus 204 L.). By analogy with other Quirinus combinations Janus Quirinus should be the god who presided over the passage from war to peace or over the beginning of peace. We cannot be sure of the exact antiquity of the cult b a t the invocation of him here can hardly be authentic. T h e fetials are beginning a war, not concluding it. Now in many early prayers Janus and Quirinus occur as separate deities, Quirinus in his own right as the god of the host at peace and Janus as the god of beginnings. Hence Janus regularly takes precedence (cf. the archaic prayer in 8. 9. 6 lane, Iuppiter, Mars pater, Quirine, Bellona . . . ; see Wissowa, Religion, 19; Altheim, History of Roman Religion, 106-14). In the original fetial formula the deities invoked must have bsen another triad, namely lane, Iuppiter, Quirine, which became dis­ composed when the function of Janus was obscured and the colloca­ tion Janus Quirinus had come into favour in military contexts. Here is one more indication of the relatively late date of these formulae. See also L. A. MacKay, Univ. of Calif Studies in Class. Phil. 15 (1956), 157-82; Koch, Religio, 17-39; Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 132 n. 3 ; Schilling, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 72 (i960), 89 ff.; Weinstock, J.R.S. 51 (1961), 212; L. A. Holland, Janus, 60 and n. 33. 32. 10. in patria maiores natu consulemus: 8. 7 n. cum . . is: so M, cum his nX. Such a use of cum his (dictis, nuntiis, &c.) in the sense 'with these words (he returned to Rome) 5 is confined to everyday speech (e.g. Bell. Afr. 12. 1) and is nowhere found in elevated style. M's uncertainty suggests that there is an underlying corruption. Walters advanced the view that his stood for h. s. or hie supple, by which the scribe of the archetype indicated a lacuna. Such symbols are certainly found but they are only found in late stages of the tradition and never in the archetype. T h e corresponding passage of D.H. (2. 72.9 KCLL fJL€TGL TOVTO

a7T€(j)aLVeV

€LS T7]V

fiovArjV

afJLCL TOLS dXXoiS

€Lp7]Vo8iKaLS

7Tapayev6fi€vos) excludes the possibility of a large gap and suggests the restoration cum legatis. Although L. has not recorded the presence of any delegates other than the pater patratus and almost implies that the pater patratus was on his own, the omission is to be attributed to the pre-eminent position enjoyed by that functionary. He was certainly accompanied by %fetiales. 32. 11. quarumrerum: 'having regard to those things, objects, suits of which the p . p . p. R. Q . gave due notice to the p. p . P. L. and to the men of the P. L., having regard to those things which they have neither given nor done nor paid, having regard to those things which they ought to have given, done, paid, speak: what think you?' T h e preamble to the interrogatio (framed in the senatorial formula: quid 132

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

ergo censes? Trachalio: quod rogas censeo). But if a senator wished to signify his agreement with the proposal without elaborating his reasons, he used the formal iadsentior\ T h e passages are collected by Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 979 n. 3 but the most revealing is the speech of Claudius {B.G.U. 611. 51-54 'consulem designatum descriptam ex relatione consilium ad verbum dicere sententiam, ceteros unum verbum dicere: i(adsentiory\ deinde cum exierint: "diximus" '). Consentio is never so used, nor is conscisco used to mean 'concur in resolving upon' {con-\-scisco) except also at 10. 18.2. (In Cicero, de Leg. 3. 10, quoted by the dictionaries consciscentur is a false reading for sciscentur.) T h e substitution of unique uses of com­ pound verbs in con- for familiar terms was doubtless motivated by a desire to reproduce the archaic solemnity often found in laws, e.g. Lex ap. Cicero, pro Cluentio 157, or S.C. de Bacchanalibus 14, to which Fraenkel has drawn attention {Agamemnon, p. 384). It is notable that it is just the phrase containing the tricolon censuit, consensit, conscivit which L. Cincius omits from his copy of the indictio belli (32. 13 n.). In early Latin purus is used of the magical object (pura hasta, pura herba) not of the process to be carried out by the use of such magic; it is most inappropriate therefore as an epithet of duello (an archaism revived by the Augustans; cf. Horace, Odes 3. 5. 38, 3. 14. 18, and especially 4. 15. 8) and has evidently been chosen to accompany pio instead of the invariable iusto (9. 8. 6, 33. 29. 8, 39. 36. 12, 42. 47. 8; Augustine, Quest. Lept. 6. 10; conversely, impium et iniustum in Cicero, de Rep. 2. 31 et al.) purely for its alliterative effect and its vague moral overtones. ordine: by rank, patricians taking precedence over plebeians in each category. pars maior eorum qui aderant in eandem sententiam ibat: as Mommsen saw {Staatsrecht, 3. 980 n. 5), L. has confused the procedure. H e seems to imply that when more than half of those present had spoken on one side or the other, the motion was decided. In fact, after everybody had given their opinion, the house was divided {discessio) by the pre­ siding magistrate calling divide or numera (cf. Pliny, Ep. 8. 14. 20). It was the physical act of the division which was termed pedibus in sententiam ire (5. 9. 2 ; Aul. Gell. 3. 18. 2 ; Sallust, CatiL 50. 4). But the same phrase was also used loosely to describe the action of anyone who went across and stood by a speaker to signify his support (27. 34. 7; Festus 232 L . ; Aul. Gell., loc. cit.). T h e double use has confused L. T h e result of a division was declared in the expression haec pars maior esse videtur (Seneca, Vit. Beat. 2. 1) which is echoed here. There is, of course, every reason for assuming that L. was not then or at any time a member of the Senate; he could hardly be expected to be accurate. He also fails to mention the consultation of the people which was an essential step and which is presupposed in 32. 13 below. 134

ANCUS MARCIUS

i. 32. 12

The Indictio Belli hastam ferratam aut sanguineam praeustam: the spear was magical, not symbolical (McDonald and Walbank, op. cit.). Iron, because of its magnetic properties, was from the earliest times regarded as a potent source of magic. At Rome, for example, it was taboo for the Fratres Arvales, while the Vestals used it for cutting up salt (Varro ap. Non., p. 330 L.). It is often mentioned or prescribed in the Greek magical papyri. Its use in this ceremony is to attract all the hostile potency of the enemy and so immobilize it. sanguineam is recondite. As early as Dio Cass. 71. 33. 3 it was being glossed as alfiaTtofes and though the correct solution was propounded by Turnebus, Adversaria, 8. 23, in 1599, Dio's interpretation was generally accepted, sanguineus is the adjective derived from the name of a species of cornel, familiar in Romance languages (fr. cornouiller sanguiri). sanguinem is listed by Macrobius (Sat 3. 20. 3) among arbores infelices (infertile), and Pliny (JV.H. 16. 74, 176) speaks of sanguineifrutices and virgae sanguineae. Cornel is frequently used as a wood for spears (Virgil, Aen. 3. 23 et saep.) but for a magical spear the infertile species was employed because its effect was to render infertile and barren the enemy's schemes. For a similar magical use of arbores infelices cf. 26. 6 n . ; and see H . E. Butler, C.R. 35 (1921), 157-8; M . Cary, J.R.S. n (1921), 285; De Waele, The Magic Staff. . . in Antiquity (Gent, 1927); M . Cary and A. D . Nock, C.Q. 21 (1927), 122-7; J- Bayet, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 52 (1935), 29-76. puberibus: persons who have not reached the age of puberty are not good workers of magic. 3 (or 5) witnesses is a normal safeguard (cf. mancipatio). 32. 13. quod populi: the formula is also given by L. Cincius in libro tertio de re militari ap. Aul. Gell. 16. 4. 1: 'quod populus Hermundulus hominesque populi Hermunduli adversus populum R o m a n u m bellum fecere deliqueruntque, quodque populus Romanus cum populo Hermundulo hominibusque Hermundulis bellum iussit, ob earn rem ego populusque Romanus populo Hermundulo hominibusque Her­ mundulis bellum dico facioque'. T h e antiquarian Cincius, who was a younger contemporary of Varro and Cicero, seems to give the for­ mula in a slightly more modern form, as can be seen from the omission of Quiritium which would be invariable in an older pronouncement, from the use of fecere instead offecerunt, and from the addition of -que to the formal asyndeton fecerunt> deliquerunt. T h e Hermunduli, whom he uses as an example, are not elsewhere mentioned but it seems plausible to suppose that we have here an early but garbled refer­ ence to the formidable German tribe of Hermunduri who migrated from Suebia to the Elbe in the last decades of the century and who 135

I- 32. 13

ANCUS MARCIUS

are prominent in the German wars thereafter (see Haug, R.E.y 'Hermunduri'). If this is so, Gincius must deliberately have omitted the clause found in L., senatusque . . .fieret, either on political grounds (the legality of the Senate declaring war without consulting the people and vice versa had been a source of dispute since the Jugurthine wars) or because he suspected its latinity. T h e manuscripts read senatusve, which has been defended on the ground that in his stage-by-stage narrative of events L. in fact does not mention any consultation of the people, but this is merely another inadvertance on his p a r t ; for it is unthinkable that in such a document the ultimate authority for the declaration of war should b~ presented as optional. Read senatusque (and hominesque). 33. 1. Politorium: Cato produced a Trojan pedigree for the town with a son of Priam, Polites, as founder (fr. 54 P . ) ; but only its name, preserved doubtless in the list of participants in the Feriae Latinae, survived into historical times. T h e combination of its known participa­ tion as a Latin community in the rites and its total disappearance led to the double version of its fate, that it was destroyed by Ancus but then inhabited by the Prisci Latini and reconquered. So also Pliny (N.H. 3. 68-69) n s t s i* both among the towns that had perished sine vestigiis and among the members of the Alban league (Poletaurini). Its site is to be looked for in the region between Rome and Ostia, Nibby proposed Gasale di Decimo, Gell La Giostra. See Hofmann, R.E., 'Politorium'. 3 3 . 2 . Aventinum: 6. 4 n. It is unlikely that Ancus with the fervour of a Syracusan tyrant deported whole populations, especially since Tellenae (see below) was in fact not depopulated, but the curious status of the Aventine, outside the pomerium and inhabited by ple­ beians, newcomers both human and divine (3. 31. 1 n.), can only be explained by assuming that it was favoured as the residence of nonR o m a n traders and others who came to Rome to make their living. Whether any of these gentes, among whom the Naevii are conspicuous (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 163; Festus 170 L.), actually came from the cities whose capture is ascribed to Ancus is quite uncertain, but they may have believed that they did. Tellenis Ficanaque: Ficana is to be sited not at Dragoncello but a mile to the east, near Malafede, at the eleventh milestone (Festus 298 L.) where an altar to Mars Ficanus has been found. See Meiggs, Ostia, 474 n. G. There was a ferry across the Tiber there (L.A. Holland, Janus, 149). Tellenae, the city of the Tellii (Schulze 568), is implied by Strabo to lie near Lanuvium, Aricia, and Antium (5. 231), that is, in the vicinity of Ardea. Since Coriolanus captured it before Ficana on his march northwards (D.H. 3. 3 8 ; 1. 16 is corrupt), it must lie 136

ANCUS

MARCIUS

i- 33- 2

on one of the spurs of the Alban hills. T h e same locality is suggested by the present passage. D.H. speaks of it as surviving down to his own day and it was a signatory of the Latin treaty (5. 6 i ) . A suitable site would be Zalforata but archaeological evidence is as yet lacking. 33. 4 . Medulliam: 38. 2 n. Marie incerto: 2. 40. 14 n. L. gives the tally of achievements in a formal, matter-of-fact style. 33. 5. vincit: many editors (Crevier, Lallemand, Madvig, Rossbach) have assumed that some words have dropped out from the text here such as deinde urbem vi cepit. Medullia had, however, to be captured as distinct from defeated in a later campaign by Tarquinius Priscus. In truth all these early wars will have been fought not to win territory but to secure pasturage. praeda potens: 'his power enhanced by the quantity of spoil'. T h e phrase is not technical. ad Murciae: or rather Admurciae; the shrine lay in the valley between the Palatine and the Aventine and was incorporated in the Circus Maximus when that was enlarged (Apuleius, Met. 6. 8 metae Murciae: [Servius], ad Aen. 8. 636, calls the whole valley vallis Murcia). T h e meaning of the name remains obscure (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 154; Pliny, N.H. 15. 2 1 ; Tertullian, de Sped. 8. 6) but it is to be connected with the ancient name of the south-eastern Aventine—mons Murcus (Festus 135 L.). Murcus is also found as a cognomen (cf. murcidus 'idle'), and Murcius as a nomen (Schulze 196). Murcia would thus bear the same relation to the mons Murcus and the name Murcius as the goddess Tarpeia to the mons Tarpeius and the name Tarpeius. See O . Skutsch, C.Q. 11 (1961), 257. Ancus' claim to have incorporated the Aventine rests on the simple resemblance of his name Marcius to Murcus. 33. 6. Ianiculum: L.'s reasoning is unsound. T h e bridge was not built to communicate with the Janiculum, but the Janiculum was fortified to guard the far end of the bridge. This is clear from the custom main­ tained from the most primitive times of posting a guard on the J a n i ­ culum whenever the comitia centuriata was meeting in the Campus Martius (39. 15. 1 1 ; Dio 37. 28), to prevent the bridge being surprised. If there is anything in the tradition about the Pons Sublicius, it may be assumed that Ancus did also provide for a fortification on the Janiculum, but to speak of the incorporation of the hill as a whole is an exaggeration. muro: with coniungi, by a zeugma, for which cf. 1. 3. 4. T h e strained construction has led to much emendation: muniri instead of muro Scheller; muro solum muniri J. S. Reid; muro solum circumdari Ruperti; muro solum saepiri Wesenberg. But the long separation of muro from coniungi facilitates the switch of meaning. ponte Sublicio: from sublica 'a pile' (Festus 374 L. T h e bridge was 137

i- 33- 6

ANCUS MARCIUS

constructed entirely of wood (Plutarch, Numa 9; Pliny, N.H. 36. 100) and was constantly repaired when damaged so that it survived down to the fifth century A.D. Site: the natural line for a bridge across the Tiber from the Porta Trigemina, the gate leading on to the Tiber bank, would be across the Insula Tiberina but the two are never linked together in any classical authority and the tradition indeed dated the formation of the island after the construction of the bridge (2. 5. 4 n.). T h e bridge must, then, have been below the island, close to the line of the Pons Aemilius begun in 179 B.C. D a t e : there is reason to believe the bridge was very old. T h e existence of a college of pontifices implies a bridge to be built and looked after, for every damage to the bridge was regarded as a prodigium and the pontifices must date back at least to the beginning of the Republic (20. 4 n.). Its wooden construction is also relevant, implying a familiarity with the technique of pile-construction used in lake-dwellings of the eighth and seventh centuries (cf. also D.H. 1. 14. 4) and pointing to an age before the general use of iron. O n balance, therefore, the traditional date can be accepted. Purpose: investigations have shown that except for minor ferries the earliest crossing of the lower Tiber was at Fidenae, which accounts for the importance of that city in Rome's prehistory. There was, however, little need of a crossing at Rome for the main lines of communication and trade from Etruria to Latium and Cam­ pania lay well to the east and upstream of the city. It was only with the growth of the salt trade, and the settlement at Ostia which was de­ signed to promote that trade, that traffic along the bank of the river became at all considerable. Now the Ostian salt-beds were not as large or rich as the salt-beds on the opposite, right bank of the river. These, however, were evidently not exploited by R o m e until the fourth century when they at once superseded the Ostian beds (7. 19. 8 salinae Romanae). T h e reason for this neglect was not that they had been over­ looked but that they were controlled and worked by Veii and were not at the disposal of Rome until Veii was crushed. There is an ancient track bypassing Rome and leading direct from Veii to the Fosso Galeria and the salinae. T h e same hostility accounts for the building of the Pons Sublicius. Veii controlled the Fidenae crossing and so it was necessary for Rome to have a crossing of her own to make full use of the openings for trade offered by the salt-trade. Thus, although it cannot be proved that Ancus was responsible for the bridge, it is a logical corollary of the foundation of Ostia and the promotion of the salt-trade. See M . E. Hirst, P.B.S.R. 1 (1938), 137 ff; L. A. Holland, T.A.P.A. 80 (1949), 312 ff; A. Alfoldi, Hermes 90 (1962), 187 ff. 3 3 . 7. Quiritium: D.H. does not name it directly but says that Ancus surrounded the Aventine with a wall and ditch, while L. might at 138

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 testimony—the terracotta and pottery fragments, the R o m a n alphabet, the fasces, the templedesigns—and 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

J

-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

Tarquin's eagle prodigy is no Augustan interpolation. It is an old element of the tradition (D.H. 3. 47. 3 ff.; Cicero, de Leg. 1. 4) and was taken over from Gyrus (cf. 4. 6 n.). Of its telling Glericus observed 'poetae magis decet' and cast the passage into three hexameters. This was over-enthusiastic; but for repono with dat., not found in prose authors, cf. Virgil, Aeneid 7. 134; for sublimis abiit see 16. 7 n. Casaubon noted that clangore (cf. 5. 47. 4 ; Virgil, Aeneid 3. 226) was an echo of the Homeric KXayyfj (cf., e.g., Iliad 3. 5). Notice the visual details, the carriage and the cap. leviter: the true reading is certainly leniter; cf. Suetonius, loc. cit.; Tacitus, Hist. 1. 62. 3 ; Gurtius 4. 15. 26. It is the gentleness of the royal bird which commands notice. See Wallden, Philologus 95 (1943), 142 ff. pilleum: the pilleus, a cone-shaped hat (Festus 484 L.) of Etruscan origin and depicted on Etruscan wall-paintings, was the head-gear ofthe pontifices and the famines ([Servius], adAen. 10. 270) and of the rex sacrorum. It was also in consequence of its use in the ceremony of manumission the symbol of freedom, the pilleus libertatis. Here it is meant as a symbol of kingship, which survived in an attentuated form before R o m a n eyes as the head-gear of the rex sacrorum. 34. 9. mulier: emphatically at the end of the sentence, for Tanaquil, like Dido, was acting in a quite un-Roman way. Women, both in Etruria and at Rome, did not divine nor did amateurs make prophecies without the assistance of a professional seer (R. Enking, Mitt. Deutsch. Arch. Inst. 66 (1959), 78). Tanaquil is modelled after the prophetic women of Greek myth, in particular Medea. humano: the cap had been placed first on his head by his own, human h a n d s : it was now placed there by divine hands. He was con­ secrated king. It is superfluous to say that it was placed on a human head. Therefore we should accept Stroth's humana mana superposition. 34. 10. Priscum: the cognomen is doubly spurious. It could only have been added after Superbus had reigned in order to differentiate the two Tarquins, and unlike the names of other kings it is descriptive. 34. 12. hello \ cf. 9. 26. 21. tutor: Ancus' sons being sui iuris but under age at his death were subject to tutela. It is not clear whether in primitive law the tutela of free-born persons invariably went to the nearest male agnate or whether, as is implied here, a m a n could appoint a tutor by his will. T h e most probable reconstruction of Table 5. 7 of the Twelve Tables suggests that testamentary guardianship was valid at least by then. T h e present case will, therefore, be a n historical precedent invented and in­ voked as an illustration of the working of the Twelve Tables (4.9.6 n.). It also raises the question of the relationship between the tutor and the heres in early law. T h e tutor at this stage of legal development 144

ANCUS MARCIUS

i . 34. 12

was seemingly regarded as having and exercising the rights of a heres who was under age, a position later modified. T h e action of Tarquinius Priscus was a test-case for this too. See Aranjio-Ruiz, Rariora> 151-67 ; Jolowicz, Historical Introduction, 120-2. 35-38. The Reign of Tarquinius Priscus If there were two Tarquins the Romans knew nothing that could be pinned to one or the other in such a way as to give their reigns separate characters. Their very names, Priscus and Superbus, are the work of subsequent differentiation and a comparison of the deeds attributed to them displays an unhealthy duplication. Both are credited with the building of the cloacae, the circus, and the beginning of the Gapitoline Temple. Both engaged in successful operations against the Latins (Apiolae and Pometia). Both were driven on by ambitious women. Yet Priscus and Superbus cannot be identified. T h e Etruscan domina­ tion of R o m e begins in the period 625-600 and at the other end 510 is a firm date for the expulsion of a king who can only be a Tarquin. We should rather believe that tradition accurately preserved the memory of an Etruscan era at Rome lasting for a century with possible interruptions (Servius Tullius) during which the Tarquin family main­ tained a dynastic rule, but that the few specific events which were remembered, such as the opposition of Attus Navius or the tragedy of Lucretia, were remembered as occurring in the times of the Tarquins rather than as attached to one particular person. It was left to the historians to arrange this inchoate material into a pattern, to distinguish one Tarquin from another, and to allocate events to each. T h e history of Tarquinius Priscus can be easily analysed into its component parts. T h e groundwork of his reign is laid with two very old stories, Attus Navius (36. 2 n.) and the river battle (37. 1 n.), both undated tales handed down as belonging to the Tarquin age of regal Rome. R o m a n institutions afforded further material, for every curiosity and every anomaly required explanation and an historical aiTLOv. Two such, the minores gentes and the centuriae posteriores, were ascribed to Tarquinius Priscus for no good reason so far as can be seen except that a study of prosopography reveals that the Tarquins did in fact encourage a number of Etruscan families to settle at Rome. So too it was a matter of observation that the ludi were Etruscan in origin and character. They must, therefore, have been instituted by a Tarquin. I n the field of topography the same desire to find an auctor and an origo for every place and every feature led historians, among whom Gato was prominent, to plot a m a p of Tarquin's con­ quests across Latium (38. 4 n.) and to credit him with buildings throughout the city itself (35. 10 n., 38. 6 n.). Finally, the study and collection of legal formulae was turned to account and the deditio 814432

145

L

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 h e interweaving of TTOXITIKCLI and 77-oAe/zi/ccu 77-pa^t? which D.H. keeps in two separate compartments (3. 4 9 - 6 6 ; 67-71) is as charac­ teristic as his handling of the Navius episode. D.H. adds it as an appendix to his history of the reign and is at pains to exaggerate the miraculous aspects of the story. L. makes it the centre-piece, playing down the miraculous (36. 4 ut ferunt. . . ferunt, 36. 5 memorant) but presenting it in lively and dramatic dialogue. See Schachermeyr, R.E., 'Tarquinius'; de Sanctis, Storia, 1. 371 ff.; Burck 157-60; Heurgon, Inform. Litt. 1955, 56-64. 35. 1. Ancus: reigned twenty-three years according to the older chronology used by Cicero (de Rep. 2. 33). puberem: 2. 50. 11 n. 35. 2. venatum: so Atys, the son of Croesus, was deprived of his royal inheritance by being sent out to hunt the Mysian boar (Herodotus i.37ff.). 35. 3 . [cum]: will not construe, and emendations (turn Kreyssig) or transpositions (accitum: (turn) se) are less plausible than deletion (cf. 41. 7 n.). For the contents of the speech cf. Canuleius' oration in 146

T A R Q U I N I U S PRISCUS

*• 35- 3

4. 3. 2 ff. Notice the rhetorical flourish with which he concludes—the chiastic in regent. . . cum rege and the alliterative obsequio et observantia. 35. 6. cetera egregium: 32. 2, an unconscious repetition (cf. 14. 4 n.). centum', cf. 2. 1. 10, 5. 14. 4. R o m e knew a distinction within the body of patricians between gentes minores and gentes maiores and, with the exception of Tacitus who ascribed it to the first consul Brutus (Annab 11. 25), the tradition attributed that distinction to the elder Tarquin (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 3 6 ; D.H. 3. 41). T h e point of the distinc­ tion is not at all clear. Ancient scholars by confusing membership of the Senate with membership of the patrician order concluded that it was no more than an increase in the size of the Senate. So L. writes here centum in patres legit. But it is hard to believe that if there were plebeian kings and plebeians among the earliest consuls there were not also plebeian senators. T h e limitation of the senate to patricians is the product of over-schematic theorizing influenced by the much later Struggle of the Orders. Originally no doubt the council of state did consist simply of the heads (patres) of the gentes and in primitive times before the influx of foreigners and immigrants the only gentes were those later recognized as patrician. For the dichotomy between patrician and plebeian was based on origin, that is on inherited sacra. T h e first move, therefore, must be to separate the issues of increasing the Senate and of increasing the patrician order. Now the patrician order, as distinct from the senatorial order, was of importance chiefly for its religious functions. Only a patrician could be an interrex. T h e major priesthoods, the flamines, were confined to patricians. Several cults, as well as the auspicial rights, were in the hands of patricians. T h u s it is probably no accident that the increase in the number of patrician families is attended by an increase in the number of Vestals, augurs, and pontifices. T h e expanding city required an enlarged religious establishment. This, and no more, is to be seen as the purpose of the creation of the minores gentes and it is notable that the only gens which we know for certain to have been one of the minoresj the Papiria (Cicero, ad Fam. 9. 21. 2), was celebrated for its religious affiliations in the early Republic, being credited with a pontifex maximus in 509 and with the author of the Ius Papirianum. Since we are ignorant of the names of the maiores and minores we cannot hope to date the creation of the latter class, but it must belong to the regal period. T h e Papirii gave their name to one of the 16 old rural tribes. It would seem, moreover, that the Alban families also belonged to the minores and I should be inclined to believe that the need to distinguish between patrician and plebeian and hence to classify minores and maiores, old and new, among the patricians only arose with the advent of the Etruscans who brought new religious practices and new families. 147

*• 3 5 - 6

T A R Q U I N I U S PRISCUS

Thereafter the distinction between maiores and minores was, at most, an heraldic one. At least four of the maiores were enrolled in the premier urban tribe, the Palatina, perhaps by Ap. Claudius Caecus in 312 (L. R. Taylor, Voting Districts, 284-5), and Mommsen conjec­ tured that the distribution was perpetuated in the aristocratic Ludus Troiae (Staatsrecht, 3. 31 n. 3 : cf. Suetonius, Julius 39). Certain it is that Cicero is wrong in pretending that the maiores were always called before the minores in the Senate to give their opinion [de Rep. 2. 35). See Mommsen, loc. cit.; Kiibler, R.E., 'gens'; Siber, R.E., 'plebs', who argues that the minores were Etruscan. Turning to the enlargement of the Senate we are faced with two questions, (i) Was the ancient tradition unanimous that the full Senate at the end of the regal period numbered 300 ? In 17. 5 the number is fixed at 100, in 30. 2 it is increased by an unspecified amount, in 35. 6 it is increased by 100, and in 2. 1. 10 it is assumed to be 300. All these passages, allowing that the increase under Tullus was 100, are con­ sistent and with them D.H. agrees (3. 67). Cicero, on the other hand, writes duplicavit patrum numerum but this does not imply that he in­ tended either a final total of only 200 if he excluded the Alban increase, or of 400 if he included it, for there was a variant tradition that the Senate after Romulus' death numbered 150 (100+50 Sabines: Plutarch, Numa 2 ; Zonaras 7. 5 : cf. D.H. 2. 47). Conversely Dio makes Tarquin augment an original 100 by 200 new members. In short it is probable that the figure of 300 was constant but that there were rival accounts of how the figure was arrived at. L. follows a late version. (ii) Did Tarquin in fact supplement the Senate and is the figure of 300 credible? T h e figure of 300 looks schematic. With no enunciated principles of election or qualification for membership we are forced to conclude that it is a conjecture derived from the later system of decuriones which prevailed in R o m a n colonies and municipia and de­ rived from the three R o m a n tribes, Ramnes, Tities, Luceres. In historical times there was no fixed limit for the Senate. This does not, however, mean that there was no increase under the Tarquin dynasty. T h e names of the oldest rural tribes contain several Etruscan names— e.g. Lemonia, Menenia, Papiria, Voltinia. T h e non-Etruscan names— e.g. Aemilia, Cornelia, Fabia, Horatia—belong to senatorial families (and include three of the presumed maiores gentes) and it is, therefore, a fair assumption that the Etruscan names are also senatorial. Now the rural tribes were certainly instituted before the end of the kingdom os that it follows that there were Etruscan senators under the Tarquins and they are hardly likely to have displaced non-Etruscans. It would be straining the evidence to pin the increase definitely on Tarquinius Priscus or to insist that the enlarged total was precisely 300. 35. 7. Apiolas: a town in Latium, placed by Strabo (5. 231) in Vol148

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 detail—horses, 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 ) .

