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

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 Erzhlungskunst
Erziihlungskunst des
des T. Livius
Livius (Berlin,

Burck
Burck

Klotz

Livius u.s.
u.s. Vorganger
= A. Klotz, Livius
Vorgnger (Neue Wege z.
Antike,
Antike, I94I).
1941).
= W. Schulze, <ur
Zur Geschichte
Geschichte lateinischer
lateinischer Eigennamen

I934)

Schulze

(Berlin,
(Berlin, I904).
1904).
E.
u.s. Vorganger
= E. Skard,
Skard, Sallust
Sallust u.s.
Vorgnger (Oslo,
(Oslo, I957).
1957).
W.
Soltau,
Livius
Geschichtswerk,
seine
Komposition
= W. Soltau, Livius Geschichtswerk, seine Komposition und
und
sei7le Quellen
seine
Quellen (Leipzig,
(Leipzig, I897).
1897).
Sydenham
The Coinage
Sydenham E. A. Sydenham, The
Coinage of
of the Roman Republic
(London, I952).
1952).
Skard
Skard
Soltau
Soltau

T. LlvIUs-no cognomen is recorded-was b

That much is clear from many sources (Qu
In Corn. 68; Martial I. 61. 3) and account
Livy accords to Patavium over Rome in his
cf. also 10.2.4-15,41. 27. I ff.). The date of
Jerome (ad Euseb. Chron. ad Ann. Abr. 1958
him with Messalla Corvinus. Jerome also
in A.D. 13, Livy in A.D. 17. The dates for M
years. Messalla can hardly have been co
eight (31 B.C.) and he was dead by A.D. 8 (
ThatJerome's date for Livy's death is righ
of a superscription in the Periocha of Book
Augusti dicitur. Since Livy wrote 142 books
he composed at least 2 I in the last thre
paralleled productivity if the average len
same. Moreover, the superscriptionreadsed
not 'written'. There is, then, no certain e
Augustus and it is tempting to believe th
years out for Livy as well as for Messalla
confusion between the consuls of 64 (Cae
59 (Caesare et Bibulo). His life-span woul
A.D.12 .

Of Livy's family background we know

Livii figure in various inscriptions from .P
and one bare epitaph of unproved aut
T. Livius C.J. with two sons and a wife, Cass
has been presuIIJ.ed to be the historian's g
us nothing of his private life or of his pare
a daughter who married L. Magius, a pr
Contr. 10 praef. 2), and a son whom he enc
of Demosthenes and Cicero and for whom
style (Quintilian 10. l. 39).
It may be assumed that Livy came from
that he received his early education loca
fluency in Greek (5. 33-35 n.) and his v
matters may be taken as proof that he did
he had not enjoyed the normal universi
814482

Livy is next heard of in Rome as the his

of approach enable us to date the change.
first five books indicates that they were com
25 B.C. (I. 19. 3 n., 4. 20. 5-11 n.; cf. I.
56.2 n., 57. 9 n., 59. 12 n., 2. 34. 12 n., 43.
58.4. n., 68. 7 n., 70. 1 n., 4 3 7 n., 4 4 n
there is nothing in them to suggest that Li
tory before 29 B.C. Secondly Syme has conv
134-42, dealing with 20 years of the Prin
death ofDrusus in 9 B.C., were a later add
the work. Livy's first objective had been
Wars and the restoration of domestic peace
of Octavian. Both lines point to the same
begun to return to normal and academic s
in the capital. Dionysius of Halicarnassus
Strabo in 29 B.C. Livy himself seems to
optimism that is evident in Virgil's Georgi
flourish once again.
Livy's concern for peace and concord
realistic, permeates his writing. Personal fa
this outlook. Padua had been the scene of
Civil Wars (Cicero, Phil. 12. 10; Macrobiu
young and, if his interests are any guide,
the pursuits of peace. Besides, Padua had a
morality and commercial prosperity (Str
Epist. I. 14.,6; Martial 11 ~. 16; Pomponiu
trade and trade requires the settled con
nationality and upbringing Livy was p
minded and somewhat bourgeois detachmen
of his time. All he asked was quiet and pe
his literary career.
Livy's retiring disposition explains his
capital. We know that he enjoyed the
(Tacitus, Annals 4. 34). He even encourage
write history (Suetonius, Claudius 41. I) a
be traced in the debt which thirty years l
speeches still owed to Livy's style. Yet Li

I For Livy's political ignorance see r. 32. 12 n.,

44 12 n., 52. 10 n., 56. 4 n., 5. 9. 3 n.; cf. also 4

Cossus (4. 20. 5-11 n.), Livy recorded it b

version. If publication of the last twenty
was postponed, it will have been, as was t
Pliny the Elder, until their author's death
ing, and perhaps incriminating, contents. T
of Livy and Augustus actually led the CO
more important. Livy recognized the gre
had rendered Rome and Italy by his succe
himself too closely with the regime that r
He is never mentioned as one of Maecen
never linked with any other ofthe literary
may assume that Livy began to compos
Knowledge of it came to Augustus' ears wh
promising a star and doubtless hoped that t
be glad in return to promote the New Re
come involved. He left his mark only on
imperial household, the invalid Claudiu
highest degree improbable, as has someti
sonal familiarity through court circles enab
material for the Aeneid from Livy or, conv
from Virgil.
He was as distant to the Opposition.
issues would keep him apart. One of the
from 29 B.C. onwards was C. Asinius Pollio
of Antony (Vell. Pat. 2. 86. 3) whom he
Pollio had been governor of Cisalpine Ga
harsh measures against Padua. Here was
Pollio had taken up Sallust's role as an hist
literary adviser Ateius Philologus (Sueton
proceeded to compose a continuation of
finished at the latter's death in 35 B.C. Po
political attitude to history and cultivated
style-durus et siccus (Tacitus, Dialogus 21. 7
Ars P. 31 I). Livy recoiled from both. H
approach to history is evident from the P
technique of composition. His distaste fo
stated (Seneca, Contr. 9. 1 (24).14,9.2 (25)
the manner ofSallust and Pollio was little be
intellect, and integrity. His attitude to T
3

Timagenes quarrelled with Augustus-th

can hardly have been before 25 B.c.-an
monograph as a defiant gesture, took refu
Ira 3.23.4 ff.; Suidas s.v. IIw>.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

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 editi<ili, so far from amounting to an
history, consisted of an attempt to relate the scatt
a consecutive narrative. For recent discussions of
Crake, Class. Phil. 35 (I940), 375 fr.; P. Fraccaro,
same reason I do not discuss two of the main sourc
early Roman historians utilized to fill out the b
dates-imaginary cases illustrating the working of
borrowed from Greek history. These also are trea

Valerius Antias' history (see below). Th

mentions are three recent historians, Va
Macer, and Q. Aelius Tubero. Livy's na
treated too seriously. The identity and ch
be unravelled by a detailed examination
and inconsistencies of the narrative itsel
a wide area the picture which emerges f
employed only two main sources for the hi
them alternately. For digressions on lega
graphical matters (5. 33-35 nn.) he might
hind the main narrative stand two writer
cast on the early history of Rome. In order t
of historical writing before Livy and to ap
became at once a classic that relegated it
it is necessary to examine the life and wo
Licinius Macer.
C. LICINIUS MACER

We know most about C. Licinius Mac

day a prominent politician and was the fa
Calvus. His immediate ancestry is unknow
father was called Lucius and that he mu
closing years of the second century B.C. if
(or possibly 88: Pliny, N.H. 7. 165). A co
116 may be conjectured. His oratorical p
patronus propemodum diligentissimus in his sum
secured him an early entry into politics.
tribune in 73, praetor c. 68. After governin
he was accused before Cicero as presiding
and died suddenly the same year (Val.
Cicero 9. 2).
The bare outline of his career does not
sympathies. He must have been quaesto
It is true that his tribunate comes later in
but Sulla's law which excluded tribunes f
repealed in 75. To his tribunate two sig
instituted an abortive prosecution of C. R
sponsible for the murder of Marius' po
100, and he delivered a speech pro Tuscis

712, 736, 739, 760, 763)~ The political

no less striking is another series issued
figuring, as it is generally interpreted, Ve
723, 724, 726, 732). These six issues of
the latest are unique in Republican coina
employed as a type-motif. The challenge is
genetrix, her charge the divinely guided ru
the Marians invoke that other protector o
that patron ofthe old Italian nation (Varro,
(Virgil, Georgics 3. 35 ff.; Sil. Ital. 1I. 17
significance, the Veiovis-type must be th
propaganda and Licinius is one of those m
Licinius is a Marian, committed to bitter
to Sulla .. It is harder to define what the p
personal creed of-a Marian popularis was.
Marius and his friends, or to vilify Sulla,
argument and reason. By good fortune a
mentation is preserved by Sallust, who i
speech delivered by Licinius as tribune (3.
sation and rewriting Sallust himself indulge
of capital importance for Licinius' atti
ominously by reminding the people of th
maioribus relictum vobis et hoc a Sulla para
slogans and jargon of party politics his
placency has allowed the people to surren
fare; and their destinies into the hands of am
engendered by promises (delenimenta) and fr
The people must learn to think about politi
themselves in the issues and not merely cast
above all, to organize themselves as a unit
can be heard. The tribunate must have its
as an effective mouthpiece of the people.
_ Such is the express philosophy and atti
are asked to believe professed no more th
doxy-an ideal supremacy of the people
authority of a benevolent Senate' (M. I. H
85) but whom Cicero with less inhibition
ad summam impudentiam. The extent to whi
judices and politics into the writing of hist
8

in J.R.S. 48 (1958),40-46. There are bo

places where wrong attributions have bee
the process produces a coherent body of L
Licinius was fashioned after the regular
Fabius Pictor and Postumius Albinus and
primarily, and an historian only as a side
as to the date when he was writing but it w
that he directed his energies to history duri
the political wilderness. The extant fragm
with the regal period. The latest cited boo
allusion to Pyrrhus (fr. 20 P.). He is not
first decade. Hence there is a strong presu
incomplete, or at least had not extended
at his death.
The task of an historian writing after the
was to be original. Just as Livy improved o
it is evident that Licinius took the history
about 130 B.a., as his groundwork and in
(frr.8, 10, II). These additions seem to co
In surnaming his son Calvus, Macer r
of his forefathers, P. Licinius Calvus. Livy
allows Macer's bias to shine through. Ag
against all probability, P. Licinius is asse
plebeian consular tribune, to have won his
campaign, to have resigned a second con
him by popular demand, in favour of his
and to have been given precedence in th
1-2 nn., 18. 5 n., 20. 4-10 n.). Nor was thi
in that' way. The list of the original trib
Macer alone puts C. Licinius at the head
did not hold the place long, for the next g
placed him in favour ofL. Iunius Brutus
eventually opened his eyes to Licinius' pa
ea propriae familiae laus leviorem auctorem L
Macer did not confine his activities to the L
had both a special interest in and a privileg
(cf. fr. 19 P.). His date for the Battle of Crem
that battle and the fate of its survivors a
3. 2. 2 n.) and the more revealing in tha
9

tribune in 76 agitated for the restoration

tribunate ([AsconiusJ, in Div. p. 189 St.;
Sicinii amply graced the pages of Mace
Curiatii and Horatii suddenly appear as
Alban Sicinius (1. 24. In.). Sicinii are num
call of avant-garde tribunes (2. 32. 2 n., 5. 2
plebeian Sicinius is substituted for a patri
One of the most interesting of these persona
(n.). Macer alone of historians records the c
One of the last prominent Marians, Q.
terms with Sulla in 82 (Vell. Pat. 2. 27. 6)
to death on Sulla's orders in 81 (Plutarch,
the reward of a consulship although he w
B.G. 1. 101 {nraTVW ETt t7T'Tra 8VTa dgtO
with a posthumous honour.
A second method by which fancy cou
throw episodes or incidents from contemp
past. Livy himself was not above doing thi
to have done so liberally. What is of espe
certain Licinian throwbacks are justific
associates or detractions of Sulla. The
most trivial. Rome learned of the defeat of
that was washed down the Tiber: so Ma
Rutilius' defeat in 90 B.O. (1. 37. In.). Ma
turn of speech. Two of his most famous re
(Plutarch, Marius 28) and ex virtute nobilitas (
reproduced in Livy (4. 1. 5 n., 1. 34. 6 n.).
was A. Postumius Albinus, consul in 99 B.
This luckless noble, whose military career
was immortalized by having the details of
in the career of an ancestor (4.49.7 n.;
the Senate on its own initiative had abroga
successor, the consul Cinna. This was an u
Licinius challenged in his narrative ab
(2. 2. 2-1 In.). Sulla had revived the dic
120 years. The move was portentous and
among his opponents. Licinius insistently b
that dictators could only be appointed by
with constitutional procedure (5.46. 7-1 I
10

is they who are affected for good or ill by a

history Licinius was at pains to emphasi
of the people (3.4. 9 n.). It is the people w
It is the people, not the Senate, who sho
determine their terms of reference (4. 51.
settle the conditions of election and powers
It is the people who should decide the iss
this to be possible or effective the people h
and led. There had to be a powerful and r
telum acerrimum libertati paratum as Macer ca
Livy 3. 55. 3 n.). Macer, as it is to be exp
cerned about the history of that institutio
feature of his account is that he believed
to be derived from a foedus between th
(4. 6. 7 n.).
An historian of the 70's would inevitably
struggle of the populus against the opportun
nobiles the struggle of the plebs against the
Time and time again we find Licinius giv
interpretation of an institution. The classi
the Lex Canuleia de conubio and the origin
Equally biased but less obtrusive is his
(4. 12. 2 n.). It was as much for their pol
the desire to employ new material for its ow
the libri lintei as the source for his list of ep
libri had reposed in the temple ofJuno Mo
vowed in 345 B.C., the centenary of the c
bunate (7. 28.4-6), and whose cult was p
fact they possessed no independent value
them like the consular tribunate itself as e
these specific facts, there is much gene
political hue. In his speech he protested t
dangers should receive the rewards (18 a
nulla pars fructus est). In his history he inser
(4. 49 ID n.), complaints about the ineq
land whereby the plebs were deprived o
2. 42. I n.). He hammers his message hom
force by the wholesale use of slogans and
rimum; 2. 12. 3 n. honos et virtus; 4. 5 I. 5 n
II

under his scrutiny. Coupled with this was

which found political or rational explana
We may recognize the LiCinian slant in th
line Temple (2. 8. 6. n.), in the death of
legendofTatius (1.14. I-3n.), in the rationa
4. 10. I I (n.) which so resemble his acco
or the Lavinian festival (fr. 5). Licinius w
with all the prejudices and faults of his cl
outlook that made his history fresh and ex
The analysis of the Licinian passages o
interest. It has been remarked that Lici
the Italian cities and their oppression un
history he shows an interested curiosity i
places near Rome which is reminiscent of
fragments contain informative comments
nium (fr. 5). From Livy we can tell that he
of Ardea (4.7. 12 n.), and much of the Ard
due to him. Licinius had evidently researc
partiCipated in theferiae Latinae (c D.H. 4
he gave a political origin. Many of these
occur in passing in Licinian sections of th
For instance eight of them are worked in
Priscus (I. 38. 1-4 nn.). The three notices
betray the same bent (4. 29. 8 n.).
Such, then, were the sympathies of the h
of the history that Livy chose to adopt a
authorities. For bibliography and discussion
(112)'; Ogilvie, J.R.S. 48 (1958),40-46; W
VALERIUS ANTIAS

Livy's second principal authority, Valer

not given), was of a different stamp. As fa
barked on a political career although a L
other Valerius with that cognomen, is (spurio
been in charge of captive envoys in 215
assume that the family was an undistingui
who assumed their cognomen from residenc
there is virtually no evidence. VeI1eius Pate
as a contemporary of Sisenna (ob. 67) an
12

was advanced by Zahlen who claimed that

results of Varro's research and who also
Catilinarian conspiracy and the career of C
of early Republican history. Neither arg
The relevant passages of Pliny make it cl
using Valerius and not vice versa; the hun
temporary references is peculiarly hazardo
every Caesarian allusion turns out on inspe
or Sullan. Cicero's apparent neglect of him
Valerius' obscurity. He was not a senator.
men like Macer or Sisenna would naturally
the work of a literary recluse would be ov
The problem might be resolved if the
could be established. The last quoted vol
75 (fr. 62 P.), but unfortunately the conten
committal and cannot be placed. The la
ment (fr. 57 P. from Aul. Gell. 6. 9. 12) is
and refers to the activities ofTiberius Grac
If the figure 22 is correct, Valerius must ha
two generations before his own at much gr
history. I
On balance therefore Velleius' date is a
later date can hardly be sustained if 4.
Tubero ... edunt is taken seriously, for i
Tubero had consulted Valerius' history ju
Macer's (10. 9.10; see Klotz, Rh. Mus. 8
Tubero was active in the 40's and 30's (s
late date of 40-30 B.C. for Valerius propose
is thus ruled out. I would conjecture that th
or thereabouts.
Much has been written about the cha
His exaggeration of numbers and his melo
been duly observed and pilloried. The fir
ever, afford an opportunity of studying hi

I It is not certain that fr. 60 P., said to come fr

need refer to Licinius' prosecution of C. Rabirus
100, except for the case against Catulus in 87 un
is unknown in this period, and Licinius need not
before 100 or during the domination of Cinna, i
be M. Mariu! (Gratidianus).

and censor in 120, about whose historical

cently published a useful summary (Sitzung
zu Berlin, 1960, no. 7). The value of Piso's
although they were branded by Cicero a
106), they contained some selection from t
Valerius' indebtedness to him is witness
I. 31. 8 n., 46. 4 n., 2. 13. 11 n., 32. In.,
this foundation Valerius set out to constru
The most striking single feature is the a
which outdoes anything which Macer co
though the place of P. Valerius Poplicola as
before Antias wrote, the Valerii claim a d
'firsts'. The first fetial is M. Valerius (I.
M'. Valerius (2. 18.6 n.); the first recipi
games was M'. Valerius Volusi f. (2. 3 I. 3
popular demand was awarded to L. Vale
public subscription for a funeral was awa
IQ-I I n.; cf. 3. 18. I I). It can be shown tha
naming L. Valerius as the prosecutor of
and M. Valerius as the prosecutor ofM. V
Valerii were the saviours of the state. M
Menenius as the conciliator at the First
Valerius rescued a Rome surprised by Sab
L. Valerius restored order and confidence
3 70 . 15)
With Valerii filling so many of the
history, there would seem to be little room
gentes, but where Antias found an anonym
or some similar action he delighted to su
Genucii at 2.52.3,3. 33 3, 7.42. 1-2: the m
only contemporary Genucius of whom we
of Cybele (Val. Max. 7. 7. 6). Others are
no claim to antiquity but prominent in the
compliments-a Q.ConsidilJ.s at 2.52.3 (n
a Racilia at 3.26.9 (n.), a iL. Alienus at
sponsible for the fantastic cognomen Cicer
suggestive Cornicen (3. 35. 11 n.). The
Macer's, but the difference is that where M
of political allies of respectable Roman d
14

themselves by staying in Rome during the

mediator with Sulla was required it was L
86) who was sent to Asia and the other L. V
of 100, who proposed a reconciliation with
introduced enabling legislation in Sulla's
between the Valerii and Sulla was natural
shared by Valerius Antias can hardly be que
Antium was most cruelly treated by Mariu
Sulla is examined below. Here we may no
gens Cornelia receive preferential treatmen
but it is Antias who alone is responsibl
proud patricians the Claudii. Earlier ann
apart from the Decemvir. Antias gave th
(2.23. 15; 2.56.5 n.; 2. 58. 6-59 n.). Agai
of Sulla's staunchest allies was Ap. Claudi
Sulla as consul in 79. At least one episode
his army by Cinna in 89, is made the basis
6 ff.). Conversely the prosecutor of the no
none other than L. Appuleius (Saturninu
The main centre of Valerius' admiratio
pressly stated but the evidence leaves no ro
Sulla Valerius need not be specifically
The relative dates are not settled althoug
Valerius is slightly the younger. Even if V
Macer as a politician (see above), there is n
recapitulation of his history. It is by no m
should have written his own version indep
Sulla had aimed so to strengthen the se
it would be capable of ruling on its own w
or subject to individual commanders back
therefore to cast Sulla in the role of Servius
echoes throughout Valerius' account of
organization, the extension of the pomerium
poly by the Senate of decisions affecting wa
resignation (I. 48. 9 n.). Valerius provided
Sullan enactments such as that concerni
games (2. 3 I. 3 n.), the reaffirmation of th
the calling of speakers in the Senate (2. 29
dictators (2. 31. 10 n.), Pompey's triump
15

with abhorrence as departures from the ve

stitution (3. 9 I n.). Counterparts from ea
factured for all that was good in Sulla's co
emphasized not merely by actual throwb
which had preceded Sulla (we may no
Asellio's murder (2. 27. 8 n.), of Cinna's
8 n., 40.7 n.), ofValeriusFlaccus' aborti
(see n. on 3. 39) but by much atmospheri
the apprehensive and deserted Rome of the
(I. 53. 6 n., 2. 23. 12 n., 3. 38. 8-13 n.). No
lurid tone in which he wrote of ergastula (
silia (2. 27. 13 n.; cf. 5. 32. 8 n.; notic
3.66.4 n.).
We cannot tell what led Valerius to take
to believe that Marius~ sack of Antium in
to do with it. For Valerius was very proud
petit (4. 59. 2 n.). Of course not every allus
to him any more than every mention of a
reasonably be assumed to be the source b
to be lavish and inquisitive in the detail w
63.6 n., 3. 5. 15 n., 10.8 n., n. on 3.22.2
drags in the history of the insignificant A
ment the exiguous facts about Antium.
Q. AELIUS TUBERO

In 4. 23. I (n.) Livy mentions a thiI'd s

The identity of this Tubero is a matter for s
had as one of his legates in 60 B.G. a L. Tu
an historian (ad QF. I. I. 10; cf. pro Plane.
disqualified by his praenomen. Nor is it likely
as the Q.Aelius Tubemwho was consul i
that the historian referred to by Livy wa
debarred from a notable political career
have written history under the Triumvira
jurist (Aul. Gel!. I. 22. 7).
Dionysius of Halicarnassus addressed hi
a Q. Aelius Tubero, generally taken to b
expresses criticism of some contemporary
dides and makes it clear that Tubero was h
16

hundred years ago Sigonius observed tha

panian delegation in 7. 30-31, which is bas
is modelled on the Corcyrean debate in
expressly censured one of Sallust's adap
(Seneca, Gontr. 9. I. 14) so that it is unlike
Livy himself. It was a fashion more appro
than to that of Livy. The echoes are often
of memorable epigrams, e.g. 4. 57. 4 cum
humana consilia",Thuc. I. 142. 1 TOV aE 7ToM
they give a thoroughly Thucydidean flavo
23. 7 n., 25 2 n., 49. 2 n., 58. 5 n., 3. 2
1 n., 71. 5 n., 5. 27. 12 n., 28. 8 n.).
There is thus a possibility that D.H.'s pat
the same Q. Aelius Tubero who remodelled
Thucydidean veneer. I In that event Livy's
at second hand through the intermediary
cannot be demonstrated and since in poin
tinctive imprint seems to have been that ofV
assume that Valerius was the main source
extensively used, although the alternativ
attractions.

STYLE AND COMP

Much has been written about Livy's style a

paid to the technique of his composition
exhaustive lists of classsical and non-classic
pages. Others have examined his direct
dividual episodes have been subject to mi
my intention to add to these studies bu
the problems which Livy faced and som
devised to overcome them. In this way I h
to see the purpose of the stylistic and lingu
illustrated in the notes and to understand
The history of remote ages presents two
if the material at the historian's disposal
worthy, it is hard to make it of interest or re
It is one thing to 'produce a research thesis

I See Peter, H;R.R. ccclxvi fr.; W. R. Robert

Imperii Romaniz D 102; P. Perrochat, Les Modeles g

814432

17

year by year and not related to larger trend

scrappiness of the material.
The second difficulty Livy tackled not b
data as he found them in his sources in o
account of early times, but by casting the
as illustrations of moral truths-omnis exem
monumento. Time and again episodes are g
by being turned into moral parables. The s
exemplifies the principles of pietas and fi
Lucretia (I. 57-59) and Verginia (3. 44-4
citia. The conduct of Sex. Tampanius is a
quam moderationis (4. 41.7). The affair of M
tion to prove the rule of Roman clementia (
of Brutus' sons derives its cohesion from th
necessary virtue (2. 3-5). Honos and virtu
the exploit of C. Mucius Scaevola (2.
facilitated by the ancient theory offixed ch
Thus, to cut across the vertical lines of
Livy constructs a series of episodes round
secure the unity of these episodes he has r
They are often marked off from the conti
introductions-erat tum inter equites tribunus
(4 19 1,2.33.5,2.3. 2,3. 11. 6, 5. 27.
prefaced by a moralizing sententia (2.2.2,
reader that he should expect an anecdote. B
struction of the episodes that Livy takes the
to achieve the effect of unity. Applying th
struction as defined by Aristotle and alread
history by Hellenistic historians (D.H. de T
Polybius 1.3.4,3. I. 4-5, 5. 32; Diodorus
material which he took over from his sour
principles of the Unities of Time and Place
of Coriolanus he omits altogether two pai
two separate campaigns into one (2. 34-4
nonsense but tense reading. His accounts bo
and of the conspiracy of Brutus' sons are s
nique of simplification: the scene-change
cidental characters omitted. A comparison
of D.H. reveals that Livy constantly inv
18

may be instructive. Sir WaIter Scott, who

and disorganized character of general hist
novels which by their very nature, like Liv
purpose, engaged the reader's attention b
the modern. His descriptions of scenes and
and substance of the novel, were given in c
was indistinguishable from that in which
some current event. The reader is made to
time he suggested the atmosphere of the pa
dialect for his characters to speak which,
it was branded as 'a dark dialect of Angl
In this way Scott captured two worlds, th
Livy's technique is similar. Steeped from
oratory of Cicero, acquainted with the p
and familiar with every weapon in the rhe
politics, Livy could with ease represent anc
and vocabulary of his day. He often did so
for the throne ofRome reads more like an ac
conspiracy than a prehistoric usurpation (
is the conspiracy of the sons of Brutus repo
cepted letters to match those of the Allob
which attended the condemnation of Co
disturbances of the age after Sulla (2. 35).
has all the air of a political trial of the 50'S a
on the trial of Milo in 52 (3. 11-13). The
which is perceptible even in some of the
marked in the speeches. Whether they be sh
or formal orations, the imagery and p
commonplaces of the rhetorical schools, a
the dying Republic ring through them. We
made by T. Quinctius (3. 67-68), C. Canul
(5. 3-6), and Camillus (5. 51-54) to soun
not disappointed. Anyone of them coul
Cicero's audiences. But the same method is
also. Cincinnatus' vehement appeal (3. 1
defence (4. 44. 7), C. Terentilius' advocac
tinctively and richly 'Ciceronian'. Each is a
rhetorical art. No wonder that the senator
ried round with him a collections of speec
.19

supply by the use of dialect. One of the w

achieve this is to make his episodes build up
or interchange of dialogue. We may detec
technique which Livy must have evolve
sophical dialogues. And these fragments
indirect speech are flavoured by the judic
language. A colloquialism or an archaism,
term woven into the dialogue serves to ch
to make him sound as a figure from the p
rtescio quo pacto antiquusfit animus (43. 13. 2).
Hercules and Cacus is Evander's greetin
religious and poetical phrases are mingled.
to action by dramatic language (I. 41. 3)
Tarquinius Superbus is conveyed by a
(I. 47. 3-5). The coarse impetuosity of T
in a single vulgar exclamation (I. 50. g)
highlighted by the menaces of Sex. Tarq
poignant interchange between Lucretia an
At the height of his exploit Horatius Cocle
found also in Ennius (2.10.11). The final a
comprises the moving dialogue between C
in which language. and rhythm combine to c
(2. 40. 4-9). C. Laetorius is crude and
examples, selected from many which wil
the notes, suffice to show that Livy does n
guage indiscriminately. It IS wrong to s
archaic and poetical colouring' in the ea
Livy's style moves in the later Decades towa
Livy confines his unclassical usages to t
heroes who thereby acquire character and
There were good precedents for this.
speeches should be appropriate to characte
as in history. D.H. criticizes Thucydidesfor
yopla,s (ad Pomp. 3. 20), Philistus as ov8~
avv~,awv TOUS ;\6yovs (ibid. 5. 6), and X
7TPE7TOVTOS TOrS 7TpoaW7TO'S 7To;\;\aK" JaTOx

8,a),6yo,s 7TP7T01Jcrn p.a.>J..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
103 per cent., the double spondaic of 29 per cen
figures given by Zielinski are 06 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 <rV Aios
dpx<6fj,crda see Gow on Theocritus 17. 1), were not made by earlier
historians. Besides conventional piety L.'s decision reflects on his
attitude to his task. H e saw himself as a creative artist, as a poet rather
than a researcher.

29

BOOK I
T H E first five books were planned and published as a unity, and
Book i states the overall themethe greatness of Rome. Rome
was a great city both as a physical entity and as a world-power. From
the very outset L. stresses the strength of the city (9. 1 iam res Romana
adeo erat valida; cf. 11. 4, 21. 6) and reiterates its increasing size (8. 4
crescebat interim urbs; cf. 9. 10, 30. 1, 33. 9, 35. 7, 37. r, 44. 5). R o m e
early became and remained a great city. And corresponding to her
physical greatness was an imperial greatness. R o m e was to be, as
L. is at pains to repeat, caput rerum (16. 7, 45. 3, 55. 6).
Book r also adumbrates the other themes which form the dominant
threads in the later four books. Book 2 is preoccupied with the nature
and problems of libertas. Already in 17. 3 we are given a foreboding
of this (libertatis dulcedine nondum experta; cf. 46. 3, 48. 9, 56. 8) T h e
consequence oflibertas, as of free enterprise, is discordia as is illustrated
by the events of the latter half of Book 2 and as is already hinted in
r. 17. 1 or 1. 42. 2. A free society requires for its preservation the
exercise by individual citizens of the social virtues. T o give way to
avaritia and to scorn modestia must entail the disruption of society
(Praef. 11 n.). This is clearly seen in the course of Book 3 ; and the way
is prepared in Book 1 where Ancus Marcius' pillaging (35. 7) is in
contrast with Romulus' forbearance (15. 4). It is in modestia and the
corresponding virtue of moderation the theme of Book 4, that the last
Tarquin is egregiously deficient. Book 5 is shot through with pietas:
Rome's success depends both on divine will and on her own observance
of divine ordinance. In many ways this was a daring and novel theme.
Divine causality had been banished from history since Herodotus /
(Cicero, de Orat. 2. 63) but in reintroducing it L. caught the mood of
his generation. Once again he foreshadows it in Book 1. Aeneas, like
Gamillus, is afatalis dux (1.4) and R o m e is founded under the guidance
of the fates (7. 15). M u c h attention is given to the desirability of
performing due rites and ceremonies (18. 10, 19. 7, 36. 6) for only so
can divine co-operation be secured. L.'s own attitude to the gods and
the alleged stories of their intervention on earth is often sceptical and
rationalistic (4. 2 n.). H e will offer a naturalistic interpretation sideby-side with a miracle.
T h e structure of the book is dictated by the length and character
of the reigns of the kings. Tradition had already given each king a
distinctive personality before the philosophies of constitutional his
tory began to press them into the moulds of fxovapxia^ /WiAeia, or
30

F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
Tvpawis. L. accepts the general philosophy of deterioration. Tullus
and Ancus are decadent counterparts of Romulus and Numa. Each
is singled out for some one particular quality: Romulus for military
expertise, Numa for the creation of the religious observances of peace
time, Tullus for ferocity, Ancus for the ceremonies of war; and the
comparison between them is expressly drawn (22. 2 (Tullus) ferocior
. . . quam Romulus; 32. 5 Numa in pace religiones, a(b Anco) bellkae caerimoniae). As N u m a founded divine law, so Servius Tullus founds the
social order (42. 4). superbia characterizes the last Tarquin. Thus each
section within the book has its own place within a general framework
and the corresponsion between the two halves of the book gives the
whole a symmetrical shape.
The Foundation of Rome
/ The Facts
There are a few traces of Ghalcolithic and Bronze Age settlement
at Rome, chiefly from the Esquiline, which may correspond to the
legends about Sicels and Aborigines but the first extensive evidence
comes from the middle of the eighth century. A series of post-holes
have been found on the two ridges of the Palatine, the Palatium and
the Germalus, which can be dated stratigraphically and by the
pottery associated with them, which is characteristic of the Early Iron
Age, to c. 750. Contemporary with this earliest community at Rome
was a cemetery in the Forum. Excavations have shown that both
cremation and inhumation were practised. T h e ashes were regularly
placed in a small urn in the shape of a hut which was stored with other
utensils in a large funerary jar. The hut urns correspond precisely
with the plan as it can be reconstructed of the Palatine huts whose
memory was also preserved in the casa Romuli. The primitive culture of
the Palatine community is found at the same period elsewhere in
Latium, particularly at Alba Longa. It is a regional variant of the
Villanovan culture which was widespread throughout Italy in the
eighth century. Little can be hazarded about the ethnic origins of
these earliest inhabitants. T h e linguistic character of the Latin lan
guage has suggested to some that they were a wave of Indo-European
immigrants who came from Central Europe c. 1000 B.C. and who found
their abode in Latium about 800 B.C. The community was a resident
nucleus of shepherds and swineherds.
Very shortly after the first huts had been built on the Palatine and
the first graves sunk in the Forum, other groi )S settled on other hills
of Rome. Cemeteries have been found in
e Esquiline and the
Quirinal, which imply the existence of vl"agc ' ommunities on those
hills as well. T h e excavations on the Quirinal were significant in that
3i

F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
they disclosed only inhumation-graves, a fact which lends colour to
the traditional belief that the inhabitants of the Quirinal were of
different racial origin from the inhabitants of the Palatine and that the
mixture of inhumation and cremation to be found in the Forum results
from the gradual fusion and intermingling of the Latins and an off
shoot of the Osco-Umbrians, the Sabines. M a n y of the oldest names at
Rome appear to be Sabine, and Latin demonstrably contains many
Sabine words. T h e duality is to be seen in the formal title populus
Romanus Quirites.
In summary it can be said that a settlement had existed on the
Palatine from pre-historic times, that it expanded in the middle of the
eighth century, that soon afterwards the Quirinal was settled by a dif
ferent, possibly Sabine, community, that the two communities together
with others on other hills gradually coalesced, and that the process of
synoecism was completed by the draining of the Forum and the build
ing of a market-place c. 625-575. T h e salient points of Roman tradition
are thus vindicated."All the attendant details and legends tell nothing
about the actual history of Rome but much about how that history
was written and how it came to be regarded.
T h e archaeological evidence is most conveniently to be found in
the three volumes of E. Gjerstad's Early Rome. T h e best general intro
duction in English is R. Bloch, The Origins of Rome, in the series
Ancient Peoples and Places, published by Thames and Hudson. See also
E. Gjerstad, Legends and Facts of Early Roman History, 6 ff.
The Legends
T w o mutually exclusive legends, of Romulus and of Aeneas,
attend the foundation of Rome. Of these Romulus was the older and
the more deep-rooted; it is assumed in an official R o m a n dedication
at Chios of c. 225 B.C. T h e legend of Aeneas became current\in the
sixth century and represents the view which the Greeks of that time
took of Rome. It was left to later historians to effect a synthesis of the
two.
Romulus is the eponymous founder of Rome. T h e suffix -ulus is
Etruscan a n d denotes a /cricmfc: Gaeculus is the mythical founder
of Praeneste. In the earliest legends he is variously associated with
Latinus, the eponymous hero of the Latins, who had penetrated Greek
consciousness as early as Hesiod (Theog. 1011). I n one version Latinus
was the father of R h o m e and R h o m y l o s . J n another Latinus had a
sister R h o m e and was himself the founder of Rome. In yet another
Latinus had a daughter who married Italus from whom Rhomos was
born. All these accounts say n o more than that Rome was founded
by the Latins. Equally the two dominant facts about the personality
of Romulus as they materialized in later telling, the antagonistic
32

F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
rivalry with his brother and the aggressive militarism which contrasts
so abruptly with the piety of his successor, correspond to no historical
actuality. They represent a peculiarly R o m a n form of myth much
older than Rome which belong to the very core of Indo-European
thought. Romulus and Remus are Cain and Abel or J a c o b and Esau.
Romulus and N u m a are Varuna and Mitra or Uranus and Zeus. T h e
detailed biography with which the name of Romulus was clothed
was m a d e up from a series of myths most of which are aetiological in
nature explaining objects and monuments and ceremonies. Many
have been supplemented from the resources of Greek mythology.
They are studied individually in their place.
T h e legend of Aeneas can be more closely determined. Scattered
groups of migrants from Greece or Asia Minor may well have touched
the coast of Latium in the seventh and sixth centuries but the first
connexion of Aeneas with central Italy is revealed by statuettes from
Veii, Greek vases from Etruria and Spina, and on Etruscan scarabs
all portraying Aeneas carrying his father on his shoulders and all
dating from the end of the sixth century. T h e first literary allusion to
Aeneas in Italy occurs a century later (D.H. 1.47-48. 1 = Hellanicus,
F.Gr. Hist 4 F 31 Jacoby) but it is possible that the tradition was
already known to Stesichorus if the Tabula Iliaca, which depicts
Aeneas departing with his father and the sacra eV rqv 'EmrepLav is
based on Stesichorus. T h e route by which the legend reached Italy
is not certain. Weinstock conjectured that it was mediated through
Sicily. More recently Bomer has argued that it came with the
Phocaeans when they fled to the west c. 540. T h e important point is
that it was a Greek view imposed on Italy. T h e Greeks attributed to
heroes of the Greek world the discovery and settlement of the communities of the west with which they had dealings. Diomede, Evander,
and, above all, Ulysses provided pedigrees in their wanderings.
Aeneas found a home in the Etruscan world and in particular at Rome.
Initially the Aeneas story was widely spread in Etruria. It became
localized at Rome partly because the Greeks already recognized in
the Romans of the early fifth century those same qualities of pietas
which distinguished Aeneas and partly because of the accidental
occurrence of a pre-Indo-European place name Troia on the coast
near R o m e (1.311.).
T h e legend represented the changing image of Rome, first as seen
through Greek eyes, then in relation to her position in Latium and
Italy, finally as the adversary of Carthage. Simultaneously a more
mechanical process was at work synthesizing the conflicting stories of
Romulus and Aeneas and devising relationships which would co
ordinate the two incompatibles. These early stages are not germane,
for it was only when Eratosthenes fixed a date for the Fall of Troy
814432

33

F O U N D A T I O N OF R O M E
that the chronological gap between Aeneas and Romulus the founder
of Rome became manifest and required bridging. It is probably that
both Fabius Pictor and Ennius were aware that a prolonged sojourn
at Alba was required if Aeneas and Romulus were to be retained in
the tradition but Cato, who calculated the interval between the Fall
of Troy and the foundation of Rome as 432 years (fr. 17), was the first
to fill the gap with circumstantial events drawn from local traditions.
His version may be briefly summarized. Latium was inhabited by
Aborigines under King Latinus. Aeneas, landing with his father
Anchises (fr. 9), founded Troia (fr. 4). Latinus granted him an
area of 2,700 iugera and the hand of his daughter Lavinia (frr. 8, 11)
and the united peoples adopted the name of Latins. T h e Trojans,
however, dishonoured the treaty by embarking on a foray (fr. 10). I n
disgust, the Latins (Aborigines) turned to Turnus the king of Rutulians who nursed a grievance against Aeneas for marrying Lavinia
(fr. 12). In the resulting war both Latinus and Turnus were killed,
while Aeneas disappeared from human sight. Aeneas' son Ascanius,
now called from his beard lulus, killed Mezentius who had come to
Turnus' aid and ruled over the city of Laurolavinium (frr. 9, 10, 11).
During the disturbances Lavinia had fled to the woods, where she
bore a son Silvius. Thirty years after the Trojan arrival in Italy
Ascanius handed Laurolavinium over to Lavinia and Silvius his halfbrother, and himself founded Alba Longa (fr. 13). Finally he trans
ferred Alba Longa also to Silvius who thus became the father of the
dynasty of Alban kings, the last of whom, Numitor, was father of a
daughter variously known as Ilia, Rhea, or Silvia. It was she who was
the mother of Romulus and Remus.
The Alban king-list did violence to history in order to preserve a
literary chronology. Rome was not the late-born offspring of Alba
Longa. T h e two villages shared a contemporary culture. Nonetheless
Cato's account of early Roman history became the standard vulgate
from which later writers only diverged to assert their individuality.
It finds typical expression in the elogium of Aeneas from Pompeii
(Inscr. Ital. 13 no. 85 : there were elogia of Aeneas and the Alban kings
also at Rome), or in the numerous versions assembled by D . H . T h e
surviving fragments of Cassius Hemina (fr. 2), Sisenna (fr. 2), and
Sempronius Tuditanus (fr. 1) show no disagreement of substance. W e
know of several minor modifications. T h e Aemilii substituted an
Aemilia for Rhea Silvia (Plutarch, Romulus 2). Others doubted the
paternity of Romulus (D.H. 1. 77). Varro added religious and
antiquarian refinements.
It is to this late stage in the synthesis of the legends that the two
authorities which L. consulted belong (1. 6 n., 3. 2 n.). Unlike Virgil,
who appears to have relied on the epic tradition created by Naevius and
34

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

i. i. 1-3

Ennius rather than the Catonian, L. followed recent historians (3. 8 n.).
There is no trace of Ennius in his account. Since nothing survives of
Valerius Antias 5 or Licinius Macer's treatment of the Trojan pre
history of Latium, L.'s sources cannot be certainly identified. T h e only
significant idiosyncrasy is that in L. Ascanius is the son of Aeneas and
his second wife, Lavinia, and Silvius is the grandson not the son of
Aeneas.
T h e principal modern works on the subject are J . Perret, Les
Origines de la Legende Trqyenne de Rome, reviewed by Momigliano, J.R.S.
35 ( r 945) 9 9 _ I O 4 J F- Bomer, Rom und Troia, 1955; A. Alfoldi, Die
Troian. Urahnen d. Romer, 1957; see also P. Ducati, Tito Livio e le
origini di Roma. T h e thesis that L. is dependent upon Ennius is main
tained among others by W. Aly, Livius und Ennius; M . Ghio, Riv. FiL
Class. 29 (1951), 1 ff.
1. 1-3. The Legend of Antenor
Nothing is known historically or archaeologically about the Euganei
who were supposed to inhabit in classical times the sub-alpine regions
above the Po valley. A number of inscriptions from the Val Camonica
dating from later than c. 500 B.G. have been adduced as evidence of
the Euganean language, for Cato ap. Pliny, N.H. 3. 134 listed the
Camunia as part of the Euganean people. T h e language is Italic,
having a closer relationship with the Latin-Faliscan group than with
the Osco-Umbrian. This does not, however, tell anything about the
ethnic or cultural character of the people since the language may well
have been acquired at a late stage in their history. Indeed place-names
from the region have been used to support the traditional account
that the Euganei were very old inhabitants of the area who pre
dated any Indo-European contamination.
Much more is known about the Veneti (5. 33. 10). Their chief
centres were Padua and Este (Ateste), where a settled culture, distinct
from the Villanovan, can be traced from the tenth to the second
century. T h e Veneti were distinguished for their metal-work and for
their horse-breeding and had commercial contacts with the Greeks
from before the sixth century. Their language also is now generally
agreed to have had its closest affinity with the Latin-Faliscan group
although its alphabet was borrowed from the Etruscans and some
words have been claimed as Illyrian. T h e phenomena can be explained
by the cultural pressures to which the Veneti were by their very situa
tion subjected. T h e ethnic origin of the Veneti remains in doubt.
Herodotus (1.196) speaks of 'IWvpt&v 'Everol but the long-fashionable
theory that the Veneti were a wave of migrating Illyrians is no longer
accepted and cannot be supported by the widespread distribution
of the name (e.g. the Venetulani in Latin, the Veneti of Armorica, the
35

i . i. 1-3

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

Slavonic Venidi, & c ) . T h e traditional account that the Euganei were

displaced by Venetic infiltration may be true. It is at least as likely that
the two groups were originally akin culturally as well as linguistically
but that the Euganei in their isolated region were gradually out
stripped by the more adaptable and progressive Veneti.
T h e connexion of Antenor and his Eneti with the Veneti belongs,
however, not to history but to Greek romancing about the Adriatic.
It is natural that it should be as old as the commercial penetration
of the area by the Greeks and hence there is no difficulty in believing
that it formed the basis of Sophocles' Antenoridae (Strabo 13. 608; see
Pearson, The Fragments of Sophocles, 1. 86-90; it was perhaps adapted by
Accius; see Polybius 2. 17. 6 with Walbank's note). It is at least cer
tain that the Antenoridae, although not necessarily Antenor, had a
cult as far west as Gyrene by the fifth century (Pindar, Pyth. 5. 80-88).
Initially, then, the Antenor legend represented the Greek attitude to
the Veneti. It was inspired by no more than a casual play on names
(cf. Pliny, N.H. 3. 130, 6. 5 ; Suidas s.v. 'EVCTOI: see Page on Alcman,
Partheneion 51). Gato was perhaps the first Roman to interest himself
in it and so to link the destinies of the Veneti and the Romans
(fr. 42). As propaganda his work was well timed, for the Veneti were
peacefully absorbed by the Romans in 184 B.C. T h e identification
was reiterated by the geographer Polemo c. 180 B.C. (E Euripides,
Hipp. 231) and thenceforth had a firm place in Roman history
(Tacitus, Annals 16. 21 ; Servius, ad Aen. 1. 243).
T h e linking of the two Trojan foundations in Italy through the
parallel legends of Aeneas and Antenor was thus a late action. It was
chiefly motivated by political considerations but folk-memory or
academic research may have recalled the curious fact that however
separated they might be geographically and culturally the Veneti
and Latins were linguistically near kin. But for L. the legend had
a special meaning. He was a Paduan and the story of his home city
was thereby joined to the history of the capital city. Hence he begins
his history with Antenor not Aeneas (but see 1. 1 n.) and takes for
granted as common knowledge that Antenor founded Padua.
For the history of the Veneti see Storia di Venezia 1 (1957); R.
Battaglia, Bull, di Paletn. Italiana, 1959, with bibliography; G.
Capovilla, Miscellanea Galbiati, 1. 238 ff.; for the Venetic language see
M. S. Beeler, The Venetic Language; Palmer, The Latin Language, 41 ff.;
for the Antenor legend seeThallon A. J.A. 28 (1924), 47 fT.; Beaumont,
J.HS. 56 (1936), 159 ff-; Ferret i57~ 2 5 6 1 . 1 . iam primum: the opening of the history is unusual. T h e conven
tional practice was to state at the outset the name of the historian (cf.
the openings of Herodotus and Thucydides: see Gow on Theocritus
36

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

i. i. i

i. 65) or the name of the subject (cf. Polybius 1.5. 1; Tacitus, Annals
1. 1 urbemRomam; Agricola 4. 1 Cn. Iulius Agricola \ D.H. 1. 8. 9). This
peculiarity led Wex to doubt whether the opening survives in its
original form {Neue Jahrb.f. PhiloL 71 (1855), 123-5). He n o t e d that
Servius (ad Aen. 1. 242) appeared to credit L. with having told of
Aeneas' betrayal of Troy (hi enim duo (Antenor et Aeneas) Troiam prodidisse dicuntur secundum Livium; cf. Origo Gentis Romanae 9. 1-2) and he
observed that L. never uses iam primum to begin a paragraph (cf.
5. 51. 6, 28. 39. 5, 39. 52. 8, 40. 3. 3). From this he concluded that a
sentence or sentences had been lost. But L.'s reason for not naming
Rome at the very beginning is that he gives pride of place to his native
district of Padua and iam primum is not strictly the opening for it
follows on from the general introduction contained in the Praefatio.
satis constat: implying that L. has consulted more than one authority
(48. 5. 5- 33- 5, 37- 34- 7)vetusti: Antenor had entertained Menelaus and Odysseus when they
came to Troy (Iliad 3. 207 with 2J) and had recommended the sur
render of Helen (Iliad 7. 347 ff.; Horace, Epist. 1. 2. 9). T h e earliest
versions do not associate Aeneas in these negotiations but cf., e.g.,
Quint us Smyrn. 13. 291 ff.
1 . 2 . et sedes: the sense is that they had lost their homes because they
had been driven out of Paphlagonia and their leader because Pylaemenes had been killed.
Pylaemene: cf. Iliad 2. 851, 5. 576.
1. 3 . Troia: so also Steph. Byz. s.v. Tpola. T h e same place-name is
better attested on the coast of Latium ( 1 . 4 ; Gato fr. 4 ; Paulus Festus
504 L . ; D.H. 1. 53. 3 ; Servius, ad Aen. 1.5, 7. 158, 9. 47). An Etruscan
oinochoe from Caere depicting a labyrinth has the inscription Truia
and the very primitive military rite at R o m e was known as the lusus
Troiae. Stephanus glosses the name by x^paZ- This evidence, whether
it be coupled with the name of old Troy itself or not, has been taken
to indicate that Troia was a pre-Indo-European term, used as a placename, meaning a fortified place (Rehm, Philologus, Supp. Band, 24
(1932), 46 ff.). When once the Greeks began to spread the Trojan
legend to Italy they naturally attached it to similar names. T h e Latian
Troia is to be sited at or near Zingarini.
1. 4 - 3 . Aeneas and the Alban Kings
1. 4. maiora: by enallage with rerum.
fatis: 4. 1 n.
Macedoniam: the old town of Rakelos in Macedonia-Thrace changed
its name to Aineia (Herodotus 7. 123. 2 ; Lycophron 1236 with U)
and issued coins of Aeneas carrying Anchises, on his shoulders (Head,
37

i. i. 4

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

Historia Numorum, 214). T h e change is perhaps to be associated with

Pisistratid control of the area (Aristotle, Ad. -TTOX. 15. 2 ; see Ath.
Tribute Lists 1. 465). T h e connexion of name was, however, long
standing in the district (cf. Ainos) and taken with Iliad 20, 303 ff.,
suggests that the Aeneadae had come to Troy from the Balkans in the
thirteenth or fourteenth century leaving traces of their passage in the
place-names en route. See Malten, Archiv f. Relig.-Wissen. 29 (1931),