36. 6. auspicato: 5. 38. 1, 6. 4 1 . 4 ; cf. Cicero, de Div. 1. 28 nihil fere quondam maioris rei nisi auspicato ne privatim quidem gerebatur. For the persons entitled to take the auspices, the mode of taking them, and the occasions when they were taken see 18.6 n. andWissowa, Religion, 523 ff. summa rerum: summa must be a neut. plural 'the weightiest affairs' (cf. 9. 43. 4 subita rerum) but the zeugma involved in understanding dirimerentur both of adjourning the assemblies met to discuss business 151

i. 36. 6

T A R Q U I N I U S PRISGUS

and of adjourning the business is harsh. Moreover L. frequently else­ where employs the phrase summa (fem. sing.) rerum 'the supreme situation', cf., e.g., 3. 51. 10 qui summae rerum praeessent.With Gronovius I think we should read vocati de summa rerum. exercitus is used not in its exclusively military sense but as the technical term for the people assembled in the comitia centuriata. 36. 7. alterum tantum: sc. numerum 'a second draft of the same size'. N.'s order tantum alterum, retained, e.g., by Pettersson, could only be under­ stood as 'he only [tantum = modo, solum) added a second draft'. mille et octingenti: the overall strength of the cavalry is unclear. T h e reorganization allegedly introduced by Servius Tullius provided for an establishment of 18 centuries of cavalry, that is 1,800 men (43. 8-9 n.). In addition to Romulus' creation of the 300 equites (13. 8 n.), identical with the 300 Geleres (15. 8 n.), Tullus enrolled a further 300 in 10 squadrons from Alba (30. 3). Unless L. is counting the 300 Geleres as a separate body from the 3 Romulean centuries the total cavalry establishment at this date can, according to the tradition, be only 600. This total doubled would yield 1,200. Neither here nor in Cicero, de Rep. 2. 36 where they read MACCC, are the m a n u ­ scripts unequivocal in giving the Tarquinian total as 1,800; it will be seen from the O.G.T. Apparatus that 77-A have M et CCC. T h e strongest argument in favour of reading 1,800 in both places is the belief that Servius Tullius merely reorganized the army and did not enlarge it. This, however, is mistaken. Festus 452 L. says: 'sex suffragia appellantur in equitum centuriis quae sunt adiectae ei numero centuriarum quas Priscus Tarquinius rex constituit', that is, Festus accepts that there were only 12 centuries or 1,200 cavalry under Tarquin and that Servius enlarged the establishment to 18. O n every ground, therefore, mille et cc should be read here (Hill, Roman Middle Class, 4 ; against Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 107 n. 3). The Defeat of the Sabines The battle is a repetition of a story which recurs on several occasions in R o m a n history (cf. 27. 10, 4. 33. 10 n.) and is thought to be inspired by a primitive ceremony, the descensio Tiberina> although here there are echoes of the disaster of 90 B.C. when Marius learnt of the defeat of his colleague Rutilius by the arms and bodies washed down the river Tolenus to him (Appian, B.C. 1. 4 3 ; Orosius 5. 18. 1 1 : see Echols, Class. World 44 (1951), 134). T h e present passage is in part also an ainov for the ceremonies of the Volcanalia (37. 5 n.). 37. 1. sublicis: the bridge is a Sabine bridge over the Anio, not the Pons Sublicius at Rome. T h e exact sense of the passage is in doubt. 152

TARQUINIUS

PRISCUS

1-37- i

Conway assumed that the bridge was a pontoon bridge consisting of stakes (sublicis) to which were moored rafts (ratibus), and that the burning logs j a m m e d against the stakes and the rafts and so set the bridge alight. But there is nothing to suggest that it was a pontoon bridge. T h e mention of sublicae points rather to a wooden pile-bridge like the Pons Sublicius. If so, there was a danger that the burning logs might float through the arches of the bridge without harm. T o obviate this the Romans had to be sure that the timbers were in units too big to pass under the bridge. In addition common sense would show that burning logs thrown into the water by themselves are not likely to stay alight for long. Both problems could be solved either by tying the logs together or by putting them on rafts. And the latter is precisely what D.H. 3. 56 says: axeStas fuAajy a i W KOI pvydva>v yefiovaag

. . . 7rapaaKevacrdfievog . . . irvp iveivat rats uAais1 eVeAeucre Kal

fiedeivai. . . €peadai Kara povv. pleraque in ratibus must go together, pleraque being understood in the sense 'most of the raft-borne logs stuck against the bridge and set it alight' rather than 'most of the logs were put on rafts', pleraque in ratibus for pleraque in ratibus imposita, though accepted by Frigell, Pettersson, and Bayet as well as by earlier editors such as Doujat and Kreyssig, is intolerable, nor can impacta be taken with the phrase (punctuating^, i. r. impacta, sublicis cum haererent) since impego is never used with in and the abl. and is too violent a word for loading logs on rafts. I have considered reading imposita either instead of impacta or before it. 37. 2. mortalibus: 9. 8 n. 37. 5. Volcano: on 23 August the Volcanalia were celebrated in the Area Volcani at which live fish from the Tiber were sacrificed to Vulcan pro animis humanis (Festus 276 L . ; Varro, deLing. Lat. 6. 20: see le Gall, Recherches sur le culte du Tibre, 49; Eitrem, C.R. 36 (1922), 72). The true origin of the ceremony is unclear but the burning of the spoils of the Sabines, who, like fish, had taken to the water, in honour of Vulcan is an attempt at an aetiology. For somewhat different offerings to Vulcan, connected with the offering to Vulcan at the Tubilustrium on 23 May (C.I.L. i 2 . 318), cf. 8. 10. 13, 30. 8, 30. 6.> , 45. 33. 1. The Deditio Formula Deditio was unconditional surrender. T h e defeated voluntarily re­ signed himself in dicionem or infidem (both phrases are used without dis­ tinction : cf. Polybius 20. 9. 10 ff.) p. R. His subsequent treatment was determined not by any treaty-obligations undertaken by the Romans but by their fides. T h e procedure is undoubtedly antique and, unlike the iusfetiale, it continued in operation throughout the historical epoch. Examples are listed by Premerstein, R.E., 'clientela'; see also Schulten, R.E., 'Dediticii'; Badian, Foreign Clientelae, 4-7. T h e formula as given 153

1.38.1

T A R Q U I N I U S PRISGUS

by L. is also of some age since it is admirably parodied in a passage of the Amphitryo of Plautus (258-9): deduntque se, divina humanaque omnia, urbem et liberos in ditionem atque in arbitratum cuncti Thebano populo. where the valuable detail that they prayed velatis manibus corroborates the belief that surrender in dicionem was surrender infidem (see note on 2. 12. 1 ff.; Riess, C.Q. 35 (1941), 155). Its form, by question and answer, also speaks for its authenticity being characteristic of other procedures in private law such as Stipulatio. We may, therefore, believe that L. gives the ancient formula modified only in ortho­ graphical details. It presumably was contained in a collection of similar formulae and was extracted and employed in its present con­ text by one of the later annalists. 38. 1. Collatia: said by Virgil (Aeneid 6. 774; cf. Pliny, N.H. 3. 69) to have been an Alban colony, Collatia was, as its name despite the artificial etymologies of antiquity (Servius, ad Aen. 6. 773 ex collata pecuniae Paulus Festus 33 L.) implies, a Latin town. It was on the site of the modern Lunghezza (cf. Frontinus, de Aqu. 1. 5. 10; see Ashby, P.B.S.R. 1 (1902), 146 fF.), commanding the Anio crossing and the transverse road from Veii to Gabii. A small community sur­ vived until the Empire (Strabo 5. 230). citra: better circa (Lallemand). Egerius: 34. 3. T h e story of his vice-royalty at Collatia is perhaps based on the known fact that the Egerii were a powerful family in Latium in early times. Cf., e.g., the dic(t)ator Latinus Egerius Laevius (Cato fr. 58 P.) and the Egerii at Aricia mentioned by Festus (128 L. a quo multi et clari viri orti sunt etper multos annos fuerunt). See also 21. 3 n. 38. 2. oratores: 15. 5, 2. 30. 8, 32. 8, 39. 11, 5. 15. 3, 16. 1; the orator differed from a legatus in that he was not a plenipotentiary but merely a spokesman. H e had no powers to negotiate. in sua potestate: 2. 14. 4 n. at ego: 28. 9 n. 38. 4. omne nomen: the list of cities comprises all those on either bank of the Anio as far as the barrier of the hills. Their capture, although not necessarily to be ascribed to the elder Tarquin, was a logical con­ sequence of the final repulse of the Sabines and the quest for wider pasturage. T h e list itself was probably compiled by selecting those names which figured in the list of the feriae Latinae and which lay in that quarter of Latium within a certain radius of Rome. Corniculum: the home of Servius Tullius' mother (39. 1 n.), its name survived in Pliny's list of vanished cities (N.H. 3. 68) and in the montes Corniculaniy which lay along a line from Antemna through Ficulea to 154

TARQUINIUS PRISGUS

i. 38. 4

Tibur (D.H. 1. 16). Corniculum was captured immediately after Collatia (D.H. 3. 50. 4) which rules out any of the distant hills such as Mte. S. Angelo. It should be sought in the area of Mte. dell'Incastro where Villanovan sherds have been found. T h e site is a typical pro­ montory without the great natural strength of Veii to make it longlived ; it is on the highest ground overlooking Collatia; it is the centre of a considerable road-system from both R o m e and Crustumerium. See also Ashby, P.B.S.R. 3 (1906), 183. Ficulea vetus: 3. 52. 3 ; so called because it was an Aboriginal settle­ ment (D.H. 1. 16) before being latinized, lay near Fondo Capobianco at the fifth milestone on the Via Nomentana. T h e site is naturally habitable and it survived Tarquin's capture to conspire against Rome in 390 (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 18) and to provide an estate for Cicero [ad Alt. 12.34. 1). T h e site is identified by inscriptions [C.I.L. 14.400155)Cameria: or Camerium (Tacitus, Annals 11. 24), an Alban colony (Diodorus 7 . 5 ; Pliny, N.H. 3. 68) which enjoyed estimable land (Festus 268 L.), its site can only be guessed in relation to Ficulea and Nomentum. It lay a night's march from Rome (D.H. 5. 49), i.e. not more than 15 miles, and is placed both by L. and by D.H. (3. 51) after Ficulea. T h e most inviting site is Casale Mte. Gentile, 10 miles from Rome, where ancient material has been unearthed (Ashby, P.B.S.R* 3 (1906), 65). T h e Coruncanii and one branch of the Sulpicii came from there but the fact that Ser. Sulpicius Rufus, consul in 51, be­ longed to the tribe Lemonia does not help. It was sacked in 502 (D.H. 5-2i,49)Crustumerium : 9. 8 n. Ameriola: mentioned only here and, as a vanished city, by Pliny. It must have lain in the area between Crustumerium and Nomentum. Possible sites would be S. Colomba on the Via Salaria or the spur at the east end of the Mte. Massa where an ancient road passes to Nomentum. Medullia: 33. 4 tuta munitionibus; the Romans had to camp in the open to attack it. It was a more considerable place than Ameriola, although listed by Pliny as vanished and evidently situated in the same locality, for the cognomen Medullinus was held by the early Furii. Despite the connexion of that family with Tusculum (C.I.L. i 2 . 4 8 57), Medullia must have been near Nomentum. T h e obvious site is Monte Rotundo. See also Ashby, P.B.S.R. 3 (1906), 186. Older con­ jectures are too far afield. Nomentum: lay 13 miles north of Rome at the end of the Via Nomen­ tana and guarded the crossing of the Allia. Claimed as an Alban colony (D.H. 2. 53), it was a Latin community which bordered so closely on Sabine territory that it often changed sides. It is the only 155

I. 38.4

TARQUINIUS PRISGUS

one of the cities to have survived in sufficient strength to be a member of the Latin League (D.H. 5. 61). It continued as a municipium into the Republic. See Philipp, R.E. 'Nomentum'. 38. 6. aquas, cloacis: the confusion in the manuscripts is caused by the interpolation of e which is transposed by R x Ox in an attempt to produce syntax. T h e notice about the cloacae and the Capitol antici­ pates the works of the younger Tarquin (56. 1-2 nn.). There was an intimate connexion between the two operations, for the Capitol could only be accessible for building after the Forum had been drained. The draining of the Forum may have been accomplished in two or more stages, minor cloacae followed by a full-scale ditch, but it is more likely that the whole operation was done at one time and that it has been reduplicated in the sources because it was known only that it had been undertaken by an unspecified Tarquin. T h e Forum-area had ceased to be used as a burial-ground by the end of the sixth century. 39-48. Servius Tullius: Origins, Accession, and Reign T h e historical character of Servius Tullius, the sixth king of Rome, is beyond dispute. H e is invariably associated with the creation of the centuriate organization, with the construction of the walls of Rome, and with the institution of the cult of Diana on the Aventine. T h e tradition is unanimous and there is no reason to reject it. His name (mentioned already in Timaeus ap. Pliny, N.H. 33. 43) has no special significance other than its uncompromising latinity and that Etruscan historians should have troubled to dispute it by identifying Servius with an Etruscan Mastarna (Or. Claudii = I.L.S. 212) only confirms that his reign marked a Latin interruption in the Etruscan domination of Rome as represented by the Tarquins. Set the basic facts on one side and the rest of the biography of Servius appears to be deliberate embellishment conceived to add dignity to a king whose role in the development of the R o m a n con­ stitution was known to be important, whose name at all times inspired the noblest sentiments of patriotic pride but whose story suffered from a paucity of circumstantial evidence. T h e miraculous circum­ stances of his infancy have many parallels in legend (39. 1 n.), the murder of Priscus is modelled on an episode from the history of fourthcentury Magna Graecia (40. 5 n.), the concealment of Priscus' death has Ptolemaic precursors (41. 4 n.), and many of the particular details of the centuriate organization can be demonstrated to be anachronisms from the second century. It is reasonable to suppose that Fabius Pictor was the first to give the reign most of its present features, since Polybius and Cicero (de Rep. 2. 38-41) do not differ strikingly from L., but later historians, inspired by political or philosophical theories 156

SERVIUS TULLIUS

i. 39-48

of history, will have added touches of tendency or, inspired by local legends and antiquarian oddities, will have inserted particular points. For L. Servius' importance lay in the part he played in promoting the growth of R o m a n institutions (42. 4). Each of the kings is cha­ racterized by a special interest, N u m a by religiones, Ancus by bellicae caerimoniae, Tullus by his ferocitas, Super bus by his superbia. So Servius' organization of the state overshadowed everything else. H e is indeed a second founder (conditor) of Rome and accordingly occupies the same position and the same amount of space in the second half of the book (39-48) that Romulus does in the first (7-16), as Superbus (49-60) balances Tullus (22-31). L. is always careful to give his books such a formal symmetry. T h e matter of L.'s account will have come without alteration from his sources and the harshness of eo tempore raises a suspicion that at that point he switches to a new source. Note also the citation of variants at 39- 5 o v e r the parentage of Servius and the contradiction between 42. 2 and the narrative of 38. L.'s description of the fire-prodigy dis­ agrees radically with that given by Valerius (39. 1 n.) so we must assume that L. changed from Licinius to Valerius at 39. 5 (n. eorum) but that he had had a preliminary glance at Valerius for details of Servius' early years. In any event the immediate source for 43 cannot be earlier than c. 130 nor later than 80 for 45. 1-8. Corro­ boration is provided by D.H. who combines Valerius with other authorities. Hence there are surprising similarities as well as sur­ prising divergences between D.H. and L. It is far-fetched to assume an analogy between the circumstances of Tullia's marriage and the abrupt wedding of Livia and Augustus in 38 B.C.

Bibliography: J. J . Bachofen, Tanaquil; L. Euing, Die Sage von Tana­ quil (Frankfurt. Stud. 8 ) ; W. Soltau, Phil Woch. 25 (1905), 220 ff.; E. Pais, Storia Critica, 1. 495 and Ancient Legends, 128-51; H. Last, C.A.H., 7. 387 ff.; E. Gocchia, Atti R. Accad. Napoli 8 (1925), 2 1 1 ; Groh, Historia, 2 (1928), 353; Burck 160-3; G. Dumezil, Servius et la Fortune (1943); W. Hoffmann, R.E., 'Servius Tullius'; Schachermeyer, R.E., ' T a n a q u i l ' ; U . Goli, S.D.H.L 21 (1955), 186 ff.; P. de Francisci, Primordia Civitatis, 668-705. 39. 1. eo tempore: 2. 33. 10 n. Servius Tullius: a Latin name, for the history of which see H . Jordan, Die Konige im alten Italien (1887), 15 ff. Subsequently Tullius was used only by plebeians, which is a guarantee of its authenticity since no fifth- or fourth-century historian would have invented a plebeian king. caput arsisse: early Roman legend offers several examples of the miraculous King's Fire. It was commonly supposed that the old Latin 157

*■ 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 version—which 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 avaypaats; 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 him—Servius 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 €L€vy 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 erigas is mentioned but not accepted by Watt. 814432

l6l

M

I. 4 1 . 3

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

hoc . . . caput: 'this head of yours', a striking circumlocution for which Shackleton Bailey on Prop. 2. 9. 26 cites also Lucan 5. 686; Silius Italicus 10. 52; Seneca, Phoen. 204; Statius, Silvae 4. 1. 21. It goes back to Plautus but it is more than a mere circumlocution here since Tanaquil is re-interpreting the omen which concerned only the head of Servius. expergiscere vere: Sanctius's expergiscere. Quid verere? and similar emendations obscure the force of the expression. Servius woke up literally once (39. 3 ) : now he is really to wake up and bestir him­ self. qui sis, non unde: 2. 7. 10. Cf. Cicero, de Rep, 2. 6 quis et unde sit scire. It was a fundamentally R o m a n idea to call to mind one's family and ancestors (cf, e.g., Seneca, adPolyb. 14. 3). Here it is given a dif­ ferent twist. There is no basic difference between the indefinite-inter­ rogative pronouns quis and qui; quis was the original form (cf. Gk. rts) while the use of qui was a later development evolved to avoid sigmatism (instances of quis s- are rare. Lofetedt, Syntactica, 2. 84 lists the principal instances) and became the predominant form in vulgar Latin writers. tua . . . consilia: the word-order is remarkable and emphatic. It should be compared with Praef. 5 quae nostra tot per annos vidit aetas on which H . J . Miiller collects a useful assemblage of parallels, but his explanation that it is 'mehr dichterisch 5 is misleading. It serves to emphasize the adjective, here tua—an effect also secured by the re­ peated consilia (wrongly deleted by Gruter). See Fraenkel, Iktus und Akzent, 162 ff.; Horace, 152 n. 1, 265 n. 3 ; Denniston, Greek Prose Style, 41-584 1 . 4 . ex superiore parte aedium: a strange anachronism. Primitive R o m a n houses and their Italic counterparts were of a simple atriumdesign without upper stories or street windows and the type of window and balcony facing the street which is demanded by Tanaquil's appearance, although common in Alexandrian palaces, was an in­ novation of the censor C. Maenius who was consul in 338 B.C. (Festus 120 L.; see A. Boethius, Eranos 43 (1945), 89 ff., and D . S. Robertson, Greek and Roman Architecture (2nd ed., 1943), 303). It is also surprising that Tarquinius should be residing near the Temple of Juppiter Stator (12. 6 n.) which lies in the angle between the Sacra Via, Via Nova, and Clivus Palatii (see plan) rather than at the official Regia, traditionally built by N u m a near the Temple of Vesta. Both details suggest that the story has been tampered with and the Hellenistic nature of the scene and the situation call to mind the similar ruse by which the death of Ptolemy Philopator was concealed for a year (204-203) by Agathocles and Sosibius (F. W. Walbank, J.E.A. 22 (1936), 22 ff.) or the death of Berenice by Euergetes in 246. T h e 162

SERVIUS TULLIUS

1.41. 4

Sultana Shajar concealed the death of Sultan Ayub and succeeded in nominating Fakhr ad-Din as viceroy. T h e anachronism is, there­ fore, due to a motif from Hellenistic history being grafted on to a R o m a n legend which would otherwise have been bare and uncircumstantial. T h e device was popular. Tacitus (Annals 1. 5) imitates L.'s account of the concealment of Priscus' d e a t h (cf. M . P. Charlesworth, CR. 41 (1927), 5 5 ; R - H - Martin, C.Q,. 49 (IC;55)> 127). T h e location of Tarquinius' residence near the temple of Juppiter Stator may have been inspired by a story attached to a striking architectural feature in the area. T h e decisive meetings of the Senate during the Gatilinarian conspiracy were held there (Cicero, in CatiL 1. 1 1 ; 2. 12; Plutarch, Cicero 16. 3). Iovis Statoris: 12. 6 n. 4 1 . 5. iubet bono animo esse: the technical vocabulary and the short staccato sentences all suggest the official medical Bulletin such as might be posted up outside a Royal Palace, bono animos es (and the indirect iubet bono animo esse) is a bare, colourless formula of reassurance. They are the opening words with which Juppiter comforts Amphitryo in Plautus (1131 bono animo es: adsum ego auxilio. Cf. 671) and are used somewhat patronizingly by Cicero in letters to Lepta (adFam. 6. 18. 1) and by Appius Claudius (10. 29. 1). Their conventional character is indicated by the coincidental resemblance of 39. 13. 7 bono animo esse iubere (Sulpiciam) consul et sibi curae fore dicere ut . . . to Tacitus, Histories 4. 52 Vespasianus... bono esse animo iubet... sibi pacem domumque curae fore. sopitum fuisse: c stunned, rendered unconscious'; a medical term. Cf. 42. 16. 3 ; Celsus, 4. 27a sopor tantum est. alte in corpus descendisse: cf. Celsus 5. 26. 35b altius descendit. iam ad se redisse: 'he had now recovered consciousness', the tech­ nical phrase to judge from Horace, Epist. 2.2. 137-8; Lucretius 4. 1023 (cf. 997). It reflects the way that Greeks and Romans always looked on loss of consciouness. inspectum vulnus: the procedure was professionally recommended by Celsus 7. 1. 1. omnia salubria esse: not 'all is well', because Priscus is still far from well, but 'all the symptoms are hopeful', another specialized use (quite different from 31.5) for which Drak. well compared Terence, Andria 481-2. dicto audientem esse: 5. 3. 8 n., 29. 20. n . T h e phrase is directly re­ lated to the concept of imperium as a study of the Plautine uses shows (G. W . Williams, Hermes 86 (1958), 97 n. 1: cf. Amph. 9 9 1 ; Miles 611), and it is suggested that it was used formally in the actual terms of the military sacramentum (Caesar, B.C. 1. 39. 7, 1. 40. 12). By it T a n a quil hints, while deliberately leaving the precise constitutional status 163

i. 4i. 5

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

vague, that Tarquin's imperium is delegated to Servius as praefectus urbi (59. 12 n . : cf. iura redditurum). No mention is made of his position in the event of Tarquin's death since Tanaquil rules that possibility out of account. See, however, Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 662 n. 2. 4 1 . 6. trabea: a short purple cloak of Etruscan origin. I n primitive times it was standard military uniform, designed perhaps to conceal wounds (trossula; cf. Servius, ad Aen. 7. 612; Val. Max. 2. 6. 2 ; Isidore 19. 22. 10). There are parallels for such a uniform in Persia and Sparta. It became in consequence the ritual dress of Etruscan kings (see the mural from Caere in Ducati, Die Etruskische Malerei, fig. 4) and it is perfectly credible that Priscus introduced it into Rome as part of his regalia. Certainly after the expulsion of the kings it survived as ritual wear for magistrates who inherited regal preroga­ tives. It was worn by consuls declaring wars (Servius, loc. cit.; Bell. Afr. 57. 4-6), by the Salii (D.H. 2. 70. 2), by the augurs, and by the flamines of Juppiter and Mars (Servius, ad Aen. 7. 190). But it also survived as a dress uniform for the equites, even though its use had long been superseded by armour. It was worn not only at the ceremony of Transvectio in July (D.H. 2. 70. 2-3) but on other state occasions such as the funeral of Germanicus in 19 A.D. (Tabula H e b a n a = Ehrenberg and Jones, Documents2, no. 94a. 59). Fully discussed and illustrated by A. Alfoldi, Der Friihrbmische Reiteradel, 1952, 36-53, with biblio­ graphy. sede regia: 20. 2 n. praesidio: 'bodyguard'. 4 1 . 7. the manuscripts have iam turn cum comprensis sceleris ministris ut vivere regem . . . nuntiatum est where cum or ut is redundant. Either could be accounted for by dittography but Livian usage seems con­ stant: ubi (2. 13. 7, 2. 40. 3, 3. 2. 7, 4. 9. 13, 5. 7. 4.),postquam($. 17. 1, 4. 50. 6, 5. 39. 5) or ut (5. 23. 1) nuntiatum est but cum nuntiatum esset (e.g. 4. 39. 7). Delete cum. Heerwagen's cum comprensi sceleris ministri sunt, ut is clumsy and the cum-clause is still wrong. Suessam Pometiam: originally called Pometia (the addition of Suessa seems to be an Annalist error), a Latin city which may have given its name to the Pontine marshes (cf. A. Rosenberg, Hermes 54 (1919), 154 ff.; Beloch, Rom. Gesch. 357. 1; Philipp, R.E., 'Suessa Pometia'; Hofmann, R.E., Suppl. 8, T o m p t i n a e paludes') but which lay to the north of the marshes on the borders of the Latin and Volscian spheres. Strabo (5. 232) said that it lay between the Via Appia and Via Latina which rules out the usual identification with Cisterna. Its absence from the early Alban league, its membership of the Arician league (Gato fr. 58 P.), and its proximity to the Volsci point to a site south of the Alban hills overlooking the marshes. Important early cemeteries have been found at Caracupo which suit the requirements (Notiz* 164