33 ff.
Siciliam: Thucydides (6.2. 3 drawing on Antiochus) called theElymi
whose chief towns were Segesta and Eryx Trojan refugees, and Hellanicus (F. Gr. Hist. 4 F 31) named Elymus as a companion-in-arms
of Aegestus and Aeneas, though in another context saying that the
Elymi came from Italy (4 F 79 b with Jacoby's note). Their culture
was characterized by elements which were more Phoenician than
Greek, lending colour to the belief that they reached Sicily from the
East before the Greeks (details in Dunbabin, The Western Greeks,
336-7). T h e specifically Trojan origin may have been devised, or at
least published, by Stesichorus of Himera and inspired by the cult
of Aphrodite Aeneias at Eryx (D.H. 1. 53). T h e Aeneas story was
rooted in Sicily at the end of the sixth century and Sicily was a possible
channel by which it could have reached Rome.
Laurentem: 1. 10 n.
tenuisse: sc. cur sum 'he had held course with his fleet to the land of
the Laurentes', cf. 31. 45. 14; for classe cf 36. 7. 15. L.'s use oftenere
is, however, awkward here so close to two places where it is used
in the meaning 'inhabit5 (1. 3 eas tenuisse terras', 1. 5 ea tenebant loca).
Frigell proposed deletion.
1. 5. Aborigines', the inhabitants of Latium were known to Hesiod as
Latini. T h e Aborigines (ab origine) figure first in Gallias (F. Gr. Hist.
564 F 5 a and b) apparently because the introduction of the Aeneas
legend entailed that the Latins could not have been an autochthonous
race but must have been the result of the fusion of Trojan and native
(aboriginal) stock (Cato frr. 9-11 P.). Thereafter they remained a
constant element in the story (for Lycophron's Bopelyovoi cf. Zielinski,
Deutsch. Philol. 1891, 4 1 ; de Sanctis, Storia, 1. 173; Kretschmer,
Glotta 20 (1932), 198),
1 . 6 . duplex: the second version, which spares the Latins the humilia
tion of defeat and the Romans the infamy of aggression, doubtless
gained currency from the late fourth century when the foundation
legend was invoked to improve relations with the Latins. It is in sub
stance the version of Cato, Virgil (7. 170 ff.), and Varro (cf. D.H.
1. 57-60, 64). T h e first version, which makes Aeneas the aggressor is,
like the dismissal of Julian pretensions in 3. 2 (n.), anti-dynastic.
38

FOUNDATION OF ROME

i. 1.6

Laurentinum: at i. 4 N read Laurentem, which has the authority

here against 7r5s Laurentinum. L. uses neither form elsewhere.
1. 9. penates: 1. 10 n.
1. 10. Lavinium'. identified by inscriptions (C.I.L. 14. 2067-8) with
the modern Pratica di Mare. T h e relation of the ager Laurens and the
people known as Laurentes to the city of Lavinium was obscure even
in classical times. No town of Laurentum is attested in inscriptions,
itineraries, or historical sources (but cf. Steph. Byz. s.v. ^vreia), but
the adjective Laurens denotes a people as early as the first Cartha
ginian treaty (Polybius 3. 22. 11 with Walbank's note: apevrlvajv as
emended) and the Arician League (Gato fr. 58 P.) In classical in
scriptions it is almost invariably linked with Lavinas (C.I.L. 14.
2070-8) and always from the site of Lavinium. It is thus scarcely to be
believed that there existed in classical antiquity a town of Laurentum
distinct from Lavinium. T h e proles biformis Laurolavinium cited only
by Servius (adAen. 1. 5, 4. 620, 6. 760, &c.) is an antiquarian invention.
Further Lavinium lay in the ager Laurens (Obsequens 7 3 ; Val. M a x .
1. 6. 7), a coastal strip some 14 miles long adjoining the land of Ardea.
Thus either Laurens was the name of the people, Lavinium of the city
(cf. the populus Ardeatis Rutulus in the Aricia inscription) or Lavinium
absorbed at a very early date a short-lived community on a different
site called Laurentum (to be sought between Ostia and A r d e a ; cf.
C.I.L. 14. 2045 vicus Augustanus Laurentium, 7 miles from Lavinium).
Both Laurentes and Lavinates figure in the list of thirty peoples given
by D . H . (2. 18. 3 n.) which might be used to support the former
alternative. See H . Boas, Aeneas' Arrival in Latium, 96-126, especially
for the etymology of Laurentes; Philipp, R.E., 'Lavinium 5 .
T h e part played by Lavinium in the development of the Trojan
legend at Rome is one of the most obscure problems in Roman
tradition. T h e Aeneas story was widely dispersed through Etruria by
the end of the sixth century: it subsequently became monopolized
by Rome. Alba Longa was incorporated into the story partly for
mere chronological convenience to supply the gap between 1184 and
750 and partly because of the intimate cultural affinity of the two
communities. In this scheme Lavinium would seem to have no place.
Yet the connexion was long established. Tradition spoke of Lavinium
as being Aeneas 5 first foundation in Italy (Timaeus 566 F 59 Jacoby ;
Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 144) and substance for the claim is provided
by the annual ceremony which Roman magistrates performed at Lavi
nium soon after vacating office (14. 2, 5. 52. 8). It was further claimed
that the Trojan penates came to Rome from Lavinium and this
has been largely confirmed by the discovery of a fifth-century dedica
tion to Castor and Pollux at Pratica (2. 20. 12 n.). T h e cult of Aeneas
Indiges, i.e. Aeneas as divine ancestor, which was attested at the river
39

I- I . 10

FOUNDATION OF ROME

Numicius near Lavinium (Fabius Pic tor fr. 4 P . ; Naevius ap. Macrobius 6. 2. 31) has recently been confirmed by a fourth-century cippus
found at Tor Tignosa 5 miles inland from Lavinium and inscribed
LARE AiNEiA D(ONOM) to be of comparable antiquity with the
Lavinian Penates (Guarducci, Bull. Commun. 76 (1956-8) 3 ff.; Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (1 g6o), 114-18). Now the cult of Aeneas never reached
Rome, although the legend did, and the explanation of the role played
by Lavinium in the Trojan origins of Rome may lie in the significance
of that fact coupled with the peculiar nature of the R o m a n Penates.
In one form the Penates certainly reached Rome from Lavinium but
the word penates must originally have designated the gods of the perms
rather than either di patrii or national protectors like the Dioscuri.
T h e basic meaning is in accord with their association with Vesta (D.H.
8. 4 1 . 3 ; Cicero, Har. Resp. 12). They were the gods of the store-house
and are to be recognized in the primitive statuettes found buried with
hut urns in the earliest graves at Rome and Alba. At some point
therefore a synthesis must have taken place which converted the
primitive penates into the complex and manifold deities with their
Trojan links which are familiar in classical times, and that synthesis
must have been made in the period 520-480 B.C. T h a t is precisely
the period when Rome became mistress of the neighbouring towns
of Latium including Lavinium. T h e hegemony implicit in the first
Carthaginian treaty is finally regularized by the treaty of Sp. Cassius.
Rome developed the Aeneas myth so that it became centred on her
while leaving a transient, if memorable, part for Lavinium; whereas
in fact it was Lavinium with the nearby Troia which had been
the first place in Latium to take u p the myth seriously and to claim
Aeneas and the Trojans as ancestors. Lavinium retained the honour
as the foundation of Aeneas and as the first home of the Penates and
throughout historical times was accorded appropriate respect by the
Romans, but it had become a mere res ting-point on the Trojan path
to Rome.
T h e bibliography is very extensive but is usefully assembled by
Weinstock, R.E. Tenates' and J.R.S., loc. cit., and Bomer, Rom und
Troia.
1. 11. Ascanium: 3. 2 n.
2. 1. Turnus rex Rutulorum: for the name Turnus see 50. 3 n., for the
Rutuli see 57. 1 n. T h e addition of Turnus and, above all, of Mezentius to the Aeneas saga is later than and dependent on the synthesis
of the Lavinian and R o m a n tradition analysed above (1. 10 n.),
although it was firmly settled by the time of Cato (cf. Servius, ad Aen.
1. 267) and admitted only of minor adjustments such as the insertion
of the dream-oracle found in D.H. 1. 57 and Virgil, Aeneid 7. 81 ff.
40

F O U N D A T I O N OF ROME
5

I. 2. 1

which was designed to mitigate Latinus discourtesy in rejecting

Turnus in favour of Aeneas as suitor for his daughter's hand. The
Etruscan name of Turnus and his Etruscan sympathies have no place
in an eighth-century context and in particular the detailed history of
Mezentius' fate was evidently modelled on the Fall of Veii, where the
king like Mezentius was impious and detested and met his match at
the hands ofafatalis dux (Aeneas, Gamillus). T h e name Mezentius, not
elsewhere attested, represents a modernized spelling of an Etr. Medior Mess- with a Latin termination.
2. 3. Caere: 6o. 2, 4. 61. 11, 5. 40. 10, the modern Cervetri, situated on
a tongue of tufa rock, 30 miles north of Rome and 3 \ miles from the
coast on which it had a port, Agylla. Its position with access to the
sea secured it prosperity from the earliest times: the oldest tombs are
dated to c. 700. Caere would, then, have been in existence in this
legendary period but that is all that can be said. For the remains see
R. Mengarelli, Mon. Ant. Ace. Lincei/\.2 (1955), 4 ff.; Maule and Smith,
Votive Religion at Caere; for the history, Sordi, / Rapporti Romano-Ceriti.
nimio plus: 2. 37. 4 n.
2. 5. implesset: 5. 33. 7 n.
2. 6. iusfasque est: the phrase (cf. 3. 55. 5, 7. 6. 11, 31. 2, 8. 10. 1,
23. 12. 15, 45. 33. 2 ; 23. 42. 4 si fas est dici) reflects the well-known
liturgical formula by which the many names and appellations of a god
are summarized (see Fraenkel on Aeschylus, Agamemnon 160). Thus
although there was no actual cult of Aeneas at Rome there is no cause
to doubt the text with SchadeL Aeneas was worshipped as a -fjpws in
the Greek world, in Macedonia, Zacynthus, Ambracia, and Segesta,
and the literary evidence for his worship by the river Numicius
(Naevius ap. Macrobius, 6. 2. 3 1 ; Fabius Pictor fr. 4 P.) is ^con
firmed by the dedication to Lar Aineas recently found at the near
by Tor Tignosa and by the elogium set up in his honour at Pompeii in
which he is styled Indiges Pater. L. implies that Aeneas was wor
shipped there under a variety of names and we have explicit evidence
for two other titles in addition to Juppiter Indiges mentioned by L.
in this passage and by Servius, ad Aen. 1. 259: Indiges Pater (see
above ; Origo Gentis Romanae 14. 4) and Aeneas Indiges (Varro, Ant.
15ft. 12; Virgil, Aeneid 12. 794; Martianus Gapella 6. 637: see Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 117).
Numkum: Numicus and Numicius are found indiscriminately
(Schulze 481). T h e identification of the Numicius with the Rio Torto
which runs from the Alban hills to the coast between Lavinium and
Ardea is certain (B. Tilly, J.R.S. 26 (1936), 1-12). T h e manuscripts
offer a straight choice between fluvium (M) and flumen (nX). While
certain principles seem to dictate his use of amnis, none can be dis
cerned for the choice betweenjluvius andJlumen (Gries, Constancy, 21 fF.)
4i

I. 2. 6

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

except that Jiuvius is very much the rarer word (33: 182). This
phenomenon alone would incline one to prefer Jlaviiim here were
it not for the proven unreliability of M in these early chapters.
Jiuvius is not used by Caesar, Hirtius, Sallust, Nepos, Velleius, Valerius
Maximus, or the authors of the Wars in Africa, Alexandria, and
Spain.
indigetem: an obscure term which must mean 'divine ancestor'. T h e
di indigetes invoked in prayers include Sol Indiges who according to
one tradition was grandfather of Latinus (Hesiod, Theogony 1011 ff.)
and the Latin word is reproduced by the Greek yevdpxqs (Diodorus
37. 11). See further Kretschmer, Glotta 31 (1951), 157 ff.; Weinstock,
loc. cit.
3 . 2 . haud ambigam: L. betrays clearly that he has consulted two
sources, one of which maintained the identification of Ascanius and
lulus the ancestor of the gens Iulia and another which denied or ignored
it. T h e history of the question can be traced. Ascanius, who is an un
obtrusive figure in Homer, acquired importance with his brothers in
the post-Homeric tradition as the surviving inheritors of the Trojan
kingdom. H e rules over the Daskylites (Hellanicus) or Ida (Demetrius
of Scepsis; cf. Steph. Byz. s.v. aoKavia\ Mela 1. 92) or Troy itself
(D.H. 1. 53. 4). Originally his mother was called Eurydice but
Creusathe name familiar from Virgil {Aeneid 2. 666; see Austin
on Virgil, Aeneid 2. 795)was at a later but unascertainable date
substituted. His brothers are equally fluid. The Verona scholiast
on Aeneid 2. 717 mentions Eurybates and Servius, ad Aen. 4. 159
Dardanus and Leontodamas but there is no firm tradition about
any of them. When Aeneas moved west Ascanius accompanied him
(cf. Sophocles, Antenoridae). So it was natural to believe that Ascanius
was the ancestor of the founder of Rome. Chronological considera
tions which inserted Alba as a link in the history of Rome between the
Trojan landing and the foundation of the city enabled Ascanius to
have an honourable role as founder of Alba. It was doubtless aided
by the family pride of the gens Iulia, an Alban family (30. 2 n.) who
connected their name with Troy by the equivalence lulus = Ilos
and accordingly claimed that lulus was another name for Ascanius.
This was an old claim, already found in Cato (fr. 9 P.)- But the gens
Iulia in the second century was of little influence and it was only in the
closing years that it revived and began to exploit its claims for political
ends. Sextus Julius Caesar, about 125 B.C., minted coins displaying
Venus Genetrix referring to their Trojan ancestry (Sydenham no. 476)
and the theme recurs in the coins of L. Julius Caesar in 94 B.C.
(Sydenham no. 593). T h e consul of 90 B.C. made capital out of the
link and took pains to publicize his patronage of the people of Ilium
42

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

i. 3. 2

(Dessau, I.L.S. 8770). This Julius was a staunch opponent of Marius

and was killed by Ginna in 87 B.C. A political motive for the two diver
gent accounts in Livy follows. T h e one which asserted that Ascanius
was the offspring of Aeneas and Lavinia, a relationship not elsewhere
attested, denied by implication the high-flying claims of the gens
lulia. It is Marian propaganda and, as such, to be attributed to Licinius
Macer. T h e alternative version is the conventional one, differing
little from that given by Cato.
3 . 3 . Longa Alba: Alba as used in the name of the mountains, the town,
and the river has no connexion with the Latin albus 'white' but is a
pre-Indo-European word meaning 'mountain 5 (cf. Alps; see Bertola,
Zeitschr. Roman. PhiloL 56 (1936), 179-88). Hence the substitution of
Tiber for Albula represents the victory of the Etruscan language
(Thebris) over the indigenous. Alba Longa, on the site of the modern
Gastel Gandolfo, was a parallel foundation to Rome, being peopled by
a race of the same ethnic stock and the same culture, but the cemeteries
found in the neighbourhood show that it was a somewhat older settle
ment than Rome, although only by decades not centuries. A recent
attempt to site Alba on the slopes of Mte. Cavo has no archaeological
support. See Ashby, Journ. Phil. 27 (1899), 3 7 - 5 0 ; I. G. Scott, Mem.
Amer. Acad. Rome, 7 (1929), 21 ff.; F. Dionisi, La Scoperta Topographica.
3 . 4. Lavinium: sc. conditum which H a r a n t would supply but cf. for the
zeugma 21. 34. 1, 28. 42. 8.
triginta: L. omits the famous prodigy of the sow with 30 piglets,
which was said to have appeared to Aeneas, presumably because he
regarded it as a piece of superstitious gullibility. T h e legend began as
an aetiological explanation of the league of 30 cities (Lycophron
1253 ff.; Pliny, JV.H. 3. 69). It has been conjectured that it sprang
from a misinterpretation of the pre-Indo-European place-name
Troia ( 1 . 3 . n.) as 'sow', a meaning which the word troia possesses in
late vulgar Latin. In any case the prodigy is old. It reflects a primitive
economic situation when Rome was no more than a community of
swineherds. Rome, anxious to reduce the standing and prestige of
the 30 cities, succeeded in proposing a new interpretation by which the
30 piglets represented, as here, the thirty-year interval between the
founding of Lavinium and Alba Longa (cf. Alcimus, F. Gr. Hist. 560
F 4 ; Fabius Pictor fr. 4 P . ; Varro, de Re Rust. 2 . 4 . 18; de Ling. Lat. 6.
141 ff.; see Ehlers, Mus. Helv. 6 (1949), 166 ff.; Sordi 168-9).
3 . 5. Albula: cf. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 29 ff.
The Alban King-list
T h e dynasty of the Silvii was invented to span the 400 years which
separated the Fall of Troy from the foundation of Rome. It occurs in
many authors with minor variations (D.H. 1. 7 1 ; Ovid, Met. 14. 610 ff.;
43

i. 3. 6

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

Fasti 4. 35 ff.; Virgil, Aeneid 6. 767 ff.; Diodorus 7 . 5 ; Dio fr. 4) and
will be as old as the realization of the approximate dates of Troy and
Rome. T h e inclusion of Capys points to a third-century date when the
relations between Rome and Capua were fraught. Certainly it was to
be found in some form in Fabius Pictor (fr. 5 P.) and Cato (fr. 11 P.)
but the exact names are not quoted before the first century. In their
invention little ingenuity was displayed. They provide patron heroes
for local places and a symbolic pageant of R o m a n historyLatinus
is succeeded by Alba whose descendant is a Romulus (3. 9 n.), signify
ing the stages of Lavinium, Alba, and Rome. Tiberinus, Aventinus,
and Capetus ( = Capitolium) personify the prominent features of
the city. O n the other side names were selected to emphasize the
Trojan origins of the people. Atys (for whom Ovid, in the Fasti,
Diodorus, and Eusebius substitute Epytus; cf. Iliad 2. 604) is the name
of several members of the Lydian royal house (Herodotus 1. 7, 34, 9 4 ;
7. 27, 74: cf. 'ATTLS). Capys was also the name of Anchises' father (cf.
4. 37. 1 n.). Capetus (elsewhere given as Calpetus to provide a pedigree
for the Calpurnii) was a suitor of Hippodameia (Pausanias 6. 21. 10).
For the more controversial names see in detail below.
Numitor and Amulius cannot be accounted for on these lines because
they belonged to an early stage of the Romulus story and so were
originally independent of the Alban king-list. They were incorporated
in it when the Romulus legend was united with that of Aeneas.
Servius (ad Am. 8. 72, 330) says that L. followed Alexander (Polyhistor) in stating that the Tiber got its name from an Alban king
Tiberinus who perished in it. This has been generally taken to mean
that L. consulted Alexander as a source but the conclusion is neither
necessary nor attractive. Alexander, a slave or freedman given the
citizenship by Sulla (c. 80 B.C.), wrote an encyclopaedia of Eastern and
R o m a n antiquities in Greek (Jacoby, F. Gr. Hist. 273). T h e obscurity
of the author, the unsuitable lay-out of his work, the unfamiliarity of
his language, the unoriginality of his technique, all make him a
most improbable authority for L. to have used. It is now generally
admitted that L. can only have consulted him, if at all, for the specific
detail about Tiberinus (3.8) and not for the Alban king-list as a whole.
Yet even so such a procedure is at variance with all that we know of L.'s
method of work. If Servius is correct in attributing this version of
the name of the Tiber to Alexander, I prefer to believe that L.
learnt it not at first hand from Alexander but through an intermediary.
Since it was argued above that the main source of the chapters was
not Licinius Macer who is quoted only in criticism, it is natural to
think of another admirer of Sulla's who wrote after Alexander and
would have had both occasion and inclination to consult his work
Valerius Antias.
44

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

i. 3. 6

For the king-list see Trieber, Hermes 29 (1894), 124 ff.; Schwartz,
A.G.G.W. 40 (1894), 3 ff.; Bomer on Ovid, Fasti 4. 39 ff.
3 . 6. Silvius: was probably inspired by the character of the land
scape of early Latium, traces of which survive in the names silva
Arsia, silva Malitiosa, &c. It is not plausible, with Sundwall (Klio 11
(1913), 250), to connect it with the Asiatic name ZY'A/fos. casu quodam
in silvis natus is the product of later romanticism.
3 . 7. Prisci Latini'. the casci Latini of Ennius. T h e name is not ancient
but stems from the Latin settlement of 338, when the need arose to
distinguish between the title 'Latin 5 with its juridical implications
which then came into force and the earlier ethnic term 'Latin'. T h e
colonies here referred to, which comprised the area between the
Anio and the Tiber, are equally anachronistic. See Sherwin-White,
Roman Citizenship, 9 ff.
3 . 8. Atys: Epytus in Ovid (Fasti), Diodorus, and Eusebius, emphasiz
ing the Trojan lineage (Iliad 2. 604).
Tiberimts: the eponymous hero of the Tiber had been cast in other
roles besides that of an Alban king. He had been an aboriginal, killed
by Glaucus, an Etruscan, a Latin, or a son ofJuppiter who fell in battle
near the river (Servius, ad Aen. 8. 72, 330).
3 . 9. Agrippa: the original name is likely to have been Acrota (Ovid,
Met. 14. 617; from at<poalluding to the arx as Capetus alludes to the
Capitol) which was then rationalized to Agrippa. Agrippa as a name
was originally a praenomen descriptive of the manner of birth (Pliny,
N.H. 7. 45) and as a cognomen was later in vogue among the Furii and
Menenii. But the only Agrippa of note between the early Republic
and the Empire was M . Vipsanius Agrippa and it is generally assumed
that the substitution of Agrippa for Acrota was out of compliment to
Augustus' general (Trieber; see Reinhold, M. Agrippa, 10 n. 38). The
suggestion is not compelling. T h e formation of the Alban king-list
belongs to the same era that gave such wide publicity to the parable
of Menenius Agrippa (2. 32. 8 n.).
Romulus: the name is given as Aremulus by Diodorus (7. 5. 10),
Cassiodorus, Hieronyrnus (1. 46. 7), and the author of the Origo Gentis
Romanae (18. 2). P. Burman, on Ovid, Met. 14. 616, wished to read
Remulus here, which is more probable than Aremulus in that it pro
vides an attractive aetiology for the ager Remurinus (Paulus Festus
345 L.) and the Remoria (Ovid, Fasti 5. 479). Nonetheless Romulus is
not only better attested; it is a necessary anticipation of the great
Romulus and makes a piquant successor to Agrippa.
fulmine: there was a meteorite held in great veneration on the
Aventine which goes far to explaining this detail.
Proca: etymologically the name is connected with proceres and Proculus and the meaning will be, 'elder, leader, prince' (Walde-Hofmann
45

i- 3- 9

FOUNDATION OF R O M E

s.v.). It may have been chosen also for the reminiscence of Prochyte,
Aeneas' kinswoman, who died en route for Sicily and gave her name to
a Gampanian headland (Servius, ad Aen. 9. 712).
' 3 . 10-4. The Birth of Romulus and Remus
I give only a cursory account of the birth of the founder of Rome in
so far as it is directly relevant to the understanding of L.'s narrative.
The subject is treated extensively in Rosenberg's articles in R.E. ('Rhea
Silvia' and 'Romulus'). T h e primary discussion is by Mommsen,
Rom. Forschungen, 1 ff. An acute analysis, with a full bibliography of
the problem, is given by G . J . Classen, Historia 12 (1963), 447 ff.
Before the insertion of the Alban king-list the founder of Rome,
variously named as Rhomos or Rhomylos, was held to be either the
son of Aeneas (Alcimus ap. Festus 326 L.) or his grandson by a Trojan
daughter (Callias ap. D.H. 1. 72 ; so also Ennius and Naevius accord
ing to Servius, ad Aen. 1. 273, 6. 777), who is consequentially named
Ilia. Originally he was an only son but by the third century at
the latest the tradition of the twins was recognized (Lycophron 1232).
Originally Romulus and Remus may have been no more than the
Etruscan (cf. rumlna and the gens Romilia) and Greek forms of the same
name, misunderstood to give two personalities.
T h e genealogy, therefore, is Greek and two Greek legends were
grafted on to it. O n 4 J a n u a r y 1837 Macaulay in Calcutta com
mented in his copy of Livy that the story of the exposure of the twins
was Very like Herodotus' account of the early history of Gyrus'. A
closer parallel is the fortunes of Neleus and Pelias, sons of Tyro by
Poseidon, set adrift on the Enipeus and suckled by a bitch and
a mare respectively. It is an age-old explanation, like siring by the firegod (39. 1 n.), to account for the emergence of a new force without
background or pedigree. The specifically Roman turn which it took
was to make the foster-mother a wolf. This may be attested as early
as the fourth century when an Etruscan stele from the Gertosa di
Bologna (Ducati, Monum. Antichi, 20. 531) depicts a she-wo If suckling
a human. It is certainly established by the early third century when
the Ogulnii set up a statue of the wolf and twins (10. 23. 11-12) and
the motif is figured on Romano-Campanian didrachms (Sydenham
no. 6). It was evidently the theme of Naevius' play Lupus. We cannot
be certain when or why the she-wolf was selected. T h e most probable
explanation sees it as an aetiological explanation of the luperci (see
note on ch. 5.). T h e recognition of the identity of the twins is a typically
Greek dvayvwptcjts.
Once the exposure story was accepted it became necessary to devise
reasons why the royal heirs should have been so humiliated. Recourse
46

FOUNDATION OF ROME

i. 3. 10

was again had to Greek mythology. The names of Numitor and

Amulius, unlike the other Alban kings, are not in themselves signifi
cant and so must belong to an old stratum of oral tradition. It is not
fanciful to see in Numitor an echo or duplication of Numa (3. 10 n.)
and Amulius may also have been the original name of a king or chief
tain later pushed into obscurity by the more etymologically satisfying
Romulus (3. 10 n.). At all events, if the names survived from the
earliest times (Amulius already occurs in Naevius before the Alban
king-list was fabricated), the careers and characters of the two
brothers are directly modelled upon the legends of Polyneices and
Eteocles, so much so that some later authorities even credited Numitor
and Amulius with a division of inheritance or alternation of rule
(Plutarch, Romulus 3; Origo Gentis Romanae 19; cf. Hellanicus 4 F
98 Jacoby).
Thus motivation and circumstantial detail were acquired for the
story of the birth of Romulus and Remus. It was left to later historians
to elaborate. At an early date the aetiological connexion with the
ficus Ruminalis was made (4. 5 n.). Subsequent historians either em
bellished by intensifying the scandalous (vi compressa) or rationalized
by reinterpreting the supernatural elements in the story. One sophis
ticated development was the result of the schematization of Roman
history to fit the Greek pattern of a developing constitution. Romulus
was the ideal or typical fxovapxos. Hence he is portrayed as a man of
mental and physical accomplishment (4. 9 n.), a trait that is as old
as Polybius and could be as old as Fabius Pictor. Sensationalism was
catered for by the ingenious identification first made, as we are
expressly told, by Valerius Antias (fr. 1 P.; from Aul. Gell. 7. 7. 1)
of the wolf (lupd) which suckled the twins with a renowned mistress
from mythologyAcca Larentia (4. 7 n.)on the basis of the collo
quial use of lupa as a synonym for meretrix (Plautus, Epid. 403; True.
657). According to the usual version she was inspired by templedreams to marry the first person that she met who would leave her his
fortune. This turned out to be Tarutius, who bequeathed to her the
site of Rome which she in her turn left to the new settlers. It was easy
to manipulate this story. Acca Larentia was the lupa, the harlot who
conceived Romulus and Remus and bequeathed to them the land on
which Rome was to be built. Scepticism was served by Licinius Macer
(fr. 1 P.; from Macrobius 1. 10. 17; so also Masurius Sabinus ap. Aul.
Gell. 7. 7. 8) who refined the story, explaining Acca Larentia's name
(4. 7 n.) by her marriage to Faustulus and making the relationship
to Romulus and Remus not that of an unmarried mother but of a
nurse.
Both versions are represented in L. (4. 6-7) and it would be in
accord with his usual practice if he had directly used these two writers
47

i. 3. 10

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

as his sole first-hand sources. T h e story is told simpJy, without

dramatic effects or literary touches.
3 . 10. Numitorem: cf. the Etr. numQral (CLE. 15; see Schulze 200).
Amulium: a diminutive of Ammius, commonly found in the early
Empire as a nomen at Puteoli. It corresponds to the Etr. amni (Schulze
121).

3 . 11. Vestalem: 20. 2 n.

4. 1. debebatur: 1. 4. Here as elsewhere L. subscribes to the view that
the growth of Rome was inevitable and predetermined. T h e Fall of
Veii like the sack of Rome or the disaster of Cannae are all spoken
of as happening in accordance with the pattern laid down by fatum (rj
LfjiapfXvr)). L. does use the word fatum in weaker senses, denoting, for
example, divine oracles (cf. 5. 16. 10), but, particularly in the first
decade, he commits himself to the Stoic conception of history as pro
pagated by Posidonius. This might be mere literary convention
Gasaubon drew attention to the reminiscence here of the common
place Greek dAA' e'Set dpa TOVTO ytveordaiwere it not for the express
evidence of Seneca (Epist. 100. 9) that L. also wrote philosophical and
historico-philosophical works. But L.'s Stoicism was polite and unrigorous. See further Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy\ Walsh, Livy,
46 ff.
4. 2. vi compressa: comprimo, of reluctant intercourse, is not elsewhere
found in prose before Tacitus (Annals 5. 9) but is frequent in comedy
(cf, e.g., Plautus, Aul. 28, 29, 30, 33, 689; Terence, Phormio 1018).
It is unexpected here but was perhaps chosen to give point to auctor
culpae honestior where culpa combines the notion of sacrilege and sexual
sin (cf. Propertius 4. 4. 70; 1. 5. 2 5 ; Tacitus, Annals 3. 24). T h e Ves
tal's rape was common and sordid: it is ennobled when a god is
credited with having been responsible.
seu . . sew. 6. 12. 1, representing different opinions more fully
summarized by D . H . 1. 77. According to one Rhea was on her way
etV Upov aXoros 'Aptos (perhaps the Incus Martis between the first and
second milestones on the Appian way (E Juvenal 1.7)) when she was
ravished. T h e juxtaposition of a natural and supernatural explanation
is common in L. (4. 4 n., 4. 7, 12. 7, 16. 4, 19. 4, 34. 8, 51. 3 : see
above p. 12).
4. A. forte quadam divinitus: the concepts of chance and providence
have struck editors as alternatives (cf. Caesar, B.G. 1. 12. 6), hence
Gruter's forte quadam an divinitus found favour with scholars as widely
distinct as Merula and Bentley, Bauer and Madvig. But there is
nothing unusual in the use offors relating to an event which is godinspired but, from the human point of view, unexpected or unfore
seen. Cf. 22. 42. 10 di. . . distulere: nam forte ita evenit; Plutarch,
48

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

1.4.4

Theseus 3 5 ; Suetonius, Claudius 13; Euripides, LA. 3 5 1 ; Medea 671.

forte quadam occurs at 3. 64. 4, 5. 49. 1.
4. 5. alluvie: not elsewhere found in L., but cf. [Cicero, Q.F. 3. 7. 1] ;
Columella 3. 11. 8 ; Frontinus, Strat. 2. 3. 22. Gronovius's eluvies would
describe stagnant, motionless water (Tacitus, Annals 13. 57) which is
incompatible with prqfluentem aquam.
ficus Ruminalis: the Romans derived Ruminalis from the goddess
Rumina, a primeval goddess of nursing, whose name is to be connected
with ruma 'a breast' (Varro, de Re Rust. 2. 11. 5 ; Festus 332 L . ; Pliny,
N.H. 15. 77). Figs are often symbolical of the human breast. T h e figtree has a milky juice and both in Greece (the Thargelia) and in Rome
(the Nonae Caprotinae) there were festivals in which the fig-tree
was central but which were primarily concerned with human pro
creation (W. R. Paton, Rev. Arch. 9 (1907), 51 ff.; Frazer, Golden
Bough, 9. 257-8; Jacobsohn, Charites f. Leo, 425 ff.; van L.Johnson,
T.A.P.A. 91 (i960), i n ff.; Weinstock, R.E., 'Nonae Caprotinae').
Modern critics, however, discounting the ancient view as a mere play
on words, link Ruminalis with the Etruscan gentile name Rumina
from which the name of R o m e and the Romilii ultimately stem
(Schulze 368). With the former interpretation the association of
Romulus and the ficus Ruminalis will be a late and contrived aetiology
based on the similarity of sound. According to the latter the associa
tion may be necessary rather than accidental and the fig-tree have
been from the very beginning intimately bound up with the legend
of Romulus. T h e former is clearly to be preferred.
T h e sources record two distinct trees called by the name ficus
Ruminalis. O n e lay at the south-western corner of the Palatine near
the Lupercal (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 5 4 ; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 90; Festus
332 L . ; Pliny, N.H. 15. 77) and was said by Ovid to survive only
vestigiously in his day {Fasti 2. 411). T h e other was situated in the
comitium (Tacitus, Annals 13. 58). Tradition claimed that the augur
Navius had miraculously transplanted the tree from the corner of the
Palatine to the comitium (Festus 168 L . ; D . H . 3. 7 1 ; see note on 1. 36).
Only the latter will have been the true ficus Ruminalis, but it was im
possible topographically for that one to have sheltered the royal
twins. Hence two trees were postulated and the proximity of the
real tree to the statue of Navius made it easy to dream up a magical
transplantation. See Nordh, Eranos 31 (1933), 85 ff.; Hadsits, Class.
Phil. 31 (1936), 305 ff.
4 . 7. Faustulo: the shepherd of Amulius' herds who found the twins is
mentioned by Varro (de Re Rust. 2. 1. 9 ; cf. D.H. 1. 79. 9 ; Plutarch,
Romulus 6), but already on a coin of the Gracchan age, minted by Sex.
Pompeius Fostlus (Sydenham no. 461) he is depicted standing beside
the wolf suckling the twins in front of a fig-tree (the ficus Ruminalis).
814432

49

i. 4. 7

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

So his place in the story is old, although his name is unaccountable.

The innovation that was made after the Gracchan age was to give
him as wife Acca Larentia. T h e character and history of Acca Larentia
have never been satisfactorily explained, and any theory is bound to
be disputable. Varro {de Ling. Lat. 6. 23) writes 'Larentalia . . . ab
Acca Larentia nominatus cui sacerdotes nostri publice parentant',
thus linking her with the rites paid at the Lar(ent)alia on 23 December
to the Lares or the deified ancestors. This has been rejected because
the quantity of the a in Lares is short but of Larentia long (Ovid,
Fasti 3. 55, 57), but alternating root-vowels present no obstacle
(Palatium is later scanned Palatium; cf. lustrum from lu) and the coin
of P. Accoleius Lariscolus (Sydenham no. 1148), figuring Acca
Larentia, presupposes the connexion. Varro's identification gains
support from the unusual name Acca which should be compared with
Greek OLKKU) and Sanskrit akka 'mother'. For Acca Larentia would
be none other than the mother of the Lares, Mater Larum (I.L.S.
5047-8). Certainly A.L. must be a divinity, for sacrifice in honour
of a mortal would be unprecedented. The development thereafter
is more easily guessed. Romulus and Remus were the ancestors of
the R o m a n people and so, on death, became Lares par excellence. It
was natural, therefore, that their (foster-) mother should be Acca
Larentia, the Mater Larum, and that she came to assume a share in
the functions of the wolf. This pairing of Acca Larentia and the wolf
abetted by the equation lupa = meretrix led to a new tradition of Acca
Larentia as the notorious whore, which is at least as old as Gato (fr. 16
P.). She is given the nickname 0aoAa (Plutarch) or Faula (Lactantius), a common hrcupa-name, is transferred to the reign of Ancus
Marcius, or becomes the mistress of Hercules (Plutarch, Romulus 5 ;
Q.R. 3 5 ; Macrobius 1. 10. 11)a fitting couple, for Hercules' amatory
exploits were a match for her own. A somewhat different tale is told
by Aul. Gell. 7. 7. 8 (cf. Pliny, N.H. 18. 6). It was left to Valerius
Antias to take the obvious step and to substitute Acca Larentia for
the wolf herself making her (Faula) the wife of Faustulus. See further
Pais, Ancient Legends, 60-95 5 Wissowa, R.E., 'Faustulus'; Bayet,
Hercule Romain, 3 4 8 - 9 ; Otto, Wien. Stud. 35 (1913), 62 ff.; Tabeling,
Mater Larum, 46 ff.; Koch, Gnomon 18 (1942), 241-4; Krappe, A.J.A.
46 (1942), 490 ff.; Bomer on Ovid, Fasti 3. 5 5 ; Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 92-93.
datos: 9. 15. 7.
4 . 9. corporibus animisque: the beau ideal, cf. Polybius 6. 5. 7 with
Walbank's note; Cicero, de Rep. 2. 4.
seria ac iocos celebrare: the rare use ofcelebrare cto enjoy together' has
led editors to read ferias for seria (Doujat, Ruperti) but the com
panionship of Romulus and the shepherds was not confined to public
50

FOUNDATION O F R O M E

1.4. 9

holidays. For celebrare cf. Cicero, de Orat. 3. 197; for seria ac iocos cf.
Ps.-Aur. Vict. Epit. 9. 17; Claudian 22. 165.
5. 1-2. Evander and the Luperci
T h e Lupercalia, held on 15 February, was among the most primitive
of R o m a n rituals. Naked patrician youths ran, not, as was once
thought, round the Palatine, but up a n d down the Sacra Via in the
Forum, armed with strips of goatskin with v/hich they hit bystanders.
Three main explanations of the ceremony have been supported and
judgement might be given in favour of one of them if only there could
be any certainty about the etymology of the word Luperci. A. K.
Michels (T.A.P.A. 84 (1953), 35-59 with references to the principal
ancient and modern authorities a m o n g whom notice especially
Deubner, Archivf. Relig.-Wiss. 13 (1910), 481 ff.), points out that the
Lupercalia fell in the middle of three days of propitiation of the dead
(dies parentales; cf. Ovid, Fasti 2. 533-70; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 13)
and that the area where the Luperci ran marked the boundary of the
primitive sepulcretum in the Forum. She sees the festival as intended to
protect the community against the power of the dead manifesting
themselves at this season in the form of wolves (cf, e.g., Petronius 62;
Augustine, Civ. Dei 18. 17; Pliny, N.H. 8. 81) and the Luperci as
priests who are endowed with the gift of controlling wolves or the
spirits of the dead manifested as wolves (lupercus formed from lupus like
noverca; so also Ernout-Meillet). A second theory, maintained by the
ancients themselves (Ovid, Fasti 2.425-52; [Servius], adAen. 8.343; Livy
fr. 63) and championed, for example, by K. Kerenyi (Mobe, 136-47), held
that it was a fertility ceremony and that flagellation was designed to
promote fertility in women. Such a theory cannot account either for
the name Luperci or for the flagellation of men as well as women. T h e
simplest hypothesis is that reaffirmed by Nilsson (Latomus 15(1956), 133).
Taking the Luperci to be derived from lupus and arceo (cf. XvKovpyos),
he regarded the ceremony as the natural concern of a shepherding com
munity to avert depredations on its herds by wolves. T h e superstitious
horror of wolves in early Rome, occasioned by economic necessity, is
plain from the prodigy of 3. 29. 9. Although it seems agreed that this
etymology of Luperci is inadmissible (see Walde-Hofmann; E r n o u t Meillet; also Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 84-86; J . Gruber, Glotta
39 (1961), 273-6), none the less the recognition of the Lupercalia as a
purification of the flocks is most in accord with the character of early
R o m a n religion (cf. the Parilia) and with the ancient evidence. T h e
Luperci may be not wolf-averters but wolf-men, who impersonate and
so control wolves. With the transition from a pastoral to an urban
society, the original character of the ceremony will also have undergone
change, until it came to be thought of as a fertility-rite.
51

I. 5. 1-2

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

Whatever its exact nature, the Lupercalia afforded the grounds for
a link between Greece and Rome. T h e similarity of the Luperci to
the cult of Ztvs AVKOLIOS in Arcadia facilitated the construction, prob
ably in the fourth century, of the myth that the Arcadian Evander had
inhabited the Palatine before the arrival of the descendants of Aeneas.
Evander also supplied an etymology of the name Palatium (5. 1 n.).
It is a purely literary invention, dating from an age which wished to
see Greek precedents for all things R o m a n and, in particular, saw the
influence of Arcadia strong in Rome (Bayet, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 38
(1920), 63 ff.; he argues for Magna Graecia as the intermediary of
the legends). For a different view see Gjerstad, Legends and Facts,
10 ff., who agrees that the rite is of the greatest antiquity.
5 1. monte: wrongly excised by Madvig, is in apposition to Palatio
(cf. Tacitus, Annals 12. 2 4 ; see Andresen, Woch. Klass. Phil. 1916,
976 ff.). Elsewhere mons Palatinus is found but it was necessary to have
the substantive form Palatium here in order to clarify the etymology.
Pallanteo: this etymology is as old as Fabius Pictor (cf. D . H . 1.31.4,
79. 4 ; Pliny, N.H. 4. 20; Pausanias 8. 43. 2 ; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 313)
but it had many rivals, e.g. from a putative son of Hercules and
Evander's daughter Launa (Lavinia) (Polybius 6. 11a 1 with Walbank's note; D . H . 1. 34. 1; Origo Gentis Romanae 5. 3 ; Servius, ad
Aen. 8. 5 1 ; the addition of Hercules helped to justify his encounter
with Cacus); from balare (Naevius ap. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 5 3 ;
Paulus Festus 245 L.), polare (Paulus Festus, loc. cit.) or the god Pales
(Veil. Pat. 1. 8. 4 ; Solinus 1. 15; cf. Palatua: this etymology is de
fended by Vanicek and Altheim). There are, however, a number of
other place-names beginning Pal- or Fal- (cf. Falerii). This points
rather to a pre-Indo-European root meaning'rock, hill' (cf., e.g., Etr.
falad 'sky': see Walde-Hofmann s.v. 'Palatium').
5. 2. Evandrum: in Greek mythology a minor 8cu/xa>v associated with
Pan and worshipped principally in Arcadia. His ties with the Trojans
were partly those of family, for he was related to Dardanus through his
great-grandfather Atlas, and partly political since he had entertained
Anchises on a visit to Arcadia (Virgil, Aeneid 8. 155) and had been
driven from his homeland by the hostility of the Argives. It is possible
that in him is preserved the dim memory of scattered Greek migrations
to Italy in the tenth century (H. Miiller-Karpe, Vom Anfang Roms).
There was a Bronze Age settlement at Rome.
Lycaeum Pana: Pan {TJdiovThe Feeder) began as a local, pastoral
deity of Arcadia. In company with Zeus he made his residence on
M t . Lykaeus near Megalopolis from where his power continued to
spread. In time of famine it was customary for Arcadian boys to whip
his statue with squills (Theocritus 7. 106-8 with Gow's notes; cf.
1. 123 ff.), and this fertility-rite, together with the name Lykaeus, is
52

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

1.5-

sufficiently reminiscent of the Lupercalia to encourage identification.

References and discussion in Farnell, Greek Cults, 5. 431-5 with
nn. 149-88).
Inuum: identified with Pan also by Macrobius (1. 22. 2) but with
Faunus by others (Servius, ad Aen. 6. 775). Virgil mentions a Castrum
Inui (near Ardea) but nothing else is known either of the place or the
god. T h e name is perhaps pre-Italic. T h e identification with Pan is a
clear case of interpretatio graeca.
5. 3 - 6 . 2 The Recognition of the Twins
T h e recognition scene was a staple ingredient of Hellenistic theorizing
about drama (cf. Aristotle, Poetics 1452*29 ff.) and hence became an
element in Hellenistic historical technique as well. Fabius Pictor who
was the first R o m a n to give an extended account of the twins may even
have been directly influenced here by Sophocles' Tyro. L.'s telling
matches the dramatic possibilities of the material. The charges are laid
in two short sentences in or. obi. and Remus is handed over for instant
punishment. His death is immediately expected but the suspense is
maintained by two long, balancing sentences (iam .. . noluerat; forte . . .
agnosceret) in which both Romulus and Numitor are apprised of the
facts and undertake the rescue of Remus. T h e result is as final as it is
unexpectedita regem obtruncatand the ends of the story are tied
up in a model periodic sentence (6. 1 pres. part., cum, postquam, abl.
abs.). For the first time in the History L. allows himself a more coloured
vocabulary to suit the dramatic excitement of the narrative (5. 6 nn.).
5. 4. impetum: the plural, proposed by Gronovius, is needed (cf. 4. 9, 10.
3, 7. 42. 4). More than one foray was the subject of the accusation.
5. 5. aperiri: the active, read by Frigell, Weissenborn, and Bayet, has
no authority, being found only in TT.
5. 6. fratres: Quintilian (9. 4. 24) formulates the rule thatfrater should
always precede geminus when both words are used, otherwise it is
superfluous. It should not, however, be deleted as a gloss here because
the emphasis on geminos ('he knew they were brothers: the startling
news was that they were twins') requires the word-order geminos esse
fratres.
tetigerat: 3. 17. 3 n.
eodem: 'he came to the same conclusion as Faustulus'. This is the
only meaning possible from N's text but it makes poor sense because
it is refuted by the succeeding words which show that Numitor's
suspicions did not in fact lead him as far as recognizing Remus. T h e
best correction is eo demum (Perizonius). Frigell preferred Crevier's eo
denique which is certainly better than eo dein (Gebhard, Lipsius) where
dein is insupportable.
dolus nectitur: 27. 28. 4, elsewhere only in Seneca's tragedies (Phoen.
53

1-5.6

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

119; Tro. 927) and Sil. Ital. 3. 234. It is no doubt meant to suggest
the Greek SdAous" v<f>alveiv (cf., e.g., Iliad 6. 187).
6. 3 - 7 . 3 . The Foundation of Rome
Only Ovid (Fasti. 4. 809 fif. with Bomer's note) makes any striking
departures from the familiar account of the death of Remus and the
foundation of the city. Yet the story, in common with so much of the
Romulus legend, is a later invention based on Greek mythology. At
bottom is the primitive belief in the sanctity of walls (Festus 358 L.).
But the evil consequences which attend contempt of walls is Greek
in origin, recalling the tale of Poimandros and Leukippos (Plutarch,
Q.R. 37) or Oeneus and Toxeus (Apollodorus 1.8. 1 ; Ox. Pap. 2463).
Its localization at Rome, natural as it was in any case, was eased by a
suggestive technical term from augury (Paulus Festus 345 L. 'remores
aves in auspicio dicuntur, quae acturum aliquid remorari conpellunt'). L. gives two versions both of which are of demonstrably late
date (6. 4 n.). A rationalistic account is placed side by side/wittLthe
volgatior fama. T h e former, which on a priori grounds can credibly be
attributed to Licinius Macer, substituted a political motive (6. 4 n.,
regni cupido) for a religious one. L., by temperament in sympathy with
such scepticism, accepts from the vulgate only the curse (7. 2 n.) which
he makes the core of the incident. It is the first of many such episodes
which are m a d e into a unity round a short piece of dramatic and
characterizing speech (7. 4-15, 2. 10. 1-13 n.). It was a story which
evidently had a contemporary message. For although the rivalry
between two brothers in which the superiority of the one entailed the
eclipse of the other represents an age-old theme prominent in many
societies (cf. Cain and Abel), Romulus' victory was only secured by
a crime and that crime of fratricide continued to reassert itself through
out Roman history. T h e evils of the Civil Wars were seen as a legacy
of Romulus' acts (Horace, Epod. 7. 17-20). Thus there was a con
tradiction between Romulus the fratricide and Romulus the conditor
urbis, the bad man and the good. In L. the conflict is still unresolved
for he depended on pre-Augustan sources, but Ovid and Virgil
(Aeneid 1. 292), reacting in different ways to Augustus' assertion of the
Romulus motif (7. 9 n.), were at pains to minimize the crime of
Romulus by emphasizing the sacrilege of Remus, by substituting
Celer for Romulus as the actual murderer, and by depicting Romulus
as shocked and saddened by what occurred. See Schilling, R..L. 38
(i960), 182-99.
6. 4. regni cupido: 17. 1 n., 23. 7, 34. 1, 2. 7. 9, 4. 46. 2.
tutelae: the dative has archetypal authority and may be supported
by 24. 22. 15, 42. 19. 15. Nagelsbach, following Doujat, would read
quorum in tutela, Holscher quorum in tutelam.
54