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

been archaic even then, b u t it was consciously revived by the historians (Bell. Afr. and Sallust) who use it chiefly to join a pronoun and a noun (Jug. 26. 1 segue et oppidum; cf. Tacitus, Agr. 42 seque et delatores). T h e usage widened as it was increasingly accepted as an ingredient of historical style (2. 59. 7, 4. 53. 12, 5. 49. 1, 5 1 . 3 ; Veil. Pat.; Curtius; in elevated passages of Virgil and Tibullus). Here it gives a touch of historical verisimilitude to the document. Stolz-Schmalz, Lat. Gramm. 3434 3 . 3 . duae fabrum: attributed by D.H., probably correctly, to the second class, not to the first. Cicero cites one century offabri which he attaches to the first class, but by calling them tignarii he implies the existence offabri aerarii, presumably included in the second class. machinas in bello ferrent: £to carry the siege-equipment in war 5 . T h e phrase seems to be guaranteed against correction by 27. 15. 6 machinas scalasque ad muros ferrent but the task seems too menial for members of the first (or even the second) class. D.H. 4. 1 7 . 3 has KaraaK€vat,6vrcov TCL els TOV TToXefiov cvxprjcrra which lends support to Ruperti's pararent, the best of the conjectures if it b s agreed that hipsius's facerent (cf. Xenophon, Cyrop, 6. 1. 21 /x^avqv . . . TroLrjadfievos) would give rise to an unexampled and intolerable repetition. We should perhaps understand that the actual porterage would be done by common people while the fabri supervised. Alternatively ferrent might stand for suppeditarent ('supply'): so W . M . Gunn, but there are no paral­ lels. 43. 5. tertia classis in quinquaginta milium censum: so the manuscripts. L. should give the minimum qualification (cf. D . H . ov fieiova 8e JJLVWV TTevTrjKovTa) but in would provide an upper not a lower limit and is thus unacceptable. T h e vulgate correction, which stems from Sobius, is tertiae classis [in] but the double genitive after census is harsh and not really supported by passages like 10. 36. 14, 37. 23. 5. Besides. L. does not say the census of a class since the census is itself what determines the class, in tertia classe (Rhenanus, Frigell), a correction which involves one small change of letter and word-order, would provide the required sense (cf. below in quarta classe). et hae: 'these centuries as well (as the centuries of the second class)'. 43. 6. arma mutata: the third and fourth classes supply light-armed troops and skirmishers; cf. D.H. 4. 18. 1 TO TTC&KOV eWA^pouo-a rtov re aXayyiTcov KCLI TCOV ifukwv orrpdrcvfia. Doubtless this was true even before the legion was reorganized for manipular warfare, despite the statement in 26. 4. 10 that velites in 211 for the first time were drafted in the legions. There survived down to the end of the second century (Lucilius 290, 393 M.) a tradition of an older body of light-armed troops called rorarii and the introduction of the velites is perhaps only a 169

i. 43.6

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

development of the rorarii under a new n a m e (Walbank on Polybius 6. 21. 7; F . Lammert, R.E., 'veles'). verutum: a short throwing spear, somewhat smaller than the hasta (velitaris). D.H. 4. 17. 1 speaks only of Sopara but adds that the fourth class had swords (#$17) and shields (dvpeovs) as well. D.H. is likely to have recorded the tradition more faithfully since Polybius gives the same equipment for the velites of historical times (6. 22. 1 fidxcupav KCLI ypo<jovs Kal Trdpfxrjv: cf. L. 38. 21. 13, 26. 4. 4). L. may merely have overlooked the other items but nihil praeter suggests that he is drawing attention to their surprising lack of arms, in which case the shortage will be the fault of his source. At all events the text is sound (hastam et scutum Lallemand; gladium, scutum, hastam et verutum anon.). 43. 7. fundas lapidesque: D.H. 4. 17. 2 aavvta /cat <jcv86vas. in his accensi cornicines tubicinesque in tres centurias distributi: so the manuscripts. T h e account which follows owes much to the interpreta­ tions of P. Fraccaro (Opuscula, 2. 315) and Sumner. D.H. 4. 17. 3-4 has two centuries of oaXTTioraL re Kal fivKaviaTat, allocated to the fourth class, a more probable arrangement since their function would primarily have been to keep contact between the scattered detach­ ments of light-armed troops. L. also appears to mention a third century which has no counterpart in D.H. Grammatically accensi could either be a participle to be taken with cornicines tubicinesque ('buglers and trumpeters, added to the members of the fifth class, were spread over three centuries') or as a noun. T h e participial construction requires the deletion of in (Perizonius; cf. Lactantius, Inst. 2. 9. 5 oriens deo adcensetur; carm. anon. poet. min. 5. 109. 5 B. but the ambiguity of accensi (cf. 2. 54. 7) would be intolerable) and the irrationality that two groups of musicians should fill three centuries has led editors since Sigonius to emend tres to duas or in tres to inter. As a noun accensi could grammatically have cornicines tubicinesque in apposition ('accensi, that is buglers and trumpeters') but there is evidence for a body of men, distinct from the musicians, who were called accensi and who per­ formed odd jobs in the army, taking the place of dead men (Paulus Festus 17 L . ; Vegetius, Mil. 2. 19; Varro ap. Non. 837 L.) or in associ­ ation with light-armed troops carrying out general duties (evidence in Marquardt, Manuel (1891), 11. 15-16; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 282) or acting as attendants on officers. Hence they are also known as accensi velati (C.I.L. 6. 1969 et al.). Cicero's account of the reformed system (de Rep. 2. 40) after an analysis of the disproportionate power enjoyed by the first class breaks off with the words quin etiam accensis velatis corni

liticinib. proletariis . . . which, whether they be restored as liticinibus cornicinibus (Mai) or simply cornicinibus (Ziegler), would definitely seem to presuppose a special century of accensi velati as well as centuries of 170

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

'•43- 7

musicians. T h e only objection to such an interpretation, other than a mistaken desire to bring the texts of L. and D . H . into line, is a lingering heresy, first propounded by Madvig (Emendationes, 82) that L. never closes an enumeration of more than two members with et or -que (A, B, et C). T h a t heresy can no longer be maintained (3. 1. 5 n.). L. therefore gives three centuries of accensi, cornicines, and tubicines. It is not immediately clear from the language (in his . . . could mean 'in these thirty centuries' or 'in the members of this class') whether the three are part of the thirty centuries of the fourth class or additional to them. Probably additional, in view of the supernumerary character of the fabri. In either case the total number of centuries, 191 (so Friezer) or 194 (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 282 n. 1), will be different from that given by D.H. for the same constitution and by Cicero for the reformed system, both of whom postulate a total of 193 voting units. This is a fact which deserves to be emphasized in the light of

43- I 2 -

undecim: D.H. 4. 17. 2 ivros CLKOGL KCLL rrivre JJLVWV a-XP1 ScuSe/oi KCLL

rjfjLLcrovs fjLvwv =25,000—12,500, 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

denarius was not introduced till c. 187 (H. Mattingly and E. S. G. Robinson, P.B.A. 18 (1933), 2 I 1 ff"0> L.'s figure for the aes equestre, like his census qualifications, may mirror the figures in force at the end of the Punic War. 1,000 den. is a large sum and it has been argued that the knight had to pay for the horses and a groom out of it. Since, however, prices for horses are otherwise unknown except for a Hyperion-class stallion which cost 400,000 H.S. = 100,000 den. (Varro, de Re Rust. 2. 8. 3 ; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 257 n. 6), the issue cannot be resolved. See further Hill, Roman Middle Class, 11-12 with bibliography; T. Frank, Econ. Survey, 1. 195; W. Helbig, Sur Vaes pararium in Melanges Boissier (Paris, 1903). ex publico: it was one of Camillus' first acts as censor to make orphans and not the state responsible for the purchase of horses (Plutarch, Camillus 2 ; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 257). bina milia: known as the aes hordearium. Cicero (de Rep. 2. 36) associates its introduction with Tarquinius Priscus but this is a later rationalization based on Priscus' connexion with Corinth where a corresponding practice prevailed (cf. also for Athens Xenophon, Hipparch. 9. 5). T h e practice survived for a long time, for Gaius (Instit. 4. 27) says that the cavalry had the right of distraint (pignoris capio) if the money was not forthcoming (Hill, A. J.P. 67 (1946), 60 ff.). T h e figure of 2,000 is not otherwise corroborated but it may be connected with the figure for the pay of the cavalry in the mid second century which Polybius (6. 39.12) gives as 1 dr. = 1 den. a day, out of which they had to find fodder and equipment, an annual pay of 360 den. if, as was the case in A.D. 14, the military year was reckoned as 360 days. Shortly after Polybius' lifetime the sextantal as was retariffed at 16 instead of 10 to the denarius, but a curious note in Pliny, N.H. 33. 45 (in militari tamen stipendio semper denarius pro X assibus datus est) points to a hidebound military conservatism which preserved the old rate of exchange (cf. P. A. Brunt, P.B.S.R. 18 (1950), 51). 3,600 = 2,250 x 16/10 asses. In other words the old cavalry pay is likely to have bsen 2,250 asses a year, reassessed at the equivalent of 360 den. and it is this figure of 2,250 which is the inspiration for the amount of the aes hordearium. The Political Development of the Comitia A political function was not integral to the Servian constitution but, perhaps at the fall of the Monarchy (60. 4 n.), the system devised in the first place for the registration of citizens for recruitment was found suitable to express the will of the new democracy. It was undoubtedly in operation by the Decemvirate and the political aspect soon com­ pletely ousted the military even if 'in fully historical times it still bore many marks of being essentially an army. It met outside the Pomerium 172

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

that with two imperfects (vocabantur) an aorist (descenderunt) is out of keeping and that the subjunctives offered by the manuscripts support one another. (2) Supply a main verb. Novak proposed (institutum) ut. This is palaeographically implausible and involves the logical absurdity that descenderent is a subjunctive of purpose whereas it is evidently the consequence of the system. Bayet, substituting ita for primum peditum vocabantur above, produces an artificial word-order and an unparal­ leled repetition of ita . . .ut. Sense and tradition would be appeased by inserting (fiebaf) ut. 'If the first class were divided, which happened rarely, it was the practice that the centuries of the second class were called but virtually never any of the classes below the second.' 43.12. For the controversial interpretation of this sentence see, before all, Walbank on Polybius 6. 14. 7; E. S. Staveley, A.J.P. 74 (1953), 1-33; Historia 5 (1956), 112 ff. 'It should not be surprising that the present system, after the full quota of 35 tribes was reached and their number was doubled in centuries of iuniores and seniores, does not agree with the total (of centuries) instituted by Servius Tullius.' It can be established at once (against J. J. Nicholls, A.J.P. 77 (1956), 243) that hunc ordinem qui nunc est means the system prevailing in L.'s (or his source's) own day and not the system which L. has just described. hie . . . qui nunc est is the regular idiom for 'present, prevailing, con­ temporary'; Cicero, ad Att. 2. 19. 2 hunc statum qui nunc est; Pap. Ox. 2088. 5-6 (on the same subject) hae et ceterae cent[uriae . . . quae] nunc sunt. Cf. qui nunc sunt = 'the present age' (Cicero ad Q.F. 1. 1. 43; Pliny, N.H. 22. 147 et al. saep.) A second fact seems equally secure: ad summam convenire must mean 'agree or square with the total5 (i.e. 'be the same numerically as') and not, as has recently been argued by both Tibilleti (Athenaeum 27 (1949), 228-9) and Staveley (A.J.P., cit.) 'was not suited by the number of centuries initiated by S. T.' The latter would require summam ad hunc ordinem convenisse and uses of convenire ad, as listed in the Thes. Ling. Lat. (e.g. Seneca, Contr. Exc. 6. 6 ad vocem tuam facta conveniunt), give no support to it. If that is so, summam must be the number of all the centuries in all classes and not (as Rosenberg and Fraccaro) the number of centuries in the first class only or, as Cavaignac, in the first and second classes. A reform of the comitia centuriata in the late third century is known to have been made. The nature of the reform is uncertain, but L. appears to be stating that it involved 'some degree of co-ordination between centuries and tribes', which in its turn would entail a reduction of the first class to 70. Given 35 tribes (the last was added in 241), if the members of the first class in each tribe were distributed into two centuries of seniores and iuniores, a total of 70 first-class centuries would result. The real question at issue, then, is whether this arrangement was confined to the first class or was extended to all the classes. If it was extended 174

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

proposed by Hertz and accepted by Mommsen (Staatsrecht, 3. 163 n. 1), Winkler, and the O.G.T.) is indefensible on every front. L. omits any reference to the institution of the rural, as opposed to the urban, tribes, which is fully treated by D . H . drawing on Varro. For the latest discussion of all matters concerning the tribes see L. R. Taylor, Voting Districts, 2 ff. tribus . . . ab tributo: Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 181, with greater plau­ sibility gives a diametrically opposite etymology: dictum a tribubus quod ea pecunia quae populo imperata erat tributim a singulis pro portione census exigebatur. Both etymologies result from an antiquarian fashion cur­ rent in the last years of the Republic. In default of literary evidence, the study of obscure ceremonies and terms was the only method by which scholars could reconstruct early history. L. subscribes to the fashion (see below lustrum condere, pomerium). tribus is cognate with the Umbrian trifu. Both are derived from a root tri- ('a third'). Three was the number of divisions in several communities (Ramnes, Tities, Luceres; the three Dorian tribes). Gradually tribus lost its numerical quality and came to mean simply a 'division', whether based on regional or racial criteria. Hence tribuo = 'I divide', tributum = 'that which is divided' (E. Taubler, Sitz. Heidel. Akad. 1929-30; S. Schloss­ mann, Arch. Lat. Lex. 14 (1905), 25-40; Ernout-Meillet, W a l d e Hofmann s.v.). neque eae: amplifies what has already been implied, that co-ordina­ tion between tribes and centuries was not part of the original organiza­ tion but was a subsequent reform. 44. 1. cum vinculorum minis mortisque: other authorities (D.H. 4. 15. 6 ; Cicero, pro Caec. 9 9 ; Zonaras 7. 19; Gaius, Instit. 1. 160) are un­ animous that the penalty in historical times if a m a n did not register was to be sold into slavery and have his goods confiscated. It has been argued that L.'s sanctions might have been true of the Regal period ( = diis sacrum esse; Pfaff, R.E., 'incensus') and a parallel has been sought in the Oscan Law of Bantia which contains a sanction for failing to register. Unfortunately the Oscan word lamatir is quite un­ certain in meaning ('sold5 Bucheler, 'killed' Bach, 'tortured' Pisani, 'accursed' E. Fraenkel: see Philologus 97 (1948), 174). L. may have been carried away in his enthusiasm, in vincula duci is a favourite picture of his (2. 4. 7, 3. 13. 4, 6, 3. 56-59 passim, 4. 26. 9, 5. 9. 4). H e had no technical details in front of him but, knowing the penalty to be severe, he invented one ad hoc. campo Martio: 2. 5. 2 n. An anachronism since at this period the Campus was not so called but such a natural anticipation is not likely to betray a difference of source or conceal a corruption (Tan, Faber deleted Martio), For the connexion with Mars see next note. 176

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 fire—the most potent of all purifying agents—rather 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

N

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

auget Esquilias: the Esquiline comprises the O p p i a n and Cispian hills both of which belonged to the first stage of synoecism, the Septimontium, and are mentioned in the very ancient sacra Argeorum (Varro, de Ling, Lat. 5. 50). But the name Esquilinus (from ex-colo 'outdweller'. Cf. inquilinus) coupled with the tradition of Sabine occupation and the marked resemblance of tombs to those found on the Quirinal (Gjerstad, op. cit. 149-265) make it likely that the settlement was originally distinct from the Palatine community. W h a t had begun as a loose association between the separate communities of the Esquiline and Palatine before Servius was evidently formalized by him and combined with the inclusion of the Quirinal and ViminaL L. writes auget Esquilias (the O.C.T. reading has no manuscript authority). By itself this cannot mean c he increased the city by adding the Esq.', which would be auget (urbem) Esquiliis (Gronovius, Madvig, Frigell), but it is clear that such was in effect the result he was regarded as having achieved (D.H. 4. 13. 2-3) and so Eutropius and the author of the de Viris Illustr. understood L. to say. L.'s phrase must mean that the Esquiline was already part of the city a n d that Servius merely added to its extent, but it may well abbreviate a fuller account in his source which dealt with the fusion of the Oppian, Cispian, and other local communities into a single more embracing unit—Esquiliae—in the enlarged synoecism of Rome. aggere etfossis et muro; the existing 'Servian' wall is of the fourth century (evidence in Saflund, Le mura di Roma, 1932) but the existence of an earlier wall is presupposed by Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 4 8 : 'Subura quod sub muro terreo C a r i n a r u m . . . cui testimonium potest esse, quod subest ei loco qui terreus murus vocatur'. Traces of an earlier agger were found by Boni on the Quirinal behind the Republican wall and it is a reasonable inference that there was a continuous agger running across the Quirinal, Viminal, and Esquiline and perhaps forming a complete enceinte round the city. T h e agger had three phases in its history and the second phase can be dated by an Attic R e d Figure sherd to between 520 and 470 B.C. This would allow the first agger to have been built, on the traditional chronology, by Servius Tullius. See E. Gjerstad, Studies presented to D. M. Robinson, 1. 412 ff.; Opuscula Romana, 3. 6 9 - 7 8 ; P. Grimal, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 71 (1959), 43~^4Tlie Pomerium T h e digression was more relevant to the age of Sulla than of Augustus. pomerium prqfert: the line made by a plough drawn by a yoked bull and cow demarcating an augurally constituted city. T h e area so defined marked the limit of the auspicia urbana. Within all was hallowed and under divine surveillance, outside was profane. T h e army as such could never cross the pomerium. The custom of demarcating a city in 179

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 city—a 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

ward as they stand. Ruperti's insertion of et to link them as a pair, although he was followed in this independently by Madvig, is frigid; and Scheller (aucta sic late . . .) may have had the right instinct in seeing that civitate is the otiose word. It might be expunged utterly: civitas is found contracted as etas (examples in Gapelli). aucta ctate provokes misgivings. Otherwise aucta (js€) civitate (jsf) magnitudine urbis: if the latter et was lost, the former would follow, ex is also possible. iam turn: the first regular temple of Artemis was constructed on marshy ground to the north of the city by Theodorus of Samos, an architect who is thought to have been active in the first half of the sixth century, if Rhoecus, the architect of the Samian Heraeum was his father. T h e date of the foundation implied by the participation of Theodorus is in accord with archaeological evidence from the earliest discovered structure. Coins, ivories, &c. from the foundation deposit cannot be dated earlier than c. 600-590 (P. Jacobsthal, J.H.S. 71 (1951), 8 4 - 9 5 ; E. S. G. Robinson, ibid. 156-67). After successive modifications (D. G. Hogarth, Brit. Museum: Excavations at Ephesus, 1908) it was rebuilt to the design of Ghersiphron c. 550 in a completely new style as the first Ionic temple in Asia (Vitruvius). According to Herodotus (1. 92) most of the columns for it were the gift of Croesus and several authorities state that it was erected by the common con­ tributions of the great cities of Asia (Pliny, JV.H. 16. 213, 36. 95). By 540 or so the elegance of the building and the liberality of the sub­ scribers would have reached even R o m a n ears through travellers' tales. T h e archaeological evidence is reviewed by J . Boardman, Antiquaries Journal 39 (1959), 204-5. The Temple of Diana on the Aventine The record of the foundation of the temple, like that of other temples in this period (Capitoline Juppiter, Castor, Mercury), can be accepted as being derived from authentic pontifical memorials. T h e religious significance of the new foundations lies in the fact that they are all temples of old Greek deities, which served the more advanced society of Greece (F. Altheim, History of Roman Religion, 250-4). T h e cult will not have come, as L. suggests, as a result of direct communication with Ephesus because, for one thing, in its Roman form it was intended to be the centre of a political league, whereas the Artemision, although financed by Ionian subscription, was never the centre of the PanIonian movement. Ephesus never usurped the place of Mycale and the temple of Poseidon Heliconius as the centre of the great con­ federation which drew all the Ionian cities, Ephesus included (/.G. 12.5. 444), together in self-defence. T h e Aventine cult of Diana seems to have been inspired by two separate but contemporary features in Ionia, the Pan-Ionian league and the Artemision of Ephesus, and the 181

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 1226—33 (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

Regillus), claimed the honour of having provided the priest on that occasion. H a d not a Postumius Albinus written Annales? 45. 4. bos . . . nata: on the coin it appears to be a bull. fuere: i.e. they had disappeared by the late Republic. 45. 5. ut erat: 'it was regarded as a prodigy, as indeed it was 5 . T h e recording of omens and prodigies was 'a traditional feature in the annals of the R o m a n s ' (R. Syme, Tacitus, 522) if only because they were one of the regular items in the pontifical tables which constituted the source material for early history. But whereas Tacitus is consistently sceptical about such manifestations, L. had a real belief in them and lamented that in his own day faith had evaporated and that prodigies were no longer recorded (43. 13. 1-2). 4 5 . 6. carmen: 26. 6 n. antistitem: cf. 20. 3. T h e term is very loose and untechnical, usually applied to the priests of foreign cults who had no place in the official nomenclature (Wissowa, Religion, 483). Although for us there is some doubt what the status of the priest of Diana was (perhaps a sacerdos since he was not a.flamen or apontifex), L.'s choice ofantistes is not to be attributed to that uncertainty because L. would have known, but to the fact that the sacrifice was a votive offering (cf. apta dies) and so did not require the presence of any other person than the templecaretaker {aedituus) and the intending sacrificer. L. uses the vague term antistes to inflate to apparent importance the menial-sounding aedituus. Here again L. is more accurate than Varro. celebrata: nominative with magnitudo. quin: 5J.J n. vivo flumine: 'running water 5 . An authentic touch. Only running water, not water drawn from wells or cisterns, could purify. Cf. Virgil, Aeneid 2 . 7 1 9 donee meflumine vivo \ abluero; Tacitus Hist. 4. 53 : and see Wissowa, Religion, 219 n. 3 ; Ninck, Die Bedeutung des Wassers im Cult. Vivus is perhaps sacral. For comparable Greek beliefs see Denniston on Euripides, Eleclra 791. infima valle: infimus is the dignified and classical form of the super­ lative, imus the colloquial; but metrical considerations as well led to the spread of imus which in later Latin becomes almost universal (Lofstedt. Syntactica, 2. 345; B. Axelson, Unpoet. Worter, 33-34). Thus infima valle here and in 7. 34. 3 as well as Hirtius, Bell. Gall. 8. 40. 2 and Columella 1. 5. 2 but ima valle in Virgil, Georg. 1. 374; Aen. 3. n o , Ovid, Met. 2. 761, 6. 343. At 33. 8. 6 the manuscripts' reading adsuos in ima valle stantes should be corrected to ad suos infima valle stantes. 46-48. The Death ofServius Tullius T h e circumstances in which Servius Tullius is said to have met his death had become part of the R o m a n historical tradition long before 184

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

i. 46-48

Roman history was actually written. As far as can be seen there is no change in the main outline of the story between the third century and Livy. Although no relevant fragment of Ennius survives, Fabius Pictor (fr. 11 P.) narrated it in substantially the form which we know today and presumably other second-century historians, including Polybius (cf. Cicero, De Rep. 2. 43), followed the same tradition. Piso (fr. 15 P.) accepted it with a small chronological modification, Diodorus (10. 1 ff.) gives a crisp summary of it, and V a r r o (de Ling. LaL 5. 159) quotes the incident of Tullia driving over her murdered father. T h e legend will have been passed on in two ways, as a part of the main stream of R o m a n folk-lore and as an explanation associated with the names of certain quarters of Rome, e.g. the vicus sceleratus, but it will not be a primitive legend. T h e careers of the two Tarquins are too alike to be other than two faces of the same coin. A dim memory of an Etruscan domination of Rome from Tarquinii (34. 1 n.) which was interrupted by a Latin restoration (Servius Tullius ) was expanded into a chronological sequence with definite and distinct personalities. Once the story had been fixed there were no major variations, and there could be none because there was no possible evidence to modify it. T h e only variations that were possible were variations for political or artistic effect. Politically the regal period exhibited for philoso­ phically minded historians like Polybius a perfect example of a con­ stitution developing from monarchy (Romulus), through kingship (Tarquinius Priscus and Servius Tullius), to tyranny (Tarquinius Superbus) with the early Republic as aristocracy and the Decemvirate as oligarchy. T o secure the even course of the decline Servius Tullius must have some tyrannical tendencies which can appear in their full maturity in the person of Tarquinius Superbus. But as at Athens Solon and Gleisthenes became controversial political slogans at the end of the fifth century when rival groups claimed authority for their own versions of the irdrpios iroXireia, so in Rome Servius Tullius was invoked by the supporters of the Sullan constitution as their precedent. T h e changes of 88 B.C. were carried out with explicit reference to Servius Tullius (Appian, B.C. 1. 59. 4). Traces of this rehabilitation of Servius Tullius crop u p throughout L.'s narrative, cheek by jowl with the older pejorative view. His reputed wish to re­ sign the throne quia unius esset (48. 9) does not belong to the original legend and reflects the self-righteousness with which Sulla's retirement was invested. L. owes his version to an historian writing under the influence of such Sullan propaganda. There are no signs of contradic­ tion with the preceding section (39-45) and certain positive affiliations (46. 1 = 4 2 . 3 ; 46. 5 = 4 2 . 1) which invite the conclusion that L. is con­ tinuing to draw his material from the same source—Valerius Antias. Artistically, however, the story afforded ample scope for development. 185

I. 46-48

SERVIUS

TULLIUS

I t is impossible to know at what period the similarity of the legend to the tragedies of the Houses of Atreus and Laius was appreciated. T h e cults of Orestes and of Hippolytus were transplanted to Italy, in particular to Aricia, at a very early date (48. 6 n.) so that the myths will have been widely disseminated. Praetextae were written on the Tarquin theme from the time of Accius, and historians of the second century, under the influence of Hellenistic theory, are unlikely to have missed the possibilities latent in such a comparison. Certainly Varro was aware of them when he commented inter duos Jilias regum quid mutet inter Antigonam et Tulliam (Aul. Gell. 18. 12.9). But a comparison with D.H. 4. 28 ff., while suggesting that the two authors are following, even if not immediately, the same source, shows that most of the tragic features of the story in L. are due to L. himself. D.H. is more diffuse, more uneven, and less critical of the unrealistic and the grotesque, as when he allows Tullia to slap her mule-driver with her shoe. D.H. feels no compunction about introducing rhetorical exercises in which the king and the usurper expound their respective claims seria­ tim. H e is blind to the actualities of motive and psychology (48. 2 n . ) ; he has no eye for a scene or for a situation. L., on the other hand, has tailored the same material to a much more graphic pattern which achieves its effect by bold and compelling lines. H e has not, of course, utilized an actual play as a model. H e has written his own tragedy. L. Tarquinius is a less scrupulous Orestes, Tullia a less noble Electra, and so Servius Tullius has to be the Aegisthus, the intruder. T h e Sullan leanings of Valerius Antias, which tended to whitewash Servius Tullius, are more than counterbalanced by the demands of a plot in which he must appear as a villain. T o have cast the tragedy of the Tarquins wholly in a Euripidean setting would have made it a mere period piece without any contem­ porary message. Such a d r a m a would have been pretty to read but not edifying, decora fabulis not salubre ac frugiferum. To achieve the latter effect as well L. makes L. Tarquinius a Catiline-figure by introducing from Sallust and Cicero several reminiscences (46. 5 n . ; 46. 9 n . ; 47. 2 n . ; 47. 7 n., 48. 1 n.) which have no equivalent in D . H . and which therefore had no place in Valerius Antias. As Catiline was a latter-day Tarquin to Cicero, so, for L., Tarquinius Superbus was a prototype Catiline. The total result, as so often in L., is a fusion of tragedy and Republican politics with echoes of each. L.'s treatment supplied Ovid with much of the material for his account of the same events in Fasti 6. 587-610, even down to particular turns of phrase. Dio Cassius [ap. Zonaras 7. gd) also followed the sequence and detail of L., diverging from him only so far as to add a few imperial touches to parts which L. had left indeterminate (e.g. ap[MdKois 8i€9eLpe = prope continuatis funeribus in 4 6 . 9 ) , 186