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

1.6.4

Palatium Romulus, Remus Aventinum: the uniform tradition of

authorities after Ennius (Aul. Gell. 13. 14. 5 ; Propertius 4. 1. 5 0 ;
Ovid, Fasti 4. 815 ff.; Seneca, de Brev. Vitae 13. 8 ; Val. M a x . 1. 4 ;
Aelian, Hist. Anim. 10. 22 et al.). Ennius, as also Servius, ad Aen. 3. 46,
appears to preserve an earlier version which sited Romulus on the
Aventine and Remus, probably, on the mons Murcus (Cicero, de Div.
1. 107; see O . Skutsch, C.Q. 11 (1961), 252-9). T h e change was no
doubt influenced by the fact that the Aventine was not within the
original pomerium and by the contrasted prosperity of the Palatine.
It is further rebuttal of the view that L. is dependent on Ennius.
templa capiunt: 18. 6 n.
7. 1. duplex-, the vulture belonged to the small category of augural
birds, including the eagle, the immusulus, and the sangualis (Festus
214 L.; Paulus Festus 3 L . ; [Servius], ad Aen. 1. 394), who afforded
omens by their flight. T h e augur considered the height, speed, and
direction of the flight but nowhere else is the number of birds held to
be significant, which might suggest that the whole episode is of later
creation when Etruscan divination had predicted a life-cycle of 12
saecula for R o m e (Censorinus, de Die Natali 17; cf. the 12 sons of Acca
Larentia). When Octavian claimed to have seen 12 vultures on
19 August 43 B.C., he was asserting his connexion with Romulus. For
vultures in augury see Plutarch, Q.R. 9 3 ; Pliny, N.H. 29, 112, 30. 130.
7. 2. sic deinde: 26. 4 n. T h e turn of phrase is reminiscent of the
equivalent passage of Ennius, Annales 99-100 V. It is deliberately
presented as an archaic-sounding formula.
interfectum: notice its dramatic position.
7. 3-15. Hercules and Cacus
T h e legend of Hercules and Cacus represents the fusion of an Italian
and a Greek version of the same basic myth, the attempted purloining
of a god's cattle, which is elaborately investigated and documented by
Fontenrose {Python, 339 ff. with earlier bibliography). In the Italian
version, Cacus, a deity of the Palatine, entertained Geranes or R e coranus (Origo GentisRomanae 6: [Servius], ad Aen. 8.203), who affronted
his hospitality by stealing his cattle. Cacus, it would seem, was a deity
of the underworld and the theft of his cattle symbolized an attempt to
break the power of death and release the dead. T h e nub of the Greek
legend was the attempt made by a brigand to steal Geryon's cattle as
H . brought them back from Erytheia. A characteristic form of it is
found in Herodotus 4. 8 or in the Scholiast on Lycophron 46. It must
therefore belong to one of the oldest layers of Indo-European myth,
but I am disinclined to believe that the coincidence between the cele
bration of the Kpovta at Athens on 12 Hekatombaion and the festival
55

i. 7- 3

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

of Hercules Invictus (the name of whose opponent, Recoranus, bears

a superficial resemblance to Cronos) on 12 August at the Circus
Maximus is substantial evidence for a pre-Hellenic common origin
of the actual cults (A. Piganiol, Hommages Grenier, 3. 1261-4).
The fusion of the Greek and Italian myths was accomplished to
provide an aetiology for the cult of Hercules at the Ara Maxima
(5. 13. 6 n.). This was a private cult, in the hands of two gentes,
the Pinarii and Potitii (7. 12 n.) and is to be distinguished from the
earliest state cult of Hercules attested in the lectisternium of 399. In the
former Hercules was a god of commerce, in the latter his function
was that of a protector of crops. Being a Greek rite (7. 3 n,), the cult
of the Ara Maxima cannot be very old. Although the claims of
different places such as Tibur (Hallam, J.R.S. 21 (1931), 276 ff.) or
Croton (Bayet) to have been the direct link through which Hercules
came to Rome have been stoutly championed, the evidence only per
mits the conclusion that the cult cannot have been older than the
fifth century. Given the underlying similarity, it was not difficult to
graft it on to the Roman myth. Cacus' original functions were almost
forgotten, so that the false equivalence Cacus = KCLKOS could easily be
made and Cacus turned from the hero to the villain. Greek literature
provided the substance of the story (7. 4 n., 7. 5 n., 7. 7 n., 7. i o n . ) .
When an historical occasion was sought to localize the myth Evander
'the Benefactor' (Evavbpos) was an obvious counterpart to Cacus 'the
Bad-man'. This, then, became the traditional story retailed with only
minor modifications by poets from the time of Ennius and by the
historians (Virgil, Aeneid 8. 185-275; Propertius 4. 9. 1-20; Ovid,
Fasti 1. 543-86, 5. 643-52; D.H. 1. 39-42; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 190).
Some accounts substituted Faunus for Evander (Derkyllos ap. [Plu
tarch], Moralia 315 c = F. Gr. Hist, 288. 2) and there was some dif
ference over the sex of the cattle (7. 7 n.) and over the precise identity
of the founder of the cult (7. i o n . ) but the differences are too minor to
enable us to determine what immediate source L. was following.
It is in the telling of the story that the interest lies. L. continues the
technique which he employed for the first time in the preceding chapter
of relating an episode so that it builds up to dramatic utterance in
archaic and forceful language (7. 10 n.) intended to suggest remote
antiquity. In that way the episode is shaped and rounded.
T h e close resemblance, extending even to verbal details, between L.
and Virgil has led many scholars to follow Stacey in believing that
both authors are directly dependent on Ennius. T h e agreements
between L. and Virgil are on matters of description which could
hardly be expressed otherwise, e.g. 7. 5 caudis in speluncam traxit =
8. 210 cauda in speluncam tractos (cf. Propertius 4. 9. 12 aversos cauda
traxit in antra boves). Where L. has used highly coloured language it is
56

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

i- 7-3

a creative method of giving character to the narrative and not de

rivative copying (7. 4 n., 7. 6 n., 7. 10 n.).
T h e literary skill is harnessed to a moral purpose. L. is no religious
enthusiast, but the proper maintenance of cult he, like most Romans,
regarded as essential for the well-being of the state. He omits the fire
and smoke which in Virgil (Aeneid 8. 199) and other authors de
fended Cacus' cave as being too obviously fabulous for history. At the
same time he stresses the piety which led to the foundation of the Ara
Maxima and the devotion of the Pinarii and Potitii who maintained it.
T h e message is conveyed in the words sacra . . .facit (7.3) and for L.'s
audience it was bound to have a contemporary meaning. Augustus,
too, was concerned to ensure the perpetuation of cult. In this, as in
other ways, he was a second Romulus (7. 9 n.).
In addition to the bibliography cited by Fontenrose see F. Miinzer,
Cacus der Rinderdieb (Basel, 1911); Santoro, Liviofonte di Vergilio, 1938;
L. Alfonsi, Aevum 19 (1945), 357-7 1 7. 3 . Graeco: it is symptomatic of the Graecus ritus that the offering was
made capite aperto (Varro ap. Macrobius 3. 6. 17), that the celebrant's
head was crowned with laurel (Varro, Menip. fr. 413 B. = Macrobius
3. 12. 2; [Servius], ad Aen. 8. 276), and that women were excluded
(Macrobius 1. 12. 2 8 ; Plutarch, Q.R. 90), as they were also from the
Herakles cult in Greece (cf., e.g., S.E.G. 2. 505 (Thasos)).
ab Evandro: so also D.H. 1. 40. 6; Macrobius 3. 11. 7; Tacitus,
Annals 15. 41 ; Strabo 5. 230. A second tradition, which is the
express opinion of L. or his source at 9. 34. 18, attributed
the actual dedication of the altar to Hercules himself (Ovid,
Fasti 1. 5 8 1 ; Propertius 4. 9. 67; Virgil, Aeneid 8. 271 ; Solinus 1. 10).
7. 4. loco herbido: the picture of the weary Hercules recalls Herodotus
4. 8 and may be derived from it. herbidus for herbosus is rare and colour
ful (cf. 9. 2. 7, 23. 19. 14, 29. 31. 9) but not confined to specifically
poetic authors. It is avoided by Cicero and Caesar but used by Pliny
(JV.H. 18. 164) and Varro (de Re Rust. 2. 1. 16).
7. 5. gravatum: used of food and drink, gravare (cf. 25. 24. 6) is bold
and uncommon, being found elsewhere only in Seneca, Thyest. 910;
Curtius 6. 11. 2 8 ; Apuleius, Met. 1. 26.
Cacus: his name is preserved in the scalae Caci which led from the
south side of the Palatine to the Circus Maximus (cf. Plutarch,
Romulus 20) and the atrium Caci mentioned in the Regionary Catalogue
(Reg. V I I I ) , but of a Caca, who in the later synthetic myth was said
to have been a sister of Cacus and to have aided Hercules, it is said
'sacellum meruit in quo ei pervigili igne sicut Vestae sacrificabatur ,
(Servius, ad Aen. 8. 190; cf. Lactantius 1. 20. 36). Such perpetual
fires are found also in the cult of Demeter, Apollo, and Pan (Pausanias
8. 37. 11) and prove that Cacus-Caca was originally a bisexual deity
57

i- 7-5

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

like Faunus-Fauna, Porno-Pomona, J a n u s - J a n a , Liber-Libera (cf.

the ritual formula sive deus sive dea), whose location in a cave on the
Palatine might be taken as evidence of chthonic powers. Cacus may
be an Etruscan word: Cacu is found as a name on an Etruscan mirror.
aversos: borrowed from the trick by which Hermes deceived Apollo
when he stole his cattle, as told in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo (413).
The archetype read aversos . . . eximium quemque . . . relictarum . . .
inclusarum. If Cacus removed bulls and only bulls, relictarum and inclusarum are impossible; if he removed some bulls and some cows,
Livian usage would still demand the masculine (Kiihnast, Liv. Syntax,
81). Stroth, followed by Kleine and Madvig, saw the difficulty.
Following the account in D.H. 1. 39 where the animals are cows
throughout he altered the text to aversas boves eximiam quamque,
keeping relictarum . . . inclusarum. It is not, however, obvious that D.H.
and L. are dependent on the same tradition. In Virgil, for ritual
reasons, the stolen cattle were 4 bulls and 4 cows but in Propertius
an unspecified number of bulls. In fact, L.'s source is unlikely to have
been either Ennius or the source used by D.H. Nonetheless it is certain
that he must have intended Cacus to have stolen only bulls from a
mixed herd. For Ovid (Fasti 1. 547 ff.), who is closely modelled on L.,
speaks exclusively of bulls (traxerat aversos Cacus in antra feros) and
desiderium is conventionally used of the longing of the female for the
male (ef. e.g. Lucretius 2. 359-60 crebra revisit ad stabulum desiderio
perfixa iuvenci; Ovid, Met, 7. 731). Cacus, no doubt, wished to improve
the strain of his own cattle. It is therefore necessary to read relictorum
. . . inclusorum,
7 . 6 . primam auroram: only here in L. Elsewhere in Ovid, Met. 3. 600;
Pliny, N.H, 11. 30; [Amm. Marc. 19. 1.2]. It enhances the fairyland
character of the narrative as do excitus somno (cf. Catullus 63. 42,
64. 5 6 : elsewhere L. uses ex somno excitus; cf. 4. 27. 6, 8. 37. 6) and
incertum animi which occurs this once in L. and is otherwise used by
Terence (Hecyra 121), Val. Flaccus (1. 79), and Statius (Theb. 3. 444).
7. 7. vadentem: Weissenborn compares Homer, Odyssey 9. 399. vado,
as a colourful synonym for eo (2. 10. 5, 12. 8, 3. 49. 2, 63. 1, 4. 38. 4,
5. 47. 4), was first used in literary prose by Sallust (Jugurtha 94. 6).
Cicero uses it only in verse (Arat. 326) and letters (ad Att. 4. 10. 2,
14. 11. 2). The word which is naturally at home in the vocabulary of
the poets (Ennius 273, 479 V . ; Catullus 63. 31, 86; Virgil, Aeneid
2. 359 et al, saep.) is employed by L. to give point to striking episodes.
7. 8. ea: with loca. The hyperbaton is not intended to provide special
emphasis so much as to set off the harmonious balance of prqfugus ex
Peloponneso, auctoritate magis quam imperio. prqfugus, are (frvyas a>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. 57 . 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
tainedthe Consualia, Thalassio, Tarpeia, the dedication to J u p piter Feretrius, Mettius Curtiusand 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. 116
Internal: Rape of the Sabine Women.
10. 111. 4 External: (a) War with Gaeninenses.
(b) War with Antemnates.
(c) War with Grustumini.
11. 5-9
Internal: Tarpeia.
12
External: Mettius Gurtius and the Defeat of the
Sabines.
13
Internal: Reconciliation.
There is also an emotional structure, ranging from defiance and
indignation (9. 14), through resignation (11. 2), to reconciliation
(13. 8 non modo commune sed concors etiam). The whole is knit together;
and a comparison with the parallel versions of Cicero (de Rep. 2. 12),
D.H. (2. 30. 1), and Plutarch in his life of Romulus leaves no doubt
that the artistry is directly due to L. T h e institution of the Gonsualia
for the particular purpose of attracting the Sabines is psychologically
more satisfying than Cicero's casual mention that there happened
to be an annual festival. So too the omission of the numerous circum
stantial details which clutter the pages of D.H. makes for clarity and
movement. Cicero is embarrassed and ashamed by the whole affair.
H e calls Romulus 5 plan subagreste and hastens to point out that the
Sabine women really were well born (honesto ortas loco). There is no
apologetic tone in L. For him it is a noble and inspiring story in
keeping with the importance and size of Romz (9. 1, 9. 8). Where
the scale is noble, the events cannot be unworthy.
Historically the only question is whether primitive Roman society
was the result of a fusion of Sabine and Latin elements. Arch geolo
gically there is ample evidence that in the eighth and early seventh
centuries there were separate village communities on the Palatine, the
Oppian (Esquiline), and the Quirinal, and that the culture of the
Palatine, as revealed by its arts and crafts, was different from that of
the other two hills. T h e same dichotomy may be disclosed by the
existence of two different burial-rites, cremation predominating in the
earliest graves of the Forum and inhumation on the Esquiline and
Quirinal. T h e same phenomenon is to b^ seen in the fields of religion
and language. Certain special ceremonies belong to the Quirinal
alone and have characteristically Sabine affinities.
T h e bsst summaries (with references) of the archaeological evidence
for the Sabine element in early Rome may b * found in R. Bloch,
814432

65

ROMULUS

i- 9-13

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 myththe 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\VOVS. 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. 113.
For the temple see Platner-Ashby s.v.; Andren, Hommages Herrmann,
9 0 ; for its restoration under Augustus see 4. 20. 6 n . ; for Juppiter
Feretrius and the spolia opima see W . A. B. Hartzberg, Pkilologus, 1
(1846), 331-9; Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung, 2. 580; Cook, C.R. 18
(1904), 3 6 4 - 5 ; Lammert, R.E. 'rpoiraiov ; L. A. Springer, Class.
7i

I. 10. I

ROMULUS

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 metatusa word re
stored by Weinstock at Varro, de Ling. Lat. 7. 8see 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 generala 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 <f>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 ose is as near the
second place in the sentence or clause as possible; cf. 3. 28. 10 sanguinis
se . . . non egere; Cicero, Brutus 12 populus se Romanus erexit: see KtihnerStegmann 2. 593.
13. 4 . silentium: 3. 47. 6 n.
13. 5. Quirites: Cures was a Sabine town on the left bank of the Tiber
close to the Via Salaria. It was built on a hill with two summits at the
foot of which flows the Fosso Corese. T h e existing ruins, excavated
by Lanciani (Commentationes Philologicae in honorem T. Mommseni, 1877,
411 ff.; see Hulsen, R.E., 'Cures') date from the late Republic when
Cures survived as a municipium, and the antiquity of the settlement
cannot be established archaeologically. It was, however, intimately
connected with the legends of early Rome, being traditionally the
birth-place of Numa (18. 1).
T h e theory which derived the official name Quirites from Cures
was maintained without serious dissent by the ancients (Columella,
Praef. 19; Festus 304 L . ; Ovid, Fasti 2. 4 7 5 ; Servius, ad Aen. 7. 710),
despite the fact that the ethnic of Cures was Curenses (Varro, de Ling.
Lat. 6. 68) which cannot morphologically be transmuted to Quirites.
T h e etymology of Quirites (the singular is found once in the old
formula ollus quiris leto datus est) remains unsolved. Plutarch [Romulus
29) urged a derivation from the Sabine word for a spear, curis. T h e
only other attractive conjecture is Kretschmer's: *couiriom 'an assembly
of people' (cf. curia).
See Kretschmer, Glotta 10 (1919), 147 ff.; Otto, Rh. Mus. 54 (1905),
197 ff.; Koch, Religio, 23 ff.; Walde-Hofmann s.v.
monumentum: the Lacus Curtius, mentioned incidentally by Plautus
(Curculio 477), Pliny (N.H. 15. 78), and Suetonius (Augustus 5 7 ;
Galba 20), was close to the later Column of Phocas. In Sullan times
the depression was paved over with two layers of grey capellaccio and
brown tufa stone.
79

i. 13. 6-8

ROMULUS
13. 6-8. The Creation of 30 Curiae and 3 Centuries

T h e organization of the people into 3 tribeswhich 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

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 dateNonae 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 jobimpulsu patrum. Such
rationalization could be carried farther. Romulus was not translated,
he was torn into little pieces by enraged enemies, by his new citizens,
according to Licinius Macer, wishfully thinking of Sulla, or by the
senators as in the variant cited in 16. 4. With the revival in the for
tunes of the Julii the apotheosis, and by implication the select role of
Proculus, was strengthened. T h e assassination was referred to in the
discussions of 67 B.C. Quirinus is figured for the only time on a
coin of C. Memmius (Sydenham no. 921 ; c. 56 B.C.). After 44 B.C.
the accounts of the death of Romulus are modelled on the murder of
Caesar (D.H. 2. 56. 5 ; Plutarch, Romulus 2 7 ; Val. Max. 5. 3. 1).
L. follows a p re-Caesarian source which favours Romulus (16. 4
nobilitavit) and is, therefore, likely to be none other than Valerius
Antias. But he makes the story into a set piece, whose climax is, as
so often, a passage of moving speech (16. 6-7). T h e preliminaries
are carefully staged. L. stresses the psychological reactions of the
spectators (pavor, desiderio, desiderium) and employs his favourite device
the dramatic pause at the moment of tension (16. 2 n.). Well constructed
and written in memorable language (16. 3 n., 16. 6-7 n.) it is designed
incidentally to illustrate the power of simple faith (fides, fidei, fide).
See J . B. Carter, A, J. A. 13 (1909), 29 ft.; Klotz 207; Miinzer, R.E.,
'Julius (33)'; R. Klein, Kbnigtum u. Konigzeit bet Cicero; Classen, Philologus 106 (1962), 174 ff.; Kajanto, God and Fate in Livv, 31 ; Hubaux
98 ff.; Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 118; Burkert, Historia 11 (1962),
356 ff.
16. 1. immortalibus: 'worthy of immortality'; cf. Seneca, Suas. 6. 5 ;
Pliny, N.H. 35. 50. But, with Crcvier and Ruperti, I would prefer
mortalibus, 'there were the works done in his lifetime'; cf. 2. 6 Aeneae
ultimum operum mortaliumfuit.
Caprae: a depression or swamp in the lowest part of the Campus
Martius near the Pantheon (cf. the Vicus Caprarius), formed by the
silting of a small stream.
85

I. l 6 . 2

ROMULUS

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 Parentaliasalve, 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 givesrem militarem colantthe 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<(pla>
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 XCS xCPL *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 themepaxfor 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 degradingefferari
militia animos. This is a heterodox notion, found only among Romans
of his time (e.g. Horace, Epode 7; cf. Tacitus, Hist. 3. 25, 31, 33). His
chief care is peace, and it is no accident that his accounts of battles
are invariably schematic and amateurish. Therefore the replacement
of the metus hostilis by the metus deorum which was a political pis aller
to Sallust and others was for L. a consummation devoutly to be wished.
See further Klingner, Hermes 63 (1928), 182 ff.; Passerini, Stud,
ltd. n (1934), 52 ff.; Fraenkel, Horace, 212-13; D. C. Earl, The
Political Thought of Sallust, 47-48.
19. 5. sine aliquo commento: for Egeria see below on 21. 3-4. T h e
deception of an ignorant people for their own good was a traditional
feature of Numa's work (Polybius 6. 56. 9). Such piafraus was per
missible for the Philosopher King whom Plato made yevvatov n ev
ifjevhcodai [Republic 414 B) in order that the people could be properly
amenable to education, and it is from Plato that the idea is ultimately
derived.
19. 6-7. The Reform of the Calendar
Although not explicitly stated, it is implied that Numa's calendar
supplanted a previous one, presumably the 10-month calendar as
cribed to Romulus (Ovid, Fasti 1. 27 ff., 3. 99 ff.; Censorinus 20. 2,
drawing on Republican antiquarians). It was generally held that
those ten months contained only 304 days and that the winter months,
being valueless to a farmer, were not included. This is almost cer
tainly false. T h e earliest community was pastoral, not agricultural, and
herds have to be tended for 365 days a year. Such speculations are a
throw-back from a time when months had a fixed number of days.
There are primitive communities spread over a large area which have
had months of widely differing duration.
T h e change to a 12-month calendar was inspired not merely by
the desire to correlate the lunar and solar year but by a more exact
computation of both undertaken principally by the Babylonians and
mediated through the Etruscans. T h e terminus ante quern is given by the
fact that it did not originally contain any reference to the dedication of
95

1.19. 6-7

NUMA

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

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 paradisegrove, 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 ferocitasferocior Romulo quam JVumae
similis (Servius, ad Aen. 6. 813)a characteristic which was suggested
as much by his name Hostilius as by the contrast with his predecessors.
T h e oldest legends which surround him are more primitive than Rome
herself. T h e battle of the champions and the death of Mettius Fufetius
belong to a stock of legends which is common to many branches
of the Indo-European tradition (24. 1 n., 28. 1 n.). Next came those
events which may reasonably have been remembered from the seventh
centurythe name of the king Tullus Hostilius (22. 1 n.), the name
of Fufetius (23. 6 n.), and the capture of Alba. These are historical
the only authentic elements in the whole story. They were supple
mented by a third source of materialtopographical researches. Rome
possessed numerous monuments, named and unnamed, explained and
inexplicable. These were brought into connexion with the legends of
Roman history and served to add substance and verisimilitude to the
bare legend. Such were the fossa Cluilia (23. 3 n.), the Sepulcra
Horatiorum et Guriatiorum (25. 14 n.), the Sepulcrum Horatiae
(26. 14 n.), the Pila Horatia (26. i o n . ) , and the Silva Malitiosa
(30. 9 n.). It is more likely that in high antiquity they were given
names to identify them with legends than that they preserved names
from actual happenings.
T h e amalgation of these different levels was effected probably as
early as the late third century. T h e reign of Tullus Hostilius was told
by Ennius (126-40 V . : see Norden on Virgil, Aeneid 6. 813) with a
richness of detail which presupposes an extended account. But L.'s
treatment owes nothing directly to Ennius (29. 6 n.). L.'s version,
like the parallel narrative in D.H. 3. 136., has been supplemented by
legal additions (26. 4 n.), in particular by the fetial formula (24. 4 n.)
and the Perduellio proceedings (26. 6 n.) of which the former can be
proved to be a formulation of the second century at the earliest. T h e
historians of that generation in their quest for new material turned to
the law to provide them with mock-archaic precedents which could
be incorporated into the body of their histories. These were dis
tributed among the kingsone fetial formula to Tullus, the other to
105

I. 22-31

TULLUS HOST1LIUS

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 GTixo<*>vTO ( 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 mele in which limbs and weapons
were all that could be distinguished: in the next moment blood could
be seen. For this sense of anceps cf. 7. 25. 4.
25. 6. vice: there is no example of vice -f- gen. = 'on account of*
whereas solliciti suam vicem or the like is standard; cf. 8. 35. i, 23. 9. 10,
26. 21. 2, 28. 19. 17, 43. 9 etc. Read vicem here.
25. 9. qualis . . . solet: 'like the cry raised by supporters as a result of
an unexpected event5, faventium as in Virgil, Aeneid 5. 148; cf. Horace,
Odes 3. 24. 46. R. C, Flickinger (Class. Journ. 16 (1921), 369) points
out that the force of ex insperato is not that their support was un
expected but that it had found vocal expression as a result of the un
looked-for turn of events.
25. 10. nee: TT\ inserted the relative qui but nee procul for non> haud
procul is not attested and cannot be supported by formations such as
necopinans. The insertion of relatives is a common corruption (cf.
1. 48. 7) and a single nee frequently introduces a parenthesis (cf.
5- 44- 3)25. 11. aequato: 2. 40. 14 n.
25. 12. manibus: 4. 19. 3. For the concept of Roman suzerainty
cf. 45. 3.
iugulo: defigo with the plain abl. is only found in poetry, e.g. Ovid,
Fasti 3. 754; Silius 4. 454.
25. 13. quo prope: for quo propius (Gruter) cf. Tacitus, Annals 1. 57,
1.68,3.5.
dicionis: 38. 1 n.
25. 14. sepulcra: the site of these monuments cannot be established.
Martial 3. 47. 3 tells of Horaliorum qua viret sacer campus and would
seem to locate it near the Porta Gapena (cf. the sepulcrum Horatiae
26. 14; cf. 26. 2: there may have been a family burial-ground of the
Horatii in the vicinity).
814492

**3

I. 26

TULLUS HOSTILIUS
26. Perduellio

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 7Tpi7TTia (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 Fufetiusa trivial and unseemly occurrencebut 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 <P6f3os (Iliad 11. 3 7 ;
Hesiod, Theog. 933 ; Shield 195) and were added to the story to provide
Homeric colouring.
27. 8. iubet: Tullus employs a textbook ruse to deceive his own troops
into confidence and to mislead the enemy. False information, as here,
that the Fidenates were carrying out a manoeuvre according to
instructions, is one of the commonest stratagems commended in
antiquity (Polyaenus 1. 33, 1. 35. i ) . T h e second device, blocking the
vision of the Roman troops by a fence of spears, is bizarre. D.H, knows
nothing of it and it is nowhere commended by the theorists. Indeed
118

TULLUS

HOSTILIUS

1,27.8

it is hard to see how it could be effective. L. must have misinterpreted

some military technicality in his source.
idem: the reading of N idem imperat ut hastas equites erigere (om. TT)
erigerent (om. A) iubeat is perplexed by no more than the Nicomachean
erinerefit
variant .
. Tullus tells the cavalry officer (equitem) to take back
7
erigere
\ 1
/
instructions that the cavalry are to raise their spears, imperat for the
generalissimo, iubeat for the subordinate commander, idem is suspect,
since idem is not elsewhere used to resume after indirect speech 'and
he also ordered'.
27. 9. ut quibus: for the legend of the early colonization of Fidenae by
Romulus see 14. 4 n. N read ut qui coloni additi Romanis essent which
would imply that the Fidenates were associated with Rome in the
status of a colony (cf. 38. 34. 6), whereas the sense might be expected
to be that a body of R o m a n colonists was sent to Fidenae to supple
ment the native population, i.e. ut quibus coloni additi Romani essent (Tan.
Faber, Walters). T h e former is to be preferred notwithstanding, for
there is no suggestion in the sources that Romulus actually sent colonists
to Fidenae. T h e fiction which was invented to justify Rome's subsequent
aggression against the city and to provide a prehistoric precedent
was rather that the Fidenates enjoyed the privileges and responsi
bilities of a Latin colony. See Bayet, Rev. Phil 12 (1938), 97-119.
27. \\. fuga: pugna Cornelissen but cf. 25. 21. 4, 37. 43. 10, 38.
27. 2.

28. 1. sacrificium lustrale: the lustratio exercitus performed before, or

after, a battle or a campaign by the procession and sacrifice of a
suovetaurilia. For details and discussion of the ceremony see J.R.S. 51
(1961), 32 ff. T h e religious atmosphere, in which Fufetius' death is
made to seem almost an act ofpietas, is heightened by the use of sacral
expressions: for ut adsolet see 5. 16. 9-11 n . ; for the steoreotyped quod
bene vertat cf. 3. 62. 5.
28. 4. infit: 23. 7 n. Tullus begins by addressing the Romans with an
echo of the formal language in which a general reported his victory
deorum benignitate, virtute militum (5. 20. 3 n.). The same formal tone is
maintained in the denunciation which follows. As has been noticed
by Murley (Class. Journal 30 (1935), 428) iniussu meo . . . meum is very
close to Terence, Phormio 231-3, but the resemblance arises not, as
Morley opined, from quotation of Terence by L.the passage is
quoted by Cicero (ad Att. 2. 19. 1)but because both authors are
imitating the edict-style. T h e first section of the speech reaches its
climax in the threefold anaphora Mettius ductor, Mettius machinatory
Mettius ruptor. When Tullus resumes, he addresses the Albans and so
commences with an official prayer (quod bonum . . . sit: see 17. i o n . ) as
"9

i. 28. 4

TULLUS HOSTILIUS

a blessing on his proposed merger of the two states. He stresses the

unity of the peoples by the repeated unam . . . unam . . . ex uno . . .
. . . in unum. Finally after a typically Livian silence (28. 8; cf 3.47.6 n.)
he pronounces sentence on Fufetius in terms which may well owe
something to Ennius. Ennius certainly treated of Fufetius, and the
pointed resemblance between L. and Virgil, Aeneid 8. 642-4, has been
taken by many scholars to hint at a common source. Throughout, the
alliteration seconds the heavy reduplication (e.g. unquam ante alias
ullo where Gobel unfeelingly wished to delete ante; at tu tuo . . . a te).
The total effect is one of great power.
28. 6. inde: 'mendosum' Madvig, but it probably means 'from the
positions we were occupying at the time'.
28. 10. in diversum: the manner of Fufetius' death is unparalleled in
R o m a n criminal history (Mommsen, Strafrecht, 960 n. 1), not so
much for its brutality as for its singularity. Yet it long survived as a
form of execution among the German races; cf. the death of the
Nightingale {The Owl and the Nightingale, 1062; Neckam, 20 de Natura
Rerum 1, ch. 51). A similar punishment was inflicted by Theodoric. It
could be inferred from this that the legend is older than the settled
constitution of the Roman people and survived their migrations. Its
specifically un-Roman character led Robortello to emend humanarum
to Romanarum but this comment on the incident seems conventional
for Varro (ap. Non. 443 L.) writes Mettum Fufetium . . . interemit . . .
imperiosius quam humanius.
The Fall of Alba
T h e destruction of cities and the fate of their inhabitants were a
favourite theme for poets (2. 33. 8 n.). Ultimately they derived their
inspiration from the Epic Cycle, from the Ilioupersis, but their vision
was wider and more personal than the objective descriptions of for
mulaic poetry. Rome, too, delighted in those fleeting visions of triumph
and ruin. There is nothing finer than the excidium Troiae in the second
book of the Aeneid, much of which Virgil owed to Ennius (Servius,
ad Aen. 2. 486 de Albano excidio translatus est locus). Ennius, that is to
say, had told of the fall of Alba and there is so much akin between
Virgil's excidium Troiae and L.'s excidium Albae that one is tempted to
believe that L. had recourse to Ennius for much of the language and
circumstance with which he invests Alba's last hours. This need not
occasion surprise. Pathetic descriptions of this kind were as much in
vogue with Hellenistic historians as they were with poets. Polybius
expressly censured Phylarchus for indulging in such extravagances
(2. 56. 7). But this is not to say that L. used Ennius as a source for
history (29. 6 n.). Despite the obvious exaggerations, the city with its
distant suburbs and augusta templa reminiscent of a Hellenistic city, the
120

TULLUS HOSTILIUS

1.29

total effect is psychologically convincing. T h e whole scene is described

in two long and involved sentences which convey its complexity.
See A. Gaheis, Wien. Stud. 48 (1930), 206; Aly, Livius u. Ennius, 3 6 ;
Austin, J.R.S. 49 (1959), 2 4 ; Walsh, Livy, 171, 257. For archaeological
evidence confirming the decline of Alba at this time see Lugli, Bull.
Com. Arch. 45 (1917), 39 ff).
29. 2. clamor hostilis et cursus: 41. 1 n.
miscet: 42. 13. 9 ; Sallust, Catil. 2. 3.
29. 3 . prae metu [obliti] : obliti is deleted as redundant by Madvig who
took the indirect questions quid . . . ferrent with deficiente consilio rogitantesque, and argued that it was not that the Albans forgot what they
should take but they did not know, obliti, however, means that their
wits deserted them in the crisis. It should be retained, cf. 4. 40. 3
oblitaeprae gaudio decoris. For prae metu cf. 5. 13. 13, 22. 3. 13, 38. 33. 3 ;
Plautus, Amph. 1066; Cas. 4 1 3 ; Cicero, Phil. 13. 20.
pervagarentur: cf. Virgil, Aeneid 2. 488-9.
29. 4. fragor: 5. 42. 4.
pulvis: cf. Aeneid 3. 3 ; Euripides, Hec. 1215; Aeschylus, Agam. 818.
larem: the Lar was the deified ancestor of the family worshipped
at the hearth (Paulus Festus 108 L.). See also 2. 6 n.
29. 5. mulierum: I would punctuate mulierum, praecipue cum . . . . The
lamentation was continuous. It did not begin only when they passed
a temple, but it reached a climax then. T h e punctuation would also
satisfy the normal position of praecipue.
29. 6. egressis: 3. 57. 10 n.
quadringentorum: so also Justin 43. 1. 13 and the same total is implied
by Virgil {Aeneid 1. 272) who allows three hundred years for the
duration of Alba before Rome was founded. Alba was traditionally
captured by Tullus, that is some hundred years after the foundation
of Rome, c. 650, although archaeological evidence indicates no
radical break in the habitation of the site. D.H., on the other hand,
gives 432 years for the period before the foundation of Rome (1. 74. 2,
following Cato) i.e. 532 years for the duration of Alba. His figure
seems to have been arrived at by accepting Eratosthenes' date for the
sack of Troy (1184/3 B - G 0 a n d the conventional duration of the king
ship (243 or 244 years) which would leave a period of 432 years be
tween the arrival of the Trojans in Italy and the foundation of Rome.
The discrepancy between the 300 of L. and Virgil and the 432 of Cato
and D.H. is to be accounted for by the belief that the former figure
was arrived at by mystical approximation rather than mathematical
calculations. One is the historians', the other the poets' figure. As
soon as it was realized that since Troy fell long before 750 Romulus
could not have been the grandson of Aeneas (3. 4 n.), an Alban king121

i. 29. 6

TULLUS HOSTILIUS

list of indeterminate length had to be invented to fill the gap and the
figure of 300 years with its mystical properties was an adequate span.
Later research, based on Hellenistic chronology, introduced more
exact dating. Thus it is very probable that L. has taken over the
figure of 400, which disagrees with his own chronology, as given in
the course of the book, from a much older version, for it is a piece of
rhetorical colouring rather than chronological reckoning. If so, it
will be from Ennius a n d will confirm the view that L. is here in
debted to that poet's Albae excidium.
excidio . . . dedit: cf. Aeneid 12. 655 deiecturum arces Italum excidioque
daturum.
temperatum: for the superstition against violating temples see Fraenkel, Aeschylus, Agamemnon 525 flf.; cf. Euripides, Troades 15 ff.
30-31. The Death of Tullus Hostilius
The capture of Alba was the high-water mark of Tullus' reign. T h e
remaining events associated with him are grouped loosely together.
30. 1. Caelius: excavations have not proved yet whether the Caelian
was inhabited from the eighth century but it is a probable assumption.
At some time after 650, and probably between 625-575, the surround
ing valleys were abandoned as burial-grounds and the settlement crept
down the slopes of the Caelian until eventually a synoecism with other
communities on the Esquiline and Palatine was effected. The literary
tradition was far from unanimous, ascribing the addition of the Caelian
to the city to Romulus (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 46), Ancus Marcius
(Cicero, de Rep. 2. 33), Tarquinius Priscus (Tacitus, Annals 4. 65), or
Servius Tullius (Oratio Claudii) as well as Tullus. Thus all that can
be said is that the memory that the Caelian was once separate and
was integrated with the other communities at a n historical date sur
vived as part of the Roman national memory. Each king was associated
with different territorial acquisitions (cf. 33.5-6). See Platner-Ashby s.v.
regiae: the kings were allotted residences by tradition in different
quarters of the city, N u m a on the Quirinal (Solinus 1. 21), Ancus on
the Palatine (Varro ap. Non. 852 L.), Tarquinius Priscus ad Statoris
(41. 4 n.), Servius on the Esquiline (Solinus 1. 25). The seven kings
might have been expected to occupy the seven hills but this is not so,
and the principles of allocation are unclear.
ibique: \JL adds deinde rightly.
30. 2. principes Albanorum: D.H. 3. 29. 7 gives them as 'IovXlovsyZepOVLXLOVS, Koparlovs,

KOLVTLXLOVS, KXOIXLOVS, reyavlovs,

MCTLXLOVS. The

addition of the Metilii was a n idle compliment to his friend Metilius

Rufus (de comp. verb. 3) justified by the name of the Alban dictator
Mettius (Fufetius). D.H. condones the emendation Iulios for Tullios
(Sabellicus; see Fabia, La Table Claudienne, 1929, 83 n. 3 ; for the Tullii
122

TULLUS HOSTILIUS

i . 30. 2

see 22.1 n.) and suggests Quinct(il)ios for Quinctiosy but the list as a whole
is curious. All the families were genuinely Latin in name and patrician
(for the Cloelii see Bk. 20, fr. 12) but clear evidence could be brought
about each to show that it was not one of the original, autochthonous
gentes. None supplied the name of a tribe. The Guriatii were known
to legend as Albans (24. 1 n.), and the fossa Cluilia demanded an Alban
origin for the Cloelii (23. 3 n.). The Julii had their gentile cult, de
rived from Alba, not in Rome but at Bovillae (C.I.L. 14. 2387; see
Doboi, Ephem. Dacoromana 6 (1935), 240 ff.) and the ties which the
Servilii had with Fidenae and the honour which they paid to a triens
(Pliny, JV.H. 34. 137) are evidence of late arrival. A variety of stories
connected a Geganius, the earliest attested member of the Geganii,
with Servius Tullius (Valerius Antias fr. 12 P.) or Tarquinius Superbus
(Plutarch, Comp. Lye. et Numae 3. n ) which shows an awareness of
their foreign origin. At some date the patrician status of these families
had to be reconciled with their late arrival and the compilation of the
list of Alban families was a step to that end. T h e Fasti also connected
the families. I n 453 a Curiatius and a Quinctilius were consuls
(3. 32. 1 n.) and in 447 a Geganius and a Julius. If we ask when the
definitive list of Alban families was composed, the early second cen
tury is the obvious date. The eclipse of the Geganii is still recent, the
last patrician Cloelius was rex sacrorum in 180, a new strain of Quinctilii comes into the fore in the person of P. Q . Varus, praetor in 203.
T h e date coincides with activities of Gato whose Origines would
naturally have dealt with the social history of Alba as it did of the
Euganei (fr. 41 P.) and is suited by the apparent disregard of the
legend of Proculus Julius (16. 5 n.). Yet L. cannot, any more than
D.H., have taken it directly from Gato, for it is inconceivable that on
whatever principles the list was composed the Julii, obscure and un
distinguished, should have been put before the Servilii who boasted
of consuls in 203 and 202. T h e precedence of the Julii must be an
anachronism of the first century. It need not post-date the dictator:
it must be later than the consuls of 91 and 90. See Miinzer, Rom.
Adelsparteien, 133 n. 1.
templum: for meeting-places of the Senate see 4. 21. 9. n. The
Curia Hostilia, universally attributed to Tullus (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 31 ;
Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 155) because of its name, is in reality likely to
have been constructed in the sixth or fifth century on the initiative
of a member or members of the gens Hostilia. It was restored and en
larged in 80 B.C. by Sulla (Pliny, N.H. 34. 26), burnt in 52 B.C., and
rebuilt by Faustus Sulla (Cicero, pro Milone 90). In 44 B.C. it was
pulled down to make way for a larger Senate-house on a new site
(Dio 44. 5), the Curia Julia. The comment ad patrum nostrorum aetatem
is, then, L.'s own.
123

^o- 5

TULLUS HOSTILIUS

War against the Sabines

30. 5. ad Feroniae fanum: Schulze regarded Feronia as an Etruscan
name (165). This is not necessarily so and the other places where
cult is attested (Pisaurum, Amiternum, Terracina) tend to confirm
the ancient tradition that she was a Sabine goddess (Varro, de Ling.
Lat. 5. 74). The cult-centre mentioned here and known also as the
lucus Capenatis (Cato fr. 30 P . ; Aeneid 7. 697) was the largest and most
celebrated. It has recently been identified as Bambocci, near Scorano,
where dedications of the type Fero(niae) don(o)m mereto have been found.
It was a natural meeting-place for the inhabitants of the region of
Capena and for traders from farther afield. See the evidence as
sembled by G. D . B . J o n e s , P.B.S.R. 30 (1962), i89ff.
suos: Madvig would add servos before suos, to provide the balanced
contrast negotiatores Romanos . . . servos suos; cf. D.H. 3. 32.
lucum: 8. 5 n.
30. 7. cum Romulo: the 1 oo-year indutiae mentioned in 15. 5. Editors
have objected that the peace was broken by the Veientes in 27. 3 and
have wished to read cum Tullo (Perizonius) or cum Romano (Duker)
but either L. has now switched to a new source which did not recognize
an earlier war between Tullus and Veii or, as Glareanus held, L. has
simply overlooked the inconsistency. L. means that it is not sur
prising that the other Etruscans did not assist the Sabines because they
had no quarrel with Rome. Veii, the only city which was hostile,
was deterred by her treaty.
30. 9. Malitiosam: the site is unknown.
The Death of Tullus
T h e events leading up to the death of Tullus are archival in charac
ter. T h e portents of stone rain (7. 28. 7, 30. 38. 9) and the speaking
grove figure commonly in prodigy lists (3. 5. 14 n.; 2. 6-7. 4 n.) and
pestilences were also recorded (3. 2. 1 n.). The notices of the Feriae
Latinae (31. 3 n.), the novemdiale sacrum (31. 4 n.), and the rites of
Juppiter Elicius ( 3 1 . 8 n.) are equally pontifical. The chapter in fact
contains an elaboration of what must have been the typical contents
of one part of the Annales. This may be no more than antiquarian
reconstruction, but there were certainly some fragments of the Annales
attributed to the regal period (frr. 2, 3 P.) and it may be that some
of the oldest surviving tabulae which had lost their eponymous headings
were assigned to the kings. See also 31. 8 n.
3 1 . 2. grandinem . . . glomeratam . . . crebri cecidere caelo: the alliteration
is in keeping with the carmen character of the notice.
3 1 . 3 . sacra: the story provides the explanation and justification of
124

TULLUS HOSTILIUS

1.31- 3

the Feriae Latinae. This festival, for which see also 5. 17. 2 n., was
celebrated with a sacrifice to Juppiter on the Alban mount by a group
of Latin communities and during it an armistice prevailed in Latium.
It is doubtful whether R o m e was even a founder-member of it or
whether Alba enjoyed any special responsibility, but with the decline
and extinction of the Latin states, who had in some cases to be arti
ficially represented at the sacrifice by Romans designated as sacerdotes
Cabenses, Rome gradually assumed a monopoly of it. T h e festival
was usually attended by the consuls and magistrates (25. 12. 2,
44. 2 1 . 3 ; Dio 47. 40. 6) and was held annually on a date appointed
by the consuls directly after their entry into office (Cicero, ad Fam.
8. 6. 3). See Samter, R.E., Teriae Latinae'.
3 1 . 4. novemdiale sacrum: a rite of purification analogous in public cult
to the private ritual performed nine days after a funeral (Porph. ad
Horace, Epod. 17. 48).
haruspicum: 56. 5 n. The variant is anachronistic, for the haruspices
were an Etruscan importation.
3 1 . 8. commentarios: 20. 5 n.
sacrificia: Duker proposed its deletion as a gloss on sollemnia but cf.
5- 52- 2.
Iovi Elicio: 20. 7 n.
operatum: 4. 60. 2, 21. 62. 6, 10. 39. 2, the t.t. for conducting a
sacrifice; cf. Horace, Odes 3. 14. 6; Virgil, Aeneid 3. 136; Lucilius
fr. 992 M . Bentley proposed operaturum but the perfect participle of
deponents is often used with a present force (cf. Virgil, Georgics 1. 339).
It is stated by Pliny {JSf.H. 28. 14) that the historian Piso was the
first to relate the circumstances of Tullus 5 death as told by L.; and
since Piso was the first to make extensive use of the Annales, it is
reasonable to believe that he had some documentary evidence for it,
although such evidence need not and indeed is unlikely to have
been authentic. This fact tends to confirm the impression that some
archival or pseudo-archival material underlies the chapter, but
the manner of his death, contrasting so signally with Romulus',
who was apotheosized, and Nutrias', who died a natural death, is
schematic.
32-34. The Reign of Ancus Marcius
The praenomen is Sabine (de Praen. 4), the name Latin and plebeian,
but did a king called Ancus Marcius ever reign at R o m e ? Later
Marcii certainly believed that he did, for the moneyer C. Marcius
Censorinus issued coins c. 86 B.C. with the heads of N u m a and Ancus
(Sydenham nos. 713, 715; cf. Suetonius, Julius 6; Plutarch, Numa
21. 1) and the Marcii Reges regarded their cognomen as proof. Their
testimony, however, amounts to nothing. T h e cognomen Rex was adopted
125

i- 32-34

ANGUS MARCUS

by the descendants of M . Marcius, the first plebeian rex sacrorum

(27. 6. 16). T h e plausibility of the tradition depends ultimately not
on the events with which L. credits Ancus but on the bare name. T h e
Marcii do not figure in the Fasti before C. Marcius Rutilus, consul
in 357, by which date the lineaments of early Roman history were
already established. It is inconceivable that a king, let alone one with
a plebeian name, could have been interpolated into the list as late as
the second half of the fourth century when the Marcii were a power in
the land. If the eclipse of the gens in the early Republic requires ex
planation, it is perhaps to be found in the legend of Cn. Marcius
Goriolanus (2. 33. 5 n.) whose family seems to have been resident at
Corioli. T h e Marcii may have been victims of the Etruscan domina
tion of Rome and have sought refuge at Corioli. O f the events associated
with Ancus Marcius only two have any substance, the foundation of
Ostia (33. 9 n.) and the construction of the Pons Sublicius (33. 6 n.).
Of the other details given by L., the capture of Politorium, Tellenae,
Ficana, and Medullia (33. 1 n., 33. 2 n., 33. 4 n.) was demanded by
the geography of the foundation of Ostia and is an antiquarian rationa
lization ; the addition of the Aventine and the settlement ad Murciae
(33. 5 n.) with the accompanyingybj\ra Quiritium is etymological specu
lation. T h e incorporation of the Janiculum followed the building of
the Pons Sublicius. In other words historians seized upon the founda
tion of Ostia as a peg on which to hang a miscellaneous collection of
random facts.
This meagre record was supplemented by fathering the fetial for
mula for declaring war on Ancus. This was an innovation in the
tradition no older than 120 B.C. (32. 5 n.), when the kings had
acquired settled characteristics and Ancus, through a false etymology
which identified Marcius and Martius, was characterized as a warrior.
T h e other major episode, the early history of the Tarquins (34),
belongs properly to the reign of Tarquinius Priscus, where it is told
by D.H., not to that of Ancus, but the need to provide material for
Ancus as well as the model of epic technique which told events in
their proper sequence (Heinze, Virgils Epische Technik, 382 fF.) led L.
to build it into the narrative of the reign.
We cannot be sure how far L.'s source, who was probably Licinius
Macer, had succeeded in unifying these scattered pieces. Where D.H.
makes a mechanical distribution of TroXeyaKai and 7roAtrt/cat Trpd^ets
L. sees each event as the reflection of the personality of the king, a
man of war concerned for the well-being of his people.
32. 1. comitia . . . auctores: 17. 9 n.
Numae: the descent from N u m a through the female line is a late
invention to satisfy the principles of hereditary succession. Cf. Cicero,
de Rep. 2. 3 3 ; Plutarch, Numa 2 1 ; Seneca, Epist. 108. 30.
126

ANCUS MARCUS

i. 32. 2

32. 2. longe: longeque (N), retained by Wimmer, is an instance of the

common interpolation of -que (2. 32. 10 n.).
commentariis \ 20. 5 n. M read regzj, not regiis with 7rA, and since
N u m a is specifically meant the singular is appropriate.
elata: cf. Cicero, de Orat. 2. 52; also Pliny, N.H. 2. 5 3 ; Tacitus,
Annals 12. 21. It differs from referre in having the force of publication.
32. 3 . desidem: the jibe is inspired by Atossa's remarks to Darius
(Herodotus 3. 134. 2).
32. 4 . sine iniuria: the placing of id, which should open its colon, and
the use of the neutral verb contigisset, which cries out for qualification,
favour taking sine iniuria with contigisset (Madvig) rather than habiturum (Seeley). 'He realized that he would not easily have that peace
which had been a feature but not a weakness ofNuma's reign.'
The Fetial Formula
The fetial procedure for declaring war, which like many other legal
and quasi-legal institutions survived long after it was obsolete, was
a ritual procedure common to all the primitive communities of Latium.
T h e original procedure had contained three stages. When some in
cident had occurred such as the theft of cattle or property, first the
pater patratus was sent with three other delegates called fetiales or
oratores (Varro ap. Nonius, p . 850 L.) to demand restitution [ad res
repetundas) and to give notice that if satisfaction was not given within
30 days action would be taken. This was the denuntiatio, or rerum re
petition If satisfaction was not obtained thefetiales returned to the enemy
after the 30 days to deliver a solemn testatio deorum, calling the gods
to witness that wrong had been done them, and that their cause was
legitimate. T h e Senate then met and decided on war, and their
decision was confirmed by the people. On the 33rd day (32. 9 n.) a
messenger was sent to cast a magical spear into the enemy's land in
order to nullify his power. This third stage was the indictio belli. T h e
whole ritual is designed to establish before the gods that the war is 'just'.
T h e antiquity of the procedure can be seen from its resemblance
to the civil procedure legis actio per condictionem, whereby a plaintiff
gave 30 days' notice before going to a magistrate ad iudicem capiendum.
T h e two procedures are strictly parallel and they have common
roots far back in Roman legal history. But as soon as Rome extended
her sphere of activity outside the narrow circle of kindred Latin
communities, the ceremony became increasingly difficult to apply. It
often took longer than 30 days for messengers to come and go between
Rome and the enemy, and it was often difficult to find a place to
throw the spear. Accordingly two main innovations occurred. In the
270's a token piece of land near the temple of Bellona was bought by
a prisoner of war captured from Pyrrhus and was marked off as a
127

 32. 5

ANGUS MARCUS

ritual stretch of 'hostile soil' into which the spear was cast ([Servius],
ad Aen. 9. 5 2 ; Ovid, Fasti 6. 205 ff.; Suet. Claud. 25). Furthermore,
since her new enemies did not share iusfetiale with Rome, the fetiales
were replaced by senatorial legati and the whole ceremony secularized.
T h e old ceremony had involved three journeys, the denuntiatio, the
testatio, and the indictio. This was no longer a practical possibility. In
its place the legati were empowered by the Senate and people in
advance to carry out all three stages on their own authority without
reference back to Rome if the enemy refused to give the required
satisfaction. This was the procedure used at the start of the Second
Punic War.
By the beginning of the second century the old iusfetiale was, there
fore, obsolete. Polybius (13. 3. 7) says that only a bare trace of the
original procedure survived in his day (fipaxy n i^vo?) a n d he makes
no mention of the fetiales9 part in declaring war. T h e fetiales suddenly
re-emerged in 136. Although it is certain that the Numantine war was
not commenced by fetial procedure, when the consul Mancinus was
handed over to the Numantines on the repudiation of the peacetreaty which he had contracted, fetiales are recorded as playing a lead
ing part in the formalities of the ceremony. T h e event, which was
little more than a piece of political play-acting, had a profound
influence on the writing of history. T h e annalistic account of the
aftermath of the Gaudine Forks was composed under the immediate
impression of the Mancinus case and Sallust's account of the pre
liminaries of the Jugurthine W a r betrays the lineaments of the fetial
procedure. It may well be that the traditions, which were kept alive
in patrician families from which the fetiales were hereditarily chosen
or through archaic ceremonies like the annual renewal at Rome of the
Lavinian treaty, were now revived and popularized in literature. It is
at this period that the significantly named Annius Fetialis was writing
antiquarian history. Such a revival would be in keeping with the
interest aroused by the publication of pontifical records and similar
documents. But if the old formulae of the fourth century did survive
they would have been, like the chants of the Salii, utterly incompre
hensible. Thus there is every a priori ground for supposing that what in
Livy purport to be the original formulae are in fact either an invention
by second-century antiquarians, anxious to supply the exact details of
a ritual in which they are beginning to become interested or, at the
very least, a 'translation' into appropriate language of archaic pro
nouncements.
T h e antiquarian rediscovery of the procedure at the end of the
second century preserved it among the more scholarly writers of the
late Republic (mentioned, e.g., by Cicero, Verr. 5. 4 9 ; and discussed
in detail by Varro and by L. Gincius), but such interest was purely
128