SERVIUS TULLIUS

i. 46-48

See further Pais, Storia Criticay 1. 2. 5 0 5 - 9 ; Last, C.A.H. 7. 3 9 3 - 6 ; F. Schachermeyr, R.E., CL. Tarquinius (Superbus)': and, for L.'s narrative, H. B. Wright, The Recovery of a Lost Roman Tragedy (New Haven, 1910); Burck 163-5; Aly, Livius undEnnius, 3 7 ; A. K . Michels, Latomus, 10 (1951), 13-24; Skard, Sallust u. s. Vorganger, 5 6 - 6 1 ; J. Gage, Huit recherches, 185 ff. 46. 1. iactari voces: it was whispered that Aegisthus held the throne illegally (Aeschylus, Agam. 1646-8) and that Creon's power though legitimate was not founded on popular consent (Sophocles, Ant. 734-7). agro . . . diviso: the deliberate conciliation of the plebs by landdistribution is a Gracchan touch (cf. Plutarch, T. Gracchus 8 ; Cicero, de Leg. Agr. 2. 81) although the use of ager publicus was disputed from time immemorial, vellent iuberentne: an archaic formula by which a lex rogata was submitted to the people by a magistrate. T h e direct form was velitis iubeatis 'would you wish and order'. T h e words form an asyndetic dicolon of a pattern very common in formal Latin (32. 13 n.) and were so spoken by the magistrate. Hence L. puts a single -ne after the second w o r d : 'vellent iuberenV-ne. T h e two words are regarded as synonymous although one might distinguish that velle represented the wishes of the people and inhere the transference of these wishes into law. L.'s use of the formula adds a touch of con­ stitutional verisimilitude to the picture which he tones down by substituting for ut with the subjunctive, which was the statutory con­ struction (38. 54. 3 ; Cicero, de Domo 44 with Nisbet's n o t e ; in Pisonem 72; Aul. Gell. 5. 19. 9), the more literary ace. and inf. (21. 17. 4 ; 31. 6. 1; 36. 1. 5 ; 45. 21. 4 ; all declarations of war). See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 1. 312 n. 2 ; D. Daube, Forms of Roman Legislation, 54 n. 1. 46. 2. domi uxore . . .stimulante: so Electra spurred on her brother Orestes. Cf. Euripides, Or. 616-17. 46. 3. tulit enim et Romana regia sceleris tragici exemplum: et 'as well' (as the palace of Mycenae), tulit. . . exemplum would seem to be a com­ ment by L. himself since the phrase, as can be seen from its use (Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 2. 165; Seneca, Ep. 24. 3 ; see Shackleton Bailey on Prop. 1. 4. 7), is offhand, ut is purposive. 46. 4. filius neposnefuerit parum liquet: L. Piso was, according to D.H. 4. 7, the first and only historian to realize that, if Servius Tullius reigned for 44 years, Tarquinius Superbus could not be a youth of eighteen or so and still be the son of Tullius' predecessor L. Tarquinius Priscus. It does not, however, follow that L. has consulted Piso at first hand. Piso's arguments will have been taken over and quoted by annalists such as Valerius Antias who used Piso in the same way that Plutarch (Poplicola 14) and the Emperor Claudius (I.L.S. 212) adopted them directly from L. without inquiring personally into the divergent authorities. 187

i. 46. 5

SERVIUS TULLIUS

46. 5. forte ita inciderat ne . . . for tuna . . . populi Romani: 5. 34. 2 n. inciderat is impersonal as at 6. 34. 6 ; 26. 23. 2 ; 28. 17. 13 so that for tuna would seem to be abl., resuming and qualifying forte (cf. 3. 40. 8). A final ne after verbs of happening conveys the deliberate, almost benevolent, nature of Fortune's intervention (voluntas fati), as at Cicero, deDivin. 2. 2 1 ; Seneca, Ep. 76. 19 (R. G. Nisbet, A. J.P. 44 (1923), 27 ff.). credo does not sound a note of scepticism but introduces an after-thought: 'by chance or rather, I suppose, by the Fortune of the Roman people'. But forte fortuna is a stereotyped phrase in archaic Latin and its appearance here is awkward. As an alternative, fortuna . . . Romani might be taken as a nominative in apposition to the sentence and treated as a parenthesis. T h e afterthought is directly inspired by the similar situation in Cicero, in Cat. 1. 15 sceleri acfurori tuo . . .fortunam populi Romani obstitisse. In D . H . the marriages are deliberately arranged by Servius Tullius. constitui civitatis mores: cf. Sallust, Cat. 5 . 8 . 46. 6. ferox Tullia: 'the Tullia who was spirited', i.e. the younger Tullia. virum nacta muliebri cessaret audacia: 'having gained a real man she lacked the daring spirit of a woman', cesso with the abl. is found at 42. 6. 8 = 'lack, fail', so that there is no need for Crevier's nacta . Bayet, following Cornelissen, objected that audacia was not a feminine quality and adopted the prosaic muliebriter cessaret But masculine audacia is a feminine quality in tragedy (e.g. Aeschylus, Agam. 1 1 ; Sophocles, fr. 943 P. dv8p6(f>pwv ywrj) and is appropriate here. 46. 7. ut fere fit: malum malo aptissimum: so punctuated since Madvig. ut fere fit is, as always, parenthetic ( 5 . 2 7 . 1 ; Cicero, delnv. 2 . 1 4 ; Rut. Lup. 1. 17) and underlines the validity of the moralizing general statement. It would be logically and linguistically unsuited to qualify a statement like malum malo apt. T h e proverb is introduced in asyndeton at the end of the argument to clinch the point, as, e.g., Theocr. 15. 28-29 alpc TO vrjfjia Kal £K JJLCOW, alvoSpimrc,

| Oes ird\w

at yaAeat fiaXaKojs xPTIa^OVTl

KaOcvSeiv. For the proverb cf. Headlam on Herodas 7. 115. 46. 8. domi: 'she would soon have seen in her own house the royal power that now she saw in her father's' (B. O . Foster). T h e wish to have a husband worthy of oneself is often uttered by tragic heroines, as by Electra in Euripides, Electa 948-9. 46. 9. Arruns Tarquinius et Tullia minor . . . cum . . . vacuas . . .fecissent: this, the reading of the manuscripts, could only mean that A. T . and the younger Tullia had caused the deaths of the older Tullia and L. Tarquinius and thereby cleared the way for their own marriage. funeribus domos vacuas matrimonio facere must mean to make room in the house for a new marriage by murders, for the phrase is a quotation from Cicero (in Cat. 1. 14 cum morte superioris uxoris novis nuptiis domum 188

SERVIUS TULLIUS

1.46. 9

vacuefecisses) which Sallust also borrowed (Catil. 15. 2 necato filio vacuam domum scelestis nuptiis fecisse). It gives a Catilinarian rather than a tragic flavour to proceedings (pace Skard, Sallust u.s. Vorganger, 57-60) and it only occurs in these three Catilinarian contexts. T h e manuscripts, therefore, make Arruns and the younger Tullia the sur­ vivors not the victims. D.H. 4. 30 agrees that it was the younger Tullia who survived and this is demanded by the tragic convention which always made the younger sister the daring a n d high-spirited one (Antigone, Electra, Medea) while the elder was cautious and weakwilled (Ismene, Ghrysothemis, Ghalciope). But Arruns cannot be right. It was Lucius who survived and reigned. Besides, Arruns was by tradition in Etruscan families the name of the younger and so he will originally have married the younger Tullia. These considerations show that the text, unless it is a remarkably over-intelligent gloss, must be emended, not by substituting, with Sabellicus, maior for minor which would allow the wrong pair to survive, b u t by altering Arruns. ita L. (Perizonius) is no real improvement on Fulvio Orsini's L. which could easily have been corrupted dittographically into Arruns before Tarquinius. In the corresponding passage D . H . writes rots OLVTOZS 7rd6c so that there can have been no documentary evidence. On balance, it is probable that Sp. Lucretius isfictitious,that his role was originally purely that of father, but that he gradually assumed a constitutional position as well—consul, and then, from the similarity of the name to Sp. Larcius, praef wrb. For later instances of the office see 3. 3. 6, 8. .7, 9. 6, 24. 2 (Lucretius), 29. 4, 4. 31. 2 (n.), 36. 5: Vigneaux, Praefectura Urbis, 17-24; Mommsen, Staatsrecht> 1. 633; Siber, Rom. Verfass. 17; Sachers, R.E., Suppl. 5, 'praefectus urbi'; de Francisci, Primordia Civitatis, 597-600; T. J. Cadoux, J.R.S. 49 (1959), 152-6. 59.13. quacumque incedebat: 59. 6 n., a typical 'unconscious repetition'. See 14. 4 n. invocantibus . . .furiosi 59. 10. 60. 2. Caere: 2. 3 n. A remarkable tomb, found in 1850, contains a series of fifth- to third-century inscriptions of the Tarcna family (C.I.L. 11. 3626-34). Although the latinized form at Caere is Tarquitius, there is no doubt that it is the same name as the Roman 229

I. 60. 2

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

Tarquinius (Schulze 95-96) and hence a reasonable probability exists that the family both originated from Caere and did in fact take refuge there (34. 1 n.). The attempt, however, to find confirmation of the traditional story of a violent expulsion of the Tarquins in the ancient religious ceremony of the regifugium on 24 February (Ovid, Fasti 2. 685) is adequately disproved by E. T. Merrill, Class. Phil. 19 (1924), 20-40. For the later history of Caere see 5. 40. 10, 50. 3. Sex. Tarquinius . . . interfectus: confirmation of this detail may also be forthcoming from Etruscan sources. In the Francois tomb at Vulci, as a counterpart to the fratricide of Polyneices and Eteocles, a Cne/re Tar^unies Ruma^ is done to death by a Marce Camitlnas. The exact interpretation remains obscure, for the praenomen Cnaeus is unaccount­ able, and the likeness to M. Camillus deceptive. Yet the parallel with Polyneices-Eteocles suits the identification of this Roman Tarquinius, supposing him to be a member of the royal house, better as Sextus than as either his father or his brothers. Sextus at least, we know, was killed, and killed ab ultoribus veterum simultatium. See H. Last, C.A.H., 7. 394; F. Messerschmidt, Necropolen von Vulci, 133 ff.; A. Momigliano, Claudius, 13, 85 n. 30. caedibus: 3. 57. 3 n. 60. 3 . annos quinque et viginti: for a discussion of the problems of regnal chronology see Walbank, Commentary on Polybius, pp. 665-9. L. gives the settled version of the late annalists. 60. 4. duo consules: it is generally agreed that the magistrate sub­ sequently known as the consul was originally called praetor (3. 55.12 n., 7. 3. 5 - 8 ; Festus 249 L.) and that the change was one instituted by the Decemvirate as part of the systematization of the constitution, which resulted in the need for an increased magistrature to deal with the increasing scope of government. It is, however, a matter of dispute what was the nature of the original magistracy. Gjerstad and those who down-date the end of the kingdom to 450 on archaeological grounds believe that the praetors were, like the Ephors at Sparta, elected assistants to the kings who only assumed full, independent powers sixty years later when the kings were expelled. This view, which is archaeologically unnecessary (see Introduction to Book 2), conflicts with all that can be known about the nature oiimperium and the scope of the Decemvirate. Others have held that there was a single eponymous magistrate (a dictator or magister populi) annually elected with a subordinate assistant on the analogy of Etruscan and Latin con­ stitutions but such an hypothesis runs counter to the deeply rooted belief that the dictatorship at Rome was always an extraordinary office (2. 18. 4 n.; cf. V. Groh, Athenaeum 6 (1928), 289 ff.). Furthermore, although there are peculiarities and interpolations in the early Fasti, the most remarkable feature about them is the record of families who 230

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

i. 60. 4

subsequently decline into complete oblivion (e.g. the Larch). These must be genuine. If so, they presuppose the survival of a tolerably complete list of magistrates, and the raison d'etre of such a list is afforded by the annual ceremony of marking the New Year by driving a nail into the temple of Juppiter Gapitolinus (7. 3. 8 sollemne clavi figendi) which was performed by the praetor maximus, The most satisfactory account still seems to be the traditional, that from the beginning of the Republic the supreme magistracy was collegiate and the magis­ trates were initially praetores, and later consuls. Whether the two praetores enjoyed equal status, or, as the term praetor maximus (but cf. the pontifex maximus) and the analogy of the Etruscan zilad or Oscan meddix might suggest, there was a senior and a junior colleague, is also uncertain. Again, however, in default of decisive evidence to the contrary it is more economic to accept the Annalistic version; for the collegiate principle of equal imperium was a feature of the Roman constitution which most impressed foreigners and which the Romans themselves regarded as primeval (cf. Polybius 6. 12. 11-12). The literature on the subject is extensive: good summaries in Leifer, Klio, Beiheft 23 and G. Wesenberg, R.E., 'Praetor5. See especially Beloch, Rom. Geschichte, 230 ff.; de Sanctis, Storia, 1. 404 ff.; Last, C.A.H., 7 436-41; Mazzarino, Delia Monarchia alio stato repubblicano, 86 ff.; Hanell, Das altromische eponyme Amt; Siber, Rom. Verfassung., 32-36; A. Heuss, ZeiU Sav.~ Stift. 64 (1944), 93 ff. comitiis centuriatis: see notes on 43. praefecto urbis: 59. 12 n. ex commentariis Ser. Tulli: 20. 5 n., 4. 3. 9 n. Much speculation has been devoted to the nature of these commentaries, chiefly in an attempt to show that they were an antiquarian forgery of the second century designed to uphold the consulate as a legitimate not a revolutionary office. It is known, however, that the commentarii pontificum were no more than manuals giving the procedure for the proper performance of sacrifices and ceremonies. Such commentarii seem to have been common to all the priestly colleges, e.g. the xvviri or Fratres Arvales. They were not records of what had been performed, nor recommenda­ tions as to what should be instituted, but handbooks of method and protocol. Religious observances of great antiquity were inevitably attributed to the kings, above all to Numa and Servius Tullius. As such, they were supposed to be enjoined by leges regiae and were incorporated in the Ius Papirianum. A manual, or commentary, would be needed to maintain the proper fulfilment of these observances and would be associated with the name of the legislator. It would pass from genera­ tion to generation with only minor alterations. The explanation that the commentarii were a priestly handbook suits the evidence better than the view of Mommsen (Staatsrecht, 3. 245 n. 1) that they constituted an 231

r 60. 4

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

assessment schedule of Roman citizens drawn up in the Punic Wars by the censors to bring the census up to date and bearing the name of Servius Tullius as the putative institutor of the census (cf., e.g., the censoriae tabulae of Cicero, Orator 156; Festus 290 L.). It does, however, entail that in the present passage the words ex c. S. T. be taken with creati sunt not with consules. L. is not saying that Servius left a posthumous testa­ ment, like the commentarii of Caesar used by Antony to such advantage (Cicero, Phil. 1. 2), in which he recommended the establishment of the consulate. He is rather stressing that the election was carried out properly with all the due procedure which governed the holding of valid comitia. See M. Voigt, Leges Regiae; G. Rohde, Die Kultsatzungen der Rom. Pontifices, 62 ff. L. Iunius Brutus et L. Tarquinius Collatinus: our earliest source, Polybius, gives the college as Brutus and M. Horatius (M. f. Pulvillus). He mentions them in connexion with the first treaty with Carthage (3. 22. 1 with Walbank's note). Even if that treaty is genuine—and it suits the historical setting (56. 3 n.)—it need not have carried the names of the consuls (or praetors) at its head. On the other hand, M. Horatius cannot be shaken from his position as dedicator of the Capitoline Temple (2. 8. 4 n.) and Brutus is also an historical figure.1 Since only two names at the most can have stood in the Fasti originally, Polybius is to be followed. Lucretius is open to suspicion (59. 12 n., 2. 8. 4 n.) and Valerius betrays the pretensions of his gens in claiming all the most honourable episodes of Roman history. The presence of Collatinus is harder to understand. Historians may have felt the need to include all the prominent actors in the expulsion of Tarquinius in the first college of consuls. Since Collatinus could then easily be removed like Hipparchus, son of Charmus, before the year was much advanced, he was substituted for Horatius. See Schur, R.E., 'L. Junius Brutus (46a)'. The claim of L. Junius Brutus to have been the first consul was assiduously cultivated for propaganda purposes at the time of Caesar's murder; M. Junius Brutus, or as he was then called Q . Caepio Brutus, issued coins with the legends LEIBERTAS ; and L. BRUTUS. PRIM. cos. (Sydenham nos. 1287, 1295; S. L. Cesano, Stud.

Mm.

1 (1942), 137-9)-

1

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. 7—11, 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 legendary—Horatius 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 areas—the 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

1 . 1 . potentiora: typical of a Roman's understanding of the concept of liberty; cf. [Sallust], EpisU ad Caesarem 2. 5. 3 nullius potentia super leges erat; Sallust, Or. Lepidi 4. See Wirzubski, Libertas, 7-9. 1. 2. conditores: 1. 11. 4, 30. 1, 33. 5, 44. 3. 1. 4. pastorum: the language is echoed by Gamillus in his great speech, cf. 5. 53. 9, 54. 2. The reminiscence is deliberate. The first section of the history of the Republic is closed by the repetition of words from its beginning. inviolati: 1. 8. 5 n., the asylum. 1. 6. libertatis: for the text see C.Q. 7 (1957), 77. For posse(n)t see 3. 23. 4 n. 1. 7-2. 2. Constitutional Arrangements The Fasces It was the unanimous tradition of antiquity that the Roman kings had twelvefasces (1. 8. 2 n.; D.H. 2.29,3.61-62 ; Cicero, de Rep. 2.31). Archaeological evidence shows the fasces to have been an Etruscan symbol of office and as such likely to have been introduced into Rome during the Regal period. L. is therefore to be believed when he says that the fasces were inherited from the kings. According to Roman theory there was only one real set of twelve fasces which alternated month by month between the two consuls. For the month in which he did not hold the real fasces the consul was followed, instead of preceded, by twelve lictors with 'dummy' fasces. See Samter, R.E., 'Fasces'; Staveley, Historia 5 (1956), 103 ff.; cf. 55. 3 n.; 3. 36. 3 n. But L. is wrong in stating that omnia iura, omnia insignia of the kings passed to the consuls. The consuls did not inherit the regia ornamenta, which were sometimes granted to foreign kings and were only worn by triumphators as servants of Juppiter. It is equally certain that they did not inherit their imperium from the kings. The consuls governed Rome not by the absolute authority which the kings had enjoyed but by power vested in them by the will of the people. Regnum and Respublica are irreconcilable concepts. Coli indeed argues that the later kings had on occasions possessed this limited, delegated power (imperium) when they commanded allied armies over which by the nature of the case they did not possess the same absolute authority as they did over their own peoples. His theory would explain the sources of Republican imperium and the fact that the consuls retained the insignia imperii but not the regia ornamenta. But the whole doctrine that regal potestas was of the same quality of consular imperium was an invention of Roman legalists (4. 2. 8, 3. 9 ; D.H. 6. 35, 7. 35, 9. 41, 10. 33). See Coli, Regnum = S.D.H.L 17 (1951), 1 ff.; Staveley, loc. cit. The alternation of the fasces is credited by Cicero (de Rep. 2. 55) 235

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.

The replenishment of the Senate is over-schematic and savours of Sulla's drastic action in recruiting 300 equites into the Senate in 81 B.C. (Livy, Epit. 89; D.H. 5. 77; Sallust, Catiline 37. 6). In this connexion it is notable that D.H. dissents from the account given by L. According to him it was not the Senate but the body of patricians which needed replenishing from the equites and the recruitment is attributed not to Brutus and Collatinus but to P. Valerius Poplicola. 236

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 priesthood—at 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.

24 May—QJuando) R(ex) C(omitiavit) F(as)—explained by Festus 310 L. and Varro de Ling. Lat. 6. 31 as days on which, after sacrifice, the rex came down into the comitium. T h e key to the ceremony lies in the fact that the preceding two days were the two festivals of Tubilustrium or Purifying of the Horns, festivals which marked and hallowed the opening and the closing of the traditional campaigning season. T h e rex performed the sacrifices and then came down to inspect the army before and after the campaign. Devoid of any practical relation to Rome's wars the vestigial ceremony survived throughout the religious life of the city. T h e rex lost his pre-eminence partly because his func­ tions were limited and did not expand, as could the Pontifex's, to em­ brace new religious trends such as arose in the hysteria of the Punic Wars, partly because the obligations of the office made it difficult to fill (27. 6. 16, 36. 5), and partly, no doubt, as a result of the activities of some dominating Pontifex. There may be a certain tendentious topicality in the false assertion that the rex was subordinate to the Pontifex from the beginning. T h e power of the pontificate, as wit­ nessed by the Lex Domitia of 103, was highly controversial at the end of the second century. See Wissowa, Religion, 504 ff.; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 117-19, J

95-7-

2 . 1 . necubi 1 2 2 . 2 . 3 , 16. 5, 28. 8 ^ 0/. T h e word is also corrupted in the texts of Caesar B.C. 2. 33. 2. regem sacrificolum: in inscriptions always rex sacrorum. L. has rex sacrificiorum at 9. 34. 12 and rege sacrifico, which should be emended to rege sacrificulo, at 40. 42. 8. Read sacrificulum here (6. 4 1 . 9). D.H. adds that the first rex was M ' . Papirius. T h e Papirii claimed a monopoly of the earliest religious offices. After the preliminary introduction L. turns to the successive threats against libertas which occupy chapters 2-14. Each is a self-contained episode. T h e plan may be briefly tabulated: Internal External 1. Collatinus (2). 2. T h e Conspiracy (3-5). 1. Veii and Tarquinii (6-7. 4). 3. Poplicola (7. 5-12). 2. Porsenna (9-14). 2. 2-11. The Abdication of Collatinus Macaulay noted in the margin of his Livy 'ostracism exactly' and the increase in our knowledge since the discovery of Aristotle's Ad. 77oA. adds support to Macaulay's divination. O n e of the first acts of the Athenian democracy after 510 was to proscribe the tyrant's immediate family. As a further safeguard Cleisthenes devised ostracism 238

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 family—Hipparchus, son of Charmus. So L. Tarquinius Collatinus is m a d e to give up the consulship—which 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

Districts, 257). The explanation may be provided by his cognomen. Lavinium was by tradition the foundation of Latinus and the religious links between the two cities were enduring enough to call for a variety of aetiological explanations. 2. 11. P. Valerium: 1. 60. 4 n. The consulship is false. 3-5 Vindicius and the Conspiracy at Rome Two entirely separate strains are blended in the episode of the sons of Brutus. The first is the simple tale of treachery punished by the father—with the familiar theme of public duty triumphing over private relationship. Rome, as Polybius observed (6. 54. 5), had several examples to show. The tale is self-contained but with it has been amalgamated a second, legal anecdote—the aetiological myth of manumission vindicta which provided a paradigm case of the process and an explanation of its origin. The actual mode of manumission is still disputed (5. 10 n.). According to Levy-Bruhl and others, the master made a declaration before the praetor, as the public authority, that he wished his slave to be free and the praetor, as the public authority, ratified it. According to the accepted view, which is sup­ ported by the etymology of the name, it was 'a piece of collusive litigation: the master got somebody to claim that his slave was free and made no defence, and the praetor, cooperating in the scheme, pronounced in favour of the claimant'. The Vindicii were never a gens, as far as we know, in classical Rome. A proconsul of Africa (C.I.L. 8. 970, cf. 11771, 16524, 27715) is met with and a relation of Sidonius Apollinaris (EpisL 5. 1.2). The name Vindicius is, therefore, added as a circumstantial detail to account for the name of the process rather than vice versa. It follows that the story was always told to illustrate manumission vindicta and not, as Daube holds, that the detailed mode of manumission was added in view of his name. The name is fictitious, the date and circumstances are apocry­ phal, belonging to the fantasy world of legal precedents, but the case must have been meant to be the first instance of manumission vindicta. There is some difficulty in the concluding sentence of the story (5. 1 opost ilium . . . viderentur) which in its context is taken to mean 'this was the first case of manumission vindicta which was the first process to give citizenship as well as freedom' (cf. Plutarch, Poplicola 7). In the Republic manumission vindicta certainly did make a slave into a citizen but there was another mode of manumission, censu, whereby the censor with or without the co-operation of the master entered a slave's name on the census and by this very act established him as a free citizen. It would seem to antedate manumission vindicta* D.H. (4. 22) attri­ butes manumission censu to Servius Tullius and, even if the attribution is mistaken, the principle seems implicit in the whole institution of the 814432

241

R

2. 3-5

50 9 B.C.

census. Alternatively, if the belief that manumission censu was in fact a later creation than other modes of manumission {vindicta, testamento, &c.) rightly finds favour with R o m a n lawyers, we should be forced to believe either that manumission vindicta had existed long before Vindicius' case but only now for the first time conveyed citizenship as well as freedom (so Daube) or, as seems to me to be the clear con­ struction of the story as we have it, that the authors of the Vindicius episode ignored the existence of manumission censu and overlooked its implications. For them Vindicius was the first case of manumission vindicta. For them manumission vindicta was the first process to convey both freedom and citizenship. They may have been wrong but that is what they affirmed. T h e real puzzle is the presence of the Aquilii and Vitellii. Gage would have us believe that the names represent a distorted folkmemory of an Etruscan ephebic institution at Rome modelled on the intimacy of Achilles ( = Aquillius) and Patroclus. T h e Aquilii were indeed an old family. T h e consulate of G. Aquilius in 487 (2. 40. 14) is corroborated by L. Aquilius Gornus, cos. trib. in 388 (6. 4. 7). It is true that later consular Aquilii belonged to the tribe Pomptina which was only created in 358 but old citizens were regularly assigned land in the new tribes (L. R. Taylor, Voting Districts, 66). It is quite other­ wise with the Vitellii. T h e accident that brought one of them to the throne encouraged Suetonius to preserve a store of random specula­ tions about their origin (VitelL 1). Goddesses, old Latin kings, Sabine aristocracy—all are adduced as ancestors, but the hard fact remains that there are no Vitellii in Republican history (but cf. Schulze 153). T w o are known as iiviri at Ostia 47-45 B.C. Nor is it possible to detect any family relationships between Aquilii and Vitellii and later Junii Bruti which would account for their introduction. If a guess is-to be hazarded, I would note that D.H. reads JVAA101 for Vitellii and that G. Aquillius Gallus (Pomponius, Dig. 1. 2. 2. 42) and G. Visellius Aculeo (Cicero, Brutus 264) were both pupils of Q . Mucius Scaevola, cos. 117, and among the most distinguished legal experts of their day. If L. or his source named Aquilii and Visellii, the interpolation be­ comes a pleasing heraldic compliment to two legal families and the corruption to Vitellii intelligible. In any event the addition of the two names to the story cannot be earlier than c. 80 B.C. T h e lateness of the anecdote is perhaps betrayed by the assumption that slaves were common in domestic service (5. 22. 1 n.). A further pointer to L.'s source is provided by the fact that in D.H. and Plutarch Vindicius makes his confessions not to the consuls in their official capacity but personally to P. Valerius Poplicola who was still at the time a private individual. Valerius can only have been invested with such personal standing by Valerius Antias so that 242

509 B.C.

2-3-5

Licinius Macer is likely to be L.'s source here. The consecration of the Campus Martius in 5. 2 contradicts 1. 44. 1 which is Valerian. L. him­ self has worked over the material and created what has been likened to the work of 'un dramaturge moderne'. Time and scene are unified. The events are telescoped to a few days (4. 5. pridie: in D.H. they are spread over a long period) and the action is confined to Rome whereas in D.H. the scene shifts from Rome to Etruria and back again. Above all, L. isolates it from the Collatinus episode. The chronology which put Collatinus' resignation before the conspiracy may already have been in his source, but L. makes Vindicius a slave of the Vitellii not of the Aquilii who were nephews of Collatinus (D.H., Plutarch), and likewise situates the action in the house of the Vitellii. This connects the whole plot closely with the person of Brutus: for Brutus had married a sister of the Vitellii (4. 1). In his telling of the story L., as so often, gives it a contemporary air by recapturing the atmosphere of more recent events. The interception of the letters may be an old element in the story for such things are stock occurrences in Greek history (e.g. in the Ionian revolt) but it has been coloured by the famous incident of the Allobroges in the Catilinarian conspiracy (Cicero, in CatiL 3. 10; Sallust, Catil. 44-45). The same contemporary flavour may be noticed in the language which is redolent of late Republican oratorical technique and makes the whole episode, an exemplum nobile sceleribus arcendis, contrast effectively with the archaicstyle stories which precede and follow it. For 3. 2 tenui loco orti cf. Cicero, pro S. Rose. 50; Verr. 3. 86; for 3. 3 licentiam . . . libertatem see 3. 9. 2-13 n.; for 3. 4 laxamenti. . . veniae cf. pro Cluentio 89; for 4. 4 manifestum . . .fecerunt cf. pro Cluentio 54; for 4. 5 remotis arbitris cf. Sallust, Catil. 20. 1; Cicero, de Off. 3. 112; for 4. 6 rem coarguere cf. pro S. Roscio 83. See 3.311. One further point is noteworthy. Whereas the other sources record that Brutus looked on unmoved at the death of his children, L. with a more perceptive grasp of psychology allows him a true conflict of emotions (5. 8 n.). See Burck 5 3 ; Klotz 221; Rh. Mus. 87 (1938), 4 4 ; Gage, Huit Recherches, 119 ff.; Klebs, R.E., 'Aquilius' (2); Gundel, R.E., 'Vitellius'; for the legal issues the chief discussion is by Daube, J.R.S. 36 (1946), 57-76; see also De Visscher, Nouvelles etudes (1949), 122; E. Volterra, Studi Paoli, 706 n. 1. 3 . 2 . erant: 33. 5 n., the formal beginning of a narrative. 3. 3 . legem: the contrast between the impersonal character of the law and the more accomodating nature of a monarch was a conventional TQTTOS (cf. Plato, Politicus 294 a ff.). Cf. also the proverbial ferrea tura. 3. 4. modum excesseris: 2. 2, an unconscious repetition (1. 14. 4 n.). 2