ANCUS MARGIUS

1-32-5

theoretical until Octavian gave it a new significance by resuscitating

it in 32 B.C. when he declared war against Cleopatra (Dio 50. 4. 4-5).
Thereafter it was continued as a piece of antique ceremonial and
kept its place among the hallowed traditions of the Empire (Inscr.
Ital. 13, no. 66). For Livy's readers this section would have a con
temporary as well as an historical interest.
Ultimately, therefore, the precise forms of the formulae in Livy
derive from a second-century antiquarian tradition, as do the fetial
procedure for making treaties (24. 4 n.) and the ceremony of deditio
(38. 1 n.) but they were mediated through different sources. The
treaty procedure was closely woven into the narrative of Tullus
Hostilius' reign and was taken over by Livy together with that nar
rative from Valerius Antias. Here the ritual is entirely on its own. We
are presented with the outline, with the bare formula (cf., e.g., quicumque
est, nominai), and no attempt is made to relate it to the narrative of
Ancus Marcius' reign. The Prisci Latini who are mentioned are
chosen purely as an example. There is no reference to an actual war.
This indicates a more antiquarian source than Valerius and it is
likely that L. here continues to follow Licinius Macer (32. 13 n.).
See further: Lange, Romische Altertiimer, i 3 . 322 ff.; Munzer, Beitrdge,
167; G. Wissowa, Religion, 4 7 5 - 9 ; Samter, R.E., Tetiales'; J . Bayet,
Mil d'Arch. et a" Hist. 52 (1935), 29 ff.; A. H . McDonald and F. W.
Walbank J.R.S. 27 (1937), 192~7 5 F. Altheim, History of Roman
Religion, 424; S. I. Oost, A.J.P. 75 (1954), 147-59; H , Drexler, Rh.
Mus. 102 (1959), 97-140. O n possible Indo-European parallels for
the procedure, G. Dumezil, R..L. 34 (1956), 93 fT.; G. Donatuti,
> 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

*-32. 5

ANCUS MARGIUS

a branch of the Oscans, they are unlikely to have been the source of
such a widespread Latin rite as the iusfetiale, which other authorities
derive from Ardea (D.H. 2. 72) or the Falisci (Servius, adAen. 7. 695).
T h e attribution of it to them is no more than a late aetiological in
vention inspired by the false etymology aequum colere, but it quickly
superseded the older traditions (cf. the Ferter Resius inscription; de
Viris Illustr. 5. 4 ; Servius, ad Aen. 7. 695). See Hiilsen, R.E., 'Aequi'.
quo res repetuntur: demanding the restitution of objects or property
stolen by the other city. In early times the chief source of complaint
would have been cattle-rustling (Servius, ad Aen. 9. 52). T h e phrase
is old and technical, occurring first in Ennius, Ann. 273 V. See
Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 1047 n. 2.
32. 6. legatus: L. appears to indicate that only one person, a legatus, went
on the mission. According to Varro (ap. Non. Marcell. 850 l^.)fetiales
legatos res repetitum mittebant quattuor, quos oratores vocabant, including the
pater patratus and the verbenarius (24. 5 n.). Varro is less anachronistic,
since L.'s account is influenced by the subsequent developments dur
ing the third and second centuries in the procedure for declaring war
whereby the ultimatum was delivered not by a fetialis but by a
senatorial legatus. See also 32. 9 nn.
Jilolanae velamen est: on the ritual significance of the covered head
cf. 4. 12. 11 n. Thefetiales were likewise forbidden to wear linen tunics.
Wool had potent magical properties, partly because it was a token
from the sacrificial victim, and partly because it was the clothing of
primitive man. Its magical use was widespread in antiquity, lending
itself particularly to knots and spells. At Rome the galerus of the
flamen Dialis was made ex pelle hostiae caesae. For other examples of
wool-magic see Pley, De lanae in antiquorum ritibus usu, 1911; Kroll,
R.E., lana\
The Rerum Repetitio or Denuntiatio
audiat fas: threefold invocation is a ritual solemnity and is met
with in many cults (e.g. the Hylas-cult, for which see Gow on Theo
critus 13. 58, or the chant of the Fratres Arvales) but the presence of
Fas as an object to be addressed betrays that the actual language is
a product of second-century antiquarianism. K. Latte (%eit. Sav.-Stift.
67 (1950), 56) has demonstrated that in early Latin fas, with its
negative connotation ('there is no religious obstacle to prevent o n e ' ;
cf. dies fasti), is only used in the phrase fas est, and the like. T h e first
use of Fas as a substantive is in Accius (trag. 585) and it is not used as
an appellative ( = @e/zi?; cf. PaulusFestus 505 L.), outside this passage
of L. and the very similar 8 . 5 . 8 , before Seneca (H.F. 658) and Lucan
(10. 410). audiat fas is therefore a late formulation, influenced by
Greek concepts.
130

ANCUS MARCIUS

i. 32. 6

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 fJLTGL TOVTO

a7T(j)aLVeV

LS T7]V

fiovArjV

afJLCL TOLS dXXoiS

Lp7]Vo8iKaLS

7Tapayev6fivos) 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 Aventinemons 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 testimonythe terracotta
and pottery fragments, the R o m a n alphabet, the fasces, the templedesignsand the historical institutions of Rome, her religious dis
cipline and lore, and the names of her leading families confirm it. A
date for the duration of this influence is also given archaeologically.
Recent stratigraphy places the earliest signs of Etruscan contact c.
625 B.C. Attic Black Figure ware, imported via Etruria, is found in
some of the earliest excavated shrines dating from 580-560 B.C. T h e
contact with Etruria coincides with a remarkable change in the
physical appearance of Rome. T h e separate hill-communities had
gradually been approaching one another and the valleys between them
ceased to be used as distinct burial grounds and were built over with
huts. This tendency was accelerated by the creation of a central
market-place between the hills, superseding the scattering of huts
which covered the area. With its forum Rome ceased to be a conglomera
tion of swineherds and became a 7r6\ts. A precise date for it cannot be
fixed but the earliest level of the Sacra Via seems to be about or a
little before 575 B.C. T h e idea of such a noXts must have been inspired
140

ANCUS MARCIUS

i- 34
by Etruscan examples. (For the archaeological evidence see especially
E. Gjerstad, Opuscula Romana, 3. 81 ff.)
Given an Etruscan period at Rome, it is not unreasonable to accept
the tradition of an Etruscan domination of Rome, especially since the
traditional dates for the dynasty of the Tarquins, 616-578 and 5 3 4 510 B.C., correspond uncommonly well with the independent evidence
from archaeology. Moreover, the Tarquins have excellent credentials
quite apart from the disputable Cn. Tar^unies R u m a ^ of the Francois
T o m b . Tarquinius is a latinized form of the common Etruscan n a m e
taryna and recalls the Etruscan hero Tarchon and the Asiatic god
Tarku. No ethnic could betray a family's origins as clearly as the name
Tarquinius. See also 60. 2 n.
But there the difficulties begin. How much else of the traditional
story can be trusted ? T h e settled version, which is as old as Fabius
Pictor (Polybius 6. 11 a. 7 with Walbank's note; Cicero, de Rep. 2.
34-36), made Tarquinius the son of the Corinthian Demaratus and
an emigrant from Tarquinii to Rome. Epigraphical evidence points
to Caere rather than Tarquinii as the home town of the Tarquins, for
the family is most abundantly attested there (cf. 60. 2 n.) and Tar
quinii may have been substituted merely for its name. The point is less
important than the parentage of Tarquin. According to the developed
source Demaratus was a Bacchiad who fled to Etruria with his family
and craftsmen on the overthrow of the Bacchiad aristocracy by
Cypselus in c. 655 (Pliny, N.H. 35. 16, 152; Strabo 5. 219). Blakeway, in a fundamental paper (J.R.S. 25 (1935), 129-48), displayed
that Corinthian pottery monopolized the Etruscan market from c.
700 to c. 625 and that there were unmistakable indications of Greek
craftsmen producing vases at Falerii and perhaps other centres in
Etruria in the second half of the seventh century. In addition the
Corinthian style exercised a striking influence over Etruscan art in
general. Thus the story of the migration of Corinthian craftsmen to
Etruria is confirmed by the evidence of Etruscan art. T h e flight of
Demaratus is to be believed. Less likely is the story that makes him the
father of a Roman king: it fails to account for the name Tarquinius.
If we ask how Demaratus was remembered, the answer must be through
early Greek sources, historians of the fourth century drawing on
Corinthian memories. A Roman source is out of the question and an
Etruscan one only theoretically possible. It follows that the fusion
of the Demaratus story with the Tarquin legend must be the work of
the earliest generation of R o m a n historians. Demaratus migrates to
Etruria, Tarquin to Rome. The pattern is symmetrical.
T h e rest of the story is more easily disentangled. Tarquin is called
by the praenomen Lucumo, which gave colour to his royal pretensions
and also provided motivation for his migration to Rome. O n e of the
141

-34

ANCUS MARCIUS

oldest Etruscan myths was the rivalry between priest and king,
Arruns and Lucumo (see Gage, Rev. Hist. ReL 143 (1953), 170-208).
It recurs in a very similar story in 5. 33. 2 (n.) and in both places it
is a rationalistic explanation of a social distinction. Lucumo for
Lucius is etymological conjecture and, although Polybius merely
speaks of ACVKIOS 6 JrjjuapaTou, it is likely to be another addition to the
outline of the Tarquin legend made by Fabius Pictor or his contem
poraries. Once the two brothers had become part of history it was
natural to pursue the fortunes of Arruns as well. Here researches into
the history of Collatia and into the traditions of the Egerii (cf. 20. 5 n.)
are indicated, suggesting the work of Cato. Tanaquil is Etruscan in
name (34. 4 n.) and the renown of her doings is likely to have kept
her name alive, but wherever we can test the truth of the circumstantial
detail in which her life is clothed we find it to be unreliable. T h e
events of her life are un-Roman and literary (34. 8 n., 34. 9 n.).
R o m a n pride was always aware that the Tarquins were interlopers
and that Rome had fallen into the hands of a foreign power but it
was equally reluctant to explain this humiliation by an Etruscan con
quest of Rome. In this dilemma the historians, while accepting the
appearance of the Tarquins in the king-list of tradition, were anxious
to dispute their legitimacy. Hence two legal niceties are inserted to
discredit the claims of the Tarquins to the R o m a n throne. Lucumo
was not legally the sole heir (34. 3 n.) and he was guilty of fraudulent
behaviour in his capacity as tutor (34. 12 n.). These legal points are
of a piece with the other legal insertions of the second century.
Thus the whole superstructure about Tarquin is precarious. It is
largely the erection of Fabius Pictor, and later historians added little
or nothing to it. L. has no trace of the story originated by Varro that
Tarquin's wife was Gaia Caecilia. But scepticism about the super
structure should not encourage scepticism about the foundations. T h e
Etruscans led by Tarquins came to R o m e towards the end of the
seventh century. Salt and the passage of the Tiber led them on. They
created the city and, by whatever means, controlled it.
T h e excellent discussion by Schachermeyr in R.E., 'Tarquinius',
has not yet been superseded. For the latest treatment of the Corin
thian aspects see Will, Korinthiaka, 306 ff.
34. 1. Lucumo: according to Servius, adAen. 2. 278, 8. 65, 475, 10. 202,
lucumo was the Etruscan for rex: but cf. Censorinus, de Die Natal. 4. 13.
T h e word also occurs on Etruscan inscriptions in various forms sug
gesting that, as here, it was used as a name (e.g. CLE. 3932, 3567,
3872, 3877: see Schulze 179). Mlinzer (R.E., 'Lucumo') argues that
Servius' meaning was the original one but with the decline or dis
appearance of the kingship the title passed into a proper name used by
142

ANGUS MARGIUS

i- 34- i

the leading family of the city (cf. Ionian jSaoxAt&zt). Here it is no more
than a false aetiology for the praenomen Lucius (cf. Auct. de Praen. 4).
maxime: M . T . T a t h a m would read maximi, an artificial sentiment.
cupidine ac spe form a single concept.
34. 2 . Demaratus'. a common Greek name, it was borne by another
Corinthian, the friend of Alexander the Great (Plutarch, Alex. 9, 56).
34. 3 . ventremferre: evidently a technical or legal phrase, for it is found
before the Jurists only in Varro, de Re Rust. 2. 1. 19.
testando: Cicero (de Orat. 1. 241) classes among self-evident cases
which are never disputed in court the nullity of wills made by a father
antequam filius natus esset.
34. 4 . Tanaquil: the n a m e is Etruscan (cf. Qanyvil) and the person
real, but her character as a femme fatale is largely modelled on Greek
prototypes. See Momigliano cited in 4 1 . 2 n . ; bibliography on 39. 1.
ea quo innupsisset: cf. 4. 4. 10. innubo takes the dat. (Ovid, Met.
7. 856 ne thalamis patiare innubere nostris; Lucan 3. 23; Cod. Theod.
3. 18. 1: contrast Lucilius 260 M.). In the present passage the sense
is clear. Tanaquil refused to give up by marriage the station to which
she had been born. T h e contrast is between Us in quibus nata erat and
ea \cum innupsisset (N). The simplest correction is ea quibus innupsisset
but Weissenborn's quo is palaeographically more satisfactory and as
an alternative to quibus for the sake of variety is to be preferred. Cf.
Plautus, Aul. 489-90 quo illae nubent divites dotatae?
34. 6. potissima: the manuscript reading potissimum is impossible to
construe and the necessary meaning 'most suitable' cannot be ex
tracted from Gronovius's potissima. potissimum is used to qualify an adj.
e.g. apta potissimum (Freudenberg) or potissimum apta (Buttner, Meyer)
'particularly suitable', opportuna potissimum (Frigell). But the easiest
correction is Heumann's aptissima, metathesis with subsequent change.
For aptus ad cf. 32. 17. 12, 35. 26. 2, 44. 3. 6.
Tanaquil's persuasion is forthright and thoroughly modern in tone.
For ex virtute nobilitas cf. Sallust, Jugurtha 85. 17 (Marius); for nobilem
. . . imagine cf. ibid. 25.
34. 7. ut cupido: 'seeing that he was eager for office5.
34. 8. aquila: the eagle was the bird of Zeus, king of the gods, in Greek
myth (e.g. Aeschylus, Agam. 113) and therefore its appearance to a
m a n betokened royal power, blessed by Zeus. T h e infant Gilgamos
was saved by an eagle and became king of Babylon (Aelian, N.A.
12. 21). Similar Greek and Oriental legends have been overlooked
in favour of the prodigy which befell Augustus (Suetonius, Aug.
94. 7 'aquila panem ei e manu rapuit et cum altissime evolasset
rursus ex improviso leniter delapsa reddidit'). Suetonius gives no
indication of date and we cannot tell (nor should we expect to know)
the relationship between L. and that event. W h a t is important is that
H3

i. 34. 8

ANGUS MARCIUS

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

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 concludesthe

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, Horatiabelong 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 detailhorses,
boxers, spectators, even a puteal which Piganiol with some plausibility
compares with the Ara Consi in the Circus (Recherches, 1-14). There
can be no doubt that the games were Etruscan in origin and date from
the Tarquin period, although later rather than earlier in it (56. 2 n.).
T h e archaeological evidence is inconclusive. T h e earliest datable con
struction belongs to the late fourth century, agreeing with L.'s notice
that the first permanent structure was made in 329 B.C. (8. 20. 1).
In short, common sense and tradition pointed to an Etruscan origin
for the games but there was no firm evidence from antiquity which
involved one or other Tarquin. Hence duplications (35. 8, 56. 2) and
uncertainty.
tumprimum: tunc primum M . See 5. 7. 13 n . ; Housman, Manilius 2 , 5.
p. 116. T h e theory that horse-races at the Consualia were as old as
the festival and so older than the Tarquins is to be rejected (9. 6 n.).
patribus equitibusque: the allocation of special seats for the equites, as an
inferior class to the patres, is a post-Sullan anachronism. It reflects the
H9

i. 35 8

T A R Q U I N I U S PRISGUS

normal seating of the late Republic. Special seats were first reserved
for senators in 194 B.C. (34. 44. 5) and for equites by the Lex Roscia of
67 B.C. Since Valerius Antias is specifically named as one of the
authorities who recorded the precedent of 194 (fr. 37 P.) it may be
inferred that he is not L.'s source here.
35. 9. ludicrum -.5. 1.5. Tacitus, Annals 14. 21, appeals to the authority
of maiores for his contention that only histriones came from Etruria
while horse-races first came from Thurii, but he is confuted by the
evidence from the Etruscan tombs.
sollemnes: 'held at regular intervals', more closely defined by annul,
cf. 3. 15. 4 sollemne in singulos annos, 1. 9. 6. Mommsen, wishing to
vindicate the truth of his theory about the games, punctuated sol
lemnes, deinde annul mansere ludl 'first at intervals and then annually',
but deinde is conclusive against this, deinde must be used here as at
27. 23, 7 is dies deinde sollemnls servatus.
35. 10. divisa . . . loca: cf. 35. 8, an unconscious repetition.
porticus tabernaeque: a recollection of the construction of the Forum
under the Tarquins. For the tabernae see 3. 48. 5 n . ; the porticus is
anachronistic since the first were those constructed in 193 B.C. by M .
Aemilius Lepidus (35. 10. 12). It is another historical throw-back.
36. 1. muro: 44. 3 n.. There are no signs of a Tarquinian wall.
36. 2. Ramnes, Tltlenses, Luceres: 13. 8 n.
Attus Navlus
Attus Navius was a famous augur under the Tarquins. This is what
we are told and we can confidently affirm it, for his name is Etruscan
and, if he had not lived under the Tarquins, he would have been
placed in the reign of Romulus or Numa. There was also a stone,,
probably a meteorite, venerated in the comltlum and surrounded by
pious hands with a puteal (Cicero, de Dlv. 1. 33 with Pease's notes;
D . H . 3. 71. 5). T h e connexion between the two was first made by
those who, whether priests or guides, were concerned to offer an ex
planation of the stone. It is an aetiology of a common type. Once
the connexion had been made it was developed. T h e augur had
performed a miracle with the stone. Such miracles are attested else
where and a close parallel is afforded by the legend of young Arthur
and Excalibur. T h e circumstances of the miracle now called for ex
planation and were provided by the curiosity of the Sex Suffragia.
It was known or might be presumed that Tarquin increased the
cavalry just as he had enlarged the Senate and the patricians, but
the signs of that increase could only be discerned in the duplication of
centuries with the same name. T h e historical oddity of prlmores and
posteriores excited comment and recalled the doings of Cleisthenes of
150

TARQUINIUS PRISCUS

i- 36. 3

Sicyon who renamed the three Dorian tribes in his city and added
one of his own (Herodotus 5. 6 8 ; cf. Cicero, de Rep, 2. 36). Thus
Greek models once again provide motive a n d continuity.
Later embellishments to the story include the naming of a fig-tree in
the vicinity of the putealficus Navia (Festus 168 L . ; Pliny, N.H. 15. 77)
and the erection of the statue (36. 5 n.). T h e activities of Q . Navius
described in 26. 4. 4-10 are purely coincidental and are unlikely to
have influenced the decision to connect Navius with a reform of the
equites. L. treats the story as an illustration of the power of religious
sentiment, although he is himself sceptical of the miraculous aspects
of it. H e admires and is anxious that others should admire the moral
nihil nisi auspicato and achieves his purpose as is his wont (2. 10. 1 n.)
by crystallizing the episode into a dialogue.
See Kroll, R.E., 'Navius ( i ) ' ; Petrikovits, Mitt. d. Ver. Klass. PhiloL
9 (1932), 36 ff.
36. 3 . inaugurato: it is not stated in 13. 8 that Romulus did so create
them but it is a reasonable assumption.
Attus Navius: for the praenomen see 2. 16. 4 n. Navius, the true
form of the name (Naevius in de Viris Must. 6. 7 is a trivialization), is
Etruscan; cf. navesi, navlis and Navinius, Navonius (Schulze 197).
36. 4 . utferunt: ct.ferunt below and 36. 5 memorant. T h e non-committal
attitude to the miraculous part of the story may be taken as some
evidence of L.'s religious scepticism (Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy, 32).
36. 5. statua: according to Pliny (N.H. 34. 21) the base was destroyed
in the conflagration of 52 B.C. but D.H. 3. 71. 5 states that the statue
was still standing and describes it as smaller than life-size. It is probable
that it did not survive to the Augustan age (notice l^.hfuit) and that
D . H . is merely retailing his sources (but see A. Andren, Hommages
Herrmann, 98).
in gradibus ipsis: the ancient comitium was a semi-circular space in the
shape of a theatre (caved). It lay between the two streets Argiletum and
Clivus Argentarius. T h e place of a stage was taken by the rostra, the
seating was arranged in tiers (the gradus mentioned here and in 48. 3),
and the old Curia stood at the top at the back. It was capable of
holding some 6,000 people. T h e gradus are not the steps leading into
the Curia (see details in Sjoqvist, Studies Presented to D. M. Robinson,
1. 4 0 0 - 1 1 ) .

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. . . <f>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 versionwhich was subsequently rationalized into
the more respectable tale adopted by L. in which divine fire merely
played about the child's head (Cicero, de Div. 1. 121; Pliny, N.H.
2. 2 4 1 ; Servius, ad Aen. 2. 6 8 3 ; de Viris illustr. 7. i ) . According to
Plutarch, Valerius Antias (fr. 12 P.) was the first to improve on that
story by making Servius not an infant but a grown m a n who had just
lost his wife Getania when the divine manifestation occurred. L.'s
version should, therefore, come from Licinius Macer.
39. 2. miraculum: 4. 7 n.
sedatoque earn tumultu: iam, read by the manuscripts, would underline
the clear break between what had happened and present circum
stances. Such a break is unwanted here since the tumult presumably
subsided at a word from the queen ('the queen asked for quiet and
forbade . . . ' ) . Gronovius proposed earn to provide, as well, a subject
for vetuisse. T h e setting of a subject noun or pronoun inside an abl. abs.
often has the effect of a present or past participle in agreement with
the noun, earn is certain here but cf. 40. 37. 6 (Meyer).
39. 3 . videsne: so n. MA have the corrupt vidine which Gronovius
emended to the syncopated viden. Elsewhere L. uses videsne tu (6. 29. 1)
and this alone should lead us to follow TT quite apart from the fact that
viden tu would be lively conversation (Terence, Heaut. 252) and in
appropriate to the formal phrasing of Tanaquil. viden ut-\-indie, is the
accepted poetical usage (Virgil, Aen. 6. 779 with Norden's note).
videsne also occurs in Cicero, Acad, prior. 2. 57 (Frigell, Epilegomena,
37).
scire licet: only here in L. T h e periphrasis lends weight to the point
which is going to be made and is used frequently by Lucretius and
Celsus in their most didactic moments.
lumen . . . praesidiumque: Tanaquil's prophecy with its figurative use
of lumen is an interpretation of the fire-prodigy, an effect destroyed by
Rhenanus's ingenious (co^lumen. Columen would be an appropriately
158

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

* 39- 3
solemn word (Fraenkel, Horace, 217 n. 2) a n d is used in metaphorical
contexts of this kind (6. 37. 10; cf. Horace, Odes 2. 17. 3-4), but the
conjunction 0$lumen andpraesidium can be supported. Cf. Virgil, Aeneid,
2. 281 (from Ennius).
nostra: not superfluous since it adds a measured dignity to her words
a n effect also achieved by the repeated n.
39. 4 . evenit facile quoddis cordi esset: if the consensus of the manuscripts
is right, quod must be a causal relative = quippe quod (cf 45. 7) and
the subject of evenit (aorist) be TanaquiPs prophecy as a whole. T h e
alternative [evenit present; quod . . . est (with Gruter and some recc.)
relative) makes the sentiment general: ' w h a t the gods wish is accom
plished easily' (cf. Petronius 76 citofit quod di volunt or, with Lendrum,
Pindar, Pyth. 9. 6 9 ; notice also Homer, Od. 3. 2 3 1 ; Euripides, Ion
1244; Pindar, Pyth. 2. 49). Gruter's interpretation ( c ut istud substruat
quasi dogma') seems, however, abrupt in the context. This moralizing
generalization reflects a commonplace, often colloquial, practice of
adding a touch of mock-seriousness to a story by inserting quomodo di
volunt and the like: cf. Plautus, Miles 117; Virgil, Aen. 5. 50; Petronius
61 fabulam exorsus est ' . . . ibi, quomodo dii volunt, amare coepi . . .'. For
dis cordi cf. 6. 9. 3, 9. 1. 4, 10. 42. 7, 22. 1. 10, 28. 18. 5, 28. 20. 7.
3 9 . 5 . serva natum: Servius' origins are veiled in darkness but the pattern
of the growing legend can be disentangled. His own name is attested
as early as Timaeus, and his mother's n a m e is equally well grounded
as Ocrisia (for the orthography and etymology see E. Morbach, R.E.,
s.v.). T h e early tradition is unanimous that she was a slave, by
captivity rather than birth, and this could be more than mere etymo
logical conjecture from the praenomen of her son Servius. Plutarch
(Q^-R. 100) discusses the question whether the feriae servorum on the
Ides of August are connected with Servius' birth from a slave woman
and it is noteworthy that the foundation date of the Servian temple
of Diana on the Aventine was the same day (H. J . Rose, ad l o c ) .
It may be that a piece of genuine history has been preserved. Ocrisia
was a prisoner of war from Gorniculum. But his paternity is contro
versial. T h e most likely reconstruction is that his father was either
unknown or soon forgotten. T o enhance Servius' royal claims he was
called the son of the fire-god. This was the oldest tradition (D. H. 4. 2
iv TOLLS imx^pioLs avaypa<f>ats; Plutarch, de fort. Rom. 10). A more
sceptical age, as we have shown above, recoiled from the idea of the
physical paternity of the fire-god and substituted one of Tarquin's
clients as Servius' actual father and turned the fire-prodigy into a mei e
halo. T h a t we presume to have been the version of Fabius Pictor (cf.
Cicero, de Rep. 2. 3 7 ; Plutarch, de fort. Rom. 10 TreAar^s) which was
utilized by Licinius Macer here; cf. also 4. 3. 12 and Claudius, I.L.S.
212. But such a birth was too humble for the greatest of Rome's kings.
159

-39-5

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

His father must have been a king not a mere client. A royal father
was fabricated for himServius Tullius of Corniculum or, according
to a tradition known to Festus 182 L. and inspired by local patriotism,
Sp. Tullius of Tibur. I take this version, which is that preferred by L.
[eorum magis sententiae sum) and D.H. (4.1), to be the creation of Valerius
Antias. Among other authorities de Viris illustr. 7, Servius, ad Aen.
2. 683 (where vericulanum should be changed by a simple metathesis
to Corniculanum), and Zonaras 7. 9 derive ultimately from L., while
Justin 18. 6, Val. Max. 1. 6. 1, and Plutarch, Q.R. 100 content
themselves with referring solely to his mother as a slave woman
without further elaboration.
eorum: probably only Valerius Antias.
Corniculo : 38. 4 n.
(in) Prisci Tarquini domo: the word-order first suggested by Curio is
preferable to Curio's second thoughts (1549) when he proposed Prisci
Tarquinii (in) domo. As Meyer demonstrated, the genitive must come
either after in domo (43. 13. 6 ; 39. 13. 3) or between in and domo
(6. 34. 6). T h e in is required. T h e plain ablative domo without in is
inadequately supported by a reference to Porph. ad Horace, Sat.
1.5-38.
39. 6. et inter mulieres: with et puerum, 'both . . . and'. Not merely did
the familiarity between Ocrisia and the women of the royal household
increase but the boy was liked too.
40. 2. tutoris: 34. 12 n.
Italicae: T a r q u i n was half Greek, half Etruscan.
40. 3 . centesimum fere annum: a round number, actually 138 years.
quam: Virtually 100 years after Romulus held the throne'. T h e
sentence is a combination of two distinct thoughts: (1) the throne
which a god once possessed is now held by a slave (quod regnum . . .
id) and (2) a 100 years after a god ruled, a slave now rules at Rome,
b u t there is no need to alter quam to quod as Drakenborch first pro
posed but rejected.
T h e greatness of Rome's downfall is emphasized by the careful
choice of language attributed to Ancus' sons. T h e dignity of Romulus
is conveyed by calling him deo prognatus; for prognatusy as can be seen
from the remarks of E. Schwyzer, Kuhn's eitschrift 56 (1928), 10 fF.
and Fraenkel, Horace, 82 n. 4, was an archaic and obsolete word as
early as Plautus (cf. Amph. 365) which later authors such as Horace,
SaL 1. 2. 70 only employed to evoke a solemn and august atmosphere.
It does not occur elsewhere in L. With this is contrasted the servile
obscurity of Servius Tullius. N had Servius serva natus, which is read
by Cocchia and other editors or emended to servus serva natus by some
of the later manuscripts and followed by most of the early editors and
160

SERVIUS TULLIUS

i. 40. 3

the O.G.T. It was the worst that the ancients could say of a man that
he was not merely a slave or a rogue but t h a t his parents were too (cf.
Aristophanes, Eq. 336-7; Ran. 7 3 1 ; Lysias 13. 18), and in comparing
Servius with Romulus to the detriment of the former L. can hardly
have failed to omit this double insult. Weissenborn's Servius (servus)
serva natus is more than attractive because of its formal antithesis to
Romulus deo prognatus deus ipse.
4 0 . 5 . ex pastoribus: the circumstances of Tarquinius' assassination
are a literary embellishment added in the third century on the basis
of two well-known stories, the murder of Jason of Phera in 370
(Xenophon, Hell. 6. 4. 31), and the assassination of Glearchus, tyrant
of Heraclea, by two noble youths (Justin 16. 5. 15). D . H . preserves
the original form of the story, which L. has abbreviated, that two
nobles, Marcii, dressed u p as shepherds.
quibus consueti . . . ferramentis: the construction is very odd; ferramentis has to be regarded as an abl. of accompaniment, 'with the
tools they were used to' but no parallel is forthcoming. Perhaps
a word has dropped out, e.g. ferramentis (armati) (G. W . Williams) or
(instructi).
4 1 . 1. clamor inde concursusque: 48. 2 n., military colouring.
populiy mirantium: the plural after a singular collective noun is illus
trated by Lofstedt, Syntactica, 2. 136. There is no need to delete miran
tium with Novak.
quid rei esset: 48. 1 n., 4. 44. 4 n. Gf. 5. 21. 7 mirantes quidnam id esset.
41. 2. paene exsanguem: 48. 4 n.
Tanaquil now delivers two short speeches of widely different and
sharply defined character. T o Servius she speaks, like a general
before battle, in rousing terms calculated to excite his courage and his
enthusiasm; to the crowd she is precise and matter-of-fact, inspiring
confidence by her assured command of medical platitudes (E. Dutoit,
Mus. Helv. 5 (1948), 120). This easy change of style aids L.'s picture of
a clever and unscrupulous woman. See the assessment by A. Momigliano, Misc. Fac. Lett. Filos. Torino, 1938, 4 ff.
4 1 . 3 . si vir es: a taunt, frequent in Latin and in Greek from the
Homeric dvepes care to Gleon's jibe against the generals at Pylos el
avSpcs Lvy but in Latin it is too strong for refined literature and is
favoured by the more excited style of letters (e.g. Cicero, ad Fam.
5. 18. 1 te colligas virumquepraebeas; ad Att. 10. 7. 2 et al.).
pessimum facinus fecere: notice the solemn 'figura etymologica'. See
K r o l l o n Catullus 81. 6.
erige te: cf. Cicero, Q.F. 1. 3. 5 erige te et confirma si qua subeunda
dimicatio erit; Seneca, Epist. 71. 6. At Cicero, Q.F. 1. 1. 4 Wesenberg's
supplement <te> erigas is mentioned but not accepted by Watt.
814432

l6l

I. 4 1 . 3

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

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 tuaan 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 KaraaKvat,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 <f>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<j<f>ovs 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 <j<f>cv86vas.
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 =25,00012,500, but the division by half looks overschematic and L.'s figure may be right. By the middle of the second
century the minimum qualification had been reduced to 4,000 (Polybius 6. 19. 2) and towards the end of the Republic (perhaps between
130 and 125 from the evidence of the large j u m p in census figures
which occurred within that period) to 1,500 (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 4 0 ;
Aul. Gell. 16. 10. 10), presumably to facilitate recruitment. 11,000
sextantal asses might have been the minimum for the fifth class at
the end of the Second Punic War. See, with reservations on chronology,
E. Gabba, Athenaeum 27 (1949), 173 ff.
The Cavalry
4 3 . 8. exprimoribus civitatis: 5. 7. 5 n. There is no hint that they had a
higher qualification.
4 3 . 9. sex . . . alias centurias: 36. 8 n., the Sex Suffragia or six preServian centuries of cavalry. T h e distinction between them and the
twelve Servian centuries may originally have been one of birth, the
Sex Suffragia being exclusively patrician (Hill, Roman Middle Classes,
211). If so, it was soon obliterated and by the end of the Republic
there remained only a distinction of title.
ab Romulo: 13. 8 n.
nominibus: i.e. Ramnenses, Titienses, Luceres.
dena milia: the aes equestre for the purchase of the horse (s). Varro,
de Ling. Lat. 8. 71 equum publicum . . . mille assariorum agrees with
L.'s figure since the assarius, despite its etymology which suggests the
Greek auadptov or as, is said by a late gloss to be equivalent in value to
and may be an easy name for a denarius of 10 asses. Since the 10-as
171

1.43-9

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

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 firethe most potent
of all purifying agentsrather than, as it is commonly understood,
to the disposal by burial of part of the sacrifice, lustrum is derived from
*Jlu and means 'that which looses' (cf.flustrum fromjluo) and condere
should mean 'to assemble or put together'. T h e importance attached
to the proper acquisition of fire is evidenced also in the annual re
kindling of the flame of Vesta (Festus 94 L.) or in the Catholic rite
of the Easter Vigil and it is natural to derive censor from *cendere ('the
kindler'). lustrum then came to mean generally 'purification'; hence
the less technical expressions 'lustrum mittere' and 'lustrum facere'
and the verb 'lustro' with the noun 'lustratio'. For a detailed dis
cussion of the evidence with illustrations see J.R.S. 51 (1961), 31-39.
L.'s explanation, that the purifying procession with the suovetaurilia
was called 'lustrum conditum' because it marked the end of the census,
appears to understand conditum as 'closed' or 'finished'.
milia octoginta: D.H. 4. 22. 2 says 84,700; Eutropius 1. 7, 83,000.
Unless the text is corrupt, L. gives a round figure to the nearest 10,000.
All three must ultimately derive from the same total which Fabius
Pictor took from the official lists (/caraypa^at) although L. is unlikely
to have consulted Fabius direct. A number of census figures are pre
served for the third century (Livy, Ep. 16, 18, 19, 20; 27. 36. 7, 29. 37.
5-6) which agree well with figures supplied by Polybius (2. 24 with
Walbank's note) for 225. In all cases the figures appear to come from
authentic documents and to include all adult male citizens other than
814432

177

1.44-2

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

the capite censi rather than all men actually under arms or in the seven
teen to forty-six age-group (Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. 2. 401). Since
Fabius had access to the official lists, the figures for the early period
(3. 3. 9 : 104,714 (465); 3. 24. 10: 117, 319 (459)) will be documentary
too, for there is no reason why the records should have been destroyed.
T h e census lists were kept in old censorial families (D.H. 1. 74. 5),
later in the Atrium Libertatis (43. 16. 13), and ultimately in the Aedes
Nympharum (Cicero, pro Milone 73). But although the fifth-century
totals when compared with those of the third century (292,234 in
265) and considered in the light of the size of the ager Romanus at that
time (Bernardi, Athenaeum 30 (1952), 19 ff.; Clerici's computations
[Economia e Finanza, 385 ff.), that the fifth-century figures give a
density of 50-90 per square km. instead of a viable 10-30, are too
rigorous) are just credible, 84,000 seems inconceivably large for the
male population of Rome before the expulsion of the kings. Perhaps it
was the number which Fabius found at the top of the list and which he
inevitably assumed to be Servian whereas in fact it probably belongs
to c. 470. See the discussion by Walbank on Polybius 2. 24 with biblio
graphy; add F. C. Bourne, Class. Weekly, 1952, 134; T. Frank, A. J.P.
51 (1930), 313 ff.
Fabius: the first mention in L. of the historian Q . Fabius Pictor. A
senator and an ambassador to Delphi in 216 B.C., he was the earliest
R o m a n to compose a history of Rome, although he wrote in Greek
and was dependent on Greek sources. It is most unlikely that L.
consulted him at first hand. For an evaluation and bibliography see
A. Momigliano, Atti della Accad. Naz. dei Lincei 15 (1961), 310-20.
44. 3 . addit duos colles, Quirinalem Viminalemque: the two colles are not
to be identified with two of the collibus in 43. 13. L. means that Servius
incorporated the physical districts into the city. Both lay outside the
original settlement and were not included in the Septimontium
(Festus 458, 476 L. (Antistius L a b e o ) ; Lydus, deMens. 4. 155). T h e
ancient tradition is amply substantiated by the fact that the Sabine
gods of the Quirinal (Quirinus) were not included in the earliest
religious calendar of Rome (Altheim, History of Roman Religion, 129)
and that the inhabitants were an inhuming and not (as the Palatine
settlement) a cremating people (evidence in E. Gjerstad, Early Rome,
1955, 2. 267-79). T h e synoecism must have occurred before the in
clusion of the Capitol (38. 6 n . ; 56. 1 n.) and, if Servius' reign marks
a break in the Etruscan domination of Rome, it would be a fitting
occasion for the separate communities to draw together for mutual
protection. D.H. 2. 50. 1 follows a variant belief (found also in Servius,
ad Aen. 6. 783) that the Quirinal was added by Romulus, but this is
a later rationalization based on the identification of RomulusQuirinus. See G. Radke, R.E. 'Viminalis'.
178

SERVIUS TULLIUS

1.44. 3

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 unitEsquiliaein
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 citya fundamental flaw in the tradi
tional etymology.
termini hi consecrati: the line of the pomerium was marked by inscribed
stones or cippi (e.g. C.I.L. 6. 31537-9).
45. 1. aucta civitate magnitudine urbis: in theory either civitate or magnitudine could be the subject: (1) 'the state having been enhanced by
the size of the city', stressing the extension of the pomerium and the
physical limits of the city, or (2) 'the size of the city having been
increased by the citizen-body (or citizenship)', stressing the effect
of the census in raising the numbers of R o m a n citizens (2. 1. 2,
38. 16. 3). Scholars have consistently preferred the former which
gains some support from 2 1 . 6 civitatem auxerunt and follows naturally
after the digression on the pomerium, but the two ablatives are awk180

SERVIUS TULLIUS

i. 45. 1

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 122633 (if genuine) and Ennius*
translation of Pyrrhus' dedication at T a r e n t u m (199-200 V.). T h e
most that Romans of Servius' day would have aspired to was to sup
plant Aricia as the 'capital' of Latium.
uni se ex Sabinis: Plutarch (QjR> 4 with Rose's note) gives an account
of the same tale which differs in some particulars. H e specifically cites
as his authorities the antiquarians J u b a and Varro. According to them
the Sabine was called Antron Goratius (or Gur(i)atius). O n e of his
slaves escaped to Rome and told Servius about the oracle. He, in his
turn, communicated it to the pontifex Cornelius who duped Goratius
into washing in the Tiber thereby giving Servius the chance to sacri
fice the cow and to dedicate the horns in the temple. I t is generally
thought (Dumezil; J . Hubaux, Rome et Veies, 232-5) that Plutarch
gives the traditional version which L. has adapted in order to minimize
the unscrupulous part played by Servius as not being in keeping with
maiestas Romana. If the story, as an Aetion, is old, L.'s version will
be prior to Varro's which is too full of etymological cleverness (cornu >
Cornelius; servus > Servius) and improbable coincidence. The priority
of L. can be shown in another way. A coin, struck c. 79 B.G. by A.
Postumius Albinus, showing on the obverse a bust of Diana and on
the reverse 'togate figure stg. 1., raising 1. hand over head of ox stand
ing r.; in centre, lighted altar 5 with the legend A. POST, A.F.S.N. ALBIN.
(Sydenham no. 745; cf. Borghesi, Fasti, 2. 4 3 ; Mommsen, Rom.
Mtinz. 617) illustrates the same story but would indicate that before
Varro's investigations established the claim of the Gornelii, the
Postumii, proud of their part in the early fortunes of Rome (Lake
183

1-45-3

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

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 sourceValerius 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. <f>ap[MdKois 8i<f>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 <V>.
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<nv arroOvrjOKovow r\ TC rrpeofivripa

rwv

TvXXiov Ovyarcpwv

/cat d

vcwTcpos rwv TapKwCwv. See also Frigell, Epilegomena, 66.

magis non prohibente Servio quam adprobante: D . H . 4. 30 gives a
slightly different antithesis: ovre TOV irarpos avrrjs fitfiaiovvros TOV ydjiov
OVT TT\S jjirjTpos awv8oKovo7]s. They look as if they have both been
inspired by the same original which L. has either misunderstood or
adapted.
47. 1. ab scelere ad aliud spectare mulier scelus: a Greek turn of phrase;
cf. Euripides, H.F. 1075, 1213. Notice the word-order which shows
the maximum emphasis on scelere and scelus. T h e whole of Tullia's
speech which follows is in a high tragic vein characterized by occa
sional archaisms. There is nothing in D . H . which corresponds to it.
In its place he has a long but ineffective debate in the Senate between
Tarquin and Tullius (4. 31-37)- L. has substituted for it a dramatic
scene between Tullia and Tarquin largely of his own composition
but drawing on some ideas which were in his source's version of
Tullia's earlier speech (46. 7-8) but which he has kept over for this
occasion. For example, the family history touching Corinth and
Tarquinii (47. 4) is included by D.H. 4. 29 on the earlier occasion
as an incentive to spur Tarquin to the murder of his wife. L. trans
poses it and makes it an incentive for murdering Tullius.
47. 2. meminisset: cf. Lentulus' letter to Catiline (Sallust, Catil. 44. 5 =
Cicero, in Catil. 3. 12) :fac . . . memineris te virum esse.
47. 3. eo nunc: 'my affairs have altered for the worse in so far that in
189

-47- 3

SERVIUS T U L L I U S

you (istic) there is not merely cowardice (as there was in my previous
husband: 46. 7) but also crime'.
47. 4. quin accingeris: 57. 7 n. Corintho: 34. 2 n.
di te penates: the objects invoked to rouse Tarquin's ambitions are
all distinctively R o m a n in character but the idea recalls Sophocles,
Electra 267-70.
imago: 34. 6 n.
47. 5. facesse hinc: 'away from here', only here in L. (cf. 48. 6), a
dramatic idiom found, e.g., in Pacuvius, frag, 326 K.facessite omnes
hinc; Seneca, Ag. 300; Afranius 203 ; cf. the paratragic play on words
in Plautus, Rudens 1061.
devolvere retro: pass, imperative. H . J . Miiller was alive to the
obscurity of the phrase, noting that there was no other instance of it.
It is difficult to know precisely what the metaphorical force is. In
later Latin devolvere is frequently used of demotion from high place
(Seneca, Suas. 1. 9 regum exfastigio suo devolutorum; Seneca, Ep. 92. 23 ;
Tert. de Castit. 9 ; Hier. Ep. 41. 3. 2), but in earlier Latin the best
illustration is Cicero, Phil. 7. 14 postridie ad spem estis inanem pacis
devolutiy where it is deliberately rough and contemptuous as here.
fratri similior quam patri: Tullia ends her speech in an iambic rhythm
(2. 40. 9 n.) and with a tragic sentiment (cf. Aeschylus, Choeph.
240 ff.).
47. 7. muliebribus instinctusfuriis: 'inspired by a woman's frenzy'; cf.
Virgil, Aen. 10. 68 Cassandrae impulsus furiis. furiae are the frenzied
emotions rather than the actual Furies, but the image, which is
wholly absent from D.H., is introduced by L. to remind his readers
of Orestes hounded by the Furies (as in Aeschylus, Eum. 46 ff.). But
the Orestes touch is immediately succeeded by a picture of a late
Republican demagogue in action which, again, since there is no trace
of it in D.H., is an addition by L.
minorum . . . gentium: 35. 6 n.
circumire et prensare: electioneering terms (2. 54. 3 ; 3. 47. 2 ) ; cf.
Pliny, Ep. 2. 9. 5 itaque prenso amicos, supplico, ambio, domos stationesque
circumeo, quantumque vel auctoritate vel gratia valeam, precibus experior.
allicere donis iuvenes: Catiline iuventutem . . . inlexerat (Sallust, Catil.
16. 1; Cicero, in Cat. 3. 8) by the same inducements and bribes.
Catiline's plot in 65 failed, according to Sallust, because of a mistake
in timing. H e had planned to burst into the Forum stipatus agmine
armatorum but, when they did not arrive on time, instead of making
a victory speech pro curia, he only gave an ill-judged signal to his
henchmen {pro curia signum sociis dare) and, instead of enlarging in
public on the grievances of the state, he had to be content with a
secret agitation in abdita parte aedium (Sallust, Catil. 20. 2-17). T h e
arguments, however, which he used against the regime bear an
190

SERVIUS TULLIUS

1.47. 7

arresting likeness to those which Tarquin is m a d e to use in the similar

position. Cf. in particular Sallust, CatiL 20. 7.
47. 9. fraudi esset: the technical sense is 'render liable to prosecution',
(3- x 9- 95 Cicero, pro Cluentio 9 1 ; Phil. 5. 34 et al.) but, since atten
dance at the Senate was not statutory and absent senators would
incur displeasure rather than legal proceedings, the meaning here is
wider and more suggestive: 'be dangerous for' (as the expression is
used in police-states).
attoniti: cannot refer both to the praeparati and to the senators
who assembled metu (alii... alii), since those who had been briefed
could not have been surprised at the turn of events. Nor can it apply
merely to those who came out of fear, because curiosity and fear
of the consequences of non-attendance are not the same thing. Doering's supplement ((alii) novitate) is required to distinguish a third
category of senators who attended out of curiosity.
47. 10-11. Tarquin's speech, with the exception of the etymological
jibe servum servaque natum (D. H. 4. 38 SovAos K SovAys, in the same
context), is largely composed of material which in D.H. is found in
the earlier debate in the Senate between Tarquin and Tullius. T h e
arguments resemble those used by the son of Ancus in 40. 1 ff.
4 8 . 1 . quid hoc . . . reiest: 41. 1 n., the language of indignant expostula
tion. Servius'words may recall the opening of Cicero's first Catilinarian
speech: notice especially audacia . . . elusisset.
48. 2. per licentiam eludentem: 'had made sport (of them) with complete
impunity'. Cf. 2. 45. 6.
clamor . . . oritur et concursus . . .fiebat: *a typical element of descrip
tions of battle scenes' (Fraenkel, Horace, 118). T h e words conjure u p
a picture of a battle on a heroic or larger-than-life scale which is
appropriate to such a tense moment of history; cf. 41. 1; Plautus, Amph.
228; Virgil, Georg. 4. 75-78; Cicero, adAtt. 1. 16. 1; and, in particular,
Sallust, CatiL 45. 3 and Horace, Sat. 1. 9. 77-78 clamor utrimque:/
undique concursus. sic me servavit Apollo ( = Homer, Iliad 20. 443).
4 8 . 3 . necessitate . . . cogente ultima audere: the motivation in D.H. 4. 38
is completely different. Tullius attempts to jostle Tarquin from the
throne and Tarquin seizes on this physical provocation as a pretext
for using violence himself. This picture, which will have been the
early version, is so maladroit that L., as often, substituted a psycho
logical motivation.
iam etiam ipsa: so N . etiam would have to be taken with iam rather than
ipsa which would need Weissenborn's et (1. 12. 3, 46. 5, 27. 27. 7)
but the meaning 'then also' seems inapposite since the only previous
occasion on which Tarquin's hand had been forced was over the murder
of his wife. A dittography is easy to suppose and etiam is best deleted.
191

1.48. 3

SERVIUS TULLIUS

gradus: 36. 5 n.
48. 4 . ipse prope exsanguis cum semianimis regio comitatu domum se reciperet
[pervenissetque ad summum cos. primum vicum] ab iis qui missi ab Tarquinio
fugientem cotisecuti erant interjicitur . . cum se domum reciperet (Tullia)
pervenissetque ad summum Cyprium vicum: the bracketed words, which
are found in all the manuscripts, are certainly interpolated from the
corresponding passage below, domum se reciperet, on the other hand,
may be authentic since the fact is recorded also in de Viris Illustribus
7. 18-19 (from Livy): Servius . . . gradibus deiectus et domum refugiens
interfectus est. . . Tullia . . . cum domum rediret. . ., unless it was inter
polated before the composition of the de V.I. regio comitatu recipere 'to
retire with his royal retinue' is unobjectionable and has good parallels
in L. (e.g. 44. 43. 1 frequenti agmine equitum et regio comitatu fugit) and
the fact that the attendants are earlier reported to have fled (fitfuga)
is immaterial since L. has switched from the scene in the Senate to
the description of Servius' return without carefully co-ordinating them.
There is no doubt that the version given by the annalists portrayed
Servius not as a solitary figure, but accompanied by some of his
retinue when he was overtaken and killed (cf. D.H. 4. 38
) so that all attempts to improve the text by depriving
Servius of his companions (sine regio comitatu Alschefski, se amisso r. c.
Frigell) are quite misguided. T h e only objection to semianimis is that
it has been thought an otiose repetition of exsanguis: but the two words
do not mean the same thing: semianimis is 'half-alive' (i.e. half-dead)
and exsanguis 'having lost blood'. T h e victims of poisoning are semiani
mis (40. 4. 15) but not exsanguis, while a severe wound can leave a m a n
exsanguis (41. 2) but not necessarily semianimis. In this case Servius
has been badly hurt and, for an old m a n , such a wound might well
have been fatal. Both words have point in the context in the same way
that L. Bantius in 22. 15. 8 ff. was left on the field of Cannae seminecis
. . . (et) prope exsanguis. They correspond to
. . . ( D . H . 4 . 3 8 ) .

48. 6. domum: L. is over-compressed. It is clear from Varro that she

was not going to her own home but was going to take possession of her
father's house, thereby establishing Tarquin's claim to the throne.
Otherwise the topography becomes tangled. T h e alternative is to
suppose cum se domum reciperet here to be interpolated from 48. 4
(forgetting that it was not Tullia's home) in order to explain their
encounter.
summum Cyprium vicum: mod. Via del Gerdello and Via del Golosseo.
(Platner-Ashby s.v.; Pais, Ancient Legends, 272-4 locates it near the
Velia, but he fails to take account of the right turn which Tullia
makes; see plan of Rome). Varro (de Ling. Lat. 5. 159) says that it
was in origin a Sabine word: vicus Ciprius a cipro . . .: nam ciprum sabine
192

SERVIUS TULLIUS

i. 48. 6

bonum. Sabine elements in R o m e and in R o m a n vocabulary are well

attested (cf, e.g., Quirites) and Varro's etymology is supported by the
existence of two towns called Gupra in Picenum and the name of the
goddess Gupra found in Picenum and U m b r i a (cf. Conway, Italic
Dialects, no. 354 Cubrar matrer). Although the vicus and its name are
not mentioned elsewhere, it is likely to be a genuine survival (Lugli,
Fontes ad Topographiam Veteris Urbis Romae> 3. 256). The orthography
of the name is quite uncertain.
ubi Dianium nuperfuit: for the cult see below. T h e only other reference
to the shrine is found in Cicero, de Har. Resp. 32 L. Pisonem quis nescit
his temporibus ipsis . . . sanctissimum Dianae sacellum in Caeliculo sustulisse ?
which shows that it was removed at least by 56 B.C. Livy's nuper might
seem to suggest a date for its destruction nearer his own time but his
language should not be pressed so closely. Indeed it may be Cicero,
if anyone, who is exaggerating, in which case the shrine could have
disappeared earlier, at the period when Livy's sources were writing.
If so, like 2. 33. 9, the note will be a comment by Valerius Antias
which L. has taken over verbatim. Its exact site is untraceable.
in Urbium clivum: Urbium, not Orbium ("Op^os or "OAfiios in D.H.
4- 39- 5) o r Virbium, is the reading of the manuscripts here and in
Solinus 1. 25 (Servius Tullius Esquilinus supra clivum Urbium (habitavit)),
the only two places in Latin literature where it is cited. There is no
objection to the form of the name which is probably of Etruscan
origin (cf. Urbinus; the gentile name Urbius in C.I.L. 6. 1058; Etr.
Urbenius, Urfedius & c . ; see Schulze 561). Its subsequent history
can only be recovered conjecturally. At an early date contact with
Aricia brought about a religious cross-fertilization between the two
towns (45. 2 n.). Now at Aricia the predominant cult, that of Diana
Nemorensis, was associated with a native Latin god Virbius, regarded
by Vibius Sequester as a river-god, but by an authority known to
[Servius] as solar {ad Aen. 7. 776), who under the influence of Greek
mythology quickly came to be identified with Hippolytus (Servius,
ad Aen. 7. 761 sed Diana Hippolytum revocatum ab inferis in Aritia nymphae
commendavit Egeriae: et eum Virbium quasi bis virum iussit vocari) and in
herited many details of Hippolytus' biography (cf. Pausanias 2. 27. 4,
32. 1). T h e street leading up to the temple of Diana Nemorensis was
called the clivus Virbi (Persius 6. 55-56). T h e similarity in sound
between the R o m a n clivus Urbius and clivus Virbi facilitated the trans
ference of the cult to Rome and its establishment in that region of
the Esquiline. T h e old etymology of Urbius was thus superseded by
the imported myth of Hippolytus-Virbius; so that it was only natural
that the horrific story of a king trampled underfoot by the mules of his
daughter's chariot should now be localized at a place which was
steeped in the traditions of another prince trampled to death by his
814432

193

I. 4 8 . 6

SERVIUS

TULLIUS

horses. For it is more likely that the scene of Tullia's outrage was m a d e
the clivus Urbius because of its connexion with Hippolytus than that
the story had always been situated there and so gave rise to the equa
tion of Urbius and Virbius-Hippolytus. T h e name and the legends
surrounding it will have been stabilized at least by the fourth century
B.C., although the first mention is only in Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 159
and Festus 450 L. See further Merkel, Ovid, Fasti, cxlvi; Frazer on
Ovid, Fasti 6. 6 0 1 ; Pais, Ancient Legends, 142-4; A. B. Cook, C.R. 16
(1902), 380 n. 3 (who reads Virbium h e r e ) ; F . Altheim, History of
Roman Religion, 509 n. 9 ; F. Bomer, Gymnasium 64 (1957), 122
(sceptical).
4 8 . 7. sceleratum victim: mod. Via di S. Pietro in Vincoli (Platner-Ashby
s.v.). A foil for the Cyprius vicus or Good Street.
furiis: 46. 7 n. Cf. Sophocles, Electra 1080.
contaminata ipsa respersaque: like a tragic murderess.
48. 9. imperium . . . deponere: the mooted abdication was no part of
the original biography of Servius Tullius and, since it never happened,
it could safely be asserted. Sulla's resignation called for precedents in
the same way that his constitutional reforms required the sanction of
mythical propriety. In inventing the rumour about Servius the Sullan
annalists were doubtless inspired by Greek precedentsPittacus and
Maeandrius. T h e phrase itself belongs to republican terminology (cf.
Caesar, B.G. 7. 33. 3 ; Tacitus Hist. 3. 70). It is the technical expression
for laying down the imperium vested in a m a n by a lex curiata. Only by
an historical fiction could it be used of a king. Besides, for L. such a
rumour of contemplated resignation must have recalled the similar
rumour about Augustus who after 31 B.C. de reddenda re p. . . . cogitavit
(Suet. Aug. 28. 1; Syme, Roman Revolution, 324).
quidam auctores: perhaps only Valerius Antias and the authors
quoted by him, if any. Cf. F. Hellmann, Livius-Interpretationen, 13.
49-60. Tarquinius Super bus
If Servius' reign marks a Latin restoration the evidence from archaeclogy and constitutional history leaves little doubt that the story of
Tarquinius Superbus, in so far as it presumes a renewed domination
of Rome by the Etruscans culminating in their violent expulsion, is
substantially historical. T h a t the Rome of the late sixth century was
Etruscan in character is proved both by the deposits on the Palatine
and by the survival of Etruscan institutions, while the violent break
between kingdom and republic is the only reasonable inference that
can be made from the nature of imperium and interregnum. Certain other
facts, traditionally associated with the last king of Rome, are indepen
dently supported. Tarquinius' name is connected with the building of
the temple of Capitoline Juppiter (55. 1 n.) and of the cloaca maxima
194

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

i. 49-60

(56. 2 n.), the capture of Gabii (53. 4 n.) and Suessa Pometia (53. 2 n.),
the colonization of Signia and Circeii (56. 3 n.), and the siege of
Ardea (57. 1 n.). For all these events there is enough external testi
mony to command belief. Such is the hard core of Tarquin's reign.
Various factors conspired to expand the hard core. At a very early
stage in the writing of R o m a n history, the synchronism of the expul
sion of the Tarquins and the expulsion of the Pisistratids was per
ceived (Aul. Gell. 17. 21. 4). T h e inevitable result of this was that
Tarquin's reign and his expulsion were assimilated to the familiar
versions of Herodotus and Thucydides. It is possible that there is a
sub-structure of historical truth in the story of Lucretia but its sig
nificance for the fate of Tarquinius Superbus owes m u c h to the affair
of Harmodius and Aristogeiton, and in marrying his daughter to
Octavius Mamilius Tarquin merely followed the precepts of Hippias
(49. 8 n.). Tarquin had to be painted in the true Greek colours of a
tyrant.
This hellenization of the character of Tarquin facilitated the inser
tion of whole incidents from Herodotus and other Greek sources to
supplement the meagre notices of R o m a n tradition. T h e capture of
Gabii combines the stories of Zopyrus (3. 154) and of Periander and
Thrasyboulos (5. 92). The embassies to Delphi may be original but
all the detailsthe hollow staff, Mother earth, the kiss, the serpent
portentcan be paralleled from the Greek (see nn.) and it is therefore
at least an open question whether they too do not go back merely
to the labours of third-century historians. Certainly the Best Wife
competition and the scene of Lucretia at her home are pure Greek
in only the poorest of R o m a n disguises.
Such must have been the development of the legend of Tarquin
down to the middle of the second century. T h e accident of time which
had turned Tarquin into a tyrant on a Greek model was fortunate for
the philosophical historians who in their concern to fit R o m a n history
to a cyclic mould welcomed a tyranny already m a d e for the purpose.
They did little more than supply further tints suitable to a real
tyrant (49. 1-7 nn.). There was little room for an historian to exercise
invention once the main outline was established, and Cassius Hemina
(fr. 15 P.) clearly had the same material in much the same form as L.
retails it. Even the duration of the kingdom and the length of Tarquin's
reign were common ground from the time of Cato (60. 4 n . : see
Walbank, Polybius, I, p . 666).
T h e version in L. is certainly later than Piso (55. 9 n.) but there is
nothing that points to a date later than Sulla. By a curiously un
resolved contradiction Brutus, although affecting to be of sub
normal intelligence, holds the office of Tribunus Celerum. This
accretion must be later than the revival of interest in that institution
195

I. 49-60

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

which can be securely dated to the antiquarianism of the early first

century (59. 7 n.; 15. 8 n.). There are few other indications either of
date or of affiliation. The description of Suessa Pometia (53. 2)
flagrantly contradicts 2. 16. 8 (Licinian) but is in harmony with 2.25.5
(Valerian). This, coupled with the resemblance of 38. 24. 3 (Valerian)
to the tale of Lucretia and Collatinus (58. 6 ff.) and the prominence
of the Vaierii throughout the section, might suggest that Valerius
Antias was L.'s authority.
The whole section is self-consistent, without variants or contradic
tions. A comparison with the parallel narrative in D.H. shows what
L. has tried to make of his material. He covers the reign in five main
acts, Turnus Herdonius and the Latins (50-52), Gabii (53-54), City
affairs (55), the Delphic oracle (56), Lucretia (57-59), and he sup
presses any events which are incidental to the main plot. For him the
history of the Tarquins is a tragedy with a moral, the triumph of
pudicitia over superhia. Tarquin is distinguished by his superhia in all his
actions just as Tullus Hostilius was by his ferocitas and it is noteworthy
that L. allocates the same space to the former at the end of the book
that he does to the latter in the centre (22-31 : 49-60). His presenta
tion is dramatic. Seeking to create almost Aristotelian unities he com
presses the events at the lucus Ferentinae from three days (D.H. 4. 45 ff.)
to one and a half and eliminates all the shifts of scene which are in
volved in D.H.'s account of Lucretia. He intensifies the effect by the
use of language, giving his characters almost tragic diction to speak
where D.H. allows them to indulge in lengthy oratorical debate
(esp. 4. 77-83) and by subtle touches evokes the tension of the Greek
stage (49. 1 n.; 59. 10 n.). Hence he omits much that is extraneous,
the negotiations of Octavius Mamilius at the Latin congress, the fact
that Herdonius is Tarquin's nephew, the settlement of Gabii after its
capture, or the Sibylline books, but the two writers are so close in
general that it is a reasonable assumption that D.H. stems from a
slightly later source which combines Valerius Antias with other
authorities. It is certain that L. does not depend upon Ennius or an
unknown Roman tragedian. With a profound interest in psychology
he is writing tragedy not copying it.
For his audience the story of Tarquin had a contemporary message.
Superhia had characterized too many of the actions of the dynasts of
their generation.1 The old virtues represented by that typically Roman
matron, Lucretia, and centred upon the restored temple of Juppiter
Capitolinus, had not lost their appeal. The origins of the Republic
and of Libertas were live issues.
See further Soltau 196; E. Pais, Ancient Legends, 185-203; Storia
Critica> 1. 475 ff.; H. Last, C.A.H. 7. 397 ff.; I. G. Scott, Mem. Amer.
1

For the Roman concept of superhia see H. Haffter, S.F.I.C. 27 (1956), 135-41.
196

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

i. 49-60

Acad. Rome 7 (1929), 1 ff.; Schachermeyr, R.E. 'Tarquinius (7)',

with full bibliography; Burck 163-76; Klotz 205; G. Pasquali,
Terze Pagine stravaganti (1942), 1 ff.; U . Coli, Regnum (1951); A. K.
Michels, Latomus 10 (1951), 13-24; M. Ghio, Riv. Fil. Class. 29 (1951),
1 ff; J. Heurgon, I.L. 7 (1955), 56-64. See also individual references
cited under the main sections below. For the Greek conception of a
tyrant cf. Plato, Gorgias 510 D9-C5 with Dodds's notes.
49. 1. occepit: 7. 6; the word is not found in Cicero or Caesar.
Superbo: 50. 3 n.
socerum gener sepultura prohibuit: L. has improved on his original.
The old tradition was not that Tarquin prevented the burial of Servius
but that he prevented a public, royal burial (D.H. 4. 40
) and allowed his widow to bury him
privately and by night. There is no mention of the precedent of
Romulus. In classical Rome nocturnal burials were confined to funera
acerba, that is, to those who died without leaving any heirs to inherit
their race (Tacitus, Annals 13. 17. 1 ; [Servius], ad Aen. 11. 143).
Normally this category would comprise those who died prematurely
before reaching the age of puberty or before marriage, but it is
evident that it also included slaves who by their status could have no
heirs. The story of Servius' furtive burial, therefore, harks back to his
servile origin and serves as an aetiology for the practice of nocturnal
burial (see Rose, C.Q. 17 (1923), 191 ff). Alternatively we may
see here a hazy recollection of the decision to abandon the Forum as
a burial place. The decision, with its natural corollary of draining the
Forum by the Cloaca Maxima (56. 2 n.), suits the outlook of Tarquin
who wished to make the city of Rome both magnificent and powerful.
But in saying that Tarquin altogether prevented Servius5 burial, L.
has introduced a quite un-Roman practice. In Rome as opposed to
Greece even criminals were permitted the decency of burial (cf. Digest,
48. 24) and Tiberius' wilful disregard of this (Tacitus, Annals 6. 29.
2) was as wanton as Tarquin's. There can be little doubt that L. has
deliberately altered the version which he inherited in order to remind
the reader of the fate of Polyneices. This is further underlined by em
phasizing their relationship (socerum gener). Creon was Polyneices' uncle.
Romulum: 16. 1-4.
49. 2. armatis corpus circumsaepsit: the liquidation of political rivals and
the requisition of a bodyguard were the notorious symptoms of Greek
tyrants. Cf. Plato, Rep. 567 e with Adam's note; Xenophon, Hiero 5 . 3 .
The Pisistratid parallel is again instructive. Hippias acquired a body
guard and, after the murder of Hipparchus,
(Thucydides 6. 59. 2 ; [Aristotle], Ath. Pol. 19).
49. 3 . neque populi iussu neque auctoribus patribus: note on ch. 17.
197

1.49-4

TARQUINIUS

SUPERBUS

4 9 . 4. caritate . . . metu: a commonplace of tyrannies for which cf.

Aristotle, Politics I3i4 b 2i alhoios . . . <f>6fiepos with Newman's note.
Cf 34. 27. 3. For a picture of the perfect tyrant see L.'s delineation
of Hieronymus (24. 5 ff.).
quern... incuteret: sc. metum, a strong phrase : cf. Caelius, adFam. 8.4. 2.
cognitiones: part of the traditional make-up of tyrants. Cf. Otanes'
denunciation of tyranny in Herodotus 3. 80. 5.
46. 6. numero imminuto: 2. 1. 10 n.
49. 7. traditum . . . morem: ut traditur . . . morem N, but a prioribus is
then left in the air. L., moreover, habitually uses ut traditur & c , to in
troduce a variant or discrepant version (Hellmann, Livius-Interpretationen, 13) of which there is no suggestion here. Grynaeus's correction
is assured. T h e theory that the Senate was consulted by the kings on
issues of war, peace, and treaties is another constitutional fiction of the
second century. It is worth noting that one of the principal issues in
the civil disturbances of the last years of that century was the right
of the populace to decide such issues without following the Senate's
recommendation. As with so many other disputes precedents were
sought in mythical prehistory. T h e question was still topical. Augustus
was offered and, it would seem, he refused the power of making war,
peace, and treaties on his own initiative. T h e question was clearly
one that was exercising R o m a n minds from 30 to 23. Augustus'
successors had no hesitation in availing themselves of the power;
cf. Lex de imperio Vespasiani ( = I.L.S. 244) . . .foedusve cum quibus volet
facere liceat ita uti licuit divo Aug. See Syme, Roman Revolution, 412.
4 9 . 8. Latinorum: 50. 1 n.
adfinitates . . . iungebat: cf. Thucydides 6. 59. 3.
4 9 . 9 . Octavio Mamilio: 3. 18. 2 n., Mamilius is a Latin name (Schulze
442), Octavius perhaps Etruscan (ibid. 201). T h e connexion between
Tarquin and Mamilius has some confirmation from the presence
of an Etruscan tomb and other Etruscan elements in early Tusculum
(Conway, Italian Dialects, p. 3 1 1 ; Zoller, Latium und Rom, 251 ff.) and
the turris Mamilia shows that the Mamilii were connected with Rome by
regal times. It is, therefore, to be believed that the marriage together
with their pedigree from Odysseus and Circe was imparted by the
gens, which reached the highest honours and influence in the third
century (Q,. Mamilius Vitulus, cos. 262; C. Mamilius Turrinus, cos.
239), to the earliest Roman historians and that it formed a stable part
of the history of the Tarquins thereafter. See F. Munzer, Romische
Adelsparteien, 65.
Tusculano : the site of Tusculum has been identified on the rim of the
Alban hills near Frascati. Close by is an Iron Age necropolis. Despite
its name, its proximity to Etruria, and the influence of Etruscan
civilization upon it Tusculum was a Latin city, but not one of the
198

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

i. 49. 9
old Latin cities of the Alban League. It was a prominent, if not for a
time the leading, member of the Latin League of Diana at Aricia
(Cato fr. 58 P.). In marrying his daughter to Mamilius Tarquin pre
sumably hoped to secure control of that league through Mamilius,
which Servius had tried to achieve by setting up a rival and superior
cult of Diana. In the struggle for power in Latium after the expulsion
of the kings, Tusculum identified its interests with the Latin cities
that resisted Rome's ambitious pretensions but, reconciled to Rome in
the foedus Cassianum (D.H. 6. 95), became a dependable ally. See
G. McCracken, T.A.P.A. 64 (1933), xlvi; R.E., T u s c u l u m ' , with
bibliography; A. E. Gordon, T.A.P.A. 63 (1932), 177-92; SherwinWhite, Roman Citizenship, 12.
Ulixe . . . Circa: a pedigree of which the Mamilii were proud.
Ulysses figures on the coin of a Mamilius monetal c. 150-133 and on
another of Sullan time (Sydenham no. 369). Consequent on this was
the belief that Tusculum was founded by Telegonus, the son of
Odysseus and Circe (Festus 1 1 6 L . ; Horace, Epod. 1. 29 ff.; Odes
3. 29. 8; Propertius 2. 32. 4). There was a statue of Telegonus in the
theatre at Tusculum (C.I.L. 14. 2649). A rival account which made
Tusculum the foundation of Latinus Silvius, king of Alba Longa
(Diodorus 7 fr. 4 ; Origo Gentis Romanae 12), is to be seen as a secondcentury attempt both to discredit the Mamilii and to provide an
irrefutable explanation of the latinity of the city. Such genealogizing
was a marked feature of the second century. W e find the Julii stressing
their descent from Venus (Sydenham no. 593), the Fabii from Her
cules, and the Hostilii from Romulus. See also 2. 19. 2 n.
perque eas nuptias: cf. 49. 5 perque earn causam. The repeated use of
the loose and inelegant Aci? dpofiev-q is another instance of L.'s habit
of unconscious repetition (14. 4 n.). It disposes of Frigell's per quern.
Turnus Herdonius and the Latins
T h e ensuing ruse by which Tarquin secured control of the Latin
League is of doubtful historicity. While it is true that Tarquin's other
actions betray an aggressive policy in Latium and t h a t his marriageconnexion with Tusculum would place him in a favourable position
to dominate the affairs of the Latins, the details of the story are a
curious mixture of the plausible and the impossible. O n the one hand,
the mention of Tusculum, Aricia, and the lucus Ferentinae fit the
pattern of the late sixth century and Herdonius is an authentic Sabine
name. O n the other hand, the story is evidently an Aetion connected
with the site of the Ferentine spring (51. 9 deiectus ad caput aquae
Ferentinae crate superne iniecta) and belongs to a familiar class of stories
which recurs in the fate of Antistius Petro of Gabii. It is myth not
history. Furthermore Turnus Herdonius himself is suspect. Turnus
199

I. 50. I

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

is an impossible name for a m a n from Aricia (50. 3 n.) and in charac

ter and action he seems merely to be the double of his descendant
Appius Herdonius. It would be rash, therefore, to believe more than
that there was a sound tradition that Tarquin managed to extend his
authority over Latium by hook or by crookover Tusculum by
marriage, over Suessa Pometia by war, and over Aricia by intrigue.
See A. E. Gordon, Cults of Aricia, 1-2; Sherwin-White, Roman Citizen
ship, 12-13; J . Gag6, Huit recherches, 211 ff. See 3. 15. 5.
50. 1. ad lucum Ferentinae: in full lucus ad caput aquae Ferentinae; long
identified with a spring near Marino (H. J . Muller's note) but it is
clear from 2. 38. 1 that it lay close to the line of the later Via Appia.
Remains of an archaic shrine have been found south of mod. Ariccia
in the Valle Ariccia where Lake Nemi has an outflow and these have
been plausibly identified as the site. It is not, of course, to be confused
with the main grove and shrine of Diana at Aricia which lay some 500
yards north-east of Lake Nemi, but it is likely that it was an alternative
meeting-place for the league and was selected for its greater con
venience. It is inconceivable that the Latin League of Diana and the
assembly at the lucus Ferentinae were not the same. See Hulsen, R.E.
'Ferentina a q u a ' ; Paribeni, Not. Scavi, 1930, 370-80; A. E. Gordon,
Cults of Aricia, 16-17.
50. 2. sol occideret: the words are reminiscent of the protocol of the
Senate (Aul. Gell. 14. 7. 8 Varro dicit s.c. ante exortum aut post occasum
solem factum ratum non fuisse), as conveniunt frequentes is the technical
expression for a crowded meeting of the Senate (Plautus, Miles 594;
Cicero, Verr. 4. 87, 5. 41).
50. 3 . Turnus: the name, derived from the Etruscan turan, has been
interpreted to mean 'tyrant's son' or 'leader' (evidence and references
in Stoltenberg, Etrusk. Gottnamen, 1957, 36-37). Although possible in
a people so affected by Etruscan influence as the Rutuli (57. 1 n.), it
rings false as the name of the leader of Latin resistance, and could
hardly be a praenomen.
Herdonius: a Sabine n a m e ; cf. Herdonia in Apulia (Pliny, N.H.
3. 105) which may have been a Sabine outpost. Variant forms,
such as Hordianius, Hordeonius, and Hordonius, are attested from
southern Italy (Schulze 256, 306).
Aricia: mod. Ariccia, on a spur of the Alban hills \\ miles from Lake
Nemi and sixteen from Rome. A colony of Alba Longa (Solinus 2. 16)
or, according to another, hellenizing, account, founded by a Sicilian
Archilochus (Gassius Hemina), its floruit was glorious but short-lived.
Not a member of the old Alban League, it appears to have built
up its own federal league which flourished for a while towards the end
of the sixth century before the city passed into the orbit of R o m e and
200

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

* 5 0 - 3

into obscurity. See G. Florescu, Ephem. Dacoromana, 3 (1925), 1-57;

A. E. Gordon, Cults ofAricia, 1-4. D.H. 4. 45. 4 writes eV iroXei OLKCOV
KoplXXrj generally corrected to KopCoX-rj, but D.H. elsewhere trans
literates Coriolani as XupUXavoi, and Apu<Lq is an easy metathesis.
Superbo: in Greek Eovirtpfios or, translated, 'Yircprfcfxivos. The
cognomen, both on account of its connotation and because tria nomina
in the regal period would be anachronistic, must have been associated
with the last Tarquin when the outline features of Roman history
were being fixed in the late fourth century. For a similar nickname
cf. 3. 65. 4.
iam . . . appellabant: (1) an aside by L. or (2) an explanation by
Herdonius? In favour of (1) is the use of the imperfect indicative
when an oratio obliqua surrounds it, but the train of thought is decisive
against it. It is most inapposite for Herdonius to say that Tarquin was
called Super bus and for L. then to gloss his remark by pointing out
that it was not strictly true. In fact Herdonius says: Tarquin is named
Superbus, not openly perhaps but the name is gaining currency. It is
part of Herdonius' assessment of the situation at Rome which is a
commonplace of a people under a tyranny 'who being completely
powerless cannot entirely express their criticism although they can only
give furtive expression to it' (Fraenkel, Agamemnon, p. 232). For similar
mutterings cf. Herodotus 8. 74. 2 ; Aeschylus, Agam. 449; Sophocles,
Antigone 700; Pindar, Pyth. 11. 28. It is perhaps worth adding that L.
only here uses the frequentative mussito for musso. L.'s partiality for
the frequentative is well marked in the first decade but mussito, avoided
as it is by all classical writers, seems to be chosen here as a charac
terizing word to convey the archaic vigour and colloquialism of
Herdonius' style. It is naturally common in Plautus.
50. 4. principibus longe: longe M, but the noun is required and M is
prone to such slips.
50. 5, quod: sc. imperium. 'If his countrymen had reason to be pleased
at their having entrusted him with that power; or if, in reality, it had
been entrusted to him and not forcibly seized on through parricide;
then the Latins ought also to entrust him with it; nay, not even in
that case, because he was a foreigner' (Baker).
50. 6. si se audiant: 'if they took his advice'.
50. 7. intervenit: according to D.H. 4. 45, Tarquin did not arrive
until the following day and the meeting was adjourned on the first
day by the president. L. has telescoped the sequence of events in
order to maintain the speed and intensity of the action. As a result,
Herdonius' main attack on Tarquin, which in D.H. is delivered on
the second day in Tarquin's presence, is transferred by L. to the first
day. The material of the two speeches seems to be common to their
sources: cf. especially 50. 6 and D.H. 4. 46.
201

i. 50. 8

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

50. 8. silentio facto: a favourite device of L.'s (3. 47. 6 n.).

disceptatorem: there is no trace of this in D.H., where Tarquin merely
ascribes Herdonius' behaviour to jealousy and pique at failing to win
the hand of Tarquin's daughter.
50. 9. ab Turno tulisse taciturn: taken to mean 'they say that neither
was this remark of Tarquin passed without comment by Turnus', i.e.
Tarquinium tulisse id taciturn ab Turno and 3. 45. 6 ut taciturn/eras quod
celari vis is quoted in support. The word-order, taciturn separated from
ab Turno, and the abrupt change of subject between tulisse (Tarquinius)
and dixisse (Turnus), without any warning or indication, argue against
the reading and 3. 45. 6 is hardly an exact parallel, since taciturn has
no prepositional phrase dependent on it and /eras is used of carrying
out proposals or plans whereas here tulisse cannot refer to a proposal to
adjourn the meeting till the following day and has to be regarded
as an equivalent of dixisse. We expect taciturn ferre = taciturn pati, with
Turnus as the subject (5. 28. 1, 35. 19. 1) and the correction of ab
Turno to Turnum, already made in the Renaissance, seems inevitable.
It also eliminates the harsh change of subject.
ni pareat patri, habiturum infortunium esse: characterizing language to
suit the speakers, infortunium is common in Plautus (Merc. 165) and
Terence (Adelphi 178) of the scrapes that slaves become involved in.
It then disappears from Latin except for the present passage and
Horace, Ars Poetka 103 (apart from later archaizers like Apuleius).
tunc tua me infortunia laedent,
Telephe vel Peleu,
where the poet is stressing the importance of tragic character speaking
tragic language: he continues
male si mandata loqueris
out dormitabo aut ridebo.
So here L. by his choice of words put in the mouth of Herdonius
contrives to reproduce the colloquial language of archaic times.
51. 2. The stratagem by which Herdonius was caught and falsely
accused owes much to a stirring episode in the Catilinarian con
spiracy when the house of C. Cethegus was broken into and a large
quantity of arms discovered. Cf. Cicero, in CatiL 3. 8.
deversorium: cf. 51. 8 deverticuli (in the literal sense of an inn, only
there and Tacitus, Ann. 13. 25, in classical Latin). It is implied that
there were a number of semi-permanent refuges or inns built near the
lucus Ferentinae to house the delegates from other Latin states, not
unlike the national treasuries at Delphi, but the grove is so close to
Aricia that it is hard to see why the delegates did not obtain accom
modation and food in the town itself. It is even harder to believe that
202

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

i. 5 1 . 2

if Herdonius was a citizen of Aricia he would not have spent the night
under his own roof. The inconsistency points to the story having been
inserted at a later date into the legend.
51. 3. una node: 25. 35. 7; Caesar, B.G., 5. 58. 1 : the quantity of arms
was so enormous that it was an achievement to have smuggled them
all in during the course of a single night. D.H. 4. 47 merely says
VTTO VVKTCL t<f>r) 7ToAA<X . . . l(JVyKLV

6 t ? T7JV KCLTaXvCFLV f r o m

which

Hachtmann proposed prima node but the need for silence and stealth
should be taken into account.
moram . . . saluti. . .fuisse: not in D.H. So Cicero claimed that his
vacillation and delay in taking action against Catiline was in reality
a divinely inspired device to reveal the full extent of the conspiracy
and so ensure the safety of Rome (in Catil. 3. 16-22).
51. 4. populorum: sc. Latinorum. Note the positions of the main verbs
in the oratio obliqua standing at the head of their sentences (ab Turno
dici . . . adgressurum fuisse . . . non dubitare . . . did . . . rogare eos),
emphasizing the abrupt and harsh tone of Tarquin's remarks, an
effect strengthened by the alliteration primoribus populorum parari. See
A. Lambert, Die indirekte Rede, 25.
51. 7. indinatis . . . animis: cf. Tacitus, Hist. 2. 1. 2 (Fletcher).
51. 9. novo genere . . . crate superne inieda: 4. 50. 4, the punishment was
evidently peculiar to the Carthaginians to judge by Plautus, Poenulus
1025-6 (Milphio to Hanno) 'sub cratim ut jubeas se supponi, atque
eo ] lapides impone multos, ut sese neces'. Cf. also Tacitus, Germania
12. 1. Vegetius 3. 4. It is therefore reasonable to suppose that
the manner of Herdonius' death was only precisely defined when
Carthaginian habits were familiar to the Romans, that is, after the
First Punic War. It will be an invention by the first generation of
Roman historians.
52. 1. parricidio: see n. on ch. 26.
verba fedt: the formula for proposing a resolution in the Senate,
generally abbreviated in documents to v./.
52. 2. [in] eo foedere teneantur: 24. 29. 11 teneri alienis foederibus; cf.
Cicero, pro Caec. 41. in may be regarded as a dittography. There is
something in favour of Scheller's iam.
quod ab Tullo: this, the reading of the manuscripts, is accepted most
recently by Bayet where it is translated 'puisque depuis Tullus l'fitat
albain . . . etait annexe'. a(b) with the name of a person in the sense of
'from the time or reign of so-and-so' is, however, confined in Latin to
a few precise idioms: (1) where it is associated with ad, as, e.g., Cicero,
Brutus 328 Me a Crasso . . . ad Paullum floruit; Quint. 1. 10. 30 et aL;
(2) where there is a defining adjective as, e.g., 1. 17. 10 qui secundus ab
Romulo numeretur; Val. Max. 5.10 ext. 2 et aL The nearest approximation
203

I. 52. 2

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

to the present passage is Pliny, N.H. 12. i n a Pompeio Magno in

triumphis arbores quoque duximus but, after duco, a there has also some
derivative force. In view of this, and the further fact that eo requires
a correlative and that a single treaty was made in 24. 4 which pre
supposed not a gradual secession but a once-for-all transference, there
should be no hesitation in accepting Drakenborch's quo sub.
52. 3 . id. . .censere ut: the accepted phraseology was ita censere ut,
and so it is transcribed in all extant senatus consulta (cf., e.g., ad Fam.
8. 8. 5). id censere ut is not found. It is, therefore, advisable in the light
of the parallel being drawn between the procedure of the Latin
assembly and the form of debate in the Senate to amend id to ita
or else delete it altogether (Ussing, Madvig). Take utilitatis omnium
causa together.
Anco: 33. 1 fF. patre: 35. 7 fT.
52. 4. in eofoedere: ea by a misprint in the O.C.T.
et Turnus . . . erat documentum: cf. C.Q. 9 (1959), 212.
52. 5. frequentes: 50. 2 n.
52. 6. secretum: 'individual'.
miscuit manipulos: the military organization is, of course, anachronis
tic but this would not be remarkable were it not that nowhere else is
there found a tradition of mixed companies. On every other occa
sion (2. 64. 10, 3. 22. 4-5, et aL; cf. Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 618
n. 4), the allies form separate contingents. The very oddity suggests
the survival of an old, if garbled, detail of fact, a memory of a deter
mined attempt by Tarquin to impose an artificial unity on his Latin
empire; or it may be, as Mommsen suggests, an echo of the emer
gency measures necessitated by the Social War or of a proposed
military reform.
ex binis singulos: the manipulus of later times consisted of two centuriae.
Tarquin took a Latin half-manipulus (i.e. a centuria) and combined it
with a Roman half-manipulus to form a single new manipulus.
Military Activities of Tarquinius Superbus
53. 1. rex . . .dux: for the Augustan overtones of these words cf.
Syme, Roman Revolution, 311-12. The antithesis is traditional; cf.
[Sallust], Epist. 1. 1. 8; Philo, Leg. Alleg. 3. 8 1 ; Veil. Pat. 2. n . 1
quantum bello optimus, tantum pace pessimus (Skard 9).
degeneratum in aliis: 'his degeneracy in other respects'. The use of
the neuter passive part, as a substantive is a development of Augustan
language in its search for greater flexibility. Cf. 4. 16. 4, 7. 8. 5.
See R. D. Williams on Virgil, Aeneid 5. 6.
53. 2. Volscis: 23. 8 n. The Volsci were a northern people with
Umbrian and possibly Illyrian affinities who towards the end of the
sixth century descended from the Apennines on to the coastal plain of
204

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

1-53-2

Latium and Campania. There is no reason to doubt the traditional

chronology of their invasion, which is confirmed by the archaeo
logical evidence from Velitrae. See Conway, Italic Dialects, p. 267;
J. Whatmough, Foundations of Roman Italy, 300; E. T. Salmon,

O.CD.

s.v.

Suessam Pometiam: 41. 7 n. It is listed as a member of the league of

Diana at Aricia in Cato fr. 58 P. populus . . . Pometinus. If that dedica
tion is prior to Tarquin's usurpation of the control of the league, there
is enough time for Pometia to have fallen into the hands of the
Volsci. The plea that a member-community must be liberated from
the grasp of a foreign power would have made a good talking-point
for Tarquin to secure the goodwill of the other associated communities.
The tradition, therefore, that the first act of the new alliance was to
recapture Pometia makes historical sense. After the expulsion of the
Tarquins and the disintegration of that alliance it lapsed into
Volscian hands again.
53. 3. dividenda praeda: the reading of the archetype has been unduly
neglected by editors in favour of divendita or divendenda (Gronovius).
When the proceeds are realized from the distribution of booty, divido
frequently comes to mean the same as divendo. Gf. 4. 16. 2, 31. 4. 6,
31. 50. 1; Suetonius, Julius 54. 2.
quadraginta talenta: 55. 8-9 nn. 40 talents was the figure given by
Fabius Pictor.
refecisset: N evidently had the dittography re^

but -cepisset is

a mere anticipation of concepit.

lovis templi: the archaeological evidence 56. 1 n.; for the dedication
2. 8. 6 n.
quae digna . . . Romano imperio . . esset: preoccupation with the
external pomp and magnificence of new cults is a familiar feature of
tyrannies (see Andrewes, The Greek Tyrants, 113-4) but sentiments
such as these savour much more of the prophecies of a later age. See
note on 55. 5.
captivam pecuniam . . . seposuit: 55. 7 n,
Gabii
3eyond the mere occurrence the details of the fall of Gabii are entirely
imaginary. They are a conflation of two episodes from Herodotus,
Zopyrus and the Capture of Babylon (3, 154) and the communication
between Thrasyboulus and Periander (5. 92. 6). The insertion of two
uch episodes from Greek history into Roman annals to provide flesh
tnd blood to an otherwise emaciated fact must belong to the earliest
(third-century) generation of historians. It will have undergone little
alteration at the hands of later writers, but L.'s treatment of it, in
205

i. 53- 4

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

comparison with D.H., is indicative of his literary methods. 'L. first

outlines the initial attempts of Tarquinius Superbus to seize the city
by storm and blockade; Dionysius' lengthy version indicates the scope
of L.'s compression. L.'s central description depicts the simulated
desertion of Tarquinius' son Sextus, his energetic activity within the
town of Gabii, and his appointment there as army commander. . . .
T h e action centres on Sextus. Dionysius recounts a long story of a
messenger sent by Sextus to his father regarding instructions which
Superbus gave by the cryptic decapitation of poppies; L. adverts to
this in a single sentence and instantly refocuses the attention on Sextus.
Finally, L.'s brief conclusion records only the betrayal of the town to
the R o m a n king without the details of the treatment of the captive
town which Dionysius outlines' (Walsh). L.'s version was used by
Ovid as the basis for Fasti 2. 685-852, though for metrical reasons
he substitutes lilies for poppies.
See E. Zarncke 286; Pais, Ancient Legends, 177; Burck 183; P. G.
Walsh, Livy, 179; and the criticisms of R. J u m e a u , R.E.A. 38 (1936),
64-655 3 . 4 . excepit deinde eum: eum, omitted by M , seems required. Cf. 6. 42.
9; Veil. Pat. 2. 55. 2 Caesar em gravius excepit {helium).
Gabios: near the mod. Torre di Castiglione, a commanding site
with an acropolis, 12 miles from Rome (Itin. Anton.; Strabo 5. 238;
Appian, B.C. 5. 23), Although the extant masonry is hardly earlier
than the third or fourth century the antiquity of the foundation is
confirmed by the discovery of pottery going back to the seventh,
which has close affinities with contemporary Alban pottery, thereby
supporting the tradition that Gabii, although not a member of the
Alban League, was a colony of Alba (D.H. 1. 8 4 ; Virgil, Aeneid6. 773:
Sicel, according to Solinus 2. 10its name, like Pompeii, may be
formed from a family name). It certainly lay in the R o m a n orbit
during the early years of the Republic (3. 8. 7, 6. 21. 6) but after
making a desperate bid for independence in the fourth century
(Macrobius 3.9. 13), it fell rapidly into decay, except for an ephemeral
veteran colony planted there by Sulla. Its name was only remembered
as a proverbial example of desolation (Lucan 7. 391-3). For further
evidence of Augustan interest in it see 54. 10 n. See also T . Ashby,
P.B.S.R. 1 (1902), 148 ff.; G. Pinza, Bull. Comm. Rom. 31 (1903),
321 fT.; Weiss, R.E. 'Gabii'; M . E. Blake, Ancient Roman Construction,
108-11.
minime arte Romana: notice L.'s prim patriotism of which there is no
trace in D.H.
fraude ac dolo: a regular conjunction from R o m a n law: cf., e.g.,
22. 23. 4 ; Plautus, Pseud. 705; Cicero,pro Flacco 74: see Lenel, Edictum,
114, n. 12.
206

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

i. 53. 5

5 3 . 5. fundamentis . . .faciendis: iaciendis Vascosanus. It is difficult to

differentiate / . facere and / . iacere, but the former seems to be almost
technical in sensethe manual construction of the foundations (Cato,
de Re Rust. 18. 3 et al.\ C.I.L. 1. 1522, Tacitus, Hist. 3. 72; Vitruvius
1. 5. 1 fundamenta sic suntfacienda utifodiantur ad solidum)whereas the
latter is the neutral term for describing such construction (cf. 12. 4
fundamenta ieci; Seneca,Dial. 12. 7. 5; Epist. 89. 21). iaciendis is certainly
the more appropriate in meaning here.
minimus ex tribus: the other two were Titus and Arruns (56. 7).
D.H. four times distinctly makes Sextus the oldest (4. 55, 63, 64, 65)
and Cicero (de Rep. 2. 46 calls him maior) but Ovid, Fasti 2. 691
namque trium minimus, shows that the text of L. is sound (maximus C.
Appleton). If there is any historical truth in the tradition that Sextus
reigned at Gabii, it is to be presumed that he was the eldest son but
his being the youngest is dramatically more exciting.
transfugit . . . conquerens: Herodotus loc. cit. (Zopyrus speaking)
avToiLoXrjau) . . . KCLL (frrjcrco 777309 avrovs

cos VITO aev rdbe 7T7rov6a.

53. 6. in curia solitudinem fecerit: reminiscent of Cicero, Brutus 227

erat ab oratoribus quaedam inforo solitudo. The description of Tarquin's
reign of terror has much in common with the unsettled times of the
Marian civil war.
53. 7. inter tela et gladiospatris elapsum: in Sextus' mouth the words are
suitably characterized by a poetical ring. Cf. 13. 1 and Virgil, Aeneid
2.318.
5 3 . 8. Hernicos'. a branch of the Sabines, their name being derived
from herna, Sabine or Marsian for a rock (saxum Festus Paulus 89 L . ;
Servius, ad Aen. 7. 684). It is likely that their migration to Latium
coincided with the movements of the Aequi and Volsci and that they
had occupied an enclave of high ground near the mod. Sacco (Trerus)
by the middle of the sixth century. Subsequently they were centred on
Anagnia cf., e.g., 9. 42. n ) . Their early dealings with Rome are
largely mythical, but a plausible pattern of events can be detected if
after a generation of intermittent hostility (2.22.3) they were persuaded
by Sp. Cassius (2. 41. 1 n.) to throw in their lot with Rome. See Weiss,
R.E., 'Hernici'.
53. 9. superbissimum regem ac ferocissimum populum: Tan. Faber com
mented 'Qui tandem? tunc ferocissimus populus? sub tyrannide?
Nugae 5 and proposed f patrem (parentem Ruperti) but L. has been
Carried away as elsewhere (3. 18. 4 n.) by his own eloquence. There is
nothing corresponding to it in D.H. T h a t populum is what L. wrote is
guaranteed by the epithetferox which is a frequent affectation (19. 2 ;
cf. Vergil, Aeneid 1. 263, 7. 384).
63.10. si nihil morarentur: 'if they took no notice'. T h e phrase, although
In or. obi, belongs to the language of everyday speech. (It is to be
207

i. 53- io

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

distinguished from the formula in 4. 42. 8 n.) It is common in Plautus

(see Duckworth on Epidicus 305) but avoided by Cicero and Caesar.
Significantly it is used in an outspoken remark of M . Antony, quoted
by Cicero, Phil. 13. 35.
incensus ira: infensus ira is given by the manuscripts only here and 2.12.
12 (cf. 7. 27. 6). It does not occur in any other Latin author, and else
where in L. when an abl. is associated with infensus it is always an abl.
abs. (5. 36. 11, 33. 47. 3). It might be defended as underlining the
dangers latent in Sextus' wrath rather than its heat; but it appears
advisable to adopt Madvig's incensus. incensus ira is frequent in all
periods (Plautus, Asin. 420; Cicero, pro Milone 5 6 ; Bell. Afr. 85. 6 ;
other examples in Thes. Ling. Lat. 869. 18 ff.).
54. 1. adsentire: the active for dep. is found only here in L. and a
unique form of this kind might be expected to have a special signifi
cance. Since none can be detected or invented (Sext. Tarquinius is
talking in the ordinary style appropriate to a public or senatorial
meeting: cf. 32. 12 n.), it is easier to believe that the mood is due to
an assimilation of endingsadsentire se for adsentiri se. At 4 1 . 24. 19
adsentierant is rightly emended to adsensi erant (Freinsheim).
adsumere: 'claimed'.
54. 3 . proelia parva: Zopyrus had arranged sham battles at 10, 7, and
20 days' interval.
dono deum . . . missum: the language is suggestive of a public thanks
giving (Cicero, pro Archia 18; Suet. Vitellius 7. 3).
54. 4 . obeundo pericula ac labores: the hallmark of the model Greek
general. Notice, for example, the advice of his father to the young
Cyrus (Xenophon, Cyr. 1. 6. 25). (in) tanta caritate (Doering; cf. 39. 6)
is not required.
54. 5. Cf. Herodotus 5. 92$. 1 : Periander sent a herald to Thrasyb o u l u s t o i n q u i r e OVTIVCL av rpoirov CLCHJHLXZCJTCLTOV Kara<JT7]<japL^vos TWV
TrpayjJLOLTWV /caAAtcrra TT)V TTOXLV iTrLrpoircvot.

ut omnia unusp. Gabiisposset: 'that in his sole person the whole power
of Gabii should be visited'. M a n y conjectures have been suggested for
the enigmatic p. of the manuscripts (ipsis R h e n a n u s ; ipse edd. vett.;
prae [Gabinis) Veith; prae aliis {Gabiis) Hertz; prope or praetor Otto;
paene Reuss; praeter ceteros Cornellissen; praecipue Binsfeld ; pro Edwards;
publice Heerwagen) but there can be little doubt that Rossbach has
diagnosed the cause of the interpolation (Berl. Ph. Woch., 1920, 627) by
illustrating the prevalence of the symbol p or p in the manuscripts
of Livy and other Latin authors as an abbreviation forproprium nomen
a note introduced by a scribe to warn the reader that a name is
coming. It had already been deleted by Bekker and Frigell. See the
other examples listed at 2. 15. 1 n.
208

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

i. 54. 6

54. 6. credo: an explanation by L. himself (46. 5 n.) which has no

place in the narrative of Herodotus.
54. 7. ut re imperfecta: some doubt attaches to these words which
should mean 'thinking his job half-done', whereas the sense demands
'thinking his mission abortive', re imperfecta does not seem to occur
elsewhere in classical Latin and the suspicion arises that it is a mere
mistake for the common re infecta (5. 4. 1 ; Caesar, B.G. 6. 12. 5, 7. 17. 5
et at.).
vocem emisisse: Tarquin's whole performance was oracular, and is
described accordingly. Gf. 5. 51. 7; Veil. Pat. 1. 10. 5 vox veluti oraculo
emissa.
54. 8. tacitis ambagibus: cf. 55. 6, 56. 9, 5. 15. 5 ; cf. Virgil, Aeneid6. 99.
sua ipsos invidia opportunos: 'who were vulnerable by the odium which
they had themselves incurred'.
54. 9 . patuit.. .fuga, out. . . acti sunt: the change of subject is remark
able but not unparalleled (35. 9). It seems to underline the variety of
methods by which Sextus Tarquinius rid himself of potential rivals.
Novak deleted out. . . acti sunt; Strothius proposed alii for aut.
54. 10. consilio auxilioque: a favourite jingle of Cicero's (A. Bloch, Mus.
Helv. 15 (1958), 136-8).
Gabina res.,, in manum traditur: the ancient tradition (cf. D.H.
4- 57- 3) 1S unanimous that Gabii was absorbed by R o m e not as a
result of direct conquest but by negotiation, and D . H . adds that the
details of the treaty were preserved on a leather shield in the temple of
Semo Sancus Dius Fidius (Horace, Ep. 2. 1. 2 4 ; Festus 48 L.). T h e
tradition is corroborated by the curious position enjoyed by Gabine
institutions in the history of Rome (e.g. 8. 9. 9, 10. 7. 3 ; Cato ap.
Servius, ad Aen. 5. 755 Gabino ritu: Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 33 ager
Gabinus) which suggests that in the fusion Gabii was negotiating from
a position of greater strength than the R o m a n historians care to allow
(Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship, 18). Historically such a fusion
could not be later than the end of the sixth century so that the main
facts of the tradition are beyond dispute. T h e leather shield treaty,
alleged to have been seen by D.H., is more suspect since the temple of
Semo Sancus also contained what purported to be the distaff and
spindle of Tanaquil (Pliny, N.H. 8. 194). T h e name and the prove
nance of the deity are still as yet unexplained but an archaic feature
of the ritual was the dedication of wheel-shaped disks as an offering
from a conquered city, urfeta (wheel-shaped discs) are assDciated with
Fiosovius Sancius in the Iguvine tablets. So orbes aenei were placed in
the temple of Semo Sancus in 329 B.C. after the destruction of Privernum
(8. 20). T h e alleged spindle of Tanaquil would have been circular and
lo was the shield from Gabii. Since it is scarcely credible that an inicription of the fifth century would have been understood by a R o m a n
814432

209

i. 54. 10

TARQUINIUS

SUPERBUS

of Cicero's day, it seems safest to assume that the 'shield' from Gabii
is in fact comparable with orbes aenei from Privernum, as a trophy from
the capture of Gabii in the Latin War of the fourth century. See
further Wissowa, Religion, 130; Norden, Altrom. Priest., 204 ff.; E. G.
Evans, The Cults of Sabine Territory, 237-40; Weinstock, J.R.S. 36
(1946), 105 n. 19.1 have also considered the custom by which Olympic
chariot victors dedicated a wheel inscribed with their own and their
city's names (Pindar, Olymp. 5. 15, 11. 8, 13. 35).
5 5 . 1 . pacem cum Aequorum gente: hostilities are implied but not stated in
53- 8.
foedus cum Tuscis: 42. 2 n., presumably a renewal of the truce which
had then expired.
monte Tarpeio: 11. 5-9 n., denoting either the whole Gapitoline hill
(Varro, de Ling. LaL 5. 41 ; Propertius 4. 4. 93) or, as here, merely
the Gapitolium (Suetonius, Julius 44; ad Herennium 4. 43).
Tarquinios . . . perfecisse: dependent on monumentum. The style is epigraphic. Gf. Dessau, LL.S. 129 (Pantheon) M. AgrippaL.F. Cos. Tertium
Fecit and, for the use of patrem . . .filium, 4318 Antonii Mariani pater et
filius. But no real inscription is intended since the temple was not
dedicated till the Republic and any such inscription could not have
survived till the first century (A. A. Howard, Harvard Studies 3 (1892),
185-6).
vovisse: 38. 7.
55. 2. exaugurare fana sacellaque: Gato fr. 24 P.:fana in eo loco compluria
fuere: ea exauguravit, praeterquam quod Termino fanum fuit: id nequitum
exaugurari; Servius, adAen.q. 446; Augustine, Civ. Dei 5.21. The building
of the temple probably did involve the destruction of a number of other
buildings but there is no record of any shrines or temples other than
Terminus (see below) of greater antiquity on the Capitol. It is possible
that there were private cults which had to be moved but it is more likely
that the tradition concerning Terminus demanded that some shrines
were uprooted. Certainly no such temples are attributed to Tatius
and it is fanciful to see here discrimination against Sabine or patrician
cults.
55. 3. movisse numen: not 'exerted their power' but literally 'moved a
nod' i.e. 'signified their will', numen is used in its literal sensethe will
of the deity displayed by a nod (cf., e.g., 7. 30. 20; Lucretius 3. 144;
Catullus 64. 204 with Fordyce's note; cf. the Homeric Karavevco and
dvavva>). The literal meaning survived only in sacral contexts (monuisse
numen Ruperti; movisse omen Ruhnken).
aves: 'to divine whether the deities were willing to leave their
native shrines'. For the procedure of evocatio see 5. 21. 1 n.
in Termini fano: a shrine consisting of a rude stone (Servius loc. cit.;
210