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, Taracia—all 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 Trvpo6po$ applied to Tarentum because of its sulphurous springs was misconstrued as irvpo6po$. 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

began by grasping it and saying (e.g. if it were a slave) 'hunc ego hominem ex iure Quiritium meum esse aio; secundum quam causam, sicut dixi ecce tibi vindictam imposuV (Gaius 4. 16-17; t n e punctuation is contro­ versial). It is commonly assumed that in this phrase vindicta denotes a rod (virga orfestuca) with which the plaintiff touched the object thereby asserting his claim, but the evidence for this meaning is dubious and late. In all such proceedings the normal action which accompanied a claim was a token display of force (manus iniectio; cf. 3. 44. 1 ff. with notes). Etymologically vindex = vin-dex (cf. index), from which vindicate and other forms are derived. But the root vin defies explanar lion, fine ('family'; cf. Fingal) and vina ('debt'; cf. Lett, vaina) have been proposed but the most satisfactory accounts connect it with vis, vim. See the discussions in Walde-Hofmann and Ernout-Meillet. I would postulate a verb *vindicere parallel to vindicate and a noun vindicta formed by the omission of some substantive such as lis, which often meant the subject of a lawsuit. Hence agereper vindictam would be £ to proceed by way of a formal assertion of claim*, vindicta seems to have come to mean 'a rod' by a confusion between the phrases agere per festucam and agereper vindictam. The parallel of name between manumission vindicta and legis actio per vindictam must imply that the former was a form of trial, if only collusive. See further Noailles, Fas et Ius, 45-90; Jolowicz, Historical Introduction to Roman Law, 183. ita: the language is properly legal. Daube compares the Lex Salpensana 5: qui ita manumissus erit liber esto. Karsten, following the hint of the Renaissance editors, called attention to the difficulty of observaturn in the sense 'the rule was maintained'. It occurs only here in L. and elsewhere in Suetonius, Aug. 57.1 accept his correction hocservatum; cf. 3. 36. 3 decemviri servassent ut. . .. 6-7, 4. The War against Veii and Tarquinii The first threat to libertas from outside came with an attempt by Veii and Tarquinii to restore Tarquin to his throne. It culminated in the mystical voice from the Silva Arsia. Whatever historical truth there be in the war will depend ultimately upon stories told about the grove. It is not in itself unreasonable to suppose that the Tarquins would have found a willing response from neighbouring governments to restore them to the throne, just as Hippias had no lack of backers after 510. Nor are the cities named, Veii and Tarquinii, improbable. The tyrants had family connexions with Tarquinii and an aggressive Rome could threaten Veii's salt-trade. It is true, as Fell pointed out, that in 5. 16. 2 (397 B.C.) the Tarquinienses are described as novi hostes exorti but such a judgement is understandable after the lapse of 247

2. 6-7- 4

509 B.C.

120 years. Nor is Cicero's silence as to the part played by Tarquinii significant. It is not by such minutiae that the credibility of the story should be determined. It stands or falls by the Silva Arsia (7. 2 n.). The grove is not otherwise mentioned and its site cannot be fixed. But such talking trees, common in all religion (e.g. Dodona; cf. also Plato, Phaedrus 275 b ; Shakespeare, Macbeth 3. 4. 122), were especially frequent at Rome (Lucretius 4. 580 H . ; Virgil, Aeneid 7. 81 ff.; Cicero, de Divin. 1. 1 o 1). Cicero goes so far as to say £ saepe Faunorum voces exauditae' and reports of such utterances (Fatuus; cf. Servius, ad Aen. 6- 775> 7- 47? 8. 3*4) were officially entered in the lists of prodigies which formed part of the Annales. T h e prodigy is cited, for instance, among those preceding Pharsalia (Virgil, Georgics 1. 476: see 1. 31. 2 n.). Somewhat similar is the prophetic voice of Aius Locutius. It is equally true that groves of Silvanus were hallowed in Rome (Plautus, AuluL 674, 766, translating Ilavos dvrpov; Virgil, Aeneid 8. 597 ff.; C.I.L. 6. 610; 12. 103 : but see 7. 2 n.). We can, therefore, say no more than that the story is inherently probable and of considerable antiquity. L. continues to follow a different source from D.H. (7. 2 n.). For him the story serves two purposes: it is one of a series of threats to R o m a n libertas and it is a parable to illustrate the much-debated philosophical problem 'is bravery compatible with anger?' (Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 4. 4 8 - 5 0 ; Seneca, de Ira 1. 11. 1-8). L. follows Cicero in allowing that Brutus was brave, although this was rejected by strict Stoicism. These two purposes dictate his composition. He introduces the description of Tarquin's appeal to the Etruscan cities (6. 1-3), which has no counterpart in D.H., to match the similar appeal to Porsenna in 9. 1-3. He builds u p the scale of the battle and the magnitude of the danger to Rome, and, instead of naively highlighting Brutus' qualities by a funeral oration ( D . H . ; Plutarch, Poplicola 9), he allows them to be revealed in the action. T h e battle itself is decided for L. by human factors: the divine element, which convention could hardly oust, scepticism relegates to an appendix (7. 2 - 3 ; cf. the similar technique in 5. 21. 8). See Fell, Etruria, 8 3 ; Schachermeyr, R.E., 'Tarquinius (4)'; Burck 53-54; Lucot, R.£.L. 33 (1955), 129-32. 6. 2. ne se ortum: so N. In the parallel passage L. writes (9. 1): ne se (the Tarquins) oriundos ex Etruscis eiusdem sanguinis nominisque . . . exulare pateretur (Porsenna). Here too se must refer to the subject of the main sentence (Tarquin), despite suos later in the sentence which refers to the inhabitants of Veii and Tarquinii; cf. 1. 26. 9, 4. 4 1 . 12, 43. 2. 2. All interpretations based on taking se as Veientes Tarquiniensesque must fail (e.g. se (abl.) ortum Weissenborn, Bayet = *un homme sorti d ' e u x ' ; ex se ortum Drakenborch, Conway). But ortum cannot be 248

5 09 B.C.

2. 6. 2

£

left without further definition ( do not a b a n d o n me descended as I a m ' ) . Some word or words have fallen out. Madvig's se ab se ortum is too severe, M . Muller's indidem too clever. Neither Sigonius's ab Us, Wesenberg's ab ipsis, or Zingerle's ex ipsis convinces. T h e similarity of 9. 1 calls for a clear-cut reference—ex Etruscis (Weinkauff) or e Tuscis (M. Muller). For a similar corruption cf. 3. 13. 8 n. Etruscis could be omitted before Eiusdem. ne se ortum e(x) . . . is unassailable. extorrem, egentem: the language is pleading and pathetic, extorris (5. 30. 6, 7. 4. 4, 9. 34. 3 et al.) is founl sparingly It is never applied objectively to describe an exile, only in contexts where the reader's sympathies are to be enlisted (Titinius fr. 76; Turpilius fr. 9 6 ; Accius, fr. 333 per terras vagus, extorris, regno exturbatus; Lucretius 3. 48 with Bailey's note). It is unique in Cicero (Verr. 3. 120) while Sallust puts it into the mouth of the abject Adherbal (Jugurtha 14. 11); cf. Tacitus, Annals 1. 53. egentem is ambiguous (see the note by Landgraf, Archiv f. Lat. Lex. 7 (1890), 275 ff., being derived either from egeo ('being in need') or e(x)gens ('being separated from one's family'). Apart from 9. 1, the context indicates elsewhere the meaning 'needy'; cf. 2. 25. 6, 8. 19. 14, 8. 26. 5, 10. 18. 8, 22. 9. 3, 26. 33. 8, 34. 31. 14. It must surely be so here and at 9. 1 also. T h e plight of the refugee is a rhetorical commonplace; cf. Sallust, loc. cit. For extorrem, egentem cf. Virgil, Aeneid 1. 384 ipse ignotus, egens; Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 3. 3 9 ; de Fin. 2. 105, 5. 84. For cadentis spei cf. Afranius, fr. 350; Ovid, Her. 9. 4 2 ; it is significantly not found elsewhere in prose; for scelerata coniuratione cf. Lentulus, ad Fam. 12. 14. 6. ante oculos suos: coming after Brutus' self-control the irony must be intentional. 6. 3 . nemo unus: 'no one at all'. 6. 7. infiammatus: cf. Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 1. 42. Arruns' language is as melodramatic as his behaviour. For ipse en Me cf. Seneca, Medea 995; for magnifice incedit cf. Sallust, Jug. 31. 10. ultores: 1. 59. 10, 2. 24. 2, 3. 2. 4. 6. 10. aequo Marte: 40. 14 n. 6. 1 1 . Tarquiniensis: the collective substantive is unexpected but may be paralleled by 9. 4 1 . 5 where Volsiniensium castella is immediately preceded by Tarquiniensem. Alan's Tarquinienses involves a change of number to the singular stetit, inadequately supported by Sallust, Jugurtha 82. 1. 7. 2. silva Arsia: so also Val. Max. 1. 8. 5 confirming the reading of N. Plutarch has Ovpaov dXaos; D.H. Spvfxog Upog yjptoos 'Opdrov. T h e locality is unknown. D.H.'s account savours of a rationalization that attempted to connect the name with the Horatii, so that he cannot be used as evidence for the devotion of that gens to wood (Gage, Hommages 249

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 libertas—the 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

Such a strong tradition cannot be disregarded. It served to in­ corporate an explanation of the dipping of the fasces to the people (7. 7 n.). L., who is clearly not following Valerius Antias, nor Atticus 5 history of the gens Junta, makes a brief d r a m a of it. T h e theme is non obstabunt P. Valerii aedes libertati vestrae. The central act is a speech— a traditional feature (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 53)—but rephrased by L. to suit the nature of his theme and the oratorical temper of the speaker (7. 8 n.). 7. 5» ut sunt: 8. 24. 6, 24. 25. 8, L. introduces the narrative, as often (2. 2 n.) 3 with a generalization for which cf. Caesar, B.G. 3. 8. 3 ; Tacitus, Annals 1. 28. It is as old as Thucydides 2. 65. 4. 7. 6. Velia: the north-eastern spur of the Palatine, reckoned as one of the seven hills of the Septimontium (Festus 458, 476 L.). Its name, like that of the city Velia, is perhaps to be derived from a root akin to Gr. lAos 'marsh'. T h e Forum was once a marsh. For the ancient de­ rivations see Varro, de Ling. Lai. 5. 54. See also Radke, R.E., 'Velia ( 3 ) ' ; Platner-Ashby s.v. fieri: N has fieri fore. Hertz overlooked a typical Nicomachean gloss and conjectured fieri foro (cf. D.H. 5. 19). Earlier editors preferred fore but fieri is confirmed by 1. 33. 6. 7. 7. submissis foscibus: the dipping of the fasces before the sovereign people is not attested in historical times although Plutarch (Poplicola 10) writes rovro \Lt\pi vvv hta^vXdrrovaLv ol apxovres. It may be presumed, for the complimentary dipping of the fasces before a mains imperium is acknowledged (Cicero, Brutus 2 2 ; Pliny, N.H. 7.112 (metaphorical)). An historical origin is invented for a constitutional practice. escendit: ascendit N. At 28. 6 M has in tribunal esc, TTX asc, and the same disagreement occurs at 3. 47. 4. T h e corruption is common, but where the manuscripts can be trusted they show that esc. not asc. is the proper form (cf. Cicero, post Red. in Senatu 12; ad Att. 4. 2. 3 ; Q.F. 1. 2. 15). gratum: gratum id, the text of MA, must be read (Rossbach, B. Ph. W., 1920, p . 700; Ernout, Rev. Phil. 16 (1942), 183). 7. 8. audire iussis: the proceedings were opened by a call to attention like the Greek O,KOV€T€ Aea>. gloria . . . invidia: a rhetorical commonplace for which cf. Sallust, Jugurtha 55. 3 ; Nepos, Chabr. 3. 3. Similarly for 7. 9 spectata virtus cf. Catil. 20. 2 ; for 7. 10 levi momento cf. Caesar, B.G. 7. 39. 3 ; for fundata fides cf. Lucretius 1. 4 2 3 ; for ubi sim quam qui sim cf. 1. 4 1 . 3 ; Seneca, Epist. 28. 4. T h e alliteration is striking. 7. 12. Vicae Potae: an old R o m a n goddess, of victory, whose festival was on 5 January. T h e ancients derived her name from vincere and potiri (Cicero, de Leg. 2. 28 ; for an alternative etymology cf Arnobius 3. 25) and identified her as Victoria (Asconius, p. 13 C ) , T h e 251

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

8. 1. Publicolae: 3. 18. 6 populi colendi. The popular etymology can hardly be correct, since the cognomen would be unique. Various modern etymologies have been proposed (e.g. a dim. of populus (Skutsch) or of Publius ( I h n e ) ; 'people's farmer' (Cornelius)) but none carries immediate conviction. Whatever its origin—and the n a m e was con­ fined to the Valerii and their relations (Meiggs, Ostia, 477)—it was used as evidence of the liberal leanings of the family. There were Greek precedents like AT^IO^IKOS to encourage the interpretation. See Volkmann, R.E., 'Valerius (302)'. 8. 4 . Sp. Lucretius', his opportune death discredits his original place in the Fasti. M. Horatius Pulvillus: the antiquity of the gens Horatia is proven (1. 24. 1 n.) and the place of M . Horatius at the head of the Fasti is guaranteed (1. 60. 4 n.). Of the man himself we can say nothing: the cognomen Pulvillus, 'a little cushion', first given by Cicero, de Domo 139, is enigmatic. Concerning his activities two difficulties arise: (1) D.H. 5. 35. 3 records that there was an inscription on the temple which named Horatius, but since there were rival traditions that Horatius dedicated it as consul (so L. here) or pontifex (Cicero, de Domo 139; Val. Max. 5. 10. 1; Seneca,Cons. adMarc. 13.1), the inscrip­ tion did not give Horatius' office. Precedent suggests that he must have been consul. (2) Nor can the inscription have given a d a t e : for Tacitus (Hist. 3. 72) and D . H . 5. 35. 3 date it to Horatius' second consulship (507), which is the same absolute date as that given by Polybius 3. 22. 1 (where see Walbank), although by Polybius' chronology that was the first year of the Republic. T h e keeping of dates in fact started with the dedication of the temple. In 303 B.C. the temple of Concord was constructed cciiii (ccciiii codd.) annis post Capitolinam dedicatam. In such chronological confusion no reconstruction can be trusted. I would point out that L. is here using Licinius Macer and that his chronology is suspect. H e dates the Porsenna war in the second year of the Republic, (P. Valerius, T. Lucretius) while D.H. puts it in the third (Valerius, M . Horatius). His lists for 507 and 506 are confused (15. 1 n.), his date for Regillus unique (21. 3 n.). I would accept 507 as the orthodox and the approximately correct date for the dedica­ tion of the Capitoline Temple. T h e denarii minted by Cn. Cornelius Blasio, which are unique in portraying the Capitoline Triad (Syden­ ham no. 561) and are to be regarded as commemorative of the 400th anniversary of the dedication of the temple, were struck in or shortly after 107 B.C. T h a t does not, however, entail rejecting Horatius' two consulships. It would be a strange coincidence that a temple so long in the making should have been ready just in time to celebrate independence. 253

2.8.5

5 09 B.C.

8. 5. apud quosdam veteres: the most recently interpolated consul was Lucretius. He is not named by Polybius or by (drawing from Republi­ can sources) Augustine (de Civ. Dei 3. 16); i.e. he was inserted towards the end of the second century. Gollatinus and Poplicola are older (cf. Cicero, de Rep. 2. 53), probably third-century, additions, memoria must be the subject oiintercido (cf. Val. Max. 5 . 2 . 1 0 ; Seneca, deBenef. 3.1.4) so that memoriam should be read. 8. 6. dedicata: technically the act of dedication was the surrender by man of 'all claim to the possession or use of something in favour of the divinity'. In the case of temples and the like the act could only be performed by consuls or magistrates with imperium (9. 46. 6) except where the people conferred special authorization on iiviri aedi dedicandae (42. 5 n.; Cicero, de Domo 130, 136). The presence of a pontifex was, as in the case of the dedication of Cicero's house, customary in order to ensure the proper performance of the ritual acts but was not strictly necessary. The pontifex did not himself dedicate the temple (despite Paulus Festus 78 L.) : he prompted the magistrate throughout. It is regularly expressed as praeeunte pontifice (C-I.L. 3. 1933; Varro de Ling. Lat. 6. 6 1 ; cf. 2. 27. 5, 9. 46. 6; Tacitus, Hist 4. 53). The act itself consisted of holding the door-post (Servius, ad Georg. 3. 16) and pronouncing the formula, a complete example of which is found in the law from Salona (C.I.L. cit.). Horatius' dedication presents points of interest. It shows that he must have been consul (or the equivalent) and not pontifex since the latter did not perform the ceremony. It is tendentious in that Horatius is selected by lot, whereas the choice was normally made by popular vote (2. 27. 5, 42. 5; cf. 4. 29. 7: Cicero, ad Att. 4. 2. 3). D.H. indeed gives a different account, that the dedicator was to be popularly selected but that in the voting Horatius cheated. L.'s source undermines this Valerian complacency by the novel doctrine that the choice was made by lot. The impassive self-control with which he greeted the news of his son's death is a literary embellishment inspired by the manner in which Xenophon heard the news about his son Gryllus (Aelian, V.H. 3. 3 with Perizonius's note). Finally, what is the significance of Horatius' perseverance? His action was treated as a precedent (Cicero, de Domo 139) and the story originated as such. In normal circumstances a death would render the whole family junesta and so unable, until purified> to perform religious acts (47. 10; Varro, de Ling. Lat 5. 23 ; Cicero, de Leg. 2. 55 ; Aul. Gell. 4. 6. 8). But Horatius was excepted—presumably on the score that he had begun the ceremony before the news was brought and he, since it was a continuous act, was for the purposes of the cere­ mony purus. 254

508 B.C. See Wissowa, R.E., pp. 209-10.

a.8.6

'Dedicatio'; Cicero, de Domo, ed. Nisbet, 9-15. War with Porsenna

For Romans the interest in the war against Porsenna centred on the three feats of Codes, Cloelia, and Scaevola—ilia 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 Cloelia—supra 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

9. 1-3. orabant: 7. 2 n. T h e Tarquins continue their plea with some oratorical commonplaces. For 'the dreary mediocrity of levelling down' cf. Veil. Pat. 2. 2. 2 ; Tacitus, Hist. 4. 4 7 ; see Otto, Sprichworter, 60. Stobaeus devotes a whole section (47) to the theme on KOXXLGTOV r) jjLovapxLCL and his illustrations range as far back as Hesiod and Homer. For aequari summa infimis cf. Ovid, Trist. 3. 10. 18; Pliny, N.H. 2. 203. 9. 4. (tuturn) : Porsenna is not concerned with the security of his own position. H e is motivated by the dignity of kingship and the pride of Etruria. By adding tuturn Conway makes an unworthy and unnecessary modification of Porsenna's attitude. 9 . 6 . annonae: the political motive is palpably an anachronistic falsifica­ tion (cf. 4. 51. 5). W h a t is more controversial is the authenticity of all these early corn-notices. T h e central discussion of the problem is by Momigliano, S.D.H.I. 2 (1936), 374-89: more recently H. leBonniec, Le Culte de Ceres a Rome, 244 ff. In addition to the present passage there are the following early allusions to the corn shortage: 496 492

D.H. 6. 17. 2-4 2.34.2-5

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

Imports from Etruria Imports from Etruscan coast, Cumae, Sicily Imports from Etruria, [Cumae], Sicily

T h e three last frumentationes are no longer seriously questioned. O n the one hand, the tradition that linked the Minucii with the corn trade is very old: on the other (and independently of it), there is explicit testimony that annona was one of the regular items in the Annales (Cato fr. 77 P.). T h e case for the earlier stands or falls by 492. Doubt has been cast on it because the consuls in 492 B.C. were T . Geganius and P. Minucius. It is observed that the Minucii were at pains to publicize their services to Rome's corn supply (cf the porticus Minucia) and that a Geganius was consul in 440 when L. Minucius was praefectus annonae. Such scruples are misplaced. T h e tradition is con­ firmed by the dedication of the temple of Ceres in 496 under direct influence from Cumae, which is constantly cited in the notices as a source of grain (21. 5 n.) and by divergent chronologies in D . H . 6. 17. 2-4 as to the R o m a n embassy to Sicily which indicate that it 256

5 08 B.C.

2.9.6

was recorded independently in Greek sources. T h e only documented famine at Athens during the period is probably to be dated to 445/4 (27 Aristophanes, Vesp. 718: I.G. i 2 . 31) but there is no reason why Greek and R o m a n famines should coincide. In short, even if the motive for fabrication is there, the means are not available. With Meiggs (Ostia, 481) I see no good reason to question them. T h e present importation is perhaps a special case like the other events purporting to date from the very first years of the Republic, but the provisions about salt (see below) which accompany it look authentic. Like the census figures in 1. 44. 2 (n.), they may come from some very early tabula but not actually be dated to 508. Volscos: being hill-people, they are a surprising (and, therefore, plausible) quarter to seek grain from. A forger could not have chosen t h e m : for they were in Roman tradition the lifelong foes of Rome. satis: the control of the salt trade in the Republic is a mystery which the sparseness of the evidence only serves to deepen. It is stated by L. (29. 37. 3) that the price of salt in 204 was regulated by the censors— an archival fact which will have been preserved in the Annales. T h e supervision of its sale and distribution was in the hands of state officials, called salinatores aerarii (Cato ap. [Servius], ad Aen. 4. 244), while the actual supply and production were undertaken by conductores salinarum or salarii, usually freedmen. T h e state monopoly continued un­ changed through the Empire (Cod. lust 4. 61.11), but how far back into the Republic it extended we have no information. T h e present notice might be no more than a throw-back to provide a precedent for later control but Porsenna's invasion and the Latin W a r will have jeopar­ dized Rome's salt supplies which depended solely on the small colony at Ostia (1. 33. 6 n.). W h a t were to be Rome's main salt-beds in later times were not available to her. Since salt matters did figure in the Annales, I would believe this note to be documentary and to come from some early tabula, if not from 508. See Bliimner, R.E., 'Salz'; Clerici, Economia e Finanza, 459 ff. omne sumptum: omni sumptu N . T h e sense is clear: the control of the price of salt was entrusted to public authorities (the consuls or, later, the censors) and taken out of the hands of private speculators. T h e chiastic antithesis between in publicum and privatis limits the scope of correction by ensuring that quia . ♦ . venibat 'because it was being sold at exorbitant prices' is a self-contained clause. Two lines of approach are open: (1) accepting omni sumptu we are forced to assume that it is part of an abl. abs. with the verb missing (recepto Clericus; translato or redacto Doering; suscepto M . Muller). But the meaning remains laboured: 'all the expense being transferred to the state'. It can hardly be seriously suggested that the state was going to 814432

257

s

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

emotion at the execution of his children, so Codes deserves that the rewards of his heroism should be unalloyed. Secondly, where D.H. relates it in a pedestrian style with fussy details about his relations and qualifications, L. gives a vivid drama, stressing Codes 5 courage and culminating in his appeal to the god which has no counterpart in D.H. ( I O - I I ) . As befits an old-time hero Codes speaks in power­ fully coloured tones (io. 3-4 nn., 10. 11 n.). 10, 1. alia . . . alia: neuter plural, 'some (sections) seemed adequately protected by walls, others by the barrier formed by the Tiber' or, perhaps better, abl. sing., 'in one direction (everything) seemed adequately protected by walls, in the other by the Tiber 5 . So Linsmayer. 10, 2. sublicius: 1. 33. 6 n. 10. 3 . qui: after giving the general situation in short, simple sentences L. begins his account with a complex series of subordinate clauses leading up to H. 5 s appeal to his fellow soldiers (testabatur). The first action is signalized by the forceful vadit (10. 5 n.) emphatically placed at the head of its sentence. 10. 4. transitumpontem: 'if they left the bridge in their rear (unbroken) after they had crossed it5. The use of the participle seems, as Gronovius says, legitimate: cf. 21. 43. 4, 23. 28. 9. The deletion of either transitum (Vielhaber) or pontem (Clericus) is uncalled for and neither Nannius 5 transitui nor Postgate5s ponte can easily be paralleled. ferro,igni: 1. 59. 1 n. 10. 5. vadit: 1. 7. 7 n. cedentiumpugna:pugnaeN, corrected by Gronovius; but L. rarely uses cedo with the plain abl. 'to leave5 (cf. 2. 10; but contrast 47. 2 ex acie cessit). cedo with dat. 'to give way before5 is common (cf. 4. 33. 3) and should be retained here. 10. 6. Sp. Larcium: the name is Etruscan (C.I.L. i 2 . 1087, 1570, 1958) and the Larcii are but one of many Roman gentes of undoubted Etrus­ can origin. For his later history see 11. 7-10, 15. 1. In reporting him and his brother T. Larcius, the manuscripts vary between -cius, -tius, and -gius (see Conway's note in the O.C.T.). In all places -cius should be restored. See Miinzer, R.E.y 'Larcius (4) 5 . The gens is lost to view until the late Republic. T. Herminium: another Etruscan family (cf. Virgil, Aeneid 11. 642; Sil. Ital. 5. 580: see Schulze 173). For his doings cf. 11. 7-10, 20. 8; D.H. 5. 26. 4 ascribes to him a corn embassy. The consul of 448 (3. 65. 2 n.) may be son or grandson but otherwise the family dies out. In the presence of two Etruscans in the Fasti it would be quite wrong to divine that Porsenna imposed a government of his own choice on Rome. See Miinzer, R.E., 'Herminius5. claros genere factisque: 8. 7. 2, 9. 7. 2. 259

2. 10. 7

508 B.C.

10. 7. coegit: Codes. 10. 8. circumferens: as the climax approaches the language becomes more poetical. T h e whole scene has, as editors have noted, much in common with the description of Hector breaking through the Greek wall {Iliad 12. 440-71). Cf. especially 10. 4 pontem . . ♦ interrumpant with 4 4 0 - 1 ; 10. 8 circumferens . . . oculos with 4 6 6 ; 10. 10 ingenti gradu with 458 ev Sta^a?. It was probably mediated to L. through Ennius for the language contains much that is characteristic of Latin poetical usage. For circumferens oculos cf. Virgil, Aeneid 12. 5 5 8 ; Ovid, Met. 6. 169, 15. 674; for truces minaciter oculos cf. Lucan 7. 2 9 1 ; Silius 3. 76; for proceres see 2. 46. 7 n . ; for detrudere cf. Plautus, Merc. 116; Virgil, Aeneid 9. 510; cf. also 28. 3. 7. T h e whole passage is imitated by Amm. Marcellinus 31. 13. 4. 10. 9. cunctati: notice the typically Livian pause to provide an almost mechanical TrepwrcVeta (9. 32. 5, 37. 43. 4). 10. 1 1 . ' Tiberine pater': cf. Virgil, Aeneid 8. 72-73 : * Tuque, 0 Thybri tuo genitor cumfiumine sancto, Accipite Aenean.' Macrobius 6. 1. 12 expressly says that Virgil is here modelling himself on Ennius ( = Ann. 54 V.), who may be assumed to have been treating of Codes. Servius remarks that at times of drought prayer was offered to the Tiber with the formula 'adesto Tiberine cum tuis u n d i s \ I t is likely, therefore, that Ennius, as often, has adapted an old prayer formula. T h e story of Codes was in origin the myth of a religious ceremony (see above). T h e poetic character of Codes' prayer is further seen in the re­ markable use of hum militem = me, for which see Nisbet on de Domo 5. It is found both in light (Terence, Heaut. 356) and solemn contexts (Ennius, Ann. 216 V.) but never in ordinary prose and cannot be paralleled from L. Here it is eased by haec arma. sic armatus: 'in full armour as he w a s ' ; cf. Cicero, pro Roscio Amer. 71 sic nudos. T h e juxtaposition of ita sic led Novak to delete sic, Heerwagen to write ita sicut. 10. 12. statua: Pliny (JV./f. 34. 29) says that the first honorary statue erected in Rome was of Horatius Codes and that it was still standing in his own day. It represented a bronze warrior in full armour. This is probably the same statue as that moved from the comitium to the Area Vulcani (see above). T h e statue may date from the sixth century, for such figures both in sculpture and in architecture were fashionable then (Richter, Etruscan Terracotta Warriors, 7 ff.; E. H . Richardson, Mem. Am. Acad. Rome 21 (1953), 99-100). But it cannot have been a statue of Codes. In Greece the earliest statue in honour of a dead m a n was only erected in 509 (Pliny, N.H. 34. 17 Harmodius and 260

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 Lucretius—for both men were to the south of the Etruscan position near the Porta Esquilina—but 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.

Naevia: cf. Varro, de Ling, Lai. 5. 163; Festus 170 L. According to the ancients it got its name from Naevius quidam but there is no further elucidation. It was situated on the Aventine. 11. 10. effuse evagandi: the sense is 'wandering at random'—evagor is only used of issuing from a place (22. 47. 2, 23. 47. 5). L. has effusi vagari at 38. 48. 5, 42. 55. 5 and vagandi should be read here (see Wolfftin, Bursians Jahresbericht 3 (1874), 737). 12-13. 5. C. Mucius Scaevola Compared with Codes the history of Scaevola's feat is a more complex affair. As Festus shows (104 L.), the etymology will only work in Greek, and the story is older than either cognomina or the familiar usage of Greek. The first historical Mucius Scaevola was praetor in 215 so that there is a gap of 250 years between his family and his reputed ancestor. There may have been a direct descent. The usual praenomen among the later Much* Scaevolae was Q,. or P. but a C. Mucius Scaevola is mentioned as xvvir s.f. at the ludi saeculares of 17 B.C., and there is no significance in the fact that the gens Mucia was plebeian while L. implies that Scaevola was a patrician. That is but a part of the normal falsification which excluded all plebeians from early government. None the less it is hard to believe that the story could have been passed on for so long within the gens. We should look for the origin of it elsewhere. The heart of the story is the plunging of the right arm into the flame on the altar (cf. the legate Pompeius and King Genthius in c. 168: Val. Max. 3. 3. 2). The burning of the right arm can have only one significance. It is the punishment for the breaking of an oath or pledge. From the earliest times the famines sacrificed to Fides manu ad digitos usque involuta (1. 21. 4 n.; cf. Servius, ad Aen. 1. 292: see also Wissowa, Religion, 134). Nor are parallels for such penalties scarce. Munzer adduces the story of Rudolph of Swabia. More familiar is the gesture of Cranmer. It follows that the original story of C. Mucius was a story about his punishment for perjury and, we may be sure, his heroism in enduring it. Whether it had any connexion with Porsenna is uncertain but not impossible (13. 5 n.). The present form of the story, the attempted assassination of Porsenna, is an early-third-century fabrication con­ trived, like so many others, under the influence of Greek legend. The entry in disguise into the enemy's camp is reminiscent of the legend of Codrus, king of Athens (see also 12. 2 n.). The presence and dignity of the secretary in attendance on Porsenna is purely hellenistic, as Bayet observes (cf. Nepos, Eumenes 1.5). The famous history of Cynegeirus in Herodotus 6. 114 may also have contributed, and antiquarian curiosity appended the Mucia prata (13. 5 n.). 262

508 B.C.

2. 12-13. 5

In substantially the present form it circulated from 200 onwards, and was retailed by Cassius Hemina (fr. 16 P . ; cf. Cicero, Sest. 4 8 ; Parad. 12). For L. the climax is the dialogue between Mucius and the king and he leads up to it with the minimum of delay. D.H., keeping closer to his original, narrates how the whole plot was debated and approved in the Senate. This is repetitious and destroys the element of surprise. Prosaically he explains that Mucius spoke Etruscan and he allows Mucius to exploit that gift in several rambling discourses. By contrast, L. paints a vivid picture of a proud and enterprising Roman, motivated by indignatio at Rome's shame rather t h a n driven to desperate measures by her plight. H e is not afraid to assert him­ self and, when he speaks, he speaks with the grandeur of an ancient hero (12. 5 n., 12. g n.). See Burck 56-57; W. F. Otto, Wien. Stud. 34 (1912), 320 ff.; Munzer, R.E., 'Mucius (10)'. 12. 1. obsidio: the preliminary situation is summarized in a long subordinate sentence (1-4), which clears the ground for the actual action. So also the complex sentences in 7-8 prepare the way for the dramatic g ff. For this technique cf. 10. 3. 1 2 . 2 . C. Mucius: D.H. 5. 25. 4 gives him the cognomen Cordus (Kohpos according to the manuscripts). So a l s o Z B o b . Cicero,pro Sestio, 131 St. Cf. Plutarch, Poplicola 17. 8 AdyvoSajpos 6 Udv8a>vos iv TO) irpos 'O/craoviav . . . /ecu 'Oijilyovov ( = Cordus; cf. Quintilian 1. 4. 25) (hvo^daOai 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 Anio—for there were other members in quite different areas of Italy who were added subsequently to the tribe—were 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 XP°VC9 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 Volscians by Tarquin ( i . 4 1 . 7 n., 53. 2). Since it was ethnically a Latin town, it might loosely be described as a colonia Latina but in the doublet of this passage (22. 2), it is once again in Volscian hands. This is a much more likely account on three grounds: the Volscians, like the Sabines, took advantage of the confusion caused by Porsenna's invasion and the Fall of the Tarquins to encroach on the Latin plain; the Aurunci are nowhere in the neighbourhood (see below) and D . H . (5. 44-47) knows only a Sabine war which he describes at length. Cora: mod. Cori, on the north-western edge of the Volscian moun­ tains. It was a Latin community (Virgil, Aeneid 6. 775: Origo Gentis Romanae 17. 6) which claimed Trojan ancestry (Pliny, JV.H. 3. 63). It was a member of the Latin League of Aricia (Catofr. 58 P.) and con­ sequently was for a while in the sphere of R o m a n influence, but, like Pometia, lying as it did on the outskirts ofLatium, it was peculiarly exposed to attack. It is therefore no surprise to find it falling to the Volsci in 495 and, after its recovery, subscribing to the Latin treaty of Sp. Cassius (D.H. 5. 61). Apart from an assault by the Privernates in 330 (8. 19. 5), it continued a peaceful and undistinguished existence down to the Empire. Its antiquity is confirmed archaeologically, for the cyclopean wall is earlier than the mid-fourth century (Blake, Ancient Roman Construction, 94) and there are 'Villanovan' burials. See Hulsen, R.E., 'Cora'. Auruncos: the Aurunci, in Greek Avaoves, hence Ausones, were an Oscan tribe, who inhabited a region south of the Volsci, between the Liris and the Volturnus. At an early date their contact with the cities of Magna Graecia spread their name in the Greek world so that it was accepted as the name of the inhabitants of the whole of middle Italy. T h e capital of the people was Suessa (mod. Sezza). T h e Aurunci could not possibly have interfered in the affairs of Cora and Pometia at this juncture. T h e whole story arises from a mistaken attempt to connect the name Suessa with the false name for Pometia, Suessa Pometia (1. 4 1 . 7 n.). See Hulsen, R.E., 'Aurunci'. 1 6 . 9 , trecenti: 300 is the traditional number in legend for hostages: cf. the 300 Corcyrean boys in Herodotus 3. 48. triumphatum: by saying 'a triumph was held' rather than 'the consuls triumphed' (16. 1), L. implies that only one consul triumphed. This is the view of Licinius Macer (fr. 9 P . ; D . H . 5. 47. 3) who says that Menenius was accorded a triumph, Postumius an ovatio—TOTC -n-pwrov, J)9 AIKIVVIOS loTopet, TOVTOV i^evpovarqs TOV Qpiaixfiov TTJs /3ov\rjs.

The

Fasti Triumphales record: P. Postumiu[s Q.f.-n. Tubert]us ann. CCL cos. II o\vans de Sabinei]s III non. Apr. Agrippa M\enenius C.f.-n. Lanjatus ann. CCL cos. de[Sabineisprid]ie non. Apr. 276

503 B.C.

2. iG. 9

Licinius' motives in investigating the origins of the ovatio were not unmixed. His kinsman M . Licinius Crassus h a d concluded the Slave W a r in 71, for which an ovatio was the conventional reward. Macer is at pains to dignify it, claiming it to be as longstanding and honourable as a triumph (Plutarch, Crassus 11-13). Licinius was approximately correct in dating the first ovatio to the early years of the Republic, for an ovatio differed from a triumph principally in the fact that the general did not wear the triumphal toga of Juppiter and the kings but the praetexta, that he did not carry a sceptre, that he walked on foot instead of riding in a quadriga, that he was crowned with myrtle not laurel, and that he led rather than followed the procession. In other respects the ceremony resembled a triumph but these differences minimized its regal character, as would have been fitting in the early days of the Republic. Such an account of its origin is more plausible than the ancient theory, to be attributed to Varro, that the ovation was quasi Venerius quidam triumphus (AuL GelL 5. 6. 22; Pliny, JV.H. r 5 - I2 5)> a triumph accorded for a bloodless victory, myrtle being sacred to Venus, since bloodless victories were only one of several pretexts for which ovations were decreed. Successful generals invari­ ably applied for a triumph but the decision whether to award a triumph or an ovation rested with the Senate who were guided partly by precedents—triumphs were not awarded when hostium nomen humile et non idoneum est, ut servorum piratarumque—but chiefly by political jealousies and partly by strife. See Rohde, R.E., 'Ovatio'. L. records ovations in 462 (3. 10. 4), 421 (4. 43. 2), 410 (4. 53. 11), and 390 (5. 31. 4 ) ; others are mentioned in 487 (D.H. 8. 67. 10) and 474 (Fast. Triumph.; D.H. 9. 36. 3). T h e entries look authentic. 1 7 . 1 . Opiter Verginius: the first of that important gens to be mentioned. Of Etruscan origin (Schulze 100), they probably came to Rome with the Tarquins. They are usually listed as patricians (e.g. by Broughton) but as with the Menenii this is an a priori assumption and later members of the gens are certainly plebeian. For the praenomen cf. Paulus Festus 201 L. cuius pater avo vivo mortuus est. In the divergent account of this year which D.H. (5. 49) gives, Verginius was responsible for the cap­ ture of Cameria. He is one of nine persons whose cremation, appa­ rently after being surprised and killed in a battle against the Volsci in 486, is said by Festus (180 L.) to have been commemorated on a stele near the Circus. No certain genealogy of his relationship with the other Verginii can be established. See Gundel, R.E., 'Verginius (17)'. Sp. Cassius: the first and only Cassius in the early history of the Republic. T h e authorities variously report his cognomen as Vicellinus, Vecellinus, or Viscellinus. Vecellinus is the best form, and is probably formed from a place-name (cf. MedulJinus). Weissenborn connected 277

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 exercitum—sed 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 repunctuation—sed 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

explained as a negligence, I think Sigonius should be followed. Pettersson's citation of i o . 15. 11 is irrelevant. 17. 7. triumpharunt: in the Fasti only Sp. Cassiu[s -f—n Vicellinu]s ann. CCLI cos. d[e Sabineis?]. 18. 1. Postumum Cominium: his name is rightly given by Cicero, pro Balbo 5 3 ; de Rep. 2. 5 7 ; Festus 180 L. N both here and at 33. 3 reads Postumius Cominius but it is unlikely that L . could have understood Postumius to be a praenomen and -ins for -us is a common corruption. T h e Cominii were a plebeian family who occur at rare but regular intervals (cf. 5. 46. 8 n. (Pontius Cominius); 8. 30. 6 ; Cicero, Brutus 2 7 1 ; pro Cluentio 100-2). They are Etruscan (cf. cumni; Schulze 108) and Cominii are found at Praeneste (C.LL. 14. 3101). T. Larcium: a brother of Sp. 18. 2. scorta: Conway comments that 'wild behaviour at the games often gave rise to disturbances' and quotes Cicero, pro Plancio 30 and Tacitus, Annals 14. 17. But the story bears too close a resemblance to the R a p e of the Sabine Women. T h a t event was commemorated or re-enacted at the games of the Consualia (1. 9. 10 n.) and the cry 'SabinaeP was part of it. I hazard the view that this anecdote derives from what was taken to be a documentary notice in the Annales about the Consualia. It is quite unknown to D . H . (5. 50. 1). spectare res videbatur: the text as given by N is sound but inelegant. For the repetition re . . . res cf. 2. 47. 12. It is not an instance of de­ liberate avTt,fjL€Tdd€(Tis (traductio) as is generally claimed. Bayet reads spectari videbatur but see Ernout, Rev. Phil. 16 (1942), 183-4: spectari is never found impersonally. 18. 3 . supra belli Latini metum: in this much disputed passage two things stand o u t : (1) supra cannot be used for super 'on top of, in addition to' (cf. 27. 10 et al.); (2) the Latin W a r which is feared is the conspiracy of the Thirty Peoples led by Octavius Mamilius re­ ferred to in the following sentence (as printed in the O.C.T.). It is, then, nonsense to take supra . . . metum with the succeeding sentence, 'surpassing their fear of a Latin war was the additional news that the Thirty People were conspiring 5 , since the fear in question is precisely the fear engendered by the news. At the very least it would be neces­ sary to read Sabini for Latini, with the Editio Princeps. T h e same objection applies to Duker's proposed super for supra (Lallamand, Crevier, Madvig, H . J . Muller). T h e conspiracy under Octavius was not in addition to the fear of a Latin w a r : it was what occasioned that fear. O n the other hand, common sense is against those who like Wex and Weissenborn attach supra . . . metum to the preceding sen­ tence. T h e disturbances at Rome were, we may be sure, disquieting but they could not be regarded as more serious than a concerted 279

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,

which only contains 29. Stephanus proposed TappaKivwv as the missing name, but Signia or Pometia are other candidates. T h e date is not in itself unreasonable. T h e menace of the Hernici and the Volsci and the leadership of Tarquinius Superbus were factors that would have tended to expand and unify the league. But the list as it stands contains anachronisms. Ardea for one did not rejoin till later (4. 7. 10 n.) and Norba as well as Setia are also possible late­ comers. It may be that as further Latin towns, whether new founda­ tions or old, in course of time subscribed to the treaty, their names were simply added to the existing signatories so that the presence of 30 names did not necessarily mean that they all signed at the same time. It would be wrong to believe that the entire league and the list of its members is a fiction of the third century because Timaeus and Lycophron gave it as an explanation of the prodigy of the 30 piglets. T h e topographical explanation of that prodigy is perceptibly older than 280

501 B.C.

2. 18. 3

the chronological (Ehlers, Mus. Helv. 6 (1949), 166 ff.; Sordi, / Rapporti Romano-Ceriti, 168-9). Of the workings of the league we know little. It met annually at the Lucus Ferentinae (Festus 276 L.) and conducted joint campaigns in time of war, Rome apparently supplying the commander. T h e posi­ tion in 501 would seem to have been that with the expulsion of the Tarquins Rome's domination and perhaps even membership of the league ceased and Tusculum regained her former hegemony. U n d e r such circumstances it is in no way odd that the league should have decided to commence hostilities against R o m e . The Dictatorship T h e tradition is right in making the dictatorship an entirely R e ­ publican creation. It was no evolution of some regal office. T h e dictator had twenty-four fasces: the king only twelve. Besides, the requirement that the dictator should on his appointment nominate a magister equitum displays a wholly Republican concern for the principle without the disadvantages of collegiality (1. 60. 4 n.). T h e problem is rather to investigate when and why the first dic­ tator was appointed. Festus (216 L.) reads: 'optima lex . . . in magistro populi faciundo, qui vulgo dictator appellatur, q u a m plenissimum posset ius eius esse significabatur ut fuit M a n i Valerii M . f. Volusi nepotis qui primus magister populi creatus est', magister populi (cf. Cicero, de Fin. 3. 7 5 ; deLeg. 3 . 9 ; deRep. 1.63) was evidently the original title, dictator will have been borrowed from the Latins, where it was in common use primarily designating a religious official, at some date in the fifth century when Rome and the Latins were intimate partners in the struggle against the Aequans and Volscians. Licinius Macer indeed thought that the office was taken over from the Albans and invented a prehistoric precedent for it (fr. 10 P.). In itself the title is not exclusively military, but the title of his lieutenant, the magister equitum, and certain of the curious customs surrounding his appoint­ ment imply that the office was designed chiefly to supply a single leadership in war of more authority than could be given by the consuls. T h e crises which faced Rome in her early days were military, not political, and a projected attack by the Latin League was as serious a threat as could arise. If the general context as given by L. is appro­ priate enough for the creation of the dictatorship and if the claims of T. Larcius to be the first dictator are sound (18. 6 n.), the dates can be narrowed down. Licinius Macer was wrong in dating the Battle of Lake Regillus to 499. T h e true date is presupposed by the treaty of Cassius and the dedication of the temple of Castor (see n. on 19 below), so that A. Postumius was dictator in 496 not 499. Now Licinius appears to have believed that only consuls could be appointed 281

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

cedence under the inspired hand of Valerius Antias. It is inconceivable that the nephew should be dictator before the uncle. No consulship is in fact recorded for him but it is possible he is one of those who met their death in 486 (Festus 180 L.). magistrum: alluding to the title magister populi. 18. 7. quin si: qui si of N can be kept, the subject being supplied from appositum; cf. 5. 52. 3 (Pettersson). 18.8. provocatio: the statement that the dictator was from the begin­ ning uniquely free from provocatio is untrue of the early period and reflects the distaste and alarm with which Licinius Macer and others viewed the revival of the dictatorship by Sulla. It would appear that consuls as well enjoyed the power of coercitio, unrestricted except by convention or at their option, down to at least 300 B.C. See Siber, Zeit. Sav.-Stift. 62 (1942), 3796°.; Staveley, op. cit. 107. 18. 10. orantibus: the interchange between the Romans and the Sabines is summed up in a neat sententiay which was not perhaps excogitated by L. himself (cf. Quintilian, Decl. 290); for bella ex bellis severe cf. 21. 10. 4; 31. 6. 4; Sallust, Epist. Mithr. 20; cf. Propertius 3. 5. 12; Lucretius 5. 1202; Euripides, Ion 1279. 19-20. The Battle of Lake Regillus 19.1. Ser. Sulpicius: N has thepraenomen Servilius, so also D.H. 5. 42. 1, but 'Servius? was hereditary in the family. The same mistake is made in the notice of his death (3. 7.6n.). Since both passages are Licinian, Servilius may have been what L. wrote. He is the first recorded mem­ ber of his family which, in the branch of the Camerini, was prominent throughout the first two hundred years of the Republic. The gens may have originated from Lanuvium (but cf. Tacitus, Annals. 3. 48; see Sydenham no. 572) and was patrician. Under this year D.H. records a lengthy conspiracy by the Tarquins which is closely modelled on the Catilinarian conspiracy. Schwartz pointed out the damaging fact that in both years a Tullius was consul and C. Sulpicius was a praetor in 63, an energetic assistant of Cicero's (in CatiL 3. 8). M\ Tullius: on the name see 1. 39. 1 n. Cicero, commenting on the falsifications of history, writes (Brutus 62): 'ut si ego me a M \ Tullio esse dicerem qui patricius cum Servio Sulpicio consul anno x post exactos reges fuit\ But, like Cassius and Brutus, he may really have been a plebeian. The only other Tullius recorded in the Fasti before Cicero is the consul of 81 B.C. The Capitoline Fasti gave him the cognomen Longus but a Tullius Tolerinus, listed by Festus 180 L. as one of those cremated in 486, is likely to be the same person, suggesting that he came from Tolerium (39. 4 n.). See Munzer, R.E., 'Tullius (41)'. nihil: thus showing that Licinius' dating of the dictatorship of T. Larcius must be wrong. 283

2. ig. i

499 B.C.

T. Aebutius: the name is Etruscan (Schulze 279), as also is the cognomen Helva so common in the gens, and Helvae are found at Glusium (CLE. 2270). C Vetusius: 3. 4. 1 n., 8. 2 n. T h e Veturii were one of the oldest R o m a n gentes in that they gave their name to the old tribe Voturia, which included Ostia and the coastal strip at the mouth of the Tiber. A family shrine corroborates that the Veturii had ancestral lands in that area (Cato, Or. fr. 74 Malcovati; see L. R. Taylor, Voting Dis­ tricts, 42). Whether the Veturii were in origin a Latin folk of the plains is less sure. Schulze (380) regarded the name as Etruscan and an Etruscan craftsman Mamurius Veturius is told of in the time of Numa, but a Sabine origin is on other grounds more acceptable. M read C Vetusius Veturius Vetusius, incorporating evidently an extra-Nicomachean gloss. It is not impossible that the form of the name with the intravocal s was primary and passed out of use after 312. If Vetusius is the right reading here it will be an antiquarian revival such as may be attri­ buted to Licinius Macer and the libri lintei. D.H. gives the praenomen IIoTrXtos, Cassiodorus L. 19. 2. Fidenae: for the early history of the town see 1. 14. 4-15 n. T h e events of this period leave no doubt that Rome was determined to secure firm control of the left bank of the Tiber north of Rome. T h e capture of Grustumeria was followed by the creation of two new tribes (the Glaudian and the Clust.) which extended R o m a n territory as far as Nomentum. An attack on Fidenae, which remained for a century a menacing enclave in R o m a n territory, was a natural con­ comitant of the same expansion. L. might seem to imply by the word obsessae that Rome was unsuccessful in her attack. D.H., however, who has no word about Crustumeria, dates under 504 a capture of Fidenae, adding that the people were allowed to retain the city but had to give up some of their land. At 4. 17. 1, when Fidenae is next mentioned by L., it is described as a colonia Romana. We must, therefore, infer that the R o m a n annalists believed that Fidenae had been colonized by R o m e at a very early date. This, however, looks like special pleading. It would be galling to Roman pride to accept that a town so small and so near should have retained its independence so long. Rome's sub­ sequent atrocities against her could be sen ten tiously justified if Fidenae were pictured as a disloyal colony. In short the siege of Fidenae may be authentic, its capture scarcely so. T h e whole notice may come from the Annales: it is at least true. Crustumeria-. 1. 9. 8 n. D.H. 3. 49. 6 has an alternative version that Grustumeria was incorporated by Tarquinius Priscus, and he is accepted by Sherwin-White (Roman Citizenship, 18-19) on the grounds that the ager Crustuminus enjoyed a special religious position (41. 13. 1-3). T h e argument is nullified by the fact that the ager Veientanus had 284

499 B.C.

2. 19. 2

the same standing. T h e strongest reason for believing that L. pre­ serves a genuine detail is the creation of the two extra tribes in 495 (21.711.).

Praeneste: mod. Palestrina, occupying a commanding outcrop of the Apennines 23 miles from Rome. T h e name suggests an Illyrian foundation which may be mirrored in the tradition that m a d e Telegonus, Odysseus' son, its founder (Propertius 2. 32. 4 ; Aristocles ap. [Plutarch], parall. 41), but any Illyrian traces were soon overlaid by a cosmopolitan mixture of Etruscan and Sabine influences. Her cults (e.g. Hercules) and her family-names (e.g. Saufeius) are strongly Sabine, while her architecture and writing are marked by Etruscan features. For Praeneste lay on the borders of the two civilizations. T h e earliest inscription written in Latin comes from Praeneste and was engraved in this period c. 500. She was one of the Thirty Peoples who signed the Latin treaty (D.H. 5. 61) but we do not know when, except that it was before her revolt in 381 (6. 21. 9). I would hazard that her Latin contacts only seriously began with the expansion of Rome to the east, the decline of the Sabines, and the rebuffs to Etruscan expansion which started with Aricia and culminated in Cumae. In 499 Praeneste is unlikely to have been a member of the Latin League but it is reasonable to suppose that she entered into some relations with Rome and that those were recorded in the Annales. T h e Terentilii may .have come to Rome from Praeneste (3. 9. 2 n.). See Radke, R.E., 'Praeneste'. 'A purely Homeric battle', Macaulay exclaimed. Of all the engage­ ments which L. describes in the early books none is told with more verve or more brilliance. This very artistry has led many scholars to question whether it was ever fought. Some would see an inextricable confusion of times and persons throughout these years, from which only the hazy outline of a battle and a treaty can be discerned. Aricia and Regillus, Larcius and Horatius, Valerius and Herminius, dictator­ ships and revolts are duplicated to provide some spurious pattern. Such radical scepticism is misplaced. Details and dates may be corrupt or fictitious but if the underlying pattern makes historical sense, the onus of proof rests with the doubter who can produce no more per­ suasive argument than that his reconstructions are more satisfying. And the underlying pattern does make sense. Something must have happened to necessitate the dictatorship. Something must have hap­ pened to explain the Latin treaty of Sp. Cassius. T h e efforts which Rome was making to secure her defences by expanding to the east would not have passed unnoticed by the Latins. Even if family tradi­ tions are suspect—and the Battle of Regillus was certainly a heredi­ tary legend among the Postumii—and even if the memories of military 285

2. 19-20

499 B.C.

practice are liable to distortion—and a curiosity of some importance is preserved in the dismounted fighting of 20. 10—no criticism can impair the date of the dedication of the temple of Castor (2. 42. 5 n.) which was vowed as a thanksgiving for the appearance of the Dioscuri in the battle. T h e addition of two new tribes in 495 is an incontrovertible symptom of a new spirit at Rome. Recovered from the humiliation and disasters of Porsenna's war, Rome under the leadership of forceful and imaginative plebeian consuls was anxious to secure a position of strength that would enable her to resist such attacks in the future. Lake Regillus is in Tusculan land. Rome was the aggressor. It is of a piece with the capture of Crustumeria and the alliance with Praeneste. As for the date of the battle, orthodox opinion held that it was fought in 496. This was Valerius Antias' date (21. 3, 22. 4 ; D . H . 6. 2. 3-22. 3) and it is the date generally recognized for centenary purposes. In 46 B.C. the moneyer M \ Cordius Rufus produced a series of coins figuring the Dioscuri (M. Grant, Roman Anniversary Issues, 15; Syden­ h a m no. 976) and the coins of A. (Postumius) Albinus, which picture the Dioscuri watering their horses at the Fons J u t u r n a e (Sydenham no. 612) are confidently dated to c. 96. In so far that 496 is closer to the signing of the treaty (495 or 493) and the dedication of the temple, 496 is to be preferred to 499. T h e later date was the conjecture of Licinius Macer. D.H., who gives an appreciably different account of the battle, in which Sex. Tarquinius plays a principal role (but cf. 1. 60. 2) since his father, the king, is absent, and two further Valerii, P. and M., nephews of M . Valerius (20. 1) are introduced, expressly states (6. 11. 2 ) : ALKIVVIOS /xev yap /ecu ol nepl JYAAiov ovSev ££r}TaKOTes OVT€ TWV ZIKOTCJV OVT€ TOiv SvvaTojv CLVTOV eladyovat, rov /JaoxAea TapKvviov ay(x)vt,£6fj,€vov d' ITTTTOV /ecu TirpcjaKoyLtvov. T h i s is 19. 6 Tarquinius Superbus equum admisit ictusque ab latere receptus in tutum est. I w o u l d

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

exploits of Hector (14. 402-15. 280). Finally, the desperate courage of the aged king (19. 6) has its counterpart in the gallant but ill-con­ sidered heroics of Nestor. Some colour, too, may be added from Greek battles in which the Dioscuri appeared (20. 12 n.). T h e Homeric character of the battle will stem from the oldest historians. L. makes his own improvements. Any reader familiar with Homer would expect the gods to participate in the fighting. So in the tra­ ditional version they did. T h e highlight of the battle was the epiphany of the Dioscuri. Even Licinius told it but there is not a word of it in L. In place of divine intervention h u m a n qualities are stressed—the ira of the contestants (19. 4, 8, 10, 20. 8, 13). O n the linguistic plane the same balance between the mythical and the real is maintained. Admittedly the general picture is of a battle between mounted 7rp6fjLaxoi but many of the terms used are contemporary, antesignani (20. 10), subsidiarii (20. 7), delecta manus (20. 5), and cohorts come from the military organization of classical times. T o match, L. uses a number of idioms of a military flavour (sermo castrensis) whose closest parallels are to be found in the author of the Bellum Hispaniense ( i g . 7 m , 2 0 . i o n . ) . At the same time as he makes the reader feel at home in such an un­ familiar type of warfare, he is careful not to lessen the sense of re­ moteness and antiquity. M a n y turns of phrase serve to convey the Homeric atmosphere (ig. 5 n., 20. 3 n., 20. 8 n., 20. i o n . ) . See Hiller, Commentationes Mommsenianae, 1877, 747; Halbfas, Theorie u. Praxis . . . hex Dionys von Halikarnass (Munster, 1910), 24; Plathner, Schlachtschilderungen, 26, 32-34; Burck 60-61 ; Klotz 227-30. 19. 3 . Regillum: D.H. shows that it was fought in hilly country and that the Latin base of operations was Corbio. T h e only site which satifies these conditions in agro Tusculano, an important requirement confirmed by the cult of Castor and Pollux (20. 12 n.), is Pontano Secco, two miles north of Frascati, where a platform of rough poly­ gonal stonework has been taken to be a commemorative altar. See T . Ashby, C.R. 12 (1898), 470; L. Pareti, Studi Romani 7 (1959), 1-30. 19. 5. miscuere: the phrase is never found in prose: cf. Lucretius 4. 1013, 5. 442 ; Virgil, Aeneid 10. 23, 12. 628. It corresponds to the Greek aWaiTTZlV

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 €p€laOr} (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

u

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

naturally qualified by the gen. temporum as at i. 24. 1 nominum error manet, so that it is better to look elsewhere for the object. Nettleship's errores res is the neatest and most satisfactory conjecture. quos: Pettersson would retain quosdam which is senseless in this context. Perizonius proposed to delete secundum quosdam altogether b u t -dam is an easy dittography after -dum and for two questions combined in an ind. question cf. 10. 14. 2, 26. 13. 6, 30. 42. 18, 36. 2. 1. 2 1 . 5. Ap. Claudius: the Elogium (Inscr. Ital. 13. 67), perhaps first set up by Ap. Claudius Caecus to accompany a statue in the temple of Bellona (10. 19. 17), reads Ap. Claudius Q. Urb. Cos. Cum P. Servilio Pr[isco. P. Servilius: the first consul from that patrician family (1. 30. 2 n.). Aristodemum: the historians (D.H. 7. 2 ; Plutarch, de Mul. Virt. 21) tell us that he was the son of Aristocrates and surnamed 6 ILCLXOCLKOS. His military prowess gained him the tyranny of Cumae (c. 504) which he consolidated with the tyrant's traditional arts of proscription and bodyguards. His end was swift and violent: a conspiracy of exiles in the 480's and murder at the hands of his concubine, Xenocrite, who chose as her reward the priesthood of Demeter. T h e story has been treated with reserve by historians b u t is borne out by circumstantial events. It was the age of tyrants in M a g n a Graecia and tyrants always endeavoured to conceal their naked power by economic prosperity. T h e coinage of Cumae begins c. 500 (Sambon, Les Monnaies antiques, 1, no. 244). It is a rich coinage, reminiscent of the coinage of Samos in its motif of a lion's head between two boars' heads. T h e link between Cumae and Samos was provided by the colony of Dicaearchia founded by fugitives from the tyranny of Polycrates II of Samos. Such a coinage is the creation of a tyrant. Cumae's position on the edge of the Greek and Etruscan worlds was a delicate one. Aristodemus seems to have observed that her true interests lay with the maritime states of Etruria rather than with the Greek cities or with inland Etruria. It is significant that he is said to have abolished that most Greek of all institutions, the Gymnasium (D.H. 7. 9. 3), and that during the period of his reign Cumae switched from a commercial to an agri­ cultural economy. She became one of the main grain suppliers in Italy, indispensable for the support of Rome as of Tarquinii or Caere. No wonder that the priesthood of Demeter was so prized, that R o m e copied her cult in the cult of Ceres, and that Aristodemus was anxious that R o m e should not pass into the hands of the inland powers. H e harboured Tarquin because he thought that Tarquin represented the best hope of keeping Rome in the coastal trade association. See Niese, R.E., 'Aristodemus'; B. Combet Farnoux, Mel. a"Arch, et a"Hist. 69 (i957)> 7-442 1 . 6. iniuriae: the slant is Licinian. 291

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.