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

i- 55- 3

LactantiuSj Inst, i. 20.37). The origin of the legend is obscure but, as in

Greece, there was a primitive law, ascribed to Numa, forbidding the
removal of boundary-stones (Festus 505 L. qui terminum exarasset, et
ipsum et boves sacros esse). Such a law is a necessary protection of
private property and its antiquity at Rome seems established by the
ancient cippus of c. 500 B.C. ( = C.I.L. i 2 . 1) found near the Lapis
Niger in the Forum whose opening clause quoi hoi. . . sakros essed is
restored to give the sense of Numa's law. (F. Ribezzo, Riv. Ind.-GrecoHal. 17(1933), 73; Goidanich, Mem. Ace. dUtal. 3 (1943), 317 fF.; C. J. S.
Marstrander, Symb. Osl. 37 (1961), 146 fT.). It was natural that a divine
sanction should be invoked for such a regulation and the role played
by Zevs "Opios in Greek religion was fulfilled at Rome by the associa
tion of Terminus with Juppiter Gapitolinus (hence in later inscriptions
Juppiter Terminus or Terminalis). From this beginning the legend of
the god who would not be moved was evolved. See further Wissowa,
Religion, 136; Frazer on Ovid, Fasti 2. 639 fT.; Platner-Ashby s.v.;
Marbach, R.E., 'Terminus'. For the subsequent interpolation of
Juventus (also in D.H. 3. 69) as another deity who would not be
moved see 5. 54. 7 n. The Periocha la gives Termonis (Pithoeus) et
Iuventae arae moveri non potuerunt but there is no question of our text of
L. being defective.
55. 5. caput humanum: a fuller account was given by Valerius Antias,
which L. has utilized but abbreviated (Pliny, N.H. 28.15 ; cf. [Servius],
adAen. 8.345; Arnobius 6. 7). 'Cum in Tarpeio fodientes delubro fundamenta caput humanum invenissent, missis ob id ad se legatis Etruriae
celeberrimus vates Olenus Calenus praeclarum id fortunatumque cernens interrogatione in suam gen tern transferre temptavit scipione determinata prius templi imagine in solo ante se: "hoc ergo dicitis, Romani ?
hie templum Iovis optimi maximi futurum est, hie caput invenimus?"
constantissima annalium adfirmatione transiturum fuisse fatum in
Etruriam, ni praemoniti a filio vatis legati respondissent: "non plane
hie sed Romae inventum caput dicimus".' The detailed development
of the myth, which has much in common with 45. 2-7, is analysed by
Weinstock, R.E., 'Olenus'. Starting as an aetiological explanation of
the name Capitolium ( = Caput Oli or Olisa latinized form of an
Etruscan name; see Schulze 73) it may have come to be regarded as
symbolizing the hold of Rome over an enemy, for the head is the
dominant part of a person and to control the head is to neutralize that
person (10.26. 11, 2 4 . 1 5 . 4 ; cf. St. John's on a charger, or Gorgo's). But
heads could also be oracularnotably the head of Orpheus (Dodds,
Greeks and the Irrational, 168 n. 78). In the third century, when the
wars with Pyrrhus and Carthage taxed the resources of Rome and
challenged her morale, the myth of the Capitolium took on a new
prophetic guise, assuring Rome of ultimate masterycaput rerumfore
211

! 55- 5

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

portendebat. T h a t this explanation of Capitolium belongs to the third

century and little earlier seems established by its association with a
comparable myth about Carthage that at the foundation of that city
the heads of an ox and of a horse were found (Servius, ad A en. i. 4 4 3 ;
Justin 18. 5. 15) from which it was inferred that et bellicosa est Carthago
per equi omen et fertilis (or serva) per bovis. Moreover, the scene of the
discovery of the head on the Capitolium appears in profusion and
for the first time as a motif on Italian gems which can hardly be dated
before the third century (Furtwangler, Die antiken Gemrren, 3. 245 ff.;
Beazley, The Lewes House Collection of Ancient Gems, no. 87). It was
treated at length by Fabius Pictor (fr. 12 P.), doubtless for propaganda
reasons, but received its final form at the hands of Valerius Antias who
may also be responsible for transferring the prodigy from Tarquinius
Priscus to Tarquinius Superbus. For L. it is not important. His treat
ment is cursory and anonymous.
55. 6. caput rerum: 45. 3 n.
55. 7. Pometinae: Pomptinae, the reading of the archetype, is preferred
by M . Ghio (Riv. Fil. Class. 29 (1951), 7) on the implausible ground
that Ennius is L.'s source here and Pometinus is impossible metrically
in hexameters, but it is more likely either that Pomptinae is a scribal
error for the rare Pometinae (Cato fr. 58 P . ; D.H. 4. 50: cf. A. Rosen
berg, Hermes 54 (1919), 154) or that the forms were in fact used
interchangeably by Romans (cf. C.I.L. 6. 3884 Poment. for Pompt.; see
Philipp, R.E., 'Suessa Pometia').
Pometinae manubiae: this is not at variance with Valerius Antias
fr. 11 P . : oppidum Latinorum Apiolas captum a L. Tarquinio rege, ex cuius
praeda Capitolium is incohaverit, nor is there any justification for assuming
with Pais that the two versions are doublets (aiuov = pomum). Tar
quinius Priscus used the spoils of Apiolae for his enterprise. T h e work
was interrupted. Superbus continued it with the spoils from Pometia.
5 5 . 8 . Fabio . . . quadraginta . . . talenta: D.H. 4. 50 and Plutarch,
Publicola 15, follow Piso in giving the larger figure (100 lb. = 1 talent;
but cf. 38. 38. 13) but it is legitimate to inquire how the two historians
could arrive at any figure, let alone discrepant figures. In the absence
both of coinage and of contemporary documents any estimate must
have been founded on a comparison with the cost of some famous
building. The temple of Juppiter Capitolinus enjoyed at Rome the
status that the cult of Athena Parthenos had in Athens. It is, therefore,
perhaps no accident that Thucydides records the weight of gold on
Pheidias' chryselephantine statue as 40 talents (2. 13. 5 : for the
variant figures given by Philochorus and Diodorus see Gomme's note).
Thucydides is giving a round figure (cf., e.g., Aristophanes, Plutus 196)
but it would have been the figure familiar to anyone interested in
Athenian antiquities like Fabius Pictor, concerned, as he was, to
212

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

i. 55- 8

depict Rome as a second Athens. Piso may have been led to correct the
figure of 40 talents to 400 either because it seemed too small for
such an undertaking or in the light of the cost of the restorations of
179 B.C. (40. 52. 3) or 142 B.C. (Pliny, N.H. 33. 5 7 ; cf. 36. 185).
55. 9. Pisoni: the historian L. Calpurnius L.f.C.n. Piso Frugi (Censorius), cos. 133 B.C. and censor 120 B.C., for whose historical work see
Introduction. Since he wrote in Latin whereas Fabius wrote in Greek,
he gives the figures in their Latin denomination.
summam: read, with Hay ley, nullius ne horum quidem magnificentiam
operum [fundamenta] non exsuperaturam. The run of the sentence neces
sitates that nullius be taken with ne horum quidem . . . operum^ 'none even
of contemporary constructions'. It is equally plain that the contrast is
between the magnificence of modern buildings and the mere founda
tions of an ancient temple. L.'s remark loses all its point if he is m a d e
to compare the foundations of the Gapitoline Temple simply with
Augustan foundations (Frigell). H e is stressing that Piso's figure is
colossal, amply large enough even in present conditions of inflation
to provide for a fine building, let alone a foundation in primitive times.
T h e manuscripts read magnificentiae but magnificentiam is what should
be expected (with operum; cf. 57. 1, 45. 28. 4 ; Vitruvius 6. 5. 2 ; Pliny,
N.H. 7. 94). In that case fundamenta must be a gloss from 55. 7 above.
Translate 'a sum of money which could not be expected from the
booty of a single city of those days and which would be more than
sufficient even for the magnificence of any modern buildings', quia
is found in the manuscripts before summam.
quia is not used as quippe (read here by Bekker, Frigell, Bayet;
cf. 3. 53. 2) without a verb to introduce a clause in apposition. Scribal
interpolations of this kind designed to make the connexion of thought
clearer can be detected at 2. 58. 5 and 4. 44. 3. See further C.Q. 9
(i959)> 2 I 4 56. 1. fabris undique ex Etruria accitis: tradition names Vulca of Veii
as the artist responsible for the cult-image (Pliny, N.H. 35. 157) and
other Veian artists as the craftsmen of the terracotta quadriga on the
apex (Pliny, N.H. 35. 157) and, although only the foundations and two
small terracotta fragments survive from the original temple, they are
sufficient to confirm the traditional descriptions of the temple (D.H.
4. 61. 3 ff.; Vitruvius 3. 3. 5) as a work of Etruscan styleDoric
hexastyle, 55 metres by 60 metres, with lower courses ofcapellacio and
superstructure largely of wood faced with terracotta decorations.
After the fire of 6 July 83 B.C., the temple was restored by Q,. Lutatius
Catulus on the same plan but with a higher elevation (Tacitus, Hist.
3. 72; Val. Max. 4. 4. 11) and, as such, it is depicted on several
Republican coins. It was restored at great expense by Augustus in
213

I. 56. I

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

26 B.G. (Res Gestae 20) and the absence of any allusion to that restora
tion indicates that the present passage was written before 26 B.G.
(56. 3 n.). For fuller details see Platner-Ashby s.v.; Scott, Mem. Am.
Acad. Rome 7 (1929), 95-116; A. Andren, Architectural Terracottas from
Etrusco-Italic Temples, 335-6; G. Lugli, J.R.S. 36 (1946), 3 ; P. J. Riis,
Etruscan Art, 120; E. H. Richardson, Mem. Am. Acad. Rome 21 (1953),
8 3 ; A. Andren, Hommages a L. Herrmann, 91 ; A. Boethius, The Golden
House of Nero, 14-19.
operis: the conscription of labour is credible enough. Lacking slaves
(cf. 2. 4. 5), Rome had no other means of undertaking such works
(Clerici, Economia e Finanza, 525 ff.).
militiae: dat. 'when this work, far from light in itself, was added to
military service5.
56. 2. foros: 35. 8 n. The stands are also attributed to Superbus by
D.H. 4. 44. 1 ; de Viris Illustr. 8. 3.
cloacam . . . maximam: 38. 6 n., ascribed unanimously by ancient
authors to Superbus (Pliny, N.H. 36. 104), the main sewer of Rome
started in the Argiletum and carried the waters from the Esquiline,
Viminal, and Quirinal through the forum to the Tiber. Originally an
open ditch (Plautus, Curculio 476), it was first enclosed in the third
century. The chief effect of its construction was the final drainage of
the forum which now for the first time became available for largescale building. Preliminary draining had been begun several decades
earlier after which the forum ceased to be used as a graveyard. These
two stages, corresponding to the works of Priscus and Superbus, can
be dated archaeologically to c. 620 and c. 570, although the earliest
extant capellacio work seems to belong to the post-390 period (see
T. Ashby, C.R. 15 (1901), 137-8; Blake, Ancient Roman Construction,
122-3).

nova haec magnificentia: to what does 'our modern magnificence'

refer ? It is generally taken to be an allusion to the splendour of the
imperial city of Rome as a whole contrasted with the achievement
of Tarquin in constructing the Cloaca and embellishing the Circus:
but such an allusion is at once too sweeping and too vague. The con
text points clearly to a contrast between the initial achievement of
constructing the two great works and the lesser achievement of bring
ing them to their present state of magnificence. If so, it presupposes
recent work both on the Cloaca and on the Circus. We know that
Agrippa in his aedileship (33 B.G.) cleaned out and navigated the sewers
(Dio 49. 43, TOVS inrovofjLovs ef eKadrjpe; Pliny, N.H. 36. 104). There is
dispute whether Agrippa also repaired and improved them but since
Strabo (5. 235 cvv (i.e. sewers, aqueducts) TrXeiurrjv iirifieXeiav eVoirjo-aro M. AypiTTTTas) suggests that he did and since a large section of
the extant Cloaca is Augustan in date, it seems reasonable to suppose
214

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

i. 56. 2

that in 33 B.C. he did carry out an extensive inspection and restoration.

As for the Circus, we know that it was damaged by fire in 31 B.G. (Dio
50. 10) and that this damage was confined to fori since Augustus
records only the restoration ofthe pulvinar adcircum maximum (Res Gestae
19; cf. Cassiodorus, Var. 3. 51. 4). L. is comparing the glory of the
new pulvinar with the achievement of the first fori. The reference of
nova haec magnificentia is, therefore, clear: it is limited to the fori and
the cloaca, and the words provide another indication that Book 1 was
written in the period 29-28 B.G. See Platner-Ashby s . w . ; F. W.
Shipley, Agrippa's Building Activities in Rome, 17-18; A. Andren,
Hommages d L. Herrmann, 94-95.
56. 3 . exercita plebe: an old part of the tradition, already related by
Cassius Hemina fr. 15 P.
usus non esset: usui non esset Cornelissen; cf. 42. 27. 1.
Signiam: 2. 21. 7, mod. Segni, a town lying on the edge of Latium
between the Via Appia and Via Latina and occupying a commanding
height in the Latin salient between the Aequi and the Volsci. The
earliest remains discovered on the site may perhaps be as old as 500
although the polygonal stonework should probably be dated to the
fourth century. The foundation of a colony by Tarquinius is, therefore,
to be regarded as apocryphal while that in 495 can be accepted. The
later date also suits the political climate of the early fifth century when
the need for such an outpost became acute. On the other hand, the
notice of Tarquin's operations may be a confusion with hostilities
undertaken by him against an indigenous population of Latins in
Signia. Throughout its history, in the Punic Wars (27. 10. 7) and in
the Civil Wars (Plutarch, Sulla 28), Signia was a strategic point. See
further Delbriick, Das Capitolium von Signia; Philipp, R.E., Signia';
Blake, Ancient Roman Construction, 96.
Circeios: mod. Mte. Circello. The early history of the town is obscure.
Diodorus (14. 102 ; cf. [Scylax], Periplus 8; 5. 24. 4 n.) dates the first
Roman colony at Circeii to 393 B.G. and that date agrees with the
archaeological remains so far discovered (T. Ashby, Mel. d*Arch. et
d'Hist. 25 (1905), 157-209; Blake, Ancient Roman Construction, 94).
Against that, the KipKaurcov (Polybius 3. 22. 11 with Walbank's note)
are mentioned in the Carthaginian treaty of 508 B.G. and Circeii
appears as a colony in the account of Coriolanus' campaigns (2. 39. 2),
when they passed under Volscian control (Plutarch, Coriolanus 28).
They were still liable to side with the Volscians in the fourth century
(6. 12. 6, 13. 8, 17. 7; cf. D.H. 5. 61). It is possible that, as in the case
of Signia, there was a Latin community at Circeii which was sub
jected to Tarquin and under Etruscan influence concluded the treaty
with Carthage. Its Etrusco-Latin career was too short-lived to leave
any mark archaeologically and it was only when the site was finally
215

i. 56. 3

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

recovered from the Volscians in 393 that a colony could be established

there. For its later history see Hulsen, R.E., 'Circeii'.
The Snake Portent and the Consultation of Delphi
T h a t there was contact in the sixth century between the leading
Etruscan cities and Delphi is proved both by the story that after the
Battle of Alalia the inhabitants of Caere (AyvXXatoi) sent a penitential
embassy to Delphi (Herodotus 1. 167) and by the clear evidence that
Caere had a treasury at Delphi from the earliest times. Moreover, the
Tarquins are closely associated with Caere (60. 2 n.) and indeed may
be derived from Caere rather than from Tarquinii (34. 1 n.), so that
the remark of Cicero (de Rep. 2. 44 institutis eorum a quibus ortus erat
dona magnifica . . . Delphos ad Apollinem misii) may well be historically
true although not confirmed from the Greek end, and that from the
known connexion of the Tarquins with Delphi the story which we find
developed in L. was evolved (cf. Cicero, Brutus 5 3 ; Ovid, Fasti
2. 711 fT.; Val. Max. 7. 3. 2 ) ; for that story is certainly no more than
an assemblage of folk-tales (56. 4 n . ; 56. 9 n . ; 56. 12 n.) around the
central aetiological myth of the cognomen of L. Junius Brutus. There
can be few doubts that such a man existed and was the first 'consul'
but his character and exploits were elaborated by the later Junii
Bruti, especially perhaps Decimus, the consul of 325, and Gaius, the
censor of 307, who, as plebeians, regarded him as their 'auctor nobilitatis\ See further Schur, R.E., SuppL 5, 'L. Junius Brutus'; Altheim,
History of Roman Religion, 264; Parke-Wormell, Delphic Oracle, 1. 266.
56. 4. anguis: snake portents feature widely in legendgenerally fore
telling the death of persons since departed souls are believed to be
reincarnated in snakes (Frazer, Golden Bough, 8. 2 9 3 - 4 ; R . D . Williams
on Virgil, Aeneid 5. 9 5 ; cf. 5. 86-88). Cadmus turned at death into
a snake (Apollcd. 3. 5. 4). When Cleomenes was crucified in Egypt,
his body was guarded by a snake (Plutarch, Cleomenes 39) and when
Plotinus was dying a snake emerged from under his bed and dis
appeared into a hole in the wall, and at the same time Plotinus
expired (Porphyry, de Vita Plot. 2). T h e same fate befell Erechtheus
(Herodotus 8. 41). T h e snake portent which appeared to Tarquin
is therefore doubtless designed to prefigure his violent end, as in the
story of Laocoon. As such it must be a post-eventum embellishment of
the legend of the Tarquins.
in regiam: if the wooden column from which the snake appeared was
in the palace, it would be necessary to follow Bauer and read in regia
'panic broke out in the palace', but against this it should be said that
the plan of the early regia leaves no room for wooden columns,
while it was well known that the primitive structure of the Capitoline
Temple was upheld by them. It would be singularly appropriate
216

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

1.56. 4

that the portent should issue from that ill-starred building whose
construction was alienating the sympathies of the Romans and whose
completion Tarquin did not survive to see. In that case the frightened
crowd would run in regiam and apprise the king of what was happening.
See also next note.
56. 5. publico,. . . domestico: prodigies were public when the attention
of the Senate was called to them and when the Senate decided to
take appropriate measures for their procuratio (Varro, de Ling, Lat.
5. 148; 2. 42. 10, 5. 15. 1,7. 6. 3). But certain classes of prodigies were
not publicly accepted, such as dreams or prodigies which occurred
in privato loco or in loco peregrino (43. 13. 6), although in such cases the
haruspices could be privately consulted and usually were. Tarquin's
prodigy, however, cannot be classed as necessarily private even if
it did appear in the regia (see above) since for religious purposes the
regia was not a private dwelling (Aul. Gell. 4. 6. 2). These considera
tions are in keeping with the tendentious character of the language
[tantum adhiberentur) so that it may be supposed that an annalist (i.e.
Piso or later) wished to devise a connexion between two traditional
elements of the Tarquin legendthe snake portent and the embassy
to Delphiand turned to advantage the fact that the prodigy was
not to be found in the Annales as it ought to have been if it had
been a publicum prodigium. See L. Wulker, Die geschicht. Entwicklung
des Prodigienwesens, 2 ff., 35-36; C. O. Thulin, Die Etrusk. Discipline
131-2.
56. 6. responsa sortium: 21. 62. 5. T h e reply of the oracle frequently
took the form of writing on leaves. See Norden's note on Virgil,
Aeneid 6. 74.
56. 7. L. Iunius Brutus: the cognomen like the nornen are of Latin or
Italic roots and this fact may support the tradition that the Etruscan
dynasty was evicted by him. Junius from J u n o (Schulze 470); for
Brutus 'Stupid 5 cf. the Oscan praenomen Brutulus in 8. 39. 12 and
Walde-Hofmann s.v.
56. 7. alius ingenio: Very different in intelligence from the mask which
he had assumed'. So the manuscripts rightly. Hofmann in Thes. Ling.
Lat.) 'ingenium', col. 1535, collects other instances of similar phrases
(e.g. 45. 10. 8, 34. 5. 6, 23. 7. 12, 35. 47. 7). Cf. Seneca, Contr. 10
praef. 4 alius animo (Meyer).
in quibus: 27. 25. 7, 37. 23. 5. See Kroll on Catullus 10. 6.
timendum . . . concupiscendum: echoed by Tacitus, Hist. 4. 42 nihil
quod ex te concupiscent Nero, nihil quod timeret.
56. 8* ex industrial Claudius, when young, adopted the same policy
(Suetonius 38. 3 ; see D. M . Last, Latomus 17 (1958), 486).
56. 9. aureum baculum: an element of folk legend. Konon, an Augustan
contemporary of L. who drew, by his own admission, on earlier sources,
217

i- 56- 9

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

including Timaeus, tells the story of a Milesian who when Miletus

was threatened by the Persian general Harpagus, entrusted his money
to a banker in the Sicilian city of Taormina. After the fall of Miletus,
when he attempted to recover the money, the banker tried to cheat
him by enclosing the gold in a vdpdrjg (F. Gr. Hist. 26 F 1 (38)).
A similar story is also found in Stobaeus 3. 28. 21. Thus, although it
remains inherently possible that an embassy did go from Rome to
Delphi, it is likely that this detail is an invention of later historians, in
which Timaeus may have played his part.
56. 10. postquam ventum est: for the use of impersonal passives such
as ventum est, itur, &c. see Fraenkel, Horace, 115 n. 1, although he
appears to regard v. e. here as applying to only one person, Brutus,
whereas all three are clearly referred to (note iuvenum).
perfectis patris mandatis: no answer is recorded to Tarquin's query,
which in itself casts doubt on the authenticity of the story, a doubt
that is intensified by observing that according to D.H. 4. 69. 2 Apollo
was consulted how to alleviate a plague (virkp TOV Xoifiov) while
Zonaras 7. 11 (cf. Pliny, N.H. 8.153) records an utterly different oracle
(Parke-Wormell 266).
56. 11. Tarquinii: 3. 1. 1 n.
56. 12. terram osculo contigit: to the ubiquitous folk-myth of earth as
mother, a specifically Roman idea is added which may be due to a
Sibylline prophecy circulating in the early part of the first century B.C.
At all events the same story is told of the young Julius Caesar in 67 B.C.
(Suetonius 7) : '(nam visus erat per quietem stuprum matri intulisse)
coniectores . . . incitaverunt arbitrium terrarum orbis portendi interpretantes "quando mater quam subiectam sibi vidisset non alia esset
quam terra quae omnium parens haberetur".5 The two stories can
hardly be unconnected. It should by added that, although L. suggests
that Brutus slipped (prolapsus), it was the regular practice of the
homecoming traveller to kiss the ground on his return. The custom
is illustrated by Fraenkel on Agamemnon 503 with which the present
passage may be compared. Note above all Odyssey 13. 354.
56. 13. Rutulos: 2. 1 n.
5 7 - 5 9 . Lucretia and the Fall of the Tarquins
The legend that the rape of Lucretia precipitated the fall of the
House of Tarquin is as old as our records allow us to discover. It was
treated by Fabius Pictor (D.H. 4. 64) and may have been the subject
of a praetexta of L. Accius, perhaps the Brutus (Cicero, pro Sest. 123;
but the text of Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 7 in Bruto Cassii. . . dicit Lucretia
is supported by another reference to Cassius in 7. 72 est apud Cassium
l
nocte intempesta nostram devenit domum? and should not be emended
to in Bruto L. Accii). In any case the tradition is too well established
218

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

* 57-59

to be doubted seriously and speculations which endeavour to make

the stories of Lucretia and Virginia mere late elaborations of legends
related to the cults of Ardea, transplanted to Rome at the end of the
fourth century, or aetiological myths associated with the shrine of
Venus Gloacina, can be discounted. Whatever the exact historical
facts, whether Lucretia committed suicide to forestall an unfavourable
verdict before a domestic court of her family or whether her suicide
was a deliberate act to ensure the birth of a vendetta against the
Tarquins, the story has been considerably improved both by the
addition of unhistorical personalities (59. 12 n., Sp. Lucretius) and by
its assimilation to the violent ends of many Greek tyrannies, in par
ticular the Pisistratids (for the moral cf. Aristotle, Politics I3i5 b 27;
Plutarch, de Mul. Virt. 26; Pausanias 2. 20. 2, 8. 47. 6). It was
against such a background that the final form of the legend took
shape. L. saw Lucretia's death not, like Shakespeare, as a recognition
that loss of chastity was a mortal sin involving the loss of all hope of
salvation, but merely as a noble example of the high moral worth of
chastity (58. 10 nee ulla deinde impudica Lucretiae exemplo vivet). It is the
exemplary aspect of her fate which he is at pains to portray, and to
achieve this he presents the sequence of events as the plot of a tragedy,
but a tragedy which has sufficient contemporary application to en
gage the reader's own sympathy. A comparison with D.H. reveals
the extent to which he has manipulated his material to secure the
impression of a play, an impression which has deceived many into
believing that he was copying or reproducing an actual play. In L.
the whole action takes place in Collatia and the scene where the
revellers come upon Lucretia is pure New Comedy (57. 9 n.). In D.H.
there are several changes of scene: after her outrage, Lucretia returns
from Collatia to Rome where the final incidents are enacted. In D.H.
speech succeeds speech (4. 70-76. 1; 77-83; 84): in L. the characters
speak in a style and diction which is quite alien to the conventional
oratory of the late Republic but which belongs to the realm of tragedy
(57. 7 n., 58. 7. n., 59. i n.). While D.H. describes at length the scenes
of emotion (66. 2-67. 3), L. represents the characters experiencing
and reacting to their emotions. But to a Roman the name of Brutus
could only mean the regicide and L.'s audience was bound to com
pare the heroism of the first consul with that of Caesar's assassins.
It was an obvious point. Statues of L. Junius Brutus stood in the
houses of M. and D. Junius Brutus (Cicero, Phil 2. 26). L. works a
little reminiscence of those stirring times into his narrative (59. 1 n.)
and he paints Lucretia not as a flat and lifeless figure (D.H. 4. 64. 4
KoXXloTTjv . . . teal (raxfypovecTTdTTjv) but as a Roman matron such as
Romans loved to idealize (57. 9 n.).
In 38. 24. 3 ff. L. narrates a comparable story, after Valerias
219

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS
' 57-59
Antias, about the wife of Ortiagon and a licentious centurion. T h e
general similarity of treatment argues for the authority of Valerius
here too.
The subject exercised a fascination on later writers (Ovid, Fasti
2. 721-852 ; Val. Max. 6. 1. 1; de VirisIllustr. 9. 1-5; Diofr. n . 13-19;
Servius, ad Aen. 8. 646 (quoting inaccurately by memory from L . ) ;
Octavia 294 ff.; Sil. Ital. 13. 821 f.) but it was as a topic of moral dis
pute that it endured. Was it right, Augustine asked, that Lucretia
added the wrong of suicide to an offence for which she could not be
blamed {Civ. Dei 1. 19); Alternatively, if it was right to commit
suicide afterwards, surely it would have been better to do so before the
outrage. So Casanova, and so the charming epigram
Casta Suzanna placet: Lucretia cede Suzannae.
Tu post, ilia mori maluit ante scelus.
See Klenze in Schwegler, Rom. Gesch. 1. 804; H. Taine, Essai sur
T.-L. 2 7 4 - 8 ; G. Voigt, Bericht. Kon. Sachs. Gesell. der Wiss. Leipzig, 35
(1883), 1-36; W. Soltau, Anfang Rom. Gesch. 73 ff., 9 3 - 9 9 ; Pais,
Ancient Legends, 185-203; de Sanctis, Storia, 1. 398; C. Appleton, Rev.
Hist. Droit 3 (1924), 2 3 9 - 7 1 ; Miinzer, R.E., 'Lucretia'; Burck 173-5;
B. Croce, Critica 35 (1937), 146-52.
57. 1. Ardeam: for its subsequent history see 3. 71-72 nn., 4. 9-11
nn., 5. 43. 6. T h e town lay some 25 miles south of Rome at a distance
of 7 miles from the sea (Strabo 5. 232; Pliny, N.H. 3. 56) and served
as the capital of the Rutuli, a people of Latin stock later strongly
influenced by Etruscan culture (Virgil, Aeneid 7. 409-11). It is men
tioned as one of the members of the Latin League of Aricia (49. 9 n.)
so that the traditional patterns of its history can be trusted, especially
since the earliest archaeological layers point to an advanced native
population without any trace of Greek or Oriental culture. Reluctant
to accept Tarquin's high-handed usurpation of the league it stood out
against him and had to be reduced by force. Presumably it succumbed.
At all events it is mentioned as being in the R o m a n sphere of influence
when the first treaty was signed with Carthage in 509 (Polybius 3. 22.
11 with Walbank's note). Archaeological confirmation is forthcoming
that there was an important harbour-town c. 500 B.C. with agger and
fossa, and traces of temple decorations in terracotta of Etruscan style
(Strabo, loc. cit.) which preceded the Roman colony. See Hiilsen,
R.E., c Ardea (2)'; Rosenberg, Hermes 54 (1919), 113 ff.; A. W. van
Buren, A.J.A. 36 (1932), 3 6 3 - 5 ; 37 (1933), 503-4; E. Holmberg,
Boll. Studi Med. 3 (1932-3), 6 ff.; A. Boethius, Boll. Studi Med. 5 (1934),
4 - 6 ; Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship, 9 - 1 1 ; Blake, Ancient Roman
Construction, 106; Stefani, Notiz. Scavi, 79 (1954), 6-30.
57. 2. 'besides his general arrogance they had a further ground of
dislike of the tyranny in that they complained that the king had kept
220

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

i- 57- 2

them so long at the work of carpenters and at menial tasks', fabrorum

only with ministeriis.
57. 3 . parum processit: 2. 44. 1 n.
57. 4 . commeatus: 3. 24. 5, the technical term for leave of absence.
57. 5. otium . . . terebant: Fraenkel, on the apocryphal GXOXTJP rpifitiv
in Aeschylus, Agamemnon 1055 f, quotes also Virgil, Aeneid 4. 2 7 1 ;
Statius, Silv. 3. 5. 61, 4. 6. 2 ; Tacitus, Hist. 2. 34. The use is thus not
exclusively poetic, but it is striking and sets the stage for the diction
which the characters are going to employ.
conviviis comisationibusque: 40. 13. 3, 40. 15. 11 ; cf. Cicero, pro Caelio
3 5 ; in Catil. 2. 10a contemporary phrase.
57. 6. forte ... incidit mentio: it is clear from Catullus 10.5-6 incidere nobis
sermones varii (with Kroll's note) and Pliny, Ep. 4. 22. 5 that this ex
pression belongs not to the sphere of deliberate narrative but to the
spontaneous language of direct presentation.
Egerifilius: 38. 1 n.
miris modis: the phrase is arresting, since the use of modis with an
adj. in the place of an adv. is very rare after Plautus and Terence and
is wholly absent from such authors as Catullus, Tibullus, and Propertius. Plautus uses it frequently (Merc. 2 2 5 ; Most. 5 4 ; cf. Terence,
Hecyra 179; Eunuchus 955) and the alternative form which he employs
(mlrimodis) is shown by its scansion to have been regarded as a collo
quialism. After the early dramatists it falls out of use except as a
stylized archaism in Lucretius (1. 123) and Virgil (Georg. 1. 477, 4. 309;
Aeneid 1. 354, 6. 738, 7. 89, 10. 822). It is, therefore, at first sight
odd that Horace should use servilibus . . . modis in his Satires ( 1 . 8 .
32-33) but there the context shows that it is consciously grotesque.
Significantly the type of phrase is employed by Seneca in Phoen. 132
and Oedipus 92. For an Augustan reader miris modis would convey an
archaic ring appropriate for such legendary champions of female
quality.
T h e idea of a contest of wives is hellenistic in feeling, owing much
to the popular treatment of the Judgement of Paris in art and litera
ture ; cf. also the beauty-contests in Lesbos (Page, Sappho and Alcaeus,
168).
57. 7. quin . . . conscendimus?: 'why don't we mount our horses?' quin =
qui (abl.) and ne with the indicative is common in old Latin (Plautus,
Miles 426; Terence, Heaut. 832). Thereafter it is confined to passages
of heightened emotion, e.g. Sallust, Catiline 20. 14; Cicero, ad Fam.
7. 8. 2 ; Catullus 76. 11.
iuventae: i.e. iuvenilis aetatis; iuventus is applied concretely to a group
of young people. T h e distinction is maintained throughout the extant
books of Livy. But cf. Sallust, Catiline 5. 2 and Horace, Odes 3. 2. 15
(Gries, Constancy, 46).
221

1-57- 7

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

id. . . oculis: language and sentiment recall Terence, Heaut. 2 8 1 4. The situation of a wife surprised at home by her husband was
one frequently handled by New Comedy, and Collatinus' words evoke
such scenes.
necopinato: 3. 26. 5 n.
57. 8. incaluerant vino: 39. 42. 10; Tacitus, Annals 11. 37. 2, 14. 2. 1;
Hist. 4. 29. 1. Notice the short sentences and vivid phraseology
matching the rapidity of the action.
'age sane': 'away then', a scarce phrase found only in a characteriz
ing utterance in Cicero, de Finibus 2. 119, outside Plautus (Menaechmi
153; Pseud. 1326).
avolant: 3. 61. 7 n.
57. 9. Collatiam: 38. 1 n.
convivio lusuque: the received reading luxuque is defended by Kohler
on account of the paraphrase in de Viris Illustr. 9.2 regias nurus in convivio
et luxu deprehendunt and by other editors by the parallel of luxuria in,
e.g., Seneca, Epist. 59. 15 (cf. 114. 11). But luxus is a state, not,
like convivium, an activity and L. elsewhere links lusus and convivium
(cf. 40. 13. 3 lusus, convivii, comissationis; 40. 14. 2) so that Gronovius's
lusu may be preferred to an early corruption.
lucubrantes ancillas: the scene is pure New Comedy again, already
familiar from Terence and so perhaps actually staged by Menander.
The most graphic representation of it is Tibullus' plea that Delia may
remain till he comes ( 1 . 4 . 83-90; W. T. Avery, C.J. 49 (1953), 165).
But the connexion of female virtue and wool-making owes nothing to
any play or poem. In Greece, and particularly in Rome, the ideal
of the maman au foyer, however optimistic, was deeply rooted. All
women should evSov pevew (cf. Euripides, Troades 649; Plutarch, Moral.
139 c; Herodas 1. 37 with Headlam's note; Theocritus, Idyll 28;
Menander fr. 592 K.). At Rome this ideal was intimately connected
with the ritual symbol of wool-making which had originally been an
economic necessity for the household and so symbolized all that a good
household stood for, even when the practice was obsolete. The sym
bolism took concrete shape in the spindle and wool carried by a
Roman bride, but it was also evoked throughout the Augustan age
both in commonplace epitaphs (e.g. Carm. Epigr. 52. 8; Laud. Tur.
1. 30; see G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 48 (1958), 21 n. 20) and in literature
(e.g. Vitruvius 6. 7. 2 ; Ovid, Medic. Fac. Femin. 11 ff.). Such was
the intellectual background, where the concept of pudicitia was
typified by lanificium, which Augustus tried to animate by making his
family spin (Suetonius 64. 2) and which L. took advantage of for the
presentation of Lucretia. Certainly L. is not making deliberate propa
ganda for Augustus' moral reforms which were in any case later than
this book. Both are reacting to the same ethos.
222

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

1-57-9

57. 11. turn quidem; the use of quidem, anticipating an adversative to

follow, builds up the sense of impending disaster.
iuuenali ludo: 5. 22. 5. For iuvenalis in L. see Gries, Constancy 46.
58. 2 - 3 . Notice the elaborate variation of the sentences. Tarquinius'
arrival on the scene is described with a complex series of clauses: part.
(exceptus), temporal clause (cum . . . deductus essei), part, (ardens), tem
poral clause (postquam . . . videbantur), abl. abs. (stricto gladio), main
verb. His own words are terse and hissed. His attempt to seduce her is
conveyed in a flurry of historic infinitives in asyndeton (fateri, orare,
miscere, versare), well suited to the passionate nature of the occasion.
satis tuta circa: 'that all around was adequately secure3, circa must
be taken as standing for a substantive 'the vicinity', as intra in 22. 45. 7,
but early editors read satis (omnia) tuta which appears also to be
Ratherius's corrected reading in M. In the order satis tuta omnia re
stores a Livian phrase (cf. 2. 49. 9, 3. 8. 7 tuta omnia fecit 4. 24. 4 et al.;
see Fordyce on Catullus 30. 8), while the plain satis tutum or satis tuta
appears only to be employed in phrases such as satis tutum est with inf.
( 1 . 2 . 3 , 3 . 16.3).
'tace, Lucretia?: a dramatic use, cf, e.g., Plautus, Pseud. 40, 889;
Rudens 117, 123.
58. 3. miscereprecibus minas: Tarquinius speaks with the fervent direct
ness of an Ovid or a Propertius to his mistress; cf. Amores 1. 6. 61 ;
Met. 2. 397.
58. 5. velut victrix: a vexed phrase which need never have been tam
pered with. It means no more than 'as if it had really won 3 with the
foreboding that appearances were deceptive and in the end libido
would not be found to have triumphed. So 3. 14. 2 cum velut victores
tribuni perlatam esse crederent legem but in fact the law had not been
passed. So in the corresponding passage of the Fasti (2. 811) Ovid
writes quid, victor, gaudes? haec te victoria perdet. Conway prints velut vi
victrix, after M. Muller (velut vi trux Vitali; vi victrix Frey; velut vi atrox
Harant), but, as Bonnet observed (Jahrb. f. Class. Phil. 99 (1869),
180), vi is wrong because it had been tried earlier and had failed and,
one might add, because the story is influenced by the course of
action which Hipparchus adopted in Thuc. 6. 54. 4 who fiiaiov
[lev ovSev efiovAeTo Spav, iv Tponw 8e TLVL 6.<f>avel . . . irapCTKva^TO

TTpoTTTjXaKLcov CLVTOV. Bonnet's own suggestion velut vindex is no happier

than others that have been proposed (soluta vinclis Cornelissen; velut
ultrix Markland; utut victrix Schadel; velut sic victrix Seyffert). Other
critics, objecting to the paronomasia vicisset . . . victrix have proposed
alternatives for the former (fregisset Bessler; cf. Prop. 4. 5. 28; elusisset
Freudenberg).
expugnato decore: glossed as pudicitia by the Periocha (cf. 34. 6. 8,
223

I-58-5

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

26. 49. 15 and, for the idea, Ovid, Met. 13. 480). expugno, as a technical
term of Love's warfare, is common in such contexts e.g. Plautus,
True. 171; Cicero, pro Caelio 4 9 ; Seneca, Contr. 2. 3. 1.
ita facto maturatoque opus esse: Lucretia's message is poignant with
its short sentences and archaically colloquial language. Cf., e.g.,
Plautus, Amph. 169, 505, 776; Terence, Heaut. 8 0 ; Lucretius 5. 1053.
58. 6. P. Valerio Volesifilio: 2. 2. 11 n. His addition to the story is due
to family history among the Valerii but may be earlier than its crystal
lization in the work of Valerius Antias.
forte: L. has to make a coincidence, since he has altered for dramatic
reasons the original plot where their meeting was deliberate.
58. 7. lacrimae obortae: claimed by Stacey as evidence for poetic ten
dencies of language in the first decade. It is true that lacrimae obortae
only occurs elsewhere in Virgil, Aeneid 3. 492, outside 40. 8. 2 0 : but
it is not true to say that the word oborior is confined to poetry since it
is used, e.g., by Cicero, pro Ligario 6 lux . . . oboriatur and Terence,
Heaut. 680. As the context of 40. 8. 20 also shows, the phrase is highly
coloured and so appropriate to the present situation but such colouring
is distinct from poeticism.
'satin salve?': 'does it fare with thee well enough?', an old-fashioned
salutation to which F . Leo drew attention in his commentary on
Plautus, Stick. 10. Outside Plautus (Trin. 1177; Menaechmi 776) and
Terence (Eun. 978) it is only found in deliberately archaic and
emotional passages of L. (3. 26. 9, 6. 34. 8, 10. 18. 11 and, in close
proximity to the second use of lacrimae obortae, 40. 8. 20). So Fronto
writing to Verus (113. 3 van den Hout), exclaims in his high-flown
and archaizing language: 'satin salve' utpercontarer? an ut complecterer?
an ut exoscularer? an ut confabularer? In the phrase salve is adverbial as
the Plautine passage shows: sc. agis?
vestigia . . . lecto: Lucre tia employs the plain language of the Elegists;
cf, e.g., Propertius 2. 9. 45 nee domina ulla meoponet vestigia lecto and the
parallels collected on that passage by Shackleton Bailey, especially
Tibullus 1.9.57; Ovid, Amores 1. 8. 97. See also Fraenkel on Aeschylus,
Agamemnon 411. vestigia is, of course, literal, 'visible marks'.
viri alieni: 46. 7. vir here may bear some of the force which it com
monly bears in love elegy'the lover in possession': cf. Catullus 68.
135 ff.; Tibullus 1. 2. 2 1 ; Ovid, Amores 3. 4. 1 : G. Luck, Latin Love
Elegy, 150 n. 1.
corpus . . . animus: 58. 9 n.
mors testis erit: for the form of the expression cf. [Ovid], Heroides
20. 101, 103; Ovid, Tristia 4. 9. 22.
sed date dexteras fidemque: note the d sounds. T h e phrase itself is vivid
and lively, and, as such, well suited to Lucretia's last moments. Cf.,
e.g., Plautus, Curculio 307; Merc. 149; Cicero, post Red. in Sen. 24; and,
224

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

i. 58. 7

before all, Virgil, Aeneid 4. 597 where another woman, also about to
face death at her own hands as a result of the misfortunes of love,
exclaims bitterly 'en dextra fidesque\ The correspondence should not,
however, suggest a common source (cf. Carm. de hello Aeg. 6).
58. 8. hostis pro hospite: 1. 12. 8, 21. 24. 4, 23. 33. 7, 36. 29. 6. The
play on words is almost hysterical (cf. Cicero, Phil. 12. 27) and is
employed by Ovid to very much the same purpose in an estimation
of Paris (Her. 17. 10; cf. 13. 44) hospes an hostis eras?
vi armatus: the words recall, as they were doubtless intended by L.
to recall in order to give a contemporary touch to the scene, the crime
of vis armata, violence committed with the use of arms. The charge is
first mentioned in our sources by Cicero, pro Caecina 55 ff. and the
definition recurs in substantially the same form in Julian's redaction
(Ulpian, Dig. 43. 16. 3. 2-12). See further Berger, R.E., 'Interdictum',
cols. 1680-1; Lenel, Edictum, 467.
si vos viri estis: 41, 3 n. Observe the clipped phrases hostis pro hospite,
priore node, vi armatus, mihi sibique, si vos viri estis. pestiferum governs
mihi sibique.
58. 9. mentempeccare, non corpus: the principles of Roman law are once
more invoked, which recognized a distinction between peccata com
mitted dolo malo and those sine dolo. To prove dolo malo it was necessary
to establish intention (consilium): cf. Cicero, Parad. 20; Seneca, Dial,
4. 26. 5-6. But this passage does not reveal anything about the state of
Roman law under the kings. The ideas expressed in it are merely the
expression of contemporary legal opinion in terms beloved by the
sophistic writers of later Greek tragedy. So far from reproducing a
point of law from regal times, mentem peccare, non corpus is a Latin ver
sion of such subtleties as 17 yAaiaa' 6fiu>nox\ r) 8e (f>p7jv ava){ioTos. In the
same spirit Publilius Syrus (640) voluntas impudicam non corpus facit or
Seneca, Phaedra 735 mens impudicam facere non casus solet echo Greek
tragic antitheses.
See further E. Wilhelm-Hooijberg, Peccatum, 33-34 with H. J.
Rose's review in Class. Rev. 70 (1956), 76; G. Luck, Latin Love Elegy,
165-6. It is interesting to compare Lucretia's argument with the
casuistry of Ovid in Amores 3. 14 who says that it is not Corinna's act
of infidelity which constitutes a peccatum and destroys her pudicitia
but the defiant openness with which she commits it.
supplicio non libero: it was widely held that adultery so defiled the
woman that any subsequent progeny would be themselves con
taminated. Hence the woman had to die.
58. 10. vos . . . ego me: notice the emphatic word-order.
58. 11. in corde defigit: a forcefully rhetorical periphrasis for 'stabbed'
(ad Herennium. 4. 65; cf. Cicero, in Catil. 1. 16 (sicam) in corpore defigere).
58. 12. prolapsa in volnus: 2. 46. 4 n. A comparison with Ovid, Fasti
811432

225

I. 58. 12

T A R Q U I N I U S SUPERBUS

2. 833-4 (with Bomer's note), shows that L. has faithfully reproduced

the version of an historian writing before the assassination of Caesar.
The dignity of Caesar's death was famous and was an inspiration to
later writers who used it as a model for similar scenes. Suetonius
describes it in detail (82. 2 ) : sinistra manu sinum ad ima crura deduxit
quo honestius caderet etiam inferiore corporis parte velata. Unlike Ovid, who
may also be influenced by Euripides, Hecuba 568-70 (cf. Pliny, EpisU
4. 11. 9), L. gives no hint of such modest susceptibilities in Lucretia.
conclamat: 4. 40. 3 n.
59, 1. manante cruore: see C.Q. 9 (1959), 217. Though ignoring the
dignity of Caesar's end, L. cannot help remembering the picture
graphically described by Cicero {Phil. 2. 28 ff.) when a later Brutus,
a later restorer of liberty, held aloft the dripping dagger and invoked
the name of Cicero.
per hunc . . . sanguinem iuro: the germ of the oath lies in the annual
oath taken by the consuls in leges (2. 1.911.) which was supposed to go
back to this specific occasion. In fact, however, the form in which L.
presents it is gravely suspect and gives ground for believing that it is
no more than an imaginative reconstruction. D . H . 4. 70 uses quite
other terms which, in itself, suggests that the precise terms of the
oath have no respectable ancestry. T h e consular oath, coupled with
the conventional hellenistic belief that such an oath was the guarantee
of democracy (cf., e.g., Lycurgus, in Leocr. 79), was an adequate
aetiology. More important is it that the language of L. betrays spurious
archaisms. T o swear per sanguinem appears to be unparalleled in
Latin (Lasaulx, DerEid bet den Romern, 8-9 but cf. Sallust, Cat. 22), for
although it was usual to invoke di inferi as well as di superi (Virgil,
Aeneid 12. 176 ff.) or to pledge what one held in highest honour (e.g.
ossa patris: cf. Horace, Odes 2. 8. 10; Propertius 2. 20. 15; Ovid,
Heroides 3. 103), this has no counterpart. Moreover, although cum
conjuge et omni liberorum stirpe conforms to the standard formula used
for <f>vyrj in Hellenistic times (e.g. Dittenberger, SylL 194 (Amphipolis)
<f>eoyiv . . . /cat avros /cat TOS natSas; earlier examples are quoted
in Page, Sappho and Alcaeus, 165; J . P. Barron, J.H.S. 82 (1962), 2 :
the offence is always treason), other phrases are maladroit, exsequi is
found only here with a personal object in the sense of expellere, cf.
persequL Frigell [Epilegomena^ 75) quotes instances where it is used to
translate the Greek /c77/z77ti/, particularly in funeral contexts. But
more to the point is the frequency of the word in legal contexts as
a synonym for vindicare or ulcisci with iniurias or the like as object (e.g.
Ulpian, Dig. 29. 5. 3. 3, 47. 10. 35). L. has misapplied the word
intentionally to give quaintness and antiquity to the formula. T h e
same reasons guarantee the reading dehinc (only here in L.), which is
226

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

i. 59. 1
avoided by classical writers (Cicero, Caesar, Catullus) and which,
although occurring often in Plautus and Terence, is only employed by
self-conscious stylists such as Sallust and Apuleius. It must be intended
to carry the same meaning as denique. Finally the whole phrase ferro,
igni, quacumque vi possim (2. 10. 4) is semi-proverbial (cf. Cicero, Phil.
11. 37 ; Suetonius, Claud. 2 1 : cf. re/xvo. . . /catco in Greek; see Fraenkel
on Aeschylus, Agam. 849).
59. 2. novum . . . ingenium: because he had appeared a dullard until
that moment.
utpraeceptum erat: cas they were instructed5 but it may as well convey
a suggestion of the concepta verba or regular formula which every party
to an oath or a prayer repeated after it had been rehearsed by the
principal (praeire).
versi: 2. 40. 5. A tragic -nepnreTeia.
59. 5. The archetype must have read pari praesidio relicto Collatiae ad
portas which is reproduced with various further corruptions in the
manuscripts. The account of D.H. 4. 71 provides guidance, where
Brutus advises Sta <f>v\aKrj$ ra? 77JAa? xcofJLV ^va fA7)&*v GUCT^TCU TapKv-

vios. Admittedly the scene in D.H. is Rome, whereas L. has trans

posed it to Collatia, but there is no doubt that the incident is funda
mentally the same. In that case ad portas deleted by Walters and
Bayet is secure and there can be no suggestion of leaving a guard for
Lucretia's father (patri praesidio relicto Bayet, Verdiere). Livian usage
favours the simple abl. abs. praesidio relicto C. a. p. (1. 14. 7, 3. 23. 3,
5. 41. 5) and it is hard to conjecture anything with pars which har
monizes satisfactorily with that usage (pars praesidio relicti J. F. Gronovius, Burmann on Suet. Julius 27, Rossbach; parte praesidio relicta
s
Heerwagen). It is more likely thatpar-% is a dittography of the opening
letters of praesidio influenced by unconscious anticipation of the suc
ceeding ceteri. Read inde praesidio relicto Collatiae ad portas custodibusque
datis . . . ceteri. . . profecti.
59. 6. quacumque incedit: 59. 13, 4. 13. 3, 4. 38. 4, 4. 59. 3 ; cf. Plautus,
Miles 92 quaqua incedit.
59 7. in forum curritur: cf. the scenes of confusion which followed the
assassination of Julius Caesar (cf. especially Plutarch, Caesar 67). There
is no record of what M. Brutus did savin his two speeches to the crowd.
The similarity of contents between 59.8-10 and D.H. 4. 77-83 suggests
that there was already in the sources a familiar oration by Brutus the
Liberator. If so, it is more likely that M. Brutus would have made
play with that, rather than that L. should here be echoing anything
actually said in 44 B.C. although his language {de vi ac libidine, de
stupro infando, de miserabili caede) is the political vocabulary of the late
Republic.
227

i. 59- 7

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

praeco: cf. Aul. Gell. 15. 27. 2.

ad tribunum celerum: 15. 8 n. In Cicero, de Rep. 2. 47 Brutus is a
privatus. Both by its source and by the fact that a man who had been
regarded as half-witted would not have been entrusted with any
responsible command, that must be the original version. Later con
stitutionalists, however, anxious to prove even by legal fiction the
legitimate development of the Roman constitution, accepted the
equation of Celeres with equites and proposed a Tribunus Celerum as
the precursor of the Magister Equitum. It would have been improper for
a non-magistrate to hold a contio. Notice the mixed or. recta and or.
obi. which follows. The most telling points (addita . . . memorata) are
picked out by being stated directly (cf. 3. 58. 7-9).
59. 8. nequaquam . . .Juerat: 'not at all in keeping with the spirit and
intelligence which he had pretended until that moment'.
Tricipitini: i.e. Sp. Lucretius. The family line ceases in the fourth
century (3. 8. 2, 4. 30. 4) but the cognomen cannot be much older than
that period, although it commemorates the family cult of a threeheaded deity of which there are several examples in Italic and kindred
worship (H. Usener, Rh. Mus. 58 (1903), 176).
59. 9. fossas cloacasque: 56. 2.
opijices ac lapicidas: stronger than 'mechanics and masons', since
the words imply slavery (Sallust, Catil. 50. 1 opijices atque servitia; cf.
Plautus, Capt. 736, 944 for quarries as places of punishment for slaves).
Evidently slogans from the politics of the late Republic.
59. 10. caedes: 48. 4. Jilia: 48. 6.
ultores parentum di\ elsewhere L. writes invocantibus parentum furias
(59. 13) and penates irati (48. 7). The identification of di parentes or
parentum with the Penates is common (Servius, adAen. 2. 514), although
properly the spirits of departed ancestors form only a part of the
household cult. Roman devotion held the family dead in honour
and sacrifice was paid to them at the annual festival of the Parentalia.
L. emphatically reiterates the vengeance of the di parentes both for
dramatic and moral reasons as an illustration of the disastrous con
sequences of dishonouring one's parents. So a law of Servius Tullius
(Festus 260): siparentem puer verberit, ast olle plorassit [parens], puer divis
parentum sacer esto. See Fordyce on Catullus 64. 404; H.Jordan, Hermes
15 (1880), 530-6; Wissowa, Religion, 232-9; Weinstock, R.E., 'Penates',
cols. 425-6; R. Lattimore, Themes in Greek and Latin Epitaphs, 94.
59. 11. 'which immediate anger at events suggested to him but which
historians find it embarrassing to recount'. For indignitas cf. 3. 38. 11,
5. 45. 6. L. probably wrote subiecit (Walsh).
imperium regi abrogaret: the technical phrase for abrogating the
imperium of a magistrate (5. 11. 13; Cicero, ad Q. F. 2. 3. 1 (Lentulus);
Veil. Pat. 2. 18. 6 (Sulla); see Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 629). The
228

TARQUINIUS SUPERBUS

1-59- "

power of the king was by nature distinct in kind from that of a

magistrate but this polite fiction is in keeping with the tendency to
see the transition from the king to the consuls as part of a continuous
development and to suppose that the power of the kings rested on the
same ultimate grounds as that of the consuls (46. 1 n.: U. Coli,
Regnum). For the contemporary issue see 2. 2. 2 - n n.
cum coniuge ac liberis: 59. 1 n.
59. 12. inde: there, i.e. the army encamped at Ardea.
praefecto urbis: Lydus, de Mens, 1. 21 W.; Tacitus, Annals 6.11: 'namque antea profectis domo regibus ac mox magistratibus, ne urbs sine imperio foret in tempus deligebatur qui ius redderet ac subitis mederetur;
feruntque ab Romulo Dentrem Romulium, post ab Tullo Hostilio
Numam Marcium et ab Tarquinio Superbo Spurium Lucretium impositos'. The topic had no little contemporary interest since the office
it was not a popularly elected magistracyrevived by Julius Caesar
became semi-permanent under Augustus and Republican precedents
were doubtless unearthed and quoted by the lawyers (Syme, Tacitus,
432). The present passage by its neutral tone would seem to have
been written before 25 when Messalla Corvinus resigned the office
after five days on the grounds that it was an incivilis potestas (Jerome,
in Euseb.). It may, however, be doubted whether the regal precedents
are authentic. The title implies a distinction between urbs and ager
Romanus which is unrealistic at this date. Besides, Sp. Lucretius himself
is of dubious historicity and it is perhaps no accident that the first
certainly recorded holder of the office is Sp. Larcius (cos. 506, 490) in
487 (D.H. 8. 64. 3). Another tradition, known to D.H. 4. 76. 1 and
84. 5, assigned Lucretius the role not of praefectus urbi but of interrex>
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 wellconsul, 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 genuineand
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)-

Gjerstad (Legends and Facts, 45 ff.) rests his case for the unhistoricity of Brutus
on the familiar ground that the gens Junta in historical times was plebeian, but the
authentic Fasti of the early Republic are so full of plebeian names that his argument
is quite void.