It is, therefore, hard to see what grievances the plebeians as such could have had. They were not excluded from office, they were not deprived of the consolations of religion. T h e economic stagnation was the same for all, plebeians and patricians. T h e struggle for the tri­ bunate cannot have arisen because the plebs were down-trodden or were righting for a voice of their own. Yet there is a connexion be­ tween the slump and the tribunate. T h e plebeian community consisted primarily not of farm-labourers but of petty craftsmen, traders and workers, in the city. Even at the worst times, unless there be severe overpopulation, m a n can grub a living from the soil and preserve his 'sturdy independence'. T h e industrial worker has no such recourse. At Rome he would have become bankrupt and there was only one answer to debt—nexum, a Tree' slavery (23. 1 n.). Now the distinguish­ ing power of the tribune was his power of auxilium, and it is precisely that power which could prevent a debtor who invoked it being claimed by his creditor. In other words, the tribunate was created, not because the plebeians were politically weak but because they were politically strong, strong enough to institute a revolutionary and extra-consti­ tutional office designed to frustrate the due processes of law. As events turned out, the tribunate altered with the changed political situation. Whatever Sp. Cassius' exact crime, his execution and the failure of his policy against the Volscians (Festus 180 L.) were attended by the discrediting of the plebeians. Whole gentes disappear from sight. Many no doubt returned to Etruria; for the new patrician regimen under the Fabii prosecuted a vigorous war against Veii, and Etruscan imports fall off sharply. There are certainly some events which are imaginative throwbacks from later times (27. 5 nn.) but there are details in the section which cannot be thought away—Cora and Pometia, the corona aurea (22. 6 n.), the temple of Mercury (27. 5 n.), Velitrae ( 3 1 . 4 n.), apart from the Fasti themselves. T h e tribunate belongs to the same hard core of facts, however much it has been dressed up. If we did not know that it was created in 493 the subsequent history of that and of the other political institutions at Rome would have obliged us to conjecture that it was created then. T h e traditional connexion between debt-problems and the tribunate is the only one that will explain the facts. T h e connexion has been confused by the Roman assumption of a political origin for the tri­ bunate. It is further confused by the fact that L., who is our primary source, did not care for such things. For him the whole episode dis­ closes the dangers that must face libertas if the state is divided (23. 2). Consequently—and a comparison with D.H. shows that this is L.'s own contribution—the whole struggle is planned and designed to lead up to the climax, Menenius' plea for concordia and the establish294

4 9 5 B.C.

2. 2 2 - 3 3 . 4

ment of the tribunate. L. is not interested in the constitutional details which D . H . laboriously rehearsed. With graphic portraits and drama­ tic incidents he constructs an action which will convey the reader inexorably to the final scene. T h e technique of his construction is clear-cut and can be set out diagrammatically: A. (1) External affairs: hostilities with Volscians (22. 1-4). (2) Internal affairs: negotiations with Latins (22. 5-7). B. T h e Political Struggle (1) Internal: the first act—entry of the nexi (23-24). (2) External: war against the Volscians (25), Sabines (26. 1-3), and Aurunci (26. 4-6). (3) Internal: the second act—plots and counter-plots, election of a dictator (27-30. 8). (4) External: war against the Aequi (30. 8-9), the Volscians (30. 10-15), a n d Sabines (31. 1-6). (5) Internal: the third act—secessio, concluded by a irepiTrireia (Menenius Agrippa): the tribunate (31. 7-33. 3). It will be seen how L. separates the different stages of the central action by the insertion of passages dealing with external affairs. H e employs this same device both at the beginning of Book 2 and in his treatment of the long negotiations of C. Terentilius Harsa. T h e acts of the drama itself are also distinguished. In the first L. puts on the stage before the reader a vivid picture of the nexi and the aged veteran. T h e second is a lurid story of cabals and secret intrigues, full of Catilinarian echoes. T h e third centres round a moving sermon on concordia. How much of this L. owed to his source cannot be proved. Probably very little, for his technique remains constant despite changes of source. Here at any rate he abandons Licinius. No other conclusion can be drawn from the doublets of 16. 8 and 22. 2 (Cora and Pometia) and 2 1 . 7 and 27. 5 (the temple of M e r c u r y ) ; hoc ira (22. 2) and recens (22. 4) presuppose the chronology which put Lake Regillus in 496 not 499. T h a t his new source is Valerius Antias seems evident from the eulogy in 30. 5 (cf. 31. 3 n.). It suits, too, the hostile attitude to the Glaudii evident from later books. For the source of 32. 3-33. 3 see below. O n the section as a whole see the dissertation by W. Kriiger, Ein Beitrag zur Darstellungskunst des T. Livius (Leipzig, 1938), who refers to earlier discussions. See also on individual items below. 22. Rome and Latium 22. 2 . trecentos: 16. 9 n. 22. 3 . suum rediit ingenium: for the psychology see 3. 36. 1 n. 295

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 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

party wished to borrow. In mancipatio, at least primitively, the res mancipiwas transferred in exchange for the copper weighed out and the propriety of the transaction was duly witnessed. In nexum the crucial question is what did the lender receive in exchange for the copper which he has transferred. The debtor is certainly not transferring himself. A nexus retained his civic rights (24. 6, 8. 28. 4 ; Val. Max. 6. 1.9) and could make contracts. Besides, Roman law acknowledged no such principle as self-mancipation. The only thing that he can have transferred is his services, his body (suae operae in Varro), and this is recognized by the lender chaining him as his side of the bargain. The formula which the lender would use as the transaction took place would be, e.g., *tu mihi nexus esto his c assibus aeneaque libra'. The transaction was then complete. The enslavement was immediate and automatic. It was an integral part of the transaction and the bondage was permanent. The form of the transaction might suggest that once it had been performed there was no legal obligation on the creditor to release the debtor, even if the debtor were subsequently able and willing to repay his debt. But in any case it is hard to see how the debtor, now giving his services as a bondsman, could ever hope to earn enough money (or its equivalent in kind) to offer the repayment and it is unlikely that his family would be able to come to the rescue. However, analogies from the debt-procedures at Athens and in other civilizations do strongly suggest that the bondsman could work off his debt by giving his services for a specified number of years. Furthermore the sources preserve record of two separate modes of release—a nexi liberatio (Festus), which will have needed the intervention of a third party, like a vindex, to transfer the services of the nexus from the creditor to his own person, since the nexus could clearly not perform his own release, and a solutio per aes et libram (Gaius 3. 174), in which the debtor himself repaid the money by a reverse process to that by which he had borrowed it. nexi liberatio implies that the nexus was really chained, whereas solutio per aes et libram suggests that the chaining was by then only symbolical, nexi liberatio, which must be the original form of release, also implies that the bondsman was not freed in con­ sideration of his repayment of his debt. Unless we are to assume that the creditor was motivated by purely philanthropic sentiments, we must believe that the debtor was able to discharge his debt by labour. By the time of the Twelve Tables, however, nexum was not the only method of contracting debt, stipulatio or verbal contract was also recognized in the Tables (Gaius 4. 17a). If a debtor was sued on a stipulation and was found against by a index or arbiter, he would as a iudicatus be immediately liable to manus iniectio with the eventual prospect of being killed or sold abroad (Aul. Gell. 20. 1. 47). The fact 297

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

Sav.-Stift. 67 (1950), 112-61; Jolowicz, Historical Introduction to Roman Law, 166-70. I find myself in general agreement with J. Imbert, Studi Arangio-Ruiz, 1. 339 fT.; Melanges H. Levy-Bruhl, 407 fT. 23. 4. ordines: Bayet, following the traces of ir\, reads the singular ordinem, but see 55. 4 n. ostentabat: it was a popular forensic flourish to display one's scars adverso pectore, as evidence of patriotism and merit. Notoriously M. Antonius had secured acquittal for M \ Aquilius in 99 by such a pathetic revelation (Cicero, de Orat. 2. 124, 195). Cf. also Sallust, Jugurtha 85. 29 (Marius). There was no denned limit of military service: the soldier served Tor the duration'. 23. 5. iniquo: 'at a time that was ruinous for him'; cf. 31. 31. 12. 23. 6. ergastulum: the detail is authentic, for the nexus could be made to work for his creditor although he was not technically a servus, but the term itself is anachronistic, ergastula were the prisons, usually underground, in which chained slave-gangs were kept. The name implies that they worked there, although in historical times ergastula were only the quarters in which the slave lived who worked on the fields, especially on latifundia. Condemning free men as a punishment to the ergastula was an innovation of the times of Marius and Sulla (cf. Suetonius, Aug. 32 : ergastilus first Lucilius 503 M.). Thus although the centurion was legally accurate in claiming that he was not being enslaved but being made to work, ergastulum is Sullan colour­ ing. In the late Republic ordinary household slavery was regarded as preferable to service in an ergastulum, whereas in 494 any debtor would have chosen to work rather than to be a slave. The extent of the anachronism is shown by Vogt, L.E.C. 9 (1941), 31-3423. 7. clamor ingens oritur: cf. Sallust, Jugurtha 57. 3. tenet: accounts better for the impossible sustinet of N (dittography after tumultus) but continet is a choicer word; cf. 39. 17.4. 23. 8. nexi, vincti solutique: vincti solutique must be in apposition to nexi —'the nexi, both those in fetters and those who were released5—but the sense is not clear. It could mean that all nexum-debtors turned up, both those who were actually in fetters and those who were, as it were, on parole, being allowed by their creditors as an act of grace to go about their work without being fettered (so, I think, de Selincourt takes it: 'debtors of all conditions, some actually in chains'). This, however, does violence to the natural meaning of soluti which should refer to those who had been released from the debt and their /lexzzm-status altogether. Alternatively it could mean that all who were or had at any time been nexi, both those now in fetters and those who had been freed. This suits soluti better but one might ask why the soluti, who were presumably free men no longer under any obligation to their erstwhile creditors, should have been reduced to an appeal to 299

2. 2 3 - 8

49 5 B.C.

the Quiritium fidem. On balance, therefore, the former meaning is pre­ ferable (see Salmasius, De Modo Usur. 837). I do not see how Nettleship's removal oivincti as a gloss or Bauer's deletion o f - ^ c o n t r i b u t e s to the solution of the difficulty. implorant Quiritium fidem: 3. 41. 4, 44. 7; cf. Seneca, EpisL 15. 7; Petronius 2 1 . 1 . The only defence open to a man who was threatened either with magisterial coercitio or legal manus iniectio was an appeal for active help from the multitude. Varro cites the archaic term for this practice which is well exemplified in Plautus, Rudens 615, as 'quiritare'. Out of this de facto appeal for help grew, on the one hand, the for­ malized provocatio which recognized the people as a possible court of appeal and, on the other, tribunician auxilium which regularized the process by which the appellant could be protected. See Greenidge, Roman Legal Procedure, 311; Staveley, Historia 3 (1955), 418; G. Broggini, Iudex Arbiterve (1957), 40 n. 44. Cf. the parallel procedure oiflagitatio (H. Usener, Kl. Schriften, 4. 356 ff.). 23. 12. infrequentiam: 4. 47. 6 n. For the picture of senators reluctant to walk abroad or perform their legislative duties cf. 3. 38. 8 ff. with notes. It is modelled on the sparse attendances during the 8o's. L. definitely implies that the meeting was abortive because a quorum was not present. This is anachronistic. A quorum was only required in the late Republic and then only for certain matters of business (Balsdon, J.R.S. 47 (1957), I9" 2 0 )23. 14. prope erat ut: see Austin on Quintilian 12. 7. 1, but the use is not colloquial. tandem curia: the repetition of tandem is awkward but not unparal­ leled (cf. 18. 2 n., 25. 6 n.). If any change is needed, read tamen (Wesenberg) rather than iam (Gronovius). 23. 15. Appius: the policies of the opposing consuls would have done credit to a slogan-writer of the 6o's or 50's, and, indeed, the characterstudy of Appius is likely to have been artificially constructed by Valerius Antias himself (56. 5 n.). flecti . . . frangi cf. Cicero, pro Sulla 18; for tutius . . . facilius cf. Seneca, de Bene/. 3. 30. 3, 4. 23. 3 ; Suetonius, Aug. 4.7. 24. 1. duos ex una: 3. 67. 10, 9, 5. 5 nn. For the Latin intelligence see 3. 4. 10 n. 24. 2. exultare gaudio: cf. Cicero, in Catil. 1. 26; Phil. 2. 65. ultores: predicative. 'The gods were at hand to avenge patrician arrogance.' The plebeian arguments betray little originality. A later Ap. Claudius uses the same hackneyed argument about pericula and praemia (5. 4. 4 n.), while the determination to bring everything down in one's own ruin is a commonplace threat, for which cf. Cicero, pro Sestio 99 and in Catil. 4. 14. 300

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

T h e capture of Suessa Pometia looks like a piece of history. In effective contrast to the political passages L. employs a curt, military style of writing (25. 1 n., 25. 4 n., 25. 5 n., 26. 1 n., 26. 6 n.). T h e sentences are short and uncomplicated, the events related with economy. Much use is made of asyndeton. 25. 1. si qua . . .posset: 27. 14. 6, 30. 12. 1, 42. 67. 6 ; a characteris­ tically military turn of phrase for expressing the intention of an opera­ tion. Cf. Caesar, B.G. 6. 29. 4, 37. 4. M . Muller compares Thucydides 2. 77. 2. 25. 4. pavidos egit: cf. Caesar, B.G. 4. 12.2 withMeusel'snote 55. 1 7 . 3 . 25. 5. captum praedae datum: p. here is the act of plundering, rarely found without a qualifying n o u n ; cf. 7. 16. 4, 27. 44. 4. T h e phrase sounds like military slang (E. J . Kenney, C.Q. 9 (1959), 242, discus­ sing Ovid, Ars Amat. 1. 114). 25. 6. Ecetranorum: 3. 4. 2, 10. 8, 4. 61. 5, a capital of the Volsci often mentioned in the early wars (D.H. 4. 49, 6. 32, 8. 4, 10. 21) and listed by Pliny among the lost cites of Latium (JV.H. 3. 69). It lay on the edge of the Volscian domains nearest the Aequi and must have been close to Algidus. Ashby and Pfeiffer (Suppl. Papers, Am. School at Rome, 1 ( I 9°5)> 87-107) identify the site as Piano della Civita in the M t e . Lepini, some 26 miles from Rome. T h e remains, which they fully describe, are suitable in point of date for a city that was destroyed in 378. T h e walls are built of rectangular, undressed blocks of stone that must belong to the late fifth century. See also Hulsen, R.E., 'Ecetra*; Blake, Ancient Roman Construction, 92-93. Crevier and Lallemand wished to delete Romam which precedes Ecetranorum in the text, and which indeed, as Madvig comments, 'ignave subicitur', but such repetitions (18. 2, 23. 14) are cumulatively self-supporting. 26. 1. praedabundum: here only in L. but cf. Sallust, Jug. 90. 2 ; Tacitus, Annals 3. 39. 1. 26. 3 . repleti: for the humiliation cf. the defeat of the Aetolians by Philip in 200 B.C. (31. 4 1 . 10 ff.; cf. 5. 44. 6). 26. 4 . partae: 5. 1. 1 n. 26. 6. itur . . . conlata . . . debellatum est: the use of the passive and in particular of the impersonal passive is a feature of military com­ muniques (cf. Caesar, B.G. 5. 40. 3 - 6 : see Fraenkel, Eranos 54 (1956), 189-94). 27-30. 8. The Second Act of the Political Struggle at Rome 27. 1. ius: the two categories of cases which L. quotes are the return of those who had been previously nexi to their creditors and the binding 302

49 5 B.C.

2. 27. I

of new next. T h e latter at least could have nothing to do with Appius' judicial activities. T h e contracting of a debt by nexum was a matter simply for lender and borrower. It is possible that by the category of ante nexi L. means those who had exercised their civic rights, although nexiy to join up, and who after the end of the campaign had attempted to avoid resuming bondage. But L. seems to be applying the procedures of later actions for debt to nexum with attendant confusion. 27. 2. inciderat: incideret Alan, cf. 3. 19. 4, 45. 8. ut [aut] . . . [aut] ut: to be retained, as Weissenborn, Bayet, Meyer, c f- 7- 39- IO> 4 2 - 53- 4- Pettersson, defending the text, cites 23. 7. 6 but admits that there is no exact parallel in L. T h e phenomenon, however, is not uncommon. Cf. Cicero, ad Fam. 11. 28. 8 (Matius); Varro, de Re Rust. 2. 7. 10. auxilio : 4 1 . 7 n. A loose use, since the consuls did not have auxilium. 27. 4. aequasse: more likely to be a corruption of adaequasse ( M ; cf. 1. 56. 2, 4. 43. 5) than vice versa. The Dedication of the Temple of Mercury T w o Homeric battles (19-20; 46-47), two duels between a Claudius and a Laetorius (27 : 56) serve to give a close-knit unity to the second book. T h e second Laetorius is modelled directly on the first and has no independent existence (56. 7 n.), so that the claims of the first need investigation. T h e Laetorii were Etruscan (Schulze 187) and plebeian, and in historical times were, like the Ogulnii, much concerned with religion. One member of the gens was magister equitum at the Latin festival (257 B.C.) and another a xvir s.f (27. 8. 4). Yet the family itself is not reliably attested at R o m e much before 300 (Val. Max. 6. 1. 11 ; D.H. 16.4. 2). It left its mark on R o m a n history by a notorious quarrel with the Servilii in the Punic Wars (30. 39. 8) and by produc­ ing a series of tough, blunt soldiers (56. 7 n.). These data explain the story of the dedication of the temple of Mercury. There can have been no documentary evidence for the date of its foundation, else there would not be the divergence between 2 1 . 6 and 27. 5. Nor can a Laetorius have dedicated it at so early a period. W e may assume that the original temple was restored c. 300 B.C. and re-dedicated by Laetorius whose name would have stood on the inscription. Such a dedication would be properly entrusted to a gens much occupied in religious affairs. Historians a century later, knowing that the temple itself went back to the 490's, invented an earlier M . Laetorius when they invented the characteristics of his family—a dislike for the Ser­ vilii and a military record. T h e story is given by Val. M a x . 9. 3. 6 but overlooked by D.H. See Wissowa, Religion, 304 ff.; Munzer, Romische Adelsparteien, 89-90; Altheim, Griech. Goiter im alien Rom, 79, 89 ff.; 303

2. 27« 4

495 B.C.

P . J . Riis, J.R.S. 36 (1946), 47; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 162-3; and for the temple itself see Platner-Ashby s.v. 27. 5. iussupopuli: 8. 6 n., as also for the role of the pontifex in dedica­ tions. praeesse annonae: 4. 12. 8 n. mercatorum collegium: the organization of guilds was quite separate from the maintenance of any particular cult. The guilds were formed as trade associations for the mutual benefit of the members. The diverse range of guilds which existed at Ostia has been recently illuminated by Meiggs (Ostia, 311 ff.) and Rome was even more prolific. It was, however, natural that the guilds should regard themselves as under the protection of a particular deity and that the mercatores should choose Mercury. They kept 15 May, the natalis of the temple of Mercury, as a special festival (Paulus Festus 135 L.; Macrobius 1. 12. 19). But the guild was essentially a secular body and its connexions with Mercury were secondary. It is true that there was a body of men, Mercuriales (Cicero, ad Q.F. 2. 5. 2; C.I.L. 14. 2105), dedicated to the service and maintenance of the cult of Mercury, but although these may have been members of a collegium mercatorum, the two bodies were not coextensive. Similarly, numerous collegia worshipped Minerva but they were not all responsible for the control of different temples. Valerius Antias has used the dedication of the temple as a peg on which to hang the institution of the collegium mercatorum. 27. 8. prae strepitu et clamore: cf. Sallust, Jugurtha 99. 3. Cf. the tumult of 89 B.C. when the praetor A. Sempronius Asellio was lynched for favouring not as here the creditors but the debtors (cf. Livy, Epit. 74; Appian, B.C. 1. 54; Val. Max. 9. 7. 4). 2 7 . 9 . periculum: rrX add liber tatis, neither an obvious gloss nor evidently misplaced, but the sense would be at variance with all L.'s preaching about libertas which is to be the common property of all. Gronovius and Madvig rightly exclude it. 27. 12. cotidiana: 'the crowd which assembled daily'. quia . . . iudicium: * because the judgement of the people was not in doubt', iudicium populi is used not technically to denote the assembly of that name but loosely of popular decision; so populi for plebis. 27. 13. occultisque colloquiis: 28. 1, 32. 1, 3. 48. 1, 4. 13. 10, 39. 14. 4. Such nocturna consilia, as Sallust calls them (Catiline 42. 2), were one of the more alarming features of the age of Sulla and the generation that followed, but they had been proscribed as early as the Twelve Tables. See C. Seignobos, de Indole Plebis Romanae apud T. Livium, 1882, 43 f. 28. 2. delatam: sc. rem. consulere with an ace. of the thing discussed is found only here in L. consulere de with the abl. at 3. 41. 3, 4. 17. 4, 304

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

X

2. 29- 7

4 9 4 B.C.

about outstanding debts. His motion, legalistic in outlook, is legalistic in language, fidem secuti 'in accordance with the pledge made to them by P. Servilius' is a technical term in law: cf. S. C. de mense Augusto (Macrobius i. 12. 35); Gaius 4. 70: see R. Feenstra, Studi Paoli, 273-87. 29. 8. demersam: by contrast Larcius is warm-hearted and emotional. For the strong metaphor (6. 27. 6) cf. Petronius 88. 6. For discordiam accendi cf. Sallust, Or. Phil, 14; for discordiam sedari cf. Cicero, Phil. 1. 1. 29. 1 1 . agedum: with a plural, instead of agitedum: cf, 38. 47. 1 1 ; Cicero, pro Sulla 72. For the false doctrine about provocatio see 18. 8 n , 30. 1. utique Largi putabant sententiam: apart from the repetition of thought (putabant sententiam after videbatur sententia) which can be justified (cf. 5. 33. 7, 26. 8. 10), there is a serious difficulty in the passage. T h e chiastic order shows that rursus . . . salubres belongs to the opening sentence and that the semicolon printed after sententia in the O.C.T. should be removed and a strong stop placed after salubres. 'Many thought Appius' motion barbarous, as indeed it was, but, conversely, Verginius' and Larcius' motions to be dangerous pre­ cedents.' T h e special point that is made about Larcius' motion is a separate o n e ; not only was it dangerous, it would utterly destroy public confidence. T h e repunctuation demanded by sense and style leaves putabant sententiam incomplete. A predicate is missing. It could be supplied by esse earn (for sententiam M . Muller) or earn (sc. esse Heraeus, Reuss): cf. 9. 3. 12 ista quidem sententia ea est quae . . . 'They thought Larcius' motion in particular was the one that would destroy credit.' T h e mistake would be a simple one. I prefer a solution along these lines to the unsatisfactory emendation of putabant (refutabant Rossbach; repudiabant Wex). 30. 2. semper: the conflict between private interest and public welfare was a stock theme for moralists. 30. 4 . sua vi: this palmary correction, first made by Wex in 1832, is confirmed by the reading of M . Cf. 3. 26. 12. 30. 5. M\ Valerium: 3. 7. 6 n. T h e Elogium (Inscr. Ital. 13. 7 8 ; cf. 60) states: ' M \ Valerius Volusi f. Maximus dictator, augur, prius quam ullum magistratum gereret dictator dictus est. triumphavit de Sabinis et Medullinis, plebem de sacro monte deduxit, gratiam cum patribus reconciliavit. faenore gravi populum senatus hoc eius rei auctore liberavit. sellae curulis locus ipsi posterisque ad Murciae spectandi causa datus est. princeps in senatum semel lectus est.' T h e praenomen M\ is also given by the Triumphal Fasti (31. 3 n.), the Capitoline Fasti (456 B.C.), and D . H . (6. 23, 39, 57, 69, 71, 77). M . is found in the manuscripts here and in Cicero, Brutus 54, Orosius 2. 5, and Zonaras 7. 14. Valerius Antias (fr. 17 P.) did not specify the praenomen. Since 306

4 9 4 B.C.