232

BOOK 2
Liberi iam hinc populi Romani. Liberty is the theme of the second book.
The ancient legends of Rome are retold in the light of Rome's new
found liberty as they illustrate the nature of it or reveal the dangers
entailed by it. For liberty is a complex possession. It can only be en
joyed under the rule of law (cf. Cicero, pro Cluent. 146: see Wirzubski,
Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome), So L. devotes much space to the
organization of the constitution whose balanced system with its
principles of collegiality and provocatio did much in Roman eyes to
safeguard liberty (1. 711, 8. 1-8, 18. 4-11). But other threats could
arise. A number of such threats to liberty occur from within and
from without (Collatinus, the conspiracy of the Vitellii and Aquilii,
Valerius Poplicola; the Tarquinienses, Porsenna, the Latins) and
L. relates each one as a separate, dramatic episode exemplifying the
moral that ceaseless vigilance is required to maintain liberty. In the
second half of the book the threat to liberty remains no longer in
the shape of individual assaults but in the more insidious form of
internal discord (cf. 1.6), springing in the first instance from the
debt-problem (nexum). The threat materializes in different ways
as a demand for the tribunate (22-33. 3)> as an attempt on the city
from outside (34-40 Coriolanus), as a projected coup (41 Sp. Cassius)
until finally the life-and-death struggle against Veii brings the
Romans together under the leadership of the Fabii. The book, then,
has a continuous refrain, just as Book 4 is characterized by the refrain
of moderatio and Book 5 by pietas, and it is given an overall symmetry
by the two big 'Homeric' battles (19-20 Lake Regillus; 45-47 the
battle with the Etruscans). In this way L. endeavours to overcome the
disjointedness from which annalistic or episodic history is apt to
suffer and he introduces the underlying concepts in the short secondary
preface (1. 1-6) with which he opens his account of the Republic.
Within the different sections the material is so arranged as to provide
variety by the alternation of internal and external affairs.
The material at L.'s disposal for the early years was largely but not
exclusively legendaryHoratius Codes, Cloelia, Scaevola, the Battle
of Lake Regillus itself. But not everything in the received history is
suspect. The conventional chronology acquires strong independent
support from external sources (21. 5 n., 54. 1 n.). The archaeological
evidence which suggests that the cultural break with Etruria did not
occur until c. 450 and which has led Bloch and others to down-date
233

INTRODUCTION
the expulsion of the Tarquins by half a century, is susceptible of a
quite different explanation. At the end of the sixth century Etruria
was divided into two distinct areasthe hellenized coastal cities, such
as Tarquinii, Veii, and Caere, and the great inland cities like Glusium.
T h e former had friendly relations with the leading Greek cities such
as G u m a e ; the latter pushing down from the interior were involved in
an aggressive expansion that led them into Campania and Latium
and brought them into conflict with Gumae and Rome. Rome's ties
were solely with the coastal cities as her pottery shows. U n d e r the
Tarquins her relations with these neighbouring Etruscan cities were
friendly and prosperous, and Superbus in particular by his seizure of
Gabii and control of the Via Latina seems to have been anxious to safe
guard the coastal strip from infiltration whether by hill-people like the
Aequi or by imperialist Etruscans from the interior. T h e expulsion of
the Tarquins was a purely domestic matter which need not have upset
commercial alinements. Rome, by her commanding position on the
river and land routes, continued to trade with the coastal cities of
Etruria, and, as the names of her leading families and the tokens of her
political institutions demonstrate, did not turn her back on her Etruscan
past. T h e break with Etruria when it came was caused not by the
expulsion of any particular family but by the jealous emergence of
Veii, as an enemy rather than a rival. It was Veii, not Etruria as a
whole, which cut Rome off from her commercial links and threatened
to strangle her. T h e break was also a matter of politics. After Porsenna's
assault Rome seems to have been governed by a succession of plebeian
consuls most of whose roots were in Etruria. It suggests a policy of
subservience to Etruria and expansion at the expense of Latium. T h e
policy was only reversed by a concatenation of events. A crushing
defeat by the Volscians (concealed by annalistic sources but preserved
in an archaeological notice embedded in Festus), the conspiracy of
Sp. Gassius which discredited the plebeian, pro-Etruscan forces at
Rome, and the decline of central Etruria all played their part.
T h e main lines are credible enough. We may believe that the
Tarquins attempted to secure their own restoration. We may believe
that Rome was attacked by Porsenna although not for the reasons
stated (9. 1 n.). We may believe that the Tarquins eventually found
refuge with Aristodemus at Gumae.
A good summary of the historical issues, with bibliography, is given
by B. Gombet Farnoux, Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 69 (1957), 7-44. See
also Bloch, R..L. 37 (1959), 118-32.
1-6. Preface
Liberty was secured at the right moment; if it had been won earlier,
the state would not have been ripe for it.
234

509 B.C.

2. I. I

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 priesthoodat
Rome to the rex sacrorum, as its holder was properly known (2. 1 n.).
The exact extent of these functions is hard to discover since the rex was
at some date, perhaps in the third century, largely overshadowed
and superseded by the Pontifex Maximus. As evidence of the original
position of the rex may be cited the Regia, later the home of the
Pontifex Maximus, the custom whereby the Vestals, later under the
supervision of the Pontifex Maximus, came on certain days to wake
the rex (Servius, adAen. 10. 228), and the leading position which the rex
held in the religious order of precedence (Festus 198 L.). As late
an> c. 275 the religious calendar is dated by the rex (Pliny, jV.//. 11. 186).
The chief duty of the rex concerned the two festivals on 24 March and
237

2. 2. I

5 09 B.C.

24 MayQJuando) 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 familyHipparchus, son of Charmus. So L. Tarquinius Collatinus is m a d e to
give up the consulshipwhich in historical reality he never held
( i . 6o. 4 n.)because, like Hipparchus, his name had unfortunate
associations and because the state could not with comfort contain
so prominent a figure.
There is, therefore, a Greek model behind the story. It will have
taken shape with the other hellenized legends in the late third century.
In the earliest recoverable version (cf. Cicero, de Rep. 2. 5 3 - 5 4 ;
Brutus 5 3 ; de Off. 3. 40) Collatinus' offence was simply his name but,
instead of abdicating, his imperium was forcibly abrogated by Brutus.
In L., on the other hand (cf. Pisofr. 19 P.), he resigns voluntarily. Here
is a constitutional issue. T h e people had both in theory and in practice
enjoyed the right to abrogate pro-consular imperia (cf. 27. 20. 11 (209
B.C.); 29. 19. 6 (204 B.C.); Asconius 78 C. (107 B.G.) : notice also the
Lex Cassia of 104 quern populus damnasset cuive imperium abrogasset: see
Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 628-30). T h e story of Collatinus was i m
proved' to provide a classic precedent. In making Collatinus resign
L. tacitly rejects the doctrine that a magistrate's imperium could be
abrogated once it had been granted by the people. This is too radical
an innovation for L. himself and the agreement of D . H . shows that
it goes back to a Sullan annalist. T h e motive will be that in 87 the
Senate had abrogated the consulship of Cinna (Veil. Pat. 2.20. 3 ; Livy
Epit. 79). This was the first occasion on which consular, as opposed to
pro-consular, imperium was abrogated. T h e annalist challenged this
right by denying the precedent on which it was based. Collatinus was
not deposed: he resigned. In the struggles of the 8o's we know that
Licinius Macer sympathized with Cinna.
Other authors implicate Collatinus in the subsequent conspiracy
(D.H. 5. 9 ; Plutarch, Poplkola 7; Zonaras 7. 12) but L. keeps the
episode self-contained. It is carefully constructed and poignandy nar
rated. T h e story is introduced by a sententia which serves to generalize
it as an instance of the problems posed by libertas (nescio an . . . modum
excesserint). T h e public gossip (3-4) is balanced by Brutus' speech
(5-7). Both are phrased in terse, compelling terms. Brutus moving
from indirect to direct speech with increasing rhetorical power (cf.
regium . . . regium; id qfficere, id obstare) breaks out into a fine direct
appeal to Collatinus himself (7 nn.). Collatinus' deliberations are
appropriately involved (9-11 postquam . . . cessit) and the whole in
cident is rounded off by two simple, matter-of-fact statements.
See Klotz 2 2 0 - 1 ; Schachermeyr, R.E., 'Tarquinius (8)'.
2 . 2 . an nimium: N seems to have read an nimis which is to be preferred.
nimis qualifies muniendo, minimisque rebus being linked with undique.
239

2. 2. 2

5 09 B.C.

'I can not help wondering whether they did not go too far in their
excessive protection of liberty in every quarter and in the smallest
matters.'
2 . 3 . enim: for this use of enim introducing a particular example of a
general thesis cf. namque (Fraenkel, Horace, 185) and the Greek /ecu yap.
offenderit: the perf. subj., meaning 'although there had been no single
offence at any time', may be kept. Cf. Caesar, B.G. 1. 26. 2.
tamquam alieni: the meaning of these words is obscure. T h e general
sense is 'not even the passage of time had enabled Superbus to forget
the throne but he had forcibly reclaimed it as a family heirloom'. If
tamquam alieniis right, it must mean 'as being in the hands of a foreigner'
(i.e. Servius Tullius). tamquam is normally used when a supposition
contradicts the facts'he used my books as if they were his own'
(tamquam sua)but occasionally it is used merely to provide a true
reason'they were looked up to as being good citizens' (4. 60. 8
tamquam bonos cives). Time could not obliterate Tarquin's memory of
the crown and how it had passed to other hands. I am not wholly
happy about the text even so. Tit tier's alienati for alieni (Weidner,
Weinkauff) does not affect the main difficulty. Boot's (solium) quamquam alieni regni makes good Latin but is absurd with the succeeding
hereditatem. tamquam alieni might be a gloss on velut hereditatem. For
the latter cf. Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 3. 84.
2. 4. datus: sermonem dare is only found here. Editors compare 3. 34. 6
rumores editas, but edere is not parallel for dare. Cornelissen suggested
dilatus (cf. 34. 49. 6 ; Tacitus, Annals 1. 4 ; Nepos, Dion 10). Ruperti
diditus. In such contexts, however, the mot juste is sermonem serere
(3. 17. 10; Plautus, Miles 700; cf. 3. 43. 2, 7. 39. 6) and satus is the
easiest correction.
2 . 7 . 'hunc tu9: the mounting passion erupts into a direct and personal
appeal to Collatinus, heightened by the emphatic juxtaposition and
placing of personal pronouns (tu . . . tua; tuas tibi. . . tui auctore me).
For similar transitions to direct speech attended by a specific address
to a person cf. 3. 9. n , 6. 6. 12, 15. 9, 8. 34. 11, 24. 22. 17 (Lam
bert). For exonera metu cf. Terence, Phormio 843; Seneca, Epist. 86. 3.
A speech was evidently one of the traditional elements in the story
(Cicero, Brutus 53) but these touches are distinctively Livian.
2. 8. incluserat: claimed as a poetic expression but cf. Cicero, pro Rab.
Post. 48, where editors read intercludit. Silences at moments of climax
are characteristic of L.'s narrative technique (3. 47. 6 n.).
2. 10. Lavinium: why to Lavinium? T h e Tarquins are known to have
had contacts with Tarquinii, Caere, and Gabii but Lavinium is not
otherwise connected with them. T h e traditions of a branch of the
Tarquinii or Tarquitii might be suspected but there is no evidence of
any of that name being settled at Lavinium (L. R. Taylor, Voting
240

5 09 B.C.

2. 2. 10

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
fatherwith 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 anecdotethe 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

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
aristocracyall 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, Taraciaall look
attempts to explain a name. The most westerly point of the Campus
Martius, where it is enclosed by the great bend in the Tiber opposite
the island and where there was a subterranean cult of Dis (Val. Max.
2. 4. 5), was called Tarentum. Ancient scholars were prolific in their
etymologies (Festus 478 L . ; Servius, adAen. 8. 63) but neither ancient
nor modern scholarship has succeeded in solving it. T h e different
accounts of the acquisition of the Campus Martius by the R o m a n
people are to be viewed in connexion with the enigmatic T a r e n t u m .
See Platner-Ashby s.v. 'Campus M a r t i u s ' ; ' T a r e n t u m ' ; F. Castagnoli, Mem. Accad. Lincei, 1948, 93-111; J. le Gall, Le Culte du Tibre,
96-104.
5. 2. fuit: can hardly mean 'became', 'was known as from then on'.
H . Richards proposed//.
Insula Tiberina
It is probable that the island was formed as a result of silting, as
the Romans believed, and there is no geological evidence for the
fashionable view that the heart of the island is an outcrop of tufa rock.
Sand silting was common before the Tiber was scientifically regulated.
The explanation of the legend that crops were thrown into the river
is harder to seek. The change from a pastoral to an arable economy
must have taken place under the Tarquins (Clerici, Economia e
Finanza, 5 8 ; cf. confarreatio) and conservative opposition might have
been manifested in some such gesture. T h a t is more satisfactory than
to suppose with Castagnoli that the epithet Trvpo<f>6po$ applied to
Tarentum because of its sulphurous springs was misconstrued as
irvpo<f>6po$. There was little, if any, building on the island before it
was taken over as the centre of the cult of Aesculapius in 291 B.C. See
Besnier, Ulle Tiberine, 11 ff.; L. A. Holland, Janus, 180 fT.
5. 3 . tenui: 1. 4. 6.
mediis caloribus: 5. 31. 5 n.
5. 4. credo: an observation of L.'s own. T h e major construction was to
245

2- 5 - 4

509 B.C.

transform the island into the shape of a ship, complete with stern,
mast, &c. T h e surviving walls belong to the period 60-40 B.C., after
the date when Licinius Macer was writing. Less imposing repairs must,
of course, have been carried out in 291. The temples which L. alludes
to were, in addition to those of Aesculapius and Tiberinus, those of
Juppiter Jurarius, Semo Sancus, Faunus, and Veiovis. No porticus is
identified on the island.
tarn . . .firmaque: the text can only be translated as 'so that the
region should be as high as it is now and strong enough to bear
temples and porticoes as well as homes', which does grave violence
to tarn. \Uam is right, the point must be that the R o m a n engineers were
anxious to secure that the island should have strength as well as
height: 'that so high a region should be strong enough for heavy
buildings'. Either -que must be deleted (Novak) or read firma quoque
templis ac: for the misplacing and corruption of quoque cf. 3. 65. 6,
4. 56. 13 n. quoque is awkwardly placed in the manuscripts as it is.
There is no self-evident reason why the ground would need to be
more solid to support temples than houses. With -que, iam (Duker,
Gronovius, Ruperti) would be an unavoidable correction for tarn.
For firmus with dat. cf. Tacitus, Agricola 35.
5. 5. direptis: the narrative is resumed by picking u p the words with
which the digression opened (5. 1-2).
patri de liberis: the juxtaposition serves to underline the tragedy of
the situation. T h e same device is used by Virgil (Aeneid 6. 819 ff.) to
describe the same scene.
dedit: 'allotted'.
5. 8. supplicium: it were superfluous to seek constitutional propriety
in tales of this nature, although a process of law is implied in 5. 5
[damnatx).
voltusque et os: define pater more closely. Cf. 5. 42. 4.
eminente: 21. 35. 7. According to D.H., Plutarch, Polybius (6. 54),
and Valerius Maximus Brutus displayed no emotion. Editors have
tried to square the text of L. by emendation (emineretne animus patrius
Stroth; non eminente Sartorius; minime eminente Koch) but emineo is used
only where an emotion or the like is conspicuous and the pendant
ablative absolute characteristically conveys a detail of substance (cf.
1. 46. 9). L. has altered his original to give a more poignant ending.
Cf. the similar scene in the story of Coriolanus.
5. 9. pecunia: financial rewards for the information leading to the
detection of conspiracies against the state were standard in historical
times (32. 26. 14, 39. 19. 3).
5. 10. vindicta: for the process see above. T h e history of the term
remains in doubt. In the parallel legal process vindicatio, legis actio per
sacramentum in rem, if the object claimed was movable, the plaintiff
246

509 B.C.

2.5.10

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 referenceex 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 libertasthe alleged ambitions
of the consul Poplicola himself. The grounds for suspicion were afforded
by the age-old association of the Valerii with the Velia. The dwellings
and burial-grounds of the gentes were in early times local. The Claudii
continued to be buried sub Capitolio well down into the Republic
(Suetonius, Tiberius 1), and the Valerii were buried vrf OueAiW (D.H.
5. 48; Cicero, de Legibus 2. 58; Plutarch, Q.R. 79; cf. the elogia of
Messala Niger and Messalla Corvinus which came from the same area).
Equally strong is the tradition that the Valerii resided there. In addi
tion to the present story Cicero (deHar. Resp. 16) says that Poplicola was
given a house in Velia by public subscription; Valerius Antias (fr.
17 P. from Asconius) tells the same story of (M.') Valerius (Volesus)
Maximus, dictator in 494, presumably a Valerian variant to mitigate the
suggestion that Valerii could even be suspected oiregnum. The theme of
the dominating palace may be hellenistic; cf. Seneca, Thyestes 642 ff.
250

5 09 B.C.

2. 7- 5

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,KOVT 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 originand 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 exceptedpresumably 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 Scaevolailia tria Romani nominis
prodigia atque miracuta. T h e war with Porsenna is genuine enough.
Clusium (5. 33. 1-3 n.) and the inland cities of Etruria pursued a
different policy and enjoyed a different civilization from coastal cities
like Caere and Rome. They were aggressive and thrusting. Their
expansion into Campania at this period can be documented in detail.
With the collapse of a strong central government at Rome, the plain
of Latium was left unguarded. Porsenna took his opportunity, broke
down from the hills, and captured Rome. Such, in brief, are the facts
and a dim memory of them survived (Tacitus, Hist. 3. 72. 1; Pliny,
N.H. 34. 139: see Syme, Tacitus, 398).
Falsification played havoc with them. Patriotic sentiment could
not allow Rome to be captured. Rome is made to hold out gallantly
and Porsenna from being a ruthless foe is turned into a sentimental
king with an admiration for R o m a n virtues which passes into friend
ship. Porsenna is regarded as king of all Etruria and his attack on
Rome supposed to be motivated by a desire to restore the Tarquins to
their throne. Such an alliance makes nonsense of the facts. Caere,
Tarquinii, Rome, Cumae were all at the mercy of Porsenna. If Por
senna had acted to aid the Tarquins, it is inconceivable that they
should eventually have found refuge with Aristodemus at Cumae.
With the exception of the intrusive chapter 11 L. welds the material
together into a unit opened and closed by summaries of the military
situation (9. 1-8; 14-15) and containing in the middle the three
chief acts. These acts are in themselves similarly constructed. T h e
climax of each is a topographical detail (10. 12, 13. 5, 13. 11), the
nub of each is a moral {fides, audacia, constantia: notice the repeated
virtus (10. 12, 12. 14, 12. 15, 13. 6, 9, 11)), and each emphasizes that
such qualities are inspired by the love of liberty (10. 8). T h e three
stories form a tricolon crescendo leading up to Cloeliasupra Coclites
Muciosque (Cloeliae) /acinus esse. T h e phase is concluded by Porsenna's
recognition of Roman liberty (15). This arrangement is L.'s work
manship.
See the judicious essay by Ehlers, R.E., 'Porsenna'; Bayet, Recherches
philosophiques, 1931, 264 ff.; Burck 54; Hofmann, Livius-Interpretationen
63-64.
9 . 1. Lartem Porsennam: for the name, which occurs elsewhere only
as a Roman nomen (C.I.L. 6. 32919 Porsina) but is pure Etruscan in
morphology, see Ehleis, loc. cit.
255

5 08 B.C.

2. g. 1-3

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

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 Lucretiusfor both men were to the south of the
Etruscan position near the Porta Esquilinabut it is not what we would
expect L. to say (Glareanus followed by many editors would substitute
Valerium for Lucretium) and we are left with a very hazy picture of the
battle. T h e names of the commanders are, of course, merely supplied
at random from the Fasti and all the military details (cohortes, manipuli)
anachronistic.
1 1 . 4 . ultor . . . vindicem : the distinction is between private and official
vengeance; cf. Veil. Pat. 2. 7. 6.
1 1 . 9 . concurrit: not elsewhere used with ex insidiis. T h e stock phrase is
consurgere ex insidiis (50. 6 ; Caesar, B.C. 3. 37. 5), which Aritzenius,
followed by Cornelissen and R. Schneider, proposed to read here.
Normally the scene of the ambuscade and of the ensuing battle are the
same, but on this occasion Herminius who lay concealed had to cover
some ground before joining the assault, concurrere, therefore, rather
than consurgere fits the context.
261

2. II. 9

5 08 B.C.

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
</)7](JLV. The cognomen was probably inspired by the model of King
Codrus of Athens (see above). For the name and its corruptions in
Latin see J . G. Griffith, C.R. 1 (1951), 138-g. It will not have been
original. It is notable that the moneyer [- Mucius?] Cordus issued in
conjunction with Q,. Fufius Calenus between 71 and 67 coins with
-the unique legend HONOS and VIRTUS (cf. 12. 15 virtuti honos; 13. 6
honorata virtute: Sydenham no. 797). See Syme, Historia 4 (1955),
cum sub regibus esset: explaining servientem. Objection has been taken
to the phrase, chiefly by Tittler (Jahrb.f. Class. Phil. 75 (1857), 800),
Cornelissen, and Karsten, the last two of whom would perform further
surgery to the sentence but it is evident from itaque that the sentence
was involved and shapeless as written, itaque is resumptive, picking up
the thread of an over-long sentence as at 8. 11. 9.
12. 4 . ignaris omnibus: abl. abs. 'without telling anyone'; cf. 7. 5. 3.
See Wackernagel, Vorlesungen iiber Syntax^ 2. 271.
fortuna: 'the present plight of the city would lend plausibility to the
charge'.
12. 5 . Hransire Tiberim!: Mucius' sentiments recall Virgil, Aeneid
9. 186-7, 2 4 0 - 3 (Nisus). The resemblance of situation and thought
suggests that for the contents of Mucius' speech, L., like Virgil, has
263

2. 12. 5

5 08 B.C.

turned to Ennius. T h e language is equally dignified. For si di iuvant

cf. Plautus, Capt. 587.
12. 7. eum(que) : a connexion is needed but Schaffer's et eum is as neat.
12. 8. concursu: 1. 48. 2 n.
fam quoque: 7. 27. 4, 36. 5. 7 'even so', to be taken closely with inter
minas.
inter minas'. L. calls on a store of ready-made phrases to describe
Mucius' plight. For inter . . . minas cf. Lucan 9. 570; for metuendus
magis quammetuens cf. Sallust's description of Adherbal (Jugurtha 20. 2 ) :
placido ingenio, opportunus iniuriae (13. 9 n.), metuens magis quam metuendus.
12. 9. 'Romanus sum' inquit 'civis': Cobet objected that Mucius'
citizen-status was irrelevant. Unlike St. Paul he was not declaring it
in order to invoke the protection of R o m a n law. He r e a d : cRomanus
sum' inquit; 'cives C. Murium vocant\ But L. is making Mucius answer in
tones of defiant pride and the word civis, postponed to the end of the
sentence after inquit carries full emphatic force. Pride in Roman citizen
ship would indeed have been anachronistic for the sixth century but
in the second and first centuries, above all for Greek audiences,
citizenship was something to be honoured. T h e remainder of Mucius'
challenge equally catches the ear. Notice the juxtaposed hostis hostem
and the chiastic mortem . . . caedem.
For etfacere et pati cf. 24. 38. 2 ; Cicero, in Pisonem 1 1 ; for the use
of the perf. subj. in prohibitions (nullam . . . timueris) cf. 1. 32. 7 n . ;
animos gessi cf. 1. 25. 3, 28. 9 ; Virgil, Aeneid 9. 309; for petentium decus
cf. 26. 48. 11 ; Horace, EpisL 1. 17. 4 2 ; Lucan 1. 174; for accingere in
(only here in L.) cf. Statius, Silv. 4. 4. 48.
Confirmation of the tragic character of Mucius' remarks is to be
found by examining the clausulae. In normal narrative passages the
dactylic clausula is favoured: here there is an unprecedented pro
portion of cretic-iambic and similar rhythms. I select the most ob
vious : Murium vocant . . . occidere volui . . . mortem minus dnimi est. . .
petentium decus . . . dimices tuo . . . indicimus helium . . . proeUum timueris .. .
singulis res erit.
12. 10. capite dimices: if the text is right, it must be explained as an
example of deliberately unusual language, for elsewhere only dimicare
de capite is found (cf. Cicero, pro Sestio 1) or de vita (24. 26. 7 ; Sisenna
fr. 28 P.; Cicero,pro Archia 29). capite decernere (ad Att. 10. 9. 2) is no
true parallel, for the prefix de- implies the abl. nor are examples of
dimico with the plain abl. periculo (Cicero, de Domo 66; Balb. 25), con
tention (Hirtius, E.G. 8. 29. 1), victoria (9. 40. 18). Read perhaps
(de} capite.
12. 11. et cum singulis'. Boot, comparing Cicero, pro S. Rose. Amer.
84 tecum enim mihi res est, deleted et but L. is making a different point.
Where Cicero is emphasizing 'my business is with you and you alone',
264

5 08 B.C.

2. 12. II

L. is saying not merely that their business is with the king alone but
that they are going to attempt it singly. T h e two separate points
demand et.
12. 12. infensus: i. 53. 10 n.
per ambages: 1. 54. 8 n.
12. 13. 'en tibV: cf. Catullus 6 1 . 156 with KrolFs note.
12. 14. hostilia ausus: 1. 59. 4 ; Sallust, Jug. 3. 2, 88. 5 ; Tacitus, Hist.
4. 15. 2, 20. 4.
made: 4. 14. 7, 7. 10. 4, 7. 36. 5, 10. 40. 11, 22. 49. 9, 23. 15. 14.
T h e meaning and origin of this much disputed phrase seems to have
been satisfactorily settled. See Wiinsch, Rh. Mus. 69 (1914), 127 ff.;
Palmer, C.Q. 32 (1938), 57-62 ; Skutsch and Rose, ibid. 220-2 ; Gonda,
Mnem. 12 (1959), 137-8; Walde-Hofmann s.v. Derived from *magere
(cf. magnus), whose root meaning combined two ideas 'to make great',
with the accessory notion of superiority to h u m a n conditions, and 'to
gladden 5 ; cf. Vedic mdhati. macte is the vocative of the past participle,
used originally in invocations: cf. Cato, de Re Rust. 132 macte vino
inferio esto; Cicero, de Div. 1. 17-22. From it the verb macto was formed
which, like dono, is followed (i) by the accusative of the god and the abl.
of the offering to be m a d e ; (ii) by the accusative of the offering and
the person to whom it is offered. Hence macte virtute esse used of men
can be seen both from its syntax and from its sense to be no archaic
phrase. It is an antiquarian idiom concocted to convey something of
the spirit of 'Bravo'. Cf. Seneca, Epist. 66. 50 macte virtute esto sanguinulentis ex acie redeuntibus dicitur. Of much the same character are the other
expressions employed by Porsenna.
12. 15. ut: consecutive; 'to prove that you have won from me by
kindness what you could not have done by threats (I will tell you
that)
via grassaremur: cf. Sallust, Jug. 64. 5.
12. 16. cuiusque: the manuscripts here read utcumque ceciderit primi but
primi cannot be construed either as a gen. singular or nom. plural.
T h e sense intended might be 'as each man's lot turns u p ' or 'however
it will happen' or 'whenever it will happen'. In either of the last two
cases it would be necessary to delete primi (Crevier, Lallemand)
neither primo (Weissenborn) nor primis (Bayet) is intelligiblebut
both seem doubly repetitious when followed by quoad . . . dederit and
suo tempore. T h e mention of sors requires that Mucius should be talking
about the would-be assassins. Hence Madvig's ut cuiusque ceciderit (sc.
sors) primi. T h e only remaining difficulty is the use of cado for excido
(21.42. 3, 22.1.11,23. 3. 7). We must either explain it as an instance of
dramatic speech or, with Queck, read exciderit. cadit sors is found in
Cicero, de Div. 1. 3 4 : elsewhere only in the Vulgate and Carm. Epigr.
1158. 3265

2. 13- I

5 08 B.C.

13. 1. Scaevolae: cognomina derived from physical peculiarities are ex

tremely common and the Mucii may have been a left-handed family
although we have no other evidence. Since, however, the aetiology
is false, I incline to believe that the name should originally be asso
ciated with a superstitious side of the word, scaevulae are small phallic
ornaments supposed to have magical properties. Cf. also Scaeva in
Caesar, B.C. 3. 53. 4.
13. 2, condiciones: the proferred peace is no more than a piece of stagemachinery to create the situation in which Cloelia should be handed
over as a hostage (14. 6 n.).
13. 3. nequiverat Tarquiiis: Tarquiniensibus (D. S. Colman) makes
the expected contrast with Romanis \ cf. 6. 4.
13. 4 . expressa: as Walker has been alone in observing, the text is
gravely obscure and may well be corrupt, necessitas is usually used in
the abl. with the passive of exprimere: cf. 6. 3. 4 orationem necessitate
ultima expressam; 8. 2. 6; Suetonius, Aug. 57. 1. In those passages a
result is extracted through necessity. T h e active form of the same idea
whereby necessity extracts a result is also found, e.g. 3. 30. 6. Here,
however, necessitas appears to be not the agency but the object of the
extraction. Yet it is clearly hostages not necessitas which are extracted.
Walker proposed expressitque necessitas obsides [dandi]. Alternatively
dandi could remain if we read expressique necessitate obsides dandi Romanis
4
the surrender of hostages by the Romans was extracted perforce 5 .
If the text is to be kept expressa must be given not its normal sense
'extract 5 b u t 'state'. 'The treaty stated that the Romans had to give
hostages if they wanted the Janiculum evacuated. 5 T h e issue is not
faced by translators: 'he compelled the Romans to submit to give
hostages' (Baker); 'forcing the Romans to give hostages 5 (de Selincourt); 'il imposa aux Romains Pobligation de donner des otages'
(Baillet).
composita pace: cf. Plautus, Merc. 9 5 3 ; Propertius 2. 2. 2 ; Virgil,
Aeneid 7. 339, 12. 822.
13. 5. Mucia prata: cf. Paulus Festus 131 L. T h e site of the fields is
unknown but Pais drew attention to the Muciae Arae, mentioned by
Pliny (JV.H. 2. 211) as being in Veiente . . . in quibus in terram depacta non
extrahuntur. T h e name suggests that the Mucii originally owned land
on the confines of Rome and Veii as did the Fabii, and support for
the hypothesis is to be found in 13. 4 de agro Veientibus restituendoy which
closely links the Mucii with a border dispute. It would be confirmed
for certain if we knew the tribe to which the Mucii belonged but that
detail has not survived. We would expect it to be the Fabia (L. R .
Taylor, Voting Districts, 279). For another example of an aetiology
being invented to explain a family's ancestral property cf. 3. 13. 10
(prata Quinctia).
266

5 08 B.C.

2. 13. 6-11

13. 6-11. Cloelia

N o two authors tell the story alike and it is told by many (Florus
1. 10. 7 ; Orosius 2. 5. 3 ; Val. M a x . 3. 2. 2 ; de Viris Illustr. 13 ; Virgil,
Aeneid 8. 6 5 1 ; Seneca, Cons, ad Marc. 16. 2 ; Juvenal 8. 265 with 2;
D . H . 5. 32. 3-35. 2 ; Plutarch, Poplicola 19. 2 ; de MuL Virt. 14;
Polyaenus 8. 3 1 ; Servius, ad Aen. 8. 646). T h e principal strands can be
isolated. T h e first is the simple tale of a girl who rescued her fellowhostages. T h e second is the wonder of a girl who crossed the Tiber
on a horse. T h e first I take to have a firm foundation in t h a t twilight
history which is all that can survive from an unlettered age. T h e
exploit is feasible and the Cloelii cannot be dislodged from the early
Fasti (2. 21. 1 n . ; 4 . 7. 1, 11. 5 n n . ; 4 . 17. 2 n . ; cf. 1. 23. 3 n . ; 3 . 25.
5 n . ; 4. 9. 12 n.). The second is an amplification of the story inspired
by a rough equestrian statue that stood in summa Sacra via until de
stroyed by fire sometime in the first century (D.H.). W h o m the statue
actually depicted is uncertain but it was probably a divinity (13.
11 n.).

T h e story had certainly assumed its full dimensions in L.'s source.

T h a t that source was not Valerius Antias can be seen from a com
parison with D.H. In D . H . (as in Plutarch; cf. Pliny, JV.H. 34. 28) the
leading role is shared by a Valerius of whom there is no trace here.
See Burck 5 4 - 5 5 ; Munzer, R.E., 'Cloelius (13)'.
13. 6. frustrata custodes: much elaborated by D . H . who makes Cloelia
u n m a n the guards by an appeal to their respectability.
tranavit: no mention of the horse. L. like others was evidently
puzzled how she could have got hold of one.
1 3 . 7 . habiturum: for the use of the ace. and inf. in a subordinate clause
in or. obi. cf. 4. 51. 4, 6. 27. 6, 26. 27. 12; Tacitus, Hist. 1. 17; Annals
2 . 3 3 ; Bell. Hisp. 22. T h e parallels show that the use is rare but authentic
(Ruperti wished to delete quemadmodum). It serves to make Porsenna's
ultimatum, as presented in indirect speech, memorable.
intactam: if -que is rightly preserved after inviolatam some such adjec
tive must have dropped out.
13. 9. quos vellet: the hostages were of mixed sex as was the usual
custom. The girls had run away so that only the boys were left.
Cloelia was allowed to select some of them and she chose the impubes
because they were most in danger of being outraged (muliebria pati:
see Shaedel, Philologus 22 (1865), 183). This agrees with the vulgate
but Servius (loc. cit.), perhaps misunderstanding L., says elegit virgines
quae iniuriae poterant esse obnoxiae.
Her choice is said to be virginitati decorum because her delicacy of
feeling prevented her from choosing people whose age might lead
to misconstruction of her motives.
267

508 B.C.

2. 13- 10

13. 10. impubes: the short form, for impuberes, is also found at 9. 14. 11,
42. 63. 10, and e.g. Tacitus, Hist. 4. 14.
quod: not 'because 5 (Pike) but 'her choice' ( = quae res).
13. 1 1 . Romani: L heightens the importance of the reward by making
it the gift of the Romans as a whole. Piso makes the other girls re
sponsible, D . H . the fathers, Servius Porsenna himself.
virgo insidens equo: the statue had been destroyed by fire before
30 B.C. but was subsequently replaced (Seneca, Plutarch). Equestrian
statues, as a type, were borrowed from the Greeks (Pliny, N.H. 34. 19)
and cannot be earlier than the fourth century at Rome. Gamillus
is credited with one (8. 13. 9) as also is Q . Marcius Tremulus (Pliny,
N.H. 34. 23). T h e 'Cloelia' group must be older than Gato a n d so
cannot have represented Cloelia. T h e most likely theory is that it is
of a deity. Pais wished to connect Cloelia with Venus Gloacina
(3. 48. 5 n.) but there are no grounds for the connexion and no
evidence that Venus Cloacina was represented on horseback. Nor
should the coincidence of horse and water be pressed into service as
evidence that the group represented Neptune (or Poseidon). A more
probable identification, made by Schwegler, is with a statue of Venus
Equestris mentioned by Suidas (s.v. A<f>poSlr7j) and [Servius], ad Aen.
1. 720. [Servius] says that her worship was introduced by Aeneas, and
the Gloelii claimed a descent from a companion of Aeneas (Paulus
Festus 48 L.). See also E. H . Richardson, Mem. Am. Acad. Rome 21
(1953), 106-7; A. Andren, Hommages Herrmann, 98-99.
14. Bona Porsennae and Tuscus Vicus
The Bona Porsennae
Plutarch (Poplicola 19. 10) gives more details. When there is to be
a public auction of booty or proscribed property the heralds open
proceedings by announcing 'the belongings of Porsenna*TI\JA]V TO>
avhpl TTJs xdpLTos atSiou iv rrj fJivrjfXT] Sia^vXdrrovrcs The explanation
must be tendentious for the ceremony implies enmity not friendship
and the tradition that turned Porsenna into an unequivocal admirer
of R o m e was a late fiction. T h e custom should be compared with the
audio Veientium. It will have been a semi-religious commemoration of
a R o m a n success. See Ehlers, R.E., 'Porsenna'.
14. 4. inpotestate: N had in potestatem, which many scholars, including
Gronovius, Brakman, and J . S. Reid, retain, esse in potestatem is
occasionally found (Lex Salpens. = C.I.L. 2. 1963; Modest. Dig.
38. 15. 1. 2 ; Gaius, Inst. 1. 55) and is offered as a reading by the
manuscripts in a few passages of Cicero (pro Lege Manilia 3 3 : cf. Aul.
Gell. 1. 7. 16; Cicero, Verr. 2. 67. 5. 98). This distribution prompts
Bulhert's judgement (Thes. Ling. Lat., 'in', 795. 15 ff.): 'usus vulgaris
268

5 0 8 B.C.

2. 14. 4

et stili curialis'. T h e present passage betrays signs of neither ten

dency.
The Battle of Aricia
For the early history of Gumae see Dunbabin, The Western Greeks;
J. Heurgon, Recherches . . . de Capoue pre-romaine. It had for long been
a position of importance as the chief outlet for Etruria to Greek com
merce. Distinctive Gumaean pottery from the mid-sixth century has
been found at Tarquinii and Caere. With the development of other
ports such as Spina and Atria her commercial importance declined
but the rich volcanic soil enabled her to build up a considerable corntrade. It was on corn rather than commerce that her prosperity de
pended c. 500, but on either score she was an envied prize for the
Etruscans who expanded into Campania in the latter half of the
century. Under the leadership of Aristodemus (21. 5 n.) Cumae re
sisted that expansion while preserving friendly relations with the mari
time states of Tarquinii and Caere. In 524 she defeated an assault by
Etruscans, aided by Umbrians and Daunians (D.H. 7.3-4). Her victory
at Aricia (c. 506) was confirmed thirty years later by the decisive
Battle of Cumae (474). Her policy is consistent throughout the period.
T h e only ambiguous feature is her relations with Rome. W e would
expect her to have been uniformly friendly with Romea city of the
same culture and sympathies as Caerebut in 491 (34. 4) she im
pounds some ships that had come from Rome to seek corn. This
gesture may have been inspired by a purely tyrant-tyrant friendship.
Aristodemus was Tarquin's heir. But it is to be remembered that Rome
had been conquered by Porsenna and forced to make humiliating
terms with him (Pliny, JV.H. 34. 139). How long that treaty subsisted
effectually is not certain; the first signs of Roman independence can
be detected under Sp. Cassius. For ten years or so Rome collaborated
with Porsenna and that fact is not likely to have endeared the Romans
to Aristodemus.
14. 6. perculerat: the Livian ircpiiTCTcia.
Latinis: presumably the members of the Latin League of Aricia.
14. 9. Tuscum vicum: the street leading from the Forum to the Circus
Maximus along the west end of the Palatine and forming the eastern
boundary of the Velabrum (see plan). Its Etruscan associations are
confirmed by the statue of the Etruscan god Vortumnus which stood
there (Varro, de Ling, Lat. 5. 4 6 ; C.I.L. 6. 9393). T w o explanations of
the name were current in antiquity, that given by L. (D.H. 5. 36;
Festus 486 L.) and Varro's that it was the residence of Etruscans who
had come to crush Titus Tatius (cf. Propertius 4. 2. 49-50; Servius,
ad Aen. 5. 560). Modern speculation has added a third, that the settle
ment was composed of workmen who came to build the Capitoline
269

2. I4- 9

5 08 B.C.

temple (cf. Tacitus, Annals 4. 65). In truth, there had always been
a sizeable Etruscan population at Rome from early times and it was
inevitable that they should have congregated together. There was
also a vicus Tuscus in Pisidian Antioch (C.I.L. 3. 6837). See PlatnerAshby s.v.; Welin, R.E., 'Tuscus vicus'.
15. Peace with Porsenna
The tailpiece to the history of Rome's war with Porsenna is provided
by the embassy which persuades him to recognize R o m a n libertas.
Critics have attempted to dissociate this chapter from the preceding
narrative. Soltau and Seemuller, arguing that there can only have
been a single peace with Porsenna, saw a doublet in the condiciones of
13. 3 and the pax fida of 15. 7. Soltau further claimed that Porsenna's
embassy in 15. 1 was so unmotivated that it must have belonged in
reality to the events related by L. under the preceding year. T h e whole
course of the negotiations between Rome and Porsenna was a creation
of latter-day historians and could be extended to taste. Moreover, 15.6
patently picks up and continues 13. 4. See also 15. 1 n. The chapter,
therefore, belongs closely with the preceding narrative and forms a
fitting conclusion to it. Paxfida cum Porsenna.
T h e Tarquins had their contact with the Mamilii and Tusculum
(1. 49. 9 n.) and the tradition that both the Tarquins and Octavius
Mamilius fought on the same side in the Battle of Lake Regillus is
unlikely to be an invention. It makes good sense. O n the other hand,
the reason of Porsenna for abandoning the Tarquins is far too highminded. As has been shown above, it was most unlikely that he ever
helped them. If the Tarquins did go to Tusculum, they will have
gone from Caere. T h e whole point of the episode is to underline the
great truth that libertas and Rome are synonymousa truth so magni
ficent that it impresses even a barbarian king. It is stated with all the
rhetorical power at L.'s command (15. 3 n.) and is accepted with
equal dignity (15. 5 n.).
15. 1. For a full discussion of the textual difficulties of this passage
see C.Q. 9 (1959), 270-1.
All attempts to secure from the manuscripts two pairs of consuls
are misconceived. T h e separated praenomen in \i (Purius P.) is not a
trace of a telescoped name. I n several manuscripts p. or / . = proprium
(sc. nomen) is inserted before a name to indicate to the reader, in de
fault of capital letters, that he is coming to a proper name (O. Rossbach, B. Ph. W.y 1920, p . 697, n. 1; E. Harrison, Cambridge University
Reporter, 27 May 1930). T h e phenomenon is frequent in N ; cf.
2. 43- 3> 5 1 - 4 61. 1, 64. 2, 3. 12. 5.
Thus L.'s list of consuls for 506 was P. Lucretius and P. Valerius
Publicola. It disagrees with the conventional list given by D . H . (from
270

5 0 6 B.C.