2.30.5

the corruption of M \ to M . is of the easiest and since M . Valerius was killed at the Battle of Lake Regillus according to the received tradi­ tion it is best to emend L. and Cicero, Brutus 54 (Orosius and Zonaras may be faithfully reproducing an already corrupt text: see Volkmann R.E., Valerius (243)'). 30. 7. decern: the size of the army, assuming as it does a total force under arms of 50,000 men, is exaggerated. T h e first time an army of this size is credibly reported (7. 25. 8 ; 349 B.C.) was the very year in which M . Valerius, later to be surnamed Corvus, fought his celebrated single combat with the Gaul. 30. 8-31. 6. War with the Aequi, Volscians, and Sabines 30. 8. oratores: 1. 38. 2 n. For their request see 3. 4. 10 n. 30. 8-9. T h e details of the campaign are omitted by D.H., who also arranges the order of the wars differently. T h e order in L. is planned to keep the principal campaign (31. 1 longe plurimum), conducted by the dictator Valerius, until the last. T h e language is military: cf. 30. 12 nn., 30. 13 n., 31. 1 n., 31. 2 n. 30. 12. ad manum: cf. Suetonius, Nero 26. 2 ; Aul. Gell. 1. 11. 9 ; Marcian. Dig. 48. 19. 11. 2. gladiis rem gerere: the expression, once mistakenly claimed by Stacey as a 'poeticism' in the light of Ennius, Ann. 268 V. vigeritur res, is army slang; cf. 28. 2. 6, 31. 35. 5 ; Sallust, Catiline 60. 2 ; Caesar, B.G. 5. 44. 11, 7. 88. 2. See Gries, Constancy, 40. 30. 13. impressionem: cf. Bell. Afr. 78. 3 ; Hirtius, B.G. 8. 6. 2 ; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 149. 3 1 . 1. fundit fugatque: N's reading should be kept and punctuated funditfugatque; exuit castris. fundo fugoque, the two words forming a single concept, is a regular term in military contexts; cf. Tab. Triumph. AciL Glabr. 1. 4. 3 ; Bell. Hisp. 31. 8 ; Sallust, Jugurtha 21. 2, 52. 4, 58. 3, 79- 4> 99- 3- Cf. 1. 10. 4, 2. 6. 11. 31. 2. quam: N had qua dum se cornua latius pandunt parum apte introrsum ordinibus aciem firmaverunt. Light is thrown on this perplexing passage by 32. 17. 8 where the Macedonians strengthen their line by deepening it—conferti, pluribits introrsus ordinibus acie firmata. Weinkauff took the sense to be that the Volsci had weakened their centre by extending the wings of their army—a mistake often inevitable and always calamitous (28. 14. 17, 5. 38. 2, 31. 21. 14, 25. 21. 6) and he proposed the radical but sensible text quam .. . parum aptis introrsum ordinibus [aciem] infirmaverant (cf. 9. 17. 15, 28. 46. 3). So also Wittmann. But the Macedonian case suggests a different interpretation and apte is confirmed by 4. 37. 8. While the wings of the Volscian army moved outwards in the hope, it may be assumed, of effecting an encircling movement, the brigade307

494 B.C.

2. 3 i . 2

commanders of the centre had committed the unpardonable error of withdrawing troops from the line in order to make deeper, and so stronger, but broken sections. T h e original line of battle might be diagrammatically represented thus:

after the redeployment it w a s :

*c^

=

=

W

c

=^

T h e effect of strengthening their sections in depth (introrsum) was to create gaps through which (qua) the R o m a n cavalry could ride and wreak havoc. If any change is needed in the text, and I do not think that it is, qui or Salmasius's quia for qua might be considered. Salmasius in his posthumous De Re Militari has an enlightening discussion of the passage. For the repeated aciem . . . aciem cf. 18. 8, 23. 14, 25. 6 et al, L. uses the form introrsum only of motion (3. 28. 7, 10. 33. 3). Elsewhere introrsus (25. 2 1 . 7 , 26. 42. 7, 33. 8. 14, 37. 40. 2) which should be read here. 31. 3. triumphans: M\ Valerius Volusif.-n, Maximus'] dic\t. de Sabineis et Medullineis]. sella . . . curulis: cf. the Elogium quoted above; Festus 464 L. Weinstock (J.R.S. 47 (1957), 148 fF.) produces evidence for the hypothesis that originally only the Flamen Dialis was allowed to sit on a sella curulis in the theatre, but that in view of the prolonged vacancy in the office of Flamen Dialis from 87 B.G. onwards Sulla created a precedent by allowing certain privileged persons to enjoy that right. Whether Sulla had any other basis for his precedent in Republican practice is unknown. W h a t can be safely asserted is that the legendary example of M \ Valerius Maximus was 'brought to light' for him by Valerius Antias (Asconius, p . 13 C ) . L. adds that the right was enjoyed by his descendants but there is no trace of this. A coin of M . Valerius Messalla (c. 53 B.C. ; Sydenham no. 934) may allude to the tradition. 3 1 . 4. Velitras: mod. Velletri. T h e name is Etruscan (cf. VelaflriVolaterra: Schulze 377). Like Rome, it was a community of funda­ mentally Latin stock which was urbanized and developed c. 600 B.G. under Etruscan influence. There is a large 'Villanovan' cemetery. Its position laid it open to Volscian pressure and during the next centuries it continually changed hands. T h e first capture by the Volscians is dated to the age of Ancus Marcius (D.H. 3. 41) and it was certainly Volscian by 500 B.G. (cf. Dio 45. 1). T h e sources report three separate colonizations by R o m e in 494 (cf. 34. 6 : Velitrae is also listed as a member of the Latin League in D.H. 5. 61), 401 (Diodorus 308

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 7rpXas ACLTLVOJV ircpav TTOXLV—Labici, Pedum, Corbio, rj Ko7rioXava>v (AB KoptaXavcbv R) 77-0At?—not Corioli which D.H. spells XcopicXavcov: Niebuhr proposed Kapvevravajv but KaniToXavajv (Capitulum, mod. Piglio, near Praeneste: cf. Strabo 5. 238; Pliny, N.H. 3. 63; C.I.L. 14. 2960) is better—Bovillae (/taAa? A /foAa? B) to the fossae Cluiliae. After negotiations he withdraws from Rome and embarks on a second campaign along a branch of the Via Ardeatina, attacking Longula (AoyydSt codd.), Satricum, Ecetra, Setia (rtavcodd.), Pollusca, AXfiirjTas, Mugilla, and annexing Corioli. Thereupon he advances to Rome once again with a bigger army than before, to be greeted by the embassy of matrons. The two campaigns are in distinct areas, the first in the Praenestine Gap, north-east of the Via Latina, the second on the coastal plain west of the Alban hills and of the later Via Appia. In L. these two separate areas with their individual campaigns are still marked. Satricum, Longula, Polusca, Corioli, all belong to the second or western area so that the corrupt novellam should also. Bovillas (Gronovius; for the corruption cf. Fraenkel, Horace, 108 n. 1) belongs to the first area and is therefore inappropriate. Mugillam (Jac. Gronovius) agrees with D.H. and is exactly what is needed. (As an adjective novella is out of the question : the diminutive is never used in L.) It is clear that for dramatic reasons L. has telescoped the two campaigns into one. He is concerned with the scene between Coriolanus and his mother and to duplicate the warlike preliminaries would be an artistic mistake. The two campaigns become one. But Coriolanus started from Circeii and so, to make geographical sense, L. has had to reverse their order. Coriolanus rolls up the map of Latium from the south and captures the cities as he comes to them. It would have been strategically grotesque for him to leap from Circeii to Corbio and then turn back to mop up Satricum and Corioli if they were all part of the same campaign. Having dealt with the second area first, L. proceeds to describe the successes among the Latin towns round Rome (Corbio, Vetelia, (?)Trebium, Labici, Pedum), culminating with a single descent on the capital, in Latinam viam transgressus is on the face of it absurd. Coriolanus does not cross to the Latin Way after Circeii according to L . ; he works his way up the coastal plain to Lavinium before crossing. The answer is that the account which L. had before him gave the traditional double campaign which started 331

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

on a strong site and the order of cities given by L. would be wrong if Tolerium is Valmontone. See Ashby, P.B.S.R. 1 (1902), 273 n. 2. Trebium: N—otherwise unknown. D.H. names the first victims of Coriolanus after Circeii ol ToXeptvoi (8. 17. 4), who are members both of the Alban League (Tolerienses; cf. Steph. Byz. ToXipiov) and of the Latin League (5. 61 ToXrjpLvcov). Write Tolerium in L.—a common metathesis. It is placed by Nibby and Nissen at Valmontone (Ashby, P.B.S.R. 1 (1902), 273; Rosenberg, Hermes 55 (1919), 137; Philipp, R.E., 'Tolerium'). Labicos: said by Strabo (5. 237) to lie on a hill to the right of the Via Labicana, 120 stades from the Esquiline gate. An imperial in­ scription (C.LL. 14. 2770: c. 200 A.D.), mentioning a resp. Lavicanorum Quintanensium, shows that by that date the Labicani and the Quintanenses had amalgamated: if so, ad Quintanas, a station on the Via Labicana 15 miles from Rome (Tab. Peut.), must be the clue to the ancient Labici. The only commanding hill which answers to the de­ scription is Mte. Compatri and this site would also suit the union of Labici with Bovillae and Gabii in a second league (Cicero, pro Plancio 23). Not a member of the Alban League, it emerged as a community in the fifth century (4. 45. 6 alliance with Aequi (418 B.C.); 47. 7 colonized; D.H. 5. 61 a member of the Latin League) but soon passed into an oblivion redeemed only by Caesar's construction of a villa the site (Suetonius, Julius 8 3 ; see Ashby, P.B.S.R. 1 (1902), 256 ff.; Philipp, R.E., 'Labici'; Barbieri, Diz. Epigr. 1946, s.v. Labici). Pedum: the regio Pedana was said by E Horace, Epist. 1. 4. 2 to lie between Tibur and Praeneste and the town is identified as the mod. Gallicano 18 miles from Rome on the Via Praenestina. Like Tolerium, a member of the Alban League (Pliny, N.H. 3. 69 Pedani) and of the Latin League (D.H. 5. 61 IJeSavajv), its commanding position was exploited by the Gauls as a camp in 358 (7. 12. 8) and by the Latins as a last stronghold in 339 (8. 12-14), after which it disappears sine vestigiis. 39. 5.fossas Cluilias: 1. 23. 3 n. 39, 7. externus timor, maximum concordiae vinculum: a commonplace going back at least to Thucydides 6. 33. 5 but more than a commonplace. It had for L. contemporary significance in that the motive for Augustus' projected Parthian campaign was at least in part to distract attention from internal politics (cf. also Tacitus, Hist. 5. 12); and L.'s statement was destined to have a profound influence on political thought. Machiavelli, combining with it the complementary doctrine otio luxuriat populus (1. 19. 4 n.) rephrased it in starker terms (Discourses, ii, ch. 35; N. H. Thomson's translation): 'the causes of division in a commonwealth are, for the most part, ease and tranquillity, while the causes of union are war and fear'. 333

2. 39-

I0

488 B.C.

39. 10. oratores: i. 38. 2 n. 40. 1. matronae: according to D.H. 8. 39 the idea came from Valeria, the sister of Publicola. In L. too the inspiration comes from a source other than Veturia herself so that he presumably had the same version before him but suppressed the individual name in order not to diffuse the attention. parum invenio: awkward. The nearest parallel is 30. 45. 6 parum conpertum habeo. Emendation {parum convenit H. J. Miiller) does not improve it. The alternative motives are reflections by L. himself, not differing traditions (cf. D.H. a> may be compared with hanc terram quae te genuit atque aluit.) Euripides, Hecuba 550-3, although different in meaning, has the ring of libera in libera patria mortua essem, while Polyxena's speech (342-78) amplifies the sentiment nee ut sum miserrima diu futura sum. Perhaps the closest extant parallel (Aly, Livius und Ennius, 37) is the declamation in [Seneca], Phoenissae 446 ff. The tragic character of the speech accounts for a few linguistic oddities. See also Brodribb, C.R. 24 (1910), 14-15. 40. 5. sine . . . sciam: sino with the subj. (not to be confused with sino ut and the subj.) is found in L. only in direct speech and only in the form sine (8. 38. 13, 22. 39. 20). In all three passages it is solemnly evocative of an obsolete idiom, familiar to Plautus and Terence, which died soon after and was resurrected by the Augustans (K. Gries, Constancy, 59). in hoc me . . . traxit ut: a final, not consecutive, clause emphasizing 334

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 you—nor, 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-

1

1

488 B.C.

non inviderunt: an Augustan usage for which see Williams on Virgil, Aeneid 5. 541. 4 0 . 12. monumento quoque quod esset: the memorial is in addition to the praise as in D.H. 8. 55 rats Se yvvai£;\v eiraivov T' airoh^oaBai . . . /cat yepas. There is no need to follow Gronovius {monumentoque; cf. 1.48. 7). T h e temple of Fortuna Muliebris was 4 miles outside Rome on the Via Latina (Festus 282 L . ; De Viris Illustr. 19; Val. Max. 1. 8. 4) and was identified by Ashby with the remains of a small Ionic temple found in the locality (P.B.S.R. 4 (1907), 79: see Lanciani, Not, Scavi, 1890, 116 ff.). T h e date of its foundation would be preserved in the Fasti but its connexion with the legend of Coriolanus may be later, inspired by the fact that it lay on his route. T h e name of the cult taken with the apocryphal rite me matronae dedistis which the statue uttered show that it was originally a dedication to Fortune made by and not in honour of univiriae, widows and others being excluded because their status showed them to be unlucky (D.H. 8. 56. 4 ; Tertullian, de Monog. 17). Since in early times such a dedication would have been contentious in that married women could own no property and per­ form no legal action, it was easy for the original character of the cult to become distorted. A further uncertainty surrounds the actual day of dedication. 1 December and 6 July are both recorded and it is too schematic to see in these dates the original vowing and the actual consecration of the temple respectively. 1 December may be a sub­ sequent invention, when the temple was associated with Veturia and the detailed chronology of Coriolanus' movements worked out. T h e ludi Romani were in September: Coriolanus took probably a month over his first campaign and definitely thirty days over his second (8. 36. 1). This places his advance on Rome at the end of November; so that by no stretch of the imagination could 6 July be relevant. See Wissowa, Religion, 2 5 8 ; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 181. 40. 12-14. Annalistic Notices A compressed bridge-passage leading to the story of Sp. Cassius. It is written in the stiff jargon of official notices. Various indications show that at this point L. gives u p Valerius Antias in favour of Licinius Macer whom he follows as his main source down to 51. rediere: a joint invasion by the Volscians and Aequi may have been recorded in the Annales but historically it can hardly have been after and in addition to the exploits of Coriolanus. It can, however, be accepted as an authentic record if we recall that the Coriolanus story did not originally belong to this year but was only located here at a relatively late date. Aequi. . . haud ultra tulere ducem: a puzzling reaction since L. gives no reason for their discontent and only here for the first time mentions 336

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. Hernici—nam 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

z

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.

Antiquarian research in the second century complicated it. A record, perhaps in the censorial archives, mentioned a statue in some way connected with Cassius. Any actual statue would in any case have disappeared in the Gallic fire (41. 10 n.), and only a confused and barely intelligible entry in the archives survived. Piso, the first his­ torian to employ pontifical records to supplement the literary tradition, and therefore the first to mention it, explains it thus: earn quam apud aedem Telluris statuisset sibi Sp. Cassius, qui regnum qffectaverat, etiam con-

flatam a censoribus (ap. Pliny, N.H. 34. 30). He understood the statue to have been erected by Cassius in his own lifetime; the people interpreted it as a sign of his tyrannical leanings, and it was de­ stroyed. It was probably as a correction of Piso's view, which can hardly be right, that the statue was explained as an offering to Ceres 338

486 B.C.

2.41

from the proceeds of Cassius' consecrated goods. This new explana­ tion was peculiarly apt, since, apart from being the proper recipient of consecratio bonorum (3. 55. 7 n.), the offended goddess was the cham­ pion of the plebs (3. 55. 13 n.), and also the guardian of the cornsupplies. A further irony would result if Sp. Cassius himself had dedicated the temple of Ceres. Research, however, also revealed a legal contradiction—a prosecution by a quaestor being terminated by the father acting on his own authority. The two elements in the old tradition are separated. One school of thought preserved the quaestorial prosecution but added a second quaestor since early cases of perduellio were examined by two persons (iiviri). The extra quaestor is called L. Valerius. Did Valerius Antias combine imagination and family gossip ? A second school of thought preferred the more dramatic idea of a iudicium domesticum in which the initiative lay throughout with Cassius' father. (Antiquarian research may also be responsible for a further oddity. The inscription, a later restoration, since it gives cognomina, listing nine persons (? tribuni militum) killed in battle against the Volsci and cremated at public expense (Festus 180 L.), includes P. Mu]cius Scaevola. Val. Max. (6. 3. 2) relates that a P. Mucius, as tribune, burned his nine colleagues for conspiring with Sp. Cassius (cf. also Dio fr. 22). It looks as if some historian, forgetful that there were at the most only five tribunes at the time, has employed the inscription to produce a melodramatic reconstruction of the end of Sp. Cassius in keeping with the passionate behaviour of tribunes in his own day. It is no more than a slip of the pen that at 5. 8. 2 Val. Max. makes Sp. Cassius himself a tribune.) But how had Sp. Cassius set about winning popular support for his intended coup? To supply the answer the annalists borrowed freely from the history of their own times. The agrarian law, the proposals to give land to the socii et nomen Latinum, the competition between Verginius and Cassius for popular support are all inspired by the doings of C. Gracchus, C. Fannius, and M. Drusus, and have no foundation in fact or legend. The proposal to repay the price of corn is modelled on C. Gracchus' Lex Frumentaria. See Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 153-79; Munzer, R.E., 'Cassius (91)'; Munzer, De Gente Valeria, 66; Soltau, Phil. Woch. 1908, 586 ff.; E. Pais, Storia di Roma, 3. 143-56; H. Last, C.A.H. 7. 471-3, 492-3; A, Oltramare, Bull. Soc. d'Hist. et d'Arch. de Geneve, 5 (1932), 1 ff.; Burck 76-79; A. N. Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship, 24-25; Klotz 243; P. Fraccaro, La Storia Romana Arcaica, (1952), 25; H. le Bonniec, Le Culte de Cere's, 213-35. 41. 1. cum Hernicis foedus ictum: the tradition is sound. The geogra­ phical situation of the Hernici in the Trerus valley made them a 339

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 Aavpajv 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, 1—17). 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.

Since Cassius and Verginius really were competing, it is hard to see what is the point of ut in ut certatim. certatim is nowhere else qualified in L. and ut could well be a dittography after cons-ul (J. F. Gronovius). 41. 8. Siculo frumento: g. 6 n. pecuniam . . . retribui: suggested, perhaps, either by Ti. Gracchus' proposals for disposing of the legacy of Attalus of Pergamum (Weissenborn) or, more probably, by C. Gracchus' alleged corn subsidy (Livy, Epit. 6 0 ; Veil. Pat. 2. 6). 4 1 . 9. praesentem: 5. 12. 3, 30. 33. g. 'Palpable'. propter suspicionem in animis hominum insitam: the manuscripts place the words in animis hominum between eius and respuebantur, where they will not construe. T h e rearrangement, due to Kock and Alan, is superior to Cornelissen's insitam in animis hominum which produces an intolerable juxtaposition of genitives (hominum regni) requiring the further deletion of regni. Insitam in animis is interchangeable with insitus animis ( D a t . ) ; cf. 4g. 12; Cicero, de Fin. 1. 3 1 ; ad Herennium 3. 28. 4 1 . 10. patrem auctorem: 1. 26. g. T h e propriety of the father's action is emphasized by the use of peculium which technically denotes the money or property that a paterfamilias allowed his slaves and children to hold. domi: 36. 6 n. See R. Dull, £eit. Sav.-Stift. 63 (ig43), 57-58. verberasse ac necasse . . . Cereri consecravisse: L. does not mention the dedication of the temple of Ceres, or rather, in full, Ceres, Liber, and Libera (3. 55. 7) traditionally ascribed to Sp. Cassius in his second consulship of 4g3 (D.H. 6. g4- 3 ; Tacitus, Annals 2. 4g). T h e omission, however, is not grave. At the time (33. 3 n.) L. was pre­ occupied with creating a unified account of the Secession of the Plebs and had also changed his sources so that it could easily have slipped his notice. There is no question that the traditional date is right. Foundation-dates are among the most secure landmarks in ancient history, and the cult of Ceres, with its Hellenic associations, harmonizes 342

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 sacer—presumably, 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.

(Steele), 'the gift of the Cassian family' (Foster), 'don de la famille Cassia5 (Baillet) but 'given from the proceeds of Cassius' belongings'. T h a t familia is used in its ancient, legal sense of property (cf. Twelve Tables 5. 4 ; Lex ap. ad Herenn. 1. 2 3 : note the phrases familia pecuniaque and paterfamilias) is clear from the corresponding passage in 3. 55. 7 familia . . . venum iret. T h e putative inscription raises serious difficulties. In the first place it is more than doubtful whether any such statue was extant in the late Republic. T h e temple of Ceres, being on the Aventine near the west end of the Circus Maximus, was in the zone subject to the devastation of the Gallic sack. No ancient author speaks of its being burnt by the Gauls, but Varro, who died in 27 B.C. before the damage caused by a conflagration in 31 B.C. had been made good by Augustus (Dio 50. 10. 3 ; Tacitus, Annals 2. 4 9 : le Bonniec 256-66), speaks of a restoration (ap. Pliny, N.H. 35. 154) which must, therefore, be earlier than Augustus' and could be a fourth-century restoration after the fire in 390. Piso, quoted above ( = fr. 37 P.), tells a quite different story of a statue associated with Sp. Cassius which was melted down, and thereby tends to confirm the suspicion that the only evidence for a statue and an inscription was second-hand and that the vague memory of it was refurbished by historians. Moreover, if the inscription were genuine, it would disprove the authenticity of one of the oldest pieces of the legend—the participation, in whatever capacity, of Sp. Cassius' father. Sp. Cassius himself had no familia but only dipeculium. He was not sui iuris since his father was still alive and at such an early period emancipation is hardly to be thought of. A writer, wishing to compose a plausible narrative of Sp. Cassius' end, would know that the belongings of a man convicted of perduellio were consecrated to Ceres. Legend told of a statue set up by Sp. Cassius which was melted down : the cult-statue of Ceres (Pliny, N.H. 34. 15) had been melted down in the fire of 390. W h a t easier than to assume that the statue associated with Sp. Cassius was really a cult-statue of Ceres cast out of the proceeds, which would consist of heavy bronze in any case, from the consecration of his belongings? 4 1 . 1 1 . quosdam: i.e. Valerius Antias. a quaestoribus: 35. 5. n., 3. 24. 2 n. T h e evidence that quaestores are old is dependable but their function was to pronounce on the guilt or otherwise of an accused. Sp. Cassius was clearly charged with perduellio which was not investigated by quaestores unless we are to believe that they held a preliminary examination at the instance of an aggrieved party before passing the case to the duoviri. This is as improbable as assuming that at this date the duoviri had not yet been invented. Admittedly the case of Horatius is fictitious (1. 26. 5 n.) but it illustrates what the Romans regarded as a very ancient procedure. T h e fact that the Twelve Tables concerned themselves with perduellio specifically as well as 344

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 aypaoi 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

i. 5), a principle which was often regularized by allowing half a vic­ torious army to foray for plunder and then selling what was obtained and distributing the proceeds throughout the whole force (cf. 4. 59. 1 o). Larger chattels and the human population accrued to the general, not as his private property, but in trust for the state. The proceeds he was obliged to pay to the aerarium but a moiety of it he could dis­ burse as a special reward to the troops for good conduct (4. 53. 10, 5. 26. 8, 6. 2. 12). This extra bounty came to be regarded by the troops as a right and if their expectations were disappointed, they were liable to instigate a prosecution for peculatus against the general for absconding privately with part of the proceeds due to the state. Historical instances are the cases of M \ Acilius Glabrio and Q . Servilius Caepio. A record may have been preserved in the Annales that Fabius had paid over a sum from the proceeds of the large plunder (such records were kept in the first century B.G.) and have formed the basis for inventing the fictitious unpopularity of Fabius. See further Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. 2. 448; Siber, Abh. Sachs, Akad. 48 (1936), 19; Vogel, R.E., Traeda\ 42. 3 . seditione . . . bellum: the alternation of war and riot continues throughout the later books. 42. 5. Castoris aedes: Suetonius, Julius 10 ut enim geminis fratribus aedes in for0 constituta tantum Castoris vocaretur; Dio 37. 8. The temple is regularly called simply aedes Castoris in official inscriptions (e.g. C.I.L. 6.363,9177, &c.) but the legend of Lake Regillus (20.12 n.) presupposes that it was dedicated both to Castor and to Pollux (cf. Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 3. 13). Since the two Dioscuri are named in certain formal documents, for example in the Fasti Praenest., iaedes Castoris et Pollucis\ we must reject a theory of Wilamowitz that the temple was dedicated to Castor alone because Pollux was mortal and that popular usage subsequently misnamed it, in favour of the view advanced by Lofstedt {Syntactical 1. 74 n. 1) that the temple was dedicated to both but was popularly referred to by the name of the more important. If so, it is proof that L. is not reproducing temple records at first hand in his history. idibus Quintilibus: the Fasti (without exception) give the dedicationdate as 27 January (Fasti Praenest.; Fasti Verol.; Ovid 1. 705-6), which is corroborated by the celebration of the ludi Castoris at Ostia on the same day (C.I.L. 14. 1 ; third century A.D.) It has been argued that 27 January is the dies natalis of the rebuilt temple dedicated in 6 A.D. by Tiberius in his own name and that of his brother Drusus (Suet. Tib. 20). 15 July was also the date of the Transvectio Equorum which commemorated the Battle of Lake Regillus and the participa­ tion of the Dioscuri, but it may be that the Transvectio, which underwent drastic reformation by Augustus, merely took the place 347

2. 42. 5

484 B.C.

of the dies natalis of the temple of Castor in the calendar when the latter was moved from July to J a n u a r y in order that the associa­ tion of 15 July with Lake Regillus should be be maintained. See Wissowa, Religion, 268 ff.; S. Weinstock, Studi e Materiali 13 (1937), 10 ff.; F. Bomer, Gymnasium 64 (1957), 113; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, vota erat: 20. 12. duumvir: aprivatus could not dedicate a temple. He, with a colleague, in this case probably his brother, had to be elected by the people to the post of iivir aedi dedicandae for the purpose. Cf. 6. 5. 8, 23. 21. 7, 3°- J 3 5 3 1 - 9> 34- 53- 5 et al- T h e tradition that the son dedicated the temple begun by his father looks over-schematic. T h e Postumii were jealous of such honours and a member of the family had written history. Note C.I.L. 6. 3732, and see Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 618-21 ; Munzer, R.E., 'Postumius (52a) 5 . 42. 6. dulcedine: 42. 1 n. fur oris . . . largitiones: the language of late Republican politics. Cf. Cicero, pro Murena 24. 42. 7. L. Valerius: 4 1 . 11. 42. 8. 'Three successive consulates, all without a break, as it were, tried and proved by tribunician struggles.' -que joins expertos and continuos. An ungainly phrase. T h e successive consulates of the Fabii have witnessed bitter campaigns by the tribunes. T h e Fabii have successfully weathered them and are tried and tested consuls {ex­ pertos). uno . . . tenore is colloquial and quasi-proverbial (cf. Cicero, Orator 21 uno tenore, ut aiunt,Jluit {stilus); 5. 5. 7, 22. 37. 10, 47. 6, 2 3 - 49- 3i Seneca, de Otio 1. 1; Otto, Sprichworter, s.v.) but the metaphor from motion is awkward with expertos. velut apologizes for the awkwardness. For other signs of unpolished writing see next note and 43. 5 n. bene locatus: 'as being well invested', not 'as being well situated 5 . Editors quote 7. 20. 5 (speech of Caeritan ambassadors) which is a deliberate echo of a similar play on words in Ennius {Trag. 409 V.). I t has no relevance to the present passage, which is more reminiscent of Plautine expressions (e.g. Most. 242, 302; Trin. 844) and is out of keeping with L.'s normally elevated style. 42. 9. bellum inde Veiens: 43. 5 n. D.H. 8. 87-91 knows nothing of a war with Veii in this year (483). According to him both consuls are engaged with the Volsci. Klotz {Mnemosyne 6 (1938), 83 ff.) maintains that L. is at fault, having combined two chronologically different sources which related the same event in 483 and 482 respectively (cf. 43. 1). If it is not another oversight, it is rather a sign that L. and D.H. are following separate sources. 42. 10. moti. . . numinis: 1. 55. 3 n. 348

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

4 3 . 5. ducendus Fabio in Veientes, in Aequos Furio datur; . . . et in Aequis quidem nihil dignum memoria gestum est: Fabio aliquanto plus . . .: so the

manuscripts. A discussion of the passage by Conway and Walters may be found in C.Q.4. (1910), 276. D.H. 9. 2, in his parallel narrative, reads: /ecu 5td raxpvs ol rmarot, StaKXrjpcoad^voL TO, aTpaT€Vfxaray itjrjeaav* Eiropios fxcv &ovpios eVt ra$ AIKCLVOJV TTOXGIS, Katacov 5c (Paj3to? €7rl Tvpprjvovs* Eiroplw fxev ovv a7ravra Kara vovv l-^oipi)o^vy ov\ v7TOfA€ivdvrojv els x€fyaS ^Xdelv rcov iroXcfxlcov . . . . (3) Kaiaojv 8e I5&)< I* *s a ' s o evident in the present two battles. Both were essentially combats between champions, the Fabii and Manlius reenacting the parts of Valerius and Postumius. Both have deliberate reminiscences of Homeric situations (45. 13 n . ; 46. 7 n . ; 4 7 . 4 n . ) and echoes of Homeric language (46. 3 n., 46. 4 n., 46. 7 n., 47. 6 n.). Both, however, are reported in a vocabulary whose similarity to the language of Caesar shows that it is the official military terminology (46. 3 n., 46. 7 n., 47. 4 n., 47. 6 n.). Both have certain glaring anachronisms (46. 3 n.). For detailed discussion see T . Stade, Die Schlachtschilderungen im Livius erster Dekade (1879); H.-G. Plathner, £>*