2. 15. I

Valerius Antias according to Peter, Hist. Rom. Rel. cccxxvii). L. omits

one complete year and in P. Lucretius records a completely mythical
personage. But his account is consistent. The divergent chronologies
of the dedication of the Capitoline temple and the wars with Porsenna
were caused by the fact that L. (and his source) did not know of
Horatius' second consulship. Such vagaries are characteristic of the
Fasti used and given by Licinius Macer. It is commonly held that the
libri linteiwere only lists of consular tribunes and covered no more than
the period of that office. But the peculiarities of Licinius' Fasti are
not confined to 443-366 and I should be inclined to believe that the
libri lintei were a complete list of eponyms from the beginning of the
Republic. This must cast grave suspicion on all chronology (such as
the revolts of Cora and Pometia, and the battle of Lake Regillus)
which depends to any extent on Licinius.
P. Lucretius: nothing else is known of him and he is probably an
error for either M. Horatius or Sp. Larcius.
P. Valerius Poplicola: the entry is unusual. At 9. 1 he is P. Valerius
iterum and at 16. 2 P. Valerius quartum, but nothing can be inferred
from this when the whole list is so awry. See also 16. 7 n.
15. 2. non quin: 'it would have been easy enough, they declared, to
give a curt refusal, on the spot, to Porsenna's overtures. That was not
the reason why Rome had sent representatives of such distinction
rather than anwer the Etruscan envoys directly' (de Selincourt).
15. 3 . hostibus: N read hostibus potius quam portas regibus where the
hyperbaton emphasizes regibus effectively. The reading should be kept.
ea esse vota: for the text see C.Q. 7 (1957), 76. The sentiments are
typical of the Republican attitude to monarchy cf. Sallust, Catil.
33. 4. For portas patefacere cf. Cicero, Phil. 5. 49, 10. 7.
15. 5. obtundam: Porsenna's language is diplomatic; cf. Cicero, Verr.
4. 109; ad Herenn. 3. 17, 4. 52.
pacem distineat: 37. 12. 2; Caesar, B.G. 7. 37. 3 ; Cicero, ad Att.
3. 23. 5 ; P M . 12. 28.
15. 7. [ita]: the position is awkward and not properly defended by
8. 6. 2. The simplest remedy is deletion but L. frequently closes an
episode with a summarizing sentence opened by ita: cf. 1. 5. 7, 7. 3, 10.
7 , 1 3 . 5 , 2 6 . 1 , 2 . 14.7^25- i,3l- ^33.^,49.12,^0.
11,51.getal.
I prefer Weinkauff's transposition: ita Romanis pax fida cum P. fuit
(Rh. Mus. 22 (1867), 156).
16-18. 505-501 B.C.
It is as difficult for the modern reader, as it clearly was for L., to see any
coherent pattern in the events of the years leading up to the Battle of
Lake Regillus. The Fasti were available and a few events may have
been documented (the triumphs, the first dictatorship, and the wars
271

2. I 6 - I 8

5 05 B.C.

with the Sabines; cf. 18. 2 n.) but even here there was wide scope for
doubt and distortion. Other events, such as the migration of the
Claudii or the activities of Octavius Mamilius, were handed down not
in records but in traditions of varying reliability. T h e credentials of
each are considered in turn below.
D.H. follows a separate tradition from L. In addition to giving a
different chronology for Lake Regillus (19. 2 n . ; D.H. expressly says
that the chronology adopted by L. was that given by Licinius Macer),
he knows nothing of the revolt of Cora and Pometia and the two wars
against the Aurunci. Instead he has four wars against the Sabines and
places Cora and Pometia in 495. Now it has long been realized that L.
duplicates the history of Cora and Pometia, for under 495 (22. 2) he
again speaks of their revolt and suppression, and this later section
is unquestionably derived from Valerius Antias. It follows that the
first account of their revolt (16. 8) cannot be from Valerius Antias.
When it is noticed that L. cites a variant tradition that makes M \
Valerius the first dictator and tacitly agrees with Licinius Macer
concerning the first ovatio (16. 9 n.) it can hardly be denied that he
must be using Licinius Macer as his main authority.
T h e paucity of facts afforded little scope for embellishment. T h e
facts are presented soberly and annalistically. They pave the way for
the great account of Lake Regillus.
16. 1. M. Valerius: a brother of Publicola. See also 30. 4 n.
P. Postumius: 16. 7, his filiation is given as Q.f. by D.H. 6. 69. 3
and the cognomen Tubertus by D.H., Cicero, de Leg. 2. 58, and Pliny,
N.H. 15. 125. For his ovatio see 16. 9 n. and for a possible grandson
4. 23. 6 n. T h e origin of the family is undisclosed. They were a patrician
family but not one of the gentes maiores; they may have come to Rome
with the Tarquins from Etruria. Diodorus (16. 82. 3) mentions
nocTTOfiiov TOV Tvpprjvov a pirate in 339, and a M . Postumius from
Pyrgi is prominent a century later (25. 3. 8-5. 1). Different branches
of the family played a leading role throughout the course of R o m a n
history. See Miinzer, R.E., 'Postumius (64)'.
cum Sabinis: the Sabine menace had been dormant for many years
but Porsenna's incursions coupled with the collapse of the central
government at Rome may have activated them again. T h e record is
inherently probable. T h e triumph figured in the Fasti Triumphales:
M. Valer[ius Volusif.-n. Volusus] cos. [de Sabineis
P. Postu[mius Qsf*-n. Tubertus] cos. [de Sabineis.
It is the first of the Republican triumphs recorded by L. although the
Triumphal Fasti have regal entries and also allot a triumph in 509
to P. Valerius Poplicola over the Veientanes and Tarquinienses. The
authenticity of the records depends in part upon the history of the
ceremony. T h e ancients were unanimous in believing that the triumph
272

505 B.C.

2. 16. i

was Etruscan in origin (Strabo 5. 220; Florus 1 . 5 . 6 ; Appian, Lib. 6 6 ;

but cf. [Servius], ad Aen. 4. 37): the triumphal garb was Etruscan
(Macrobius 1.6. 7) and the crown was termed the corona Etrusca. T h e
very n a m e triumphus, formed from the cry io triumphe, was the Greek
dplafi^os mediated through Etruscan sources (Varro, de Ling. Lat.
6. 6 8 ; Servius, ad Aen. 10. 775). An Etruscan origin would suggest an
early date, and since the central act of the ceremony was a procession
to the Capitol and an offering in the temple of Juppiter O.M., it was
reasonable to connect the institution of the ceremony with the founda
tion of the temple (Ehlers, R.E., 'Triumphus' with earlier literature).
Wallisch, however, has challenged the conventional account (Philologus 99 (1955), 245-58), pointing out that morphologically triumphus
must be mediated from the Greek through S. Italy and that the dis
tinctive feature of a triumph, the appearance of the triumphator in the
guise of Juppiter, is based on the late Hellenic idea of the conqueror
as Dionysus, the son of Zeus, the God-Liberator (cf. Clearchus in
Justin 16. 5. iff.; Alexander in Plutarch, Alex. 6 7 ; Arrian 6. 2 8 ; Curtius 9. 10. 24 ff). T h e Etruscan pictures usually claimed to represent
triumphs lack the characteristic laurel-branch and sceptre carried in
the hand and should rather be associated with pompaefunebres. Besides,
the corona Etrusca is not old (Pliny, N.H. 21. 6, 33. 11). Wallisch does
not, however, do justice to the central idea. T h e victorious general
had to perform a thanksgiving and discharge his votum. This is a very
ancient rite and I would believe that the original triumph was no
more than the general's procession to the Capitoline temple. All the
paraphernalia may well be subsequent embellishment introduced
after 300 B.C. from Greek models, but the central act is as old as the
temple and was recorded either in the Annales or in separate
records on the Capitol. For later triumphs see 16. 6, 16. 9, 17. 7, 20.
I3 3I
' ' 3\
16. 4 . Attius Clausus: it was an old family tradition that the Claudii
came to Rome from Sabine country and it was true. T h e singular
praenomen Appius, the distinctive funeral practices, and the longcontinued clientela among the Sabines attested by inscriptions all speak
to the truth of the tradition. But they can scarcely have migrated to
Rome in 504. They were a patrician gens and, as such, their roots in
R o m e must go back to the monarchy. They were one of many nomadic
shepherding clans who settled at Rome with the rise of agricultural
prosperity. Suetonius (Tiberius 1) dates their migration to the time
of Romulus, Appian (Reg, 12) to that of the Tarquins. T h e version
which dated it to 504 (so also D . H . 5. 4 0 ; Plutarch, Poplicola 2 1 ;
Servius, ad Aen. 7. 706) was in part influenced by the certain fact that
the tribus Claudia was organized in 495 (21. 7 n.) and in part by a
tendentious desire to make the Claudii great Republicans, lovers of

814432

273

2. i6. 4

504 B.C.

libertas, who are only induced to move to Rome when the oppressive
tyranny of the Tarquins has been cast off.
Appius Claudius may once have borne the praenomen Attus. It is a
Sabine name (cf. C.I.L. 11. 6706. 2 At. Fertrio(s)) carried also by Attus
Navius (1. 36. 4 n.). L., who writes Attius, may have misunderstood it
as a nomen, for there was a gens Attia. But Appius' nomen cannot have
been Clausus. T h e original Sabine form is Claudius from which
Clausus is derived by the regular assimilation of dentals before con
sonant i in almost all the non-Latin dialects of Italy (Conway ad l o c ) .
Antiquarians, noticing the form Clausus in Sabine territory at a
much later date, assumed that it was the primitive form. For his
subsequent history see 21. 5, 29. 9, 30. 2. An Elogium set up in the
late Republic in his honour (Inscr. Ital. 13. 65) also adds that he
was quaestor. See Munzer, R.E., 'Claudius (321)'; Mommsen,
Staatsrecht, 3. 16 n. 1, 175 n. 3 ; L. R . Taylor, Voting Districts, 35-37.
turbatoribus belli: this difficult expression is explained by Ernesti
(Opuscule 322-3) who calls attention to the use of the verb turbare in
the sense of comitate (cf, e.g., Tacitus, Annals 4. 6 7 : cf. the Greek
7rdAe/xos> erapdxOr] in Dem. de Cor. 151). belli is needed to balance
pacis which rules out the conjectures of T a n . Faber (reipublicae), Clericus
(plebis), or H. J. Muller (vulgi). If turbatoribus is wrong, Novak's concitoribus (23. 4 1 . 2, 29. 3. 3) is better that Gronovius's auctoribus or
Crevier's hortatoribus. There are other signs of careless writing (18. 2 n.),
which may excuse the text.
Inregillo: N had cnregillo or the like. T h e Claudii originated from
Regillum (Suetonius, D.H., Appian) but a wrong identification of
cognomina by a scholar, perhaps due to the confusion of Crassin. RegilL
with Crass. Inregill. (see the Fasti for 450) led to a town Inregillum
and a cognomen Inregillensis (8. 15. 5 ; Fasti Cap.) being postulated.
T h e corruption in N favours Inregillo here too and shows the late date
of L.'s source.
magna: D.H. says 5,000.
clientium: 3. 44. 5 n.
1 6 . 5 . vetus . . . appellati: appellata N . T h e problem here is to determine
the meaning of the clause qui ex eo venirent agro. If it means 'those who
come from this district across the Aniofor there were other members
in quite different areas of Italy who were added subsequently to the
tribewere called 'Old Claudians', it will be necessary with Madvig
to read appellati (cf. 1. 43. 2). But the subjunctive is unexplained
(Virtually oblique': Conway), venirent is a misleading term (censerentur Seyffert) and the whole clause qui. . . venirent in the natural
run of the sentence is expected to follow after the plural tribulibus. I
prefer an alternative explanation, putting commas after tribus and
agro and taking qui . . . venirent with tribulibus. 'The tribe was called
274

504 B.C.
5

2. 16. 5

'Old Claudian and there were later added to it new members who
came from that area.' I take eo loco to refer to the land given to the
Glaudii rather than their Sabine homeland. T h e original members
of the tribe were all Claudii, subsequently other residents in the area
where the Claudii settled were given citizenship and enrolled in the
same tribe. A particular example is the case of Fidenae which after its
incorporation was enrolled in the Claudian tribe (C.I.L. i 2 . 1709).
Vetus is to distinguish them from the other pockets of the tribe created
throughout Italy after 241.
L. seems to date the creation of the tribe to the current year but
D.H. in his parallel account says it was created avv XPVC9 after the
migration of the Claudii. Geographical considerations suggests that it
must have been after the fall of Crustumeria, so that both the Claudia
and the Crustumina will belong to 495 (21. 7 n.).
inter patres: 4. 4. 7. L. means that he was m a d e a patrician rather
than a senator.
16. 6. timeriposset: timerepossent N, defended by Drakenborch, is at
least as good.
triumphantes: the Triumphal Fasti differ slightly: P. Valeriu[s Volusi
f.-n.] Poblicol[a II cos I IIIde Sa]bine[is] el Veient[ibus . . . non]as Mai,
16. 7. P . Valerius: the formal vote of a public funeral was recorded in
the Annales and was used by historians as the basis of a brief obituary
(cf. Seneca, Suas. 6. 2 1 : see Syme, Tacitus, 312). T h e earliest notices
are not above suspicion (33. i o n . ) and may be no more than anti
quarian reconstruction.
Agrippa Menenio: one of the oldest R o m a n families, giving its n a m e
to the tribe. They perhaps came from or at least owned land in the
region of Pedum and Praeneste (L. R. Taylor, Voting Districts, 4 3 - 4 8 :
the name is Etruscan). They were in historical times plebeian (4. 53. 2,
6. 19. 5, 7. 16. 1) and there is no reason to suppose that they were not
always plebeian (32. 8). T h e presence of plebeian gentes in the early
Fasti is well attested. Agrippa is remembered for the part which he
played in the First Secession (32. 8-12).
P. Postumio: 16. 1. T h e absence of iteration is not remarkable, for
the practice of noting the number of consulships is the exception
rather than the rule until the institution of the consular tribunate. I
have noticed it only at 2. 8. 9, 16. 2, 3. 22. 1, 66. 1, and 4. 8. 1, whereas
there are twenty-three occasions when possible iterations are omitted.
The incidence of cognomina is equally random.
de publico'. 33. 10 n.
luxere: Eutropius (1. n ) and the author of the de Viris Illustr. (15. 6)
specify a year's mourning. Hence Kohler wished to add annum after
Brutum: it would be better after matronae.
16. 8. coloniae: when last heard of, Pometia had been recaptured from
275

2. i6. 8

503 B.C.

the 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 ovatioTOTC -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 precedentstriumphs were not awarded when hostium nomen
humile et non idoneum est, ut servorum piratarumquebut 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 exercitumsed ab utro consule non adiecit. Lipsius
was the first to conjecture utrum for verum, which must be right. The
change is minimal. But, like Drakenborch after him, he retained
nomen. nomen makes poor sense. It was not so much the name as the
identity of the consul which was in doubt. I would delete nomen with
Hertz and Freudenberg. Nothing is gained by F. Walter's repunctuationsed utrum? auctores non adiciunt (cf. 7. 33. 2, 44. 13. 4). Most
editors have neglected the evidence of 10. 37. 14 and emended the
passage along different lines {sed viri nomen Heerwagen; verum nomen
Alschefski; sed nomen Madvig; ceterum nomen Gundel).
17. 4. relatus: Duker's certain correction of N's relictus (cf. 20. 9).
maiore: N adds bellum, which is retained by Weissenborn and
Pettersson as a kind of zeugma, gestum being understood from inlata
(cf. 25. 6. 19, 39. 25. 16, 42. 49. 10), but it breaks the close connexion
between ira and viribus.
17. 5. mole belli: cf. Virgil, Aeneid 5. 439; a Livian cliche: cf. pcoXos
2. 17. I

'ApT]OS.

in eo esset: 'the situation had reached the point that . . .'. In this
idiom res is usually expressed (8. 27. 3, 28. 22. 8 sing.; 30. 19. 3,
33. 41. 9 plur.). Sigonius could find no parallel in L. or elsewhere
for the ellipse of res and inserted res before esset. Unless the ellipse be
278

502 B.C.

2- 17- 5

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 -fn 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,fjLTdd(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 suspectand the Battle of Regillus was certainly a heredi
tary legend among the Postumiiand even if the memories of military
285

2. 19-20

499 B.C.

practice are liable to distortionand a curiosity of some importance

is preserved in the dismounted fighting of 20. 10no 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<f>' 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 stressedthe 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 plaOr} (Iliad 7. 145, 11. 144, 12. 192). T h e use oidefluo is confined
to verse (Bibac.^/r. 8 M. habenas misit equi lapsusque in humum defluxit; Ovid,
Met. 6. 229; Virgil, Aeneid 11. 501). retardo is found only here in L.
20. 5. delectam: such corps d9 elites were first organized by Scipio
Africanus Maior (29. 1. 1).
20. 8. insignem veste armisque: cf. Virgil, Aeneid 6. 403.
20. 9. veruto: 1. 43. 6.
20. 10. descendant: 24. 44. 10, 39. 31. 11. Elsewhere descendere ex equis
is only found in BelL Hisp. 4. 2, 15. 2 and the Scrip tores Historiae
Augustae which is decisive for its military tone; cf. Cicero, Cato 34.
T h e curiosity of cavalry dismounting and fighting on foot may be
instructive. There is good evidence to show that the original equites
were not cavalry in the proper sense but mounted hoplites who used
their horses, as Homeric heroes their chariots, to get to and from the
scene of battle. If so, it looks as if a genuine detail has been remem
bered about the conditions of primitive fighting. See W. Helbig,
Die Equites als berittene Hopliten; H. Hill, Roman Middle Class, 2.
dicto paruere: 18. 8, 9. 32. 4, 4 1 . 13. This synonym for the more
technical dicto oboediens esse (5. 3. 8) is not found in classical prose,
only in Plautus, Pers. 812; Terence, Hec. 564; Virgil, Aeneid 1. 695,
3. 189, 7. 4 3 3 ; cf. Ennius, Ann. 299 V.
20. 12. Castori: it was commonly believed that the worship of the
Dioscuri reached R o m e in two distinct ways. T h e oldest cult was the
cult of the Penates who were, and were identified with, the Dioscuri
([Servius], ad Aen. 3.12; other references in Weinstock J.R.S. 50 (1960),
112-13). Tradition avers that they came to R o m e from Lavinium
and there is nothing to confute and much to support tradition on the
point. T h e Penates must antedate the temple of Castor (and Pollux)
by long enough for the essential identity of the two cults to be obfus
cated. Castor and Pollux were venerated at many places, at Larinum,
Ardea, Cora, and Ostia, but their principal shrine was at Tusculum
(Cicero, de Div. 1. 9 8 ; C.I.L. 14. 2620). Lake Regillus lay in agro
Tusculano so that it was natural to think that the Romans vowed a
temple to the Brothers for having changed their allegiance and aided
288

499 B.C.

2. 20. 12

the Romans in battle. Not strictly an evocatio, but analogous, and the
cult must have come from a Latin rather than a Greek source for the
decemviri s.f. had no say over it. Such seems to have been the belief of
the ancients too. A coin of L. Servius (Sulpicius) Rufus c. 43 B.C.
(Sydenham no. 1081) depicts on the obverse the Dioscuri and on the
reverse a view of Tusculum with a gateway inscribed TUSGUL. A com
plicating factor is the recent discovery at Lavinium of a bronze tablet
dated to the fifth century and inscribed GASTOREI PODLOVQVEIQVE
QVROIS (see Castagnoli, Studi e Materiali 30 (1959), 109 ff.). It
indicates that the cult of the brothers as Castor and Pollux as well as
Penates was prevalent at Lavinium at much the same time as the
dedication of the temple at Rome. T h e importance of the dis
covery should not, however, override the much greater weight of
evidence in favour of a Tusculan origin. For the title and date of the
temple see 42. 5 n.
L. blandly omitted the theophany which was the motive for the
vow and the climax of the engagement. T h e participation of the
Dioscuri in battle is a common Greek tale (cf. their presence at Aegospotamoi; the Battle of the Sagra: see Frazer, The Magic Art, 2. 50),
but after Lake Regillus their next activity on R o m a n behalf is not till
Pydna in 168 (Cicero, deJVat. Deorum 2. 6 ; Val. Max. 1.8. 1) and then
against the Cimbri (Pliny, N.H. 7. 86) and at Pharsalus (Dio 41. 61).
This should not, however, lead us to believe that the story of their
presence at Lake Regillus was a late invention based on Greek history.
Theophanies in the heat of combat are more widely current than that.
T h e Romans believed that the Dioscuri sided with them. For other
examples see Mayor on Cicero, loc. cit. See Wissowa, Religion, 268 ff.;
Wilamowitz, Sappho u. Simon. 234; Mattingly and Robinson, P.B.A.
18 (1932), 245 ff.; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 173 ff. For the temple see
Platner-Ashby s.v. See also R . Bloch, Rev. de Phil. 34 (i960), 182-93.
20. 13. triumphantes: a loose use. Only the dictator triumphed :
A. Postu[mius P.f.-n. Albus] Regil[lensis diet, de Latineis].
2 I . 4 9 8 - 4 9 5 B.C.
2 1 . 1. Q.Cloelius: 13. 6 n.
A. Sempronius: consul again with M . Minucius in 34. 7. Both con
sulship shave been disputed as late interpolations (a Minucius was
consul in 305, a Sempronius in 304) but the Minucii were an oldestablished family (3. 33. 3 n.) and the Sempronii supply consular
tribunes in 444, 425, 420, 416, and consuls in 444 (but see 4. 7. i o n . )
and 423. In historical times they were a plebeian family, which has
been held against their early magistracies. Even if a transitio adplebem
is excluded there is nothing to prevent plebeians having held the
814432

289

2. 21. I

497 B.C.

consulship in the early years (cf. Cassius, Brutus, Menenius) and their
prominence in the lists of consular tribunes is in favour of plebeian
status. A. Sempronius, at least, must be genuine, for he is among those
listed by Festus (180 L.) as having been cremated in the Circus.
2 1 . 2. Saturno: the construction of the temple is attributed variously
to Tullus Hostilius, Tarquinius Superb us (Varro ap. Macrobius
i. 8. i ) , T . Larcius (D.H. 6. 1.4), Postumus Cominius, or L. Furius,
trib. mil. (Gellius ap. Macrobius: see 4. 25. 5 ; he was perhaps re
sponsible for the restoration after the Gallic sack), in addition to
Sempronius and Minucius. There was clearly no substantive evidence,
but the cult itself must be of high antiquity. T h e name Saturn is
Etruscan (cf. Volturnus, J u t u r n a ) and there was an archaic altar
on the site of the later temple (Festus 430 L.). T h e Saturnalia also
must, in origin at least, be an old winter festival. Although there is no
connexion between Saturnus and sata (crops), yet the festival was held
on 17 December, at the end of the year, and the sigillaria and other magic
spells are proper to festivals celebrating the end of one agricultural year
and seeking success for the next. A temple is likely to have been con
structed in the opening decades of the Republic to supersede the primi
tive altar but the notice that dated the institution of the Saturnalia
to the same date is simply a confusion based on the coincidence of the
natalis of the temple with the festival (C.I.L. i 2 , pp. 245, 337). U n d e r
the year 217 L. writes (22. 1. 20): 'Saturnalia diem ac noctem clamata
populusque eum diem festum habere ac servare in perpetuum iussus'.
W h a t L., forgetful of the present passage, mistakenly regards as the
institution of the Saturnalia, was a radical reorganization of it under
Greek influence which introduced a lectisternium and other ceremonies
derived from the worship of Kronos. See Wissowa, Religion, 204 ff.;
Platner-Ashby s.v.; Herbig, Philologies 74 (1917), 446 ff.; Latte,
Religionsgeschichte, 254-5; ^. Gjerstad, Hommages Grenier, 2. 757 ff.
2 1 . 3 . dubiae: D.H. gives an extended account of the affair. T h e
suspicion looks like a precedent for domestic malice between the
Verginii and the Postumii but no historical issue comes to mind.
T h e Postumii seem to have broken with the Glaudian-Fulvian party
in 180 B.C. and a L. Verginius served under Q . Claudius in 207 (see
Scullard, Roman Politics, igo ff.).
2 1 . 4 . tanti errores implicant temporum: is taken to mean 'such mistakes
of date perplex (the historian)' but the absolute use of implico is un
paralleled and cannot be justified on the pretext that L. is here speak
ing propria persona or that there are other inelegancies in this scrappy
chapter (21. 6 n.), as Brakman would defend it. An object for implicant
must be provided. Duker read tempora, but it is not so much the
years that are confused as the reckoning of years, i.e. temporum
(jationem) (Wolfflin, H . J . and M . Muller). errores, however, is
290

496 B.C.

2. 21. 4

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 debtnexum, 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 awayCora 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).
Consequentlyand a comparison with D.H. shows that this is L.'s
own contributionthe 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 actentry 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 actplots 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 actsecessio, 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 <aes> quod obligatur
per libram neque suum fit, inde nexum dictum, liber qui suas operas
in servitutem pro pecunia quam <debet d a t ) , d u m solverit, nexus
vocatur ut ab aere obaeratus', a passage which proves how little the
ancients themselves knew about nexum.
T h e analogy of nexum and mancipatio stated by the sources implies
that in the former the creditor in the presence of the required five
witnesses and scale-holder weighed out the copper which the other
296

49 5 B.C.

2. 23-24

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 releasea 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 released5but 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 95)> 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 familya 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

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
itconferti, pluribits introrsus ordinibus acie firmata. Weinkauff took the
sense to be that the Volsci had weakened their centre by extending the
wings of their armya 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^

=^

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 7rp<orcos Kar^araOi]aav 8r)fjiapxoi rerrapc?. Diodorus' testimony is irrelevant. The wordorder, with Tcrrapcs placed last, shows that he is emphasizing the
number not the office'for the first time four, as opposed to two,
309

494 B.C.

2. 32. I
5

were elected . As for the inconsistencies between the other sources,

these are to be seen as the growth of the myth. Every author has his
own contribution to make to the story, political, personal, literary.
W h a t we must ask is 'Was there a secession in 494 ? Was the tribunate
instituted then ?' rather than worry about the names of tribunes or
conflicting locations.
To both questions the answer must be affirmative. If prosopography
can teach anything, then it is clear that a number of plebeian,
Etruscan families quitted Rome before 450 B.C. This is a matter of
observation. W h a t happened to the Galerii, the Pupinii, the Voltinii?
to the Larcii, the Gominii, the Gassii? Emigration was the course
adopted by many families who found that their social status, their
family connexions, or their commercial interests made life in the new
Rome of the growing Republic uncongenial. T h e First Secession is,
it would seem, a more dramatic and more concerted symptom of the
same unease.
T w o grievances stand out. T h e brunt of Rome's economic misfor
tunes fell on them because they made up the commercial and business
community, so that the harsh debt laws operated greatly to their dis
advantage. T h e patrician debtor was better off to the extent that he
at least was likely to enjoy the protection of a powerful patronus
(3. 44. 5 n.) who would proffer support and mitigate ruin. T h e
immigre would be fortunate indeed if he had managed to win such a
relationship for himself. Secondly, and for the same reason, the lack
of a. patronus, he was peculiarly liable to the severities which might fall
on him as a result of consular or, now, dictatorial coercitio. H e had no
refuge while his patrician counterpart could invoke the potent and
indefinable forces which clientela created. So today connexion will
do much to ameliorate the naked indiscrimination of professional or
judicial processes.
If this is a correct diagnosis of the plebeian dilemma in the first
quarter of the fifth century, intensified as it was by the respon
sibilities of military service demanded of plebeians, the tribunate with
its powers of auxilium guaranteed by the sacrosanctity of the tribune
supplied a mutually satisfactory remedy. It was not a magistracy;
it was a watch committee. As will be seen below, the oldest tradition
gave the original number of tribunes in 494 as two. This is plausible,
for the two tribunes were to match the two consuls. T h e number was
only raised to four when the assembly of the tribes, which would mean
primarily the four urban tribes at that date, came into being (56. 2 n.,
58. 1 n.: 471 B.C.) and officially elected the tribunes. Since the term
tribunus is cognate with tribus, the title was probably only introduced
in 471 when the four tribuni plebis were appointed as officers of the
four urban tribes.
310

494 B.C.

2. 32. 1

T o the final objection that since the tribunes were not yet magis
trates of the state their institution cannot have been recorded in the
Annales, it may be replied that the Secession will have figured there
it had obvious religious repercussionsbut that the tribunate was
one of those landmarks of plebeian history which would have been
recorded in the temple records of Geres (33. 3 n.). In any case they
were events which could be remembered without documentation.
T h e detailed narratives of these events show a gradual development.
Cicero (deRep. 2. 58 ;pro Cornel, fr. 48) speaks of a Secession to the Mons
Sacer, the demand for leges sacratae (33. 3 n.), and the appointment
of two tribunes comitiis curiatis (32. 2 n.). So also Festus 422 L. Even
this version, which will go back to Polybius at the least, may not be
the original. Piso placed the Secession on the Aventine (32. 3). It is
a more probable site in that it was the plebeian hill (3. 31. 1 n.) and that
the substitution of the Sacred Mount could easily be caused by a
false etymology for the leges sacratae (see on 3. 50-54). The original
number of tribunes was two. Five was a supplement of the postGracchan age who desired to bring the number of tribunes into rela
tion with the number of classes (58. 1 n . ; cf. Asconius, in Cornel.
p. 77. 2 Clark singulos ex singulis classibus). T h e names are equally
fluid: neither Cicero nor Festus names them. Asconius quotes Tuditanus
(fr. 4 P.) for L. Sicinius L.f. Velutus and L. Albinius C.f. Paterculus.
Livy gives C. Licinius and L. Albin(i)us adding that three more were
co-opted including Sicinius quidam. D.H. (6. 89. 1) lists the first two as
L. Junius Brutus and C. Sicinius Vellutus, and, in addition, C. and
P. Licinius and C. Viscellius (?) Ruga (cf. also Suidas s.v. S^/xa/^ot).
From this it emerges that D.H. at any rate is following a tradition
much influenced by the late democratic prestige of the Junii Bruti, a
prestige due in part to Atticus' researches into the family and in part
to the activities of the tyrannicides. L., on the other hand, seems to
have displaced Sicinius for Licinius, a significant alteration when
taken in connexion with other features of 32. 2-33. 3. For D.H.'s
account of the secession is not merely more diplomatic (there is a
ten-man delegation to conduct negotiations with the plebs): it is pungently Valerian. T h e auctor concordiae is not Menenius, but Valerius
(D.H. 6.43. 4 ; so also Cicero, Brutus 5 4 a n d the Elogium cited on p. 306
above). Seignobos drew attention to Livy, Epit. 83 (85 B.C.): effectum
est per L. Valerium Flaccum, principem senatus, et per eos qui concordiae
studebant ut legati ad Sullam depace mitterentur. Valerius Antias must have
been responsible for supplanting Menenius. O n the other hand
Licinius for Sicinius points to Licinius Macer and it may well be that
L. turned to the latter for the account of the actual secession itself
(note the citation of variants at 32. 2 and 33. 3).
See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 272-330; E. Meyer, Kl. Schriften,
311

2. 32. I

494 B.C.

i. 353-73; K. J. Neumann, Grundherrsch. d. Rom. Republik, 14 ff.;

Beloch, Rom. Geschichte, 239 ff.; Momigliano, Bull. Comm. 59 (1931),
15777; Langle, R.E., 'Tribunus (13)'; Stuart Jones, C.A.H. 7.
438 ff.; Siber, Pleb. Magistraturen; R.E., Tlebs (Tribunat) 5 ; C. Gioffredi, S.D.H.L 11 (1945), 37-6432. 2. Sicinio: according to D.H., L. in Asconius. Despite the
existence of a homonym who was a friend and fellow tribune of
C. Licinius Macer, the tradition which associated the Sicinii with the
tribunate is very strong (58. 1, 6 1 . 2, 3. 54. 12) and will represent an
underlying fact. D.H. (7. 33 ff.) gives a long account of his later
career which L. wisely ignores. See Mnzer, R.E., 'Sicinius (4)'.
32. 4 . sumendo: 2. 9, the equivalent of a present participle, often used
for variatio by Tacitus (Annals 15. 69). It is not commonly found in
elevated prose earlier than the Augustan age. See Klotz on Bell. Hisp.
12. 4 ; Marouzeau, Mem. Soc. Ling. 16 (1911), 133 ff.
3 2 . 5. pavor: L. frequently conveys thoughts, hopes, fears, mis
givings in the form of a speech reported indirectly to build up a
realistic atmosphere. Cf. 49. 1-2, 3. 56. 7-8, 4. 50. 1, 5. 24. 5-6.
32. 7. earn: presumably = plebem, although they have not expressly
been named for several sentences. Alternatively understand concordiam:
for concordiam reconciliare cf. 7. 42. 6, 4 1 . 25. 2 ; Cicero, in Catil. 3. 2 5 ;
Petronius 109. 5 ; Aul. Gell. 2. 12. 4.
32. 8. placuit igitur: \L prefaces with sic, which is favoured by L. for
resuming the main thread of a narrative (cf., e.g., 1. 5. 4, 2. 46. 7) and
should be read here too. For igitur in third place see R e h m , Thes. Ling.
Lat. s.v. 'igitur', col. 254. 38-46.
oratores: 1. 38. 2 n.
The Parable of Menenius Agrippa
T h e parable of the body and the limbs is an old one of Greek
extraction, as was demonstrated by W. Nestle. There are variations of
it in Xenophon, Memorab. 2 . 3 . 18, and in Polyaenus 3. 9. 22 where it is
attributed to the fourth-century general Iphicrates. The closest
parallels are Aesop 197 and St. Paul, 1 Cor. 12. 12-27, and there are
echoes of it in Cicero, de Off. 3. 22. Even in its present form it is de
monstrably Greek, tempore quo represents exactly the beginning of a
Greek . Nestle himself believed that the story
was introduced into Roman historiography early in the first century.
Momigliano, agreeing in general with Mommsen and E. Meyer,
would date it to the fourth century, and in particular would connect
it with the problematic construction of a temple of Concord by
Camillus in 367, and with the political settlement of that year, since
the Menenii figure for the last time in the Fasti of 366 B.C. T h e date is
attractive but, to my mind, too early. I would prefer to believe that the
312

4 9 4 B.C.

2. 32. 9

parable was introduced in the formative period of R o m a n historio

graphy that is the generation of Fabius Pictor and his successors.
In retailing it L. was faced with a difficulty. T h e parable was elegant
and sophisticated, but Menenius is a plebeian and is supposed to
speak prisco illo et horrido modo. T o represent such archaic uncouthness
directly would offend against the canons of writing history and would
do violence to what is a pre-eminently couth tale. L. side-stepped the
problem by reporting the speech indirectly (cf. 4. 41. 1 n.).
See Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 128 n. 34; E. Meyer, KL
Schriften, 1. 358; Brodribb, Class. Rev. 24 (1910), 13-15; W. Nestle
Klio 21 (1927), 350; Skard, EuergetesConcordia, 90 ff.; W . J a e g e r ,
Scripta minora, 2.112; A. Momigliano, C. Q. 36 (1942), 117-18; Lambert,
Die indirekte Rede, 16.
32. 10. dentes: for the approved text of the passage which should read
nee dentes conficerent see C.Q,. 9 (1959), 279.
32. 1 1 . sanguinem: the vital element in the body, which only the
stomach can supply, is postponed dramatically to the end of the
sentence.
3 3 . 1. sacrosancti: 3. 55. 7-12 nn.
3 3 . 2. C. Licinius: rudely interpolated by his namesake and de
scendant.
L. Albinos \ Albinius is the true form of the nomen (cf. 5. 40. 9 n.,
6. 30. 2 ) ; the corruption is due to the frequency of the cognomen Albinus,
particularly in the fourth century A.D. The Albinii were an Etruscan
family (Schulze n 8 f . ) who continued in the honourable obscurity
of minor senatorial rank (cf. Cicero, pro Sestio 6) for long years of the
Republic. It is unlikely that they would have had the opportunity or
the motive to invent so famous an ancestor if he had not existed.
fuisse: sc. constat which Novak would supply as an alternative to
deleting Juisse and removing the full stop after creaverunt. It can, I
think, be understood by anticipation from minus convenit.
33. 3 . sacratam legem: the creation through a lex sacrata of a sworn
confederacy who are dedicated to a particular objective and elect
their own leaders is a phenomenon to be observed in the social and
military history of the Osco-Sabellian races (4. 26. 3 n., 10. 38. 1 ff.).
The most determined body of iurati whom Rome had to face were the
Samnites in Campania. T h e First Secession exactly reproduced the
character of such a confederacy. T h e lex sacrata which later historians
rationalized into a law passed by the comitia curiata recognizing the
sacrosanctity of the tribunes was in reality the oath by which plebeians
banded themselves as an individual body and dedicated themselves to
the goals of self-help and hostility to the patricians. T h e oath was taken
in the name of Ceres (D.H. 6. 89. 3), Juppiter only being added in later
313

2- 33- 3

494 B.C.

forms. This reveals both the Italian character of the secession, for
Ceres had come from Campania to be the tutelary deity of the
plebeians, and also its partisan aims. Juppiter was the god of the
community as a whole. They elected their own officers, the tribunes,
and although the patricians must have recognized the tribunes and
the principle of auxilium before the plebeians would have ended the
Secession, the first move to incorporate the tribunes into the con
stitutional framework was not taken till 471.
Such seems the best account of the lexsacrata, of which many inter
pretations were current even in antiquity. If it is basically correct, it
supports the traditional outlines. See Latte, Gott. Gel. Nachricht.,
1934/6, 69 fF.; F. Altheim, Lex Sacrata.
33. 3-40. Coriolanus
No sooner has Rome emerged from the throes of the First Secession
than she is once again plunged into danger by political disunion. Just
as before the quarrel arose on the question of debt, so now it breaks
out over the distribution of corn imported during a shortage. O n this
occasion it is not the impartial mediation of a Menenius but the
presence of a remorseless aggressor which persuades the Romans to
close their ranks and L. uses the legend of Coriolanus not, like Shake
speare, as a study in the limitations of the man of action but as a
parable on the text externus timor maximum concordiae vinculum (39. 7).
T h e theme is not a new o n e : it has been hinted at several times
before but for the first time L. uses it as a moral around which to
build his narrative. H e subordinates the whole of his material to it.
T h e tragedy leads on to the supreme interview between Coriolanus
and his mother in which Coriolanus acts out the secondary moral
that in the last resort a true Roman's love for his country outweighs
every other consideration. T h e method by which L. constructs this
unified episode is evident from a comparison with the parallel narra
tive of D.H. Only here does L. abandon the regular annalistic practice
of introducing each year formally with its list of magistrates, and since
the lists are to be found in D.H. (7. 68. 1,8. 1. 1 Q,. Sulpicius, Sp.
Larcius; C.Julius, P. Pinarius) and are presumed in the computation
of dates which L. himself makes later (4. 7. 1), we are entitled to
assume that he deliberately omitted them in order to preserve an
Aristotelian unity of time rather than that his source was defective.
A logical inspection of the timing of Latinius 5 dream points to a
similar conclusion. In D.H. 6. 68-69 Latinius has his dream before
Coriolanus is expelled from Rome (68. 1-3) so that Coriolanus knows
that the games are to be repeated and therefore that they would
present a suitable opportunity for provoking the Romans to slight
the Volscians. In L. the dream occurs after Coriolanus has left and it
3J4

493 B.C.

2. 33- 3-40

is nowhere explained how Coriolanus knew that the games were to be

repeated (36. 1 n.) Yet to have inserted the d r e a m at its proper place
would both have interrupted the account of Coriolanus* expulsion
and have separated it from its natural context, the chain of events
leading u p to the Volscian march on R o m e . A third instance of the
liberties which L. took with his material is to be seen in the telescoping
of Coriolanus' two campaigns into one (39. 3 n.).
T h e original myth, stemming partly from old R o m a n legend and
partly from the special propaganda of the gens Marcia during its rise
in the fourth century, made Coriolanus a R o m a n from the Latin city
of Corioli (hence his name) who at some indeterminate date as consul
(De Viris Illustr. 19) offended the people. In this he resembled Camillus,
and, like Camillus, he was driven from the city into the arms of the
Volsci and after being deterred from the destruction of Rome by the
pleas of his mother retired to spend an old age in exile (Fabius Pictor
fr. 17 P.). T h e scrutiny of the Fasti by historians towards the end of
the third century disclosed no consular Coriolanus: but there was
a record preserved of the capture of Corioli by the Romans in 491
and it was to this event that the story of Coriolanus was attached to
provide an aetiological explanation of his name (33. 5 n.). A study of
the comparative history of Greece and Rome showed that the stories
of Coriolanus and Themistocles enjoyed a similarity not merely in
date (Aul. GelL 17. 21. 12) but also in substance which encouraged
the transference to Coriolanus of several details concerning Themis
tocles, in particular his attitude to his country and his suicide. Cf.
Cicero, Brutus 41-43, who concludes Coriolanus (est) plane alter Themi
stocles.
Other embellishments may well include the addition of Latinius'
dream to the story. It is not essential. Macrobius (1. 11. 3) specifically
assigns it to 279 nor is it connected with Coriolanus in the version,
taken directly from Coelius Antipater, which is given by Cicero (de
Div. 1. 55). T h e influence of dreams became fashionable after Hanni
bal. Certainly the flash-point of the quarrel between Coriolanus and
the plebs, the distribution of corn, is a post-Gracchan improvement.
T h a t there was a corn shortage is doubtless historical and would have
left its mark in the Annales. There were, too, from earlier times,
recorded sales of corn below the market prices (Pliny N.H. 18. 17:
251 B.C.). But the political manipulation of the prices begins with
C. Gracchus (Appian, B.C. 1. 2 1 ; Plutarch, C. Gracchus 5 ; Cicero,
pro Sestio 103). A further touch that corn was sent from Dionysius of
Syracuse (Gellius fr. 20 P . ; Licinius Macer fr. 12 P.), corrected on
chronological grounds to Gelon by D.H. himself (7. i ) , 1 is a confusion
with similar deals a century later (4. 25. 4 n., 4. 52. 6 n.). T h e
1

A. Klotz, Rh. Mus. 87 (1938), 35 f.

315

493 B.C.

2. 33- 3-40

confusion was engendered by the dominating position which Dionysius

occupied in Sicilian history. T h e hand of Valerius Antias can be seen
both in the lurid details of Coriolanus' death and in the appearance
of Valeria in the embassy of matrons.
T h e dry bones, on the other hand, come from two documentary
sources, the restored foedus Cassianum and the Annales. T h e Annales
would have contained under the different years notes on seven topics:
the names of the consuls, a list of cities captured in the course of each
year (2. 19. 1 n.), the public funeral of Agrippa Menenius, the annona
and the places from which corn was imported, the dispatch of settlers
to Velitrae and Norba, the instauratio ludorum, the foundation of the
temple of Fortuna Muliebris. Such were the eight dry bones from
which successive generations brought Coriolanus to life.
T h e version in D.H., on which Plutarch and so Shakespeare are
dependent, is at the least an amalgamation of Licinius Macer and
Valerius Antias. Traces of two strands can be seen in the duplication
of plunder raids against Tolerium and Gorioli and in the curious
muddle where the number of tribes is given as twenty-one (7. 64) but
it is later said that, if eleven tribes had acquitted Coriolanus, a tie would
have resulted. H e alters Licinius Macer expressly (see above), but
has many striking Valerian allusions (7. 54 M \ Valerius; 8. 49
Valeria). H e may also have taken over some colour from an Augustan
archaizing poem about Coriolanus (8. 62). l
L.'s account, simpler and more homogeneous than D.H.'s, bears no
such marks of contamination. It is in general so close to D.H. that it
may represent one of the traditions which D . H . has combined. There
is no doubt that it belongs to the Sullan stage of the development of
the m y t h : it has all the post-Gracchan tendency but the terms in
which the bronze pillar of the foedus Cassianum is mentioned indicate
that it was written well before 56 B.G. (33. 9 n.). T h e special knowledge
about Antium (33. 4 n.), the use of Greek models, the absence of
Dionysius of Syracuse, and the affiliations with other Valerian passages
cumulatively support the claims of Valerius Antias.
See further Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. 2. 113-52; K. W. Nitzsch,
Rh. Mus. 24 (1869), 150; J. Bachofen, Vber die Geschichtlichkeit der
Coriolansage; E. Zarncke, Commentationes Phil. 0. Ribbeck; Soltau 162;
W. Schur, Hermes 59 (1924), 4 5 1 - 4 ; A. Reichenberger, Studien zu
Erzahlungkunst der T. Livius, (1931),25; E. T . Salmon, C.Q,. 24 (1930),
9 6 - 1 0 1 ; Burck 70; Schur, /?."., Suppl. 5. 653-60; Klotz 241. For the
unattractive theory that L. used Ennius directly see W. Aly, Livius,
und Ennius, 37 (Coriolanus = Achilles); O . Schonberger, Hermes 88
(1955), 245 ff. (Coriolanus = Meleager).
3 3 . 3 . per secessionemplebis . . . inierunt: L., still experimenting to com1

A. Momigliano, J.R.S. 47 (1957), i n .

316

493 B.C.

2. 33- 3

bine episodic treatment with an annalistic narrative, delays mention

of the accession of the consuls until he has disposed of the Secession.
The pluperfect, first read by Reiz, is not required.
Sp. Cassius: 17. i. Second consulate but no mark of iteration; 16. 7 n.
33. 4. cum Latinis populis ictum foedus: for the Latini populi see 18. 3 n.
D.H. (6. 95) gives the text of the treaty as follows:
,
'
' ,

,
'
, ' , .
' ' ,
. Festus 166 L. quotes
two fragments: item in foedere Latino: 'pecuniam quis nancitor habeto'
et 'si quid pignoris nanciscitur sibi habeto\ There certainly was a
bronze inscription in the Forum at the beginning of the first century
B.C. which was regarded as the original treaty and from which D.H.'s
source could have transcribed the text (33. 9 n.). The provisions
correspond with those regularly found in later foedera such as the
treaties with Methymne (I.G.R.R. 4. 2: c. 129 B.C.), Astypalaea
(I.G.R.R. 4. 1028: 105 B.C.), and Mytilene (I.G.R.R. 4. 33: 25 B.C.;
note the commercial clauses after the usual terms about forbidding
transit to enemies). As far as the contents go, therefore, the version
given by D.H. is plausible enough and, despite L.'s attempt to make
a foedus aequum appear more favourable to Rome than it really was,
we may detect its operation in his account of the division of spoils
(4. 29. 4, 5. 19. 8 n.). Moreover, it is exactly analogous with the
Hernican treaty (41. 1 n.) in that it fits the political condition of
Latium and the wider Italian scene. Under pressure from the Volscians
in the south-east and after the loss of several cities (Antium, Corioli,
Velitrae), the Latins would naturally turn to Rome for alliance and
protection and they received immediate relief by way of Cominius5
counter-offensive. Only in this period were the triginta populi an
organized and articulate body.
But neither the translation given by D.H. nor the quotation in
Festus suggests archaic Latin. Indeed in one important particular
there can be little doubt that D.H.'s text is anachronistic. The dura
tion of the treaty is prescribed
which is the same as the duration of the bizarre treaty
which Alexander made with Celts in 335 B.C. (Ptolemaeus 138 F 2
Jacoby; Arrian 1. 4. 8; see H. d'Arbois de Jubainville, Les Premiers
Habitants, 2. 316; W. W. Tarn, Alexander the Great, 1.6). This was an
317

2. 3 3 - 4

493 B.C.

oath peculiar to the Celts and one which was still in use among the
Irish in the eighth century. As such it would be inconceivable for
primitive Romans and Latins. It is likely enough that the inscription
was altered and re-carved to keep pace with subsequent developments,
as other cities subscribed to the treaty, and that the copy from which
D.H.'s text was taken had not been standing in the Forum for much
more than a century before it became finally obsolete in 89 and
disappeared.
Nor can it be demonstrated for certain that the treaty is correctly
dated to 493, Cassius' second consulship. His name stood in the treaty,
but perhaps in his capacity as fetial rather than consul. In any case
the treaty would not have differentiated between his consulships.
493 could well have been chosen as the date simply because of the
erroneous belief that Cassius had to be consul in order to make a
treaty. Although the condition of the Latin world in 493 is equally
compatible with the terms of the treaty it is natural to expect that it
would have been made in the aftermath of the Battle of Lake Regillus
and a trace of such a treaty may even survive in 22. 3-4 n.
See R. von Scala, Die Staatsvertrdge des Altertums, 3 1 - 3 3 ; E. Taubler,
Imperium Romanum, 1. 262-317; H. M . Last, C.A.H. 7. 488-92; A. N .
Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship, n - 3 0 ; Steinwenter, R.E., 'ius
Latii'; E. Badian, Foreign Clientelae, 291 n. C.
The Latin Counter-Offensive against the Volscians
Antiates Volscos: Antium, mod. Anzio, originally a Latin city
which with other coastal towns formed part of an Etruscan hegemony
centred on Rome. It figures as an ally or dependant of Rome in the
first treaty of 508 B.C. with Carthage (Polybius 3. 22. n : ApSearcov,
AVTLGLTCUV, Apevrlvcov, KipKaurcov, TappOiK.ivITcov: see Walbank, ad
loc.) but in the unsettled conditions following the expulsion of the
kings it had passed under Volscian control. T h e annalist Valerius
Antias came from here (Introduction p. 16). For the archaeological
remains see Lugli, Tecnica edilizia, 270-1.
Longulam: identified by Nibby with Buon Riposo, a settlement on
the road from Antium to Ardea 26 miles from Rome and 10 miles
from Antium. In Pliny's list of the Alban League of Juppiter Latiaris
(JV.H. 3. 69) the received text Longani is better corrected to Longulani
than understood with O . Seeck (Rh. Mus. 37 (1882), iff.) as an
ignorant duplication of Albani to denote the inhabitants of Alba
Longa. If so, Longula was one of the earliest Latin communities.
See Philipp, R.E., 'Longula (2)'.
3 3 . 5. protinus Poluscam, item Volscorum : a certain correction by Cluver
in the light of the parallel account in D.H. 6. 91. 3 and the campaign
of Coriolanus (39. 3). T h e site is put by Nibby at Osteria di Civita
318

493 B.C.

2. 33- 5

where the roads to Antium and Satricum divide, 20 miles from Rome
and 15 miles from Antium. Like Longula it may be recognized in
Pliny's list (Pollustini) as an Alban community which had subsequently
fallen into Volscian hands. Both cities disappear from history after
their recapture by the Volscians under Coriolanus and may well have
been destroyed. They are absent from the list given by D . H . (5. 61)
which purports to preserve the composition of the triginta populi in
500 B.C., but more probably reflects a state of affairs prevailing around
400 B.C. (18. 3 n.). In that case they will have ceased to exist by the
end of the century. Hofmann, R.E.y Tollusca'.
Coriolos: placed by Gell and Nibby on M t e . Giove. Unlike Longula
and Polusca it is listed as a Latin city by both Pliny and D . H . from
which it may be inferred that after being captured twice by the Vol
scians it ultimately regained its independence and survived as a Latin
community at least until after 400 (3. 71. 6 n.).
erat turn in castris: cf, 4. 19. 1 erat turn inter equites. L. is fond of intro
ducing his central characters by this Hellenistic formula which, to
take but one example, is the regular way of beginning a novel; cf.,
e.g., Xenophon Ephes. 1. 1 T}V iv yE<f>4.aco dvrjp TWV rd nptoTa e/cef
Swa/zeVcov, AvKOfxrj8rjg ovo/xa; Chariton Aphrodis. 1. 3. It makes the
reader aware that a special story is coming. Cf. Horace, Sat. 2. 3. 281.
Cn. Marcius: the manuscripts at 35. 1, 39. 1, 39. 9 are unanimous
for the praenomen Cn. which should be read here as well, in preference
to the C. of 7rA. Cn. is traditional (Val. Max. 4. 3. 4 ; Aul. Gell. 17. 21.
11) but D.H. (hence Plutarch and Shakespeare's, 'Ay Marcius, Caius
Marcius') follows a separate tradition attributable to Licinius Macer.
et consilio et manu promptus: 3. 11. 6 n., and for the combination of
consilium and manus cf. Sallust, Jug. 96. 3 ; Tacitus, Hist. 2. 5, 3. 17,
an historical commonplace taken over from Hellenistic writers and
possessing epic and tragic overtones. Cf. Homer, Iliad 13. 727-8;
Euripides, Chrysippos fr. 842 N . : see H . D. Kemper, Rat und Tat (Diss.
Bonn, 1957).
cui cognomen postea Coriolano fuit: it is implied that he received the
cognomen, which is not found elsewhere, for his exploits against Corioli.
This must be a fabrication. T h e earliest cognomen derived from a cap
tured city is perhaps Privernas (329 B.C.) or Messalla (263 B.C.),
while the first one formally bestowed is said to have been Africanus
(30. 45. 7: 201 B . C ) . H e must have been so called because Corioli
was the Marcian home town (cf. Praenestinus, Veliternus, Auruncus),
but a new explanation was required when the legend was tied down
to a period in which Corioli, being in Volscian hands, could not have
produced a Roman citizen. Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. 2. 295; B. Doer,
Die Rom. Namengebung, 1937, 48-50.
33. 7. per patentem portam ferox inrupit: caedeque in proxima urbis facta
319

2. 33- 7

493 B.C.

ignem . . . iniecit'. the text presents several small difficulties none of

them cumulatively sufficient to justify radical surgery. T h e use of
proxima with a gen. = 'the nearest parts of5 is paralleled by 31. 46. 12
traicit in proxima continentis and the rhythm -eque, generally disliked by
classical authors, by 8. 9. 7, 21. 39. 2 ( H . J . Miiller). Objection has
chiefly been taken to caede facta with in and ace. instead of in and abl.
(as Cicero, Brutus 8 5 ; Paradoxa 30) but the battle is moving, not
stationary, and the same usage occurs in 3. 10. 7 ne qui in loca summa
urbis impetus caedesque inde jierent. Madvig's transposition [inrupit in
proxima urbis caedequefacta) is shown to be wrong by the parallel account
in D.H. 6. 92 Kara iroXXa fJ>prj rrjs iroXetos <f>6vos lyivtTo.
33. 8. clamor . . . mixtus muliebri puerilique ploratu ad terror em, ut solet,
primum ortus: primo ortu N . ortus (Gronovius) gives a more compact
subject, all the components being included between the noun and the
participle, than orto (sc. ploratu Madvig). T h e men began to shout,
the women and children to scream as soon as Coriolanus broke into
the city, clamor oriri ad aliquid is favoured by L . : cf. 1. 39. 2, 2. 23. 7,
3. 48. 6.
turbavit Volscos, utpote capta urbe, cut . . . venerant: for the separation of
the relative and correlative by an abl. abs. cf. 64. 8 (Pettersson).
T h e description of the capture of Corioli, however much it may
owe to L.'s own experience of war, owes more to literary conventions
inspired by epic and tragedy (e.g. the Troades). Almost all L.'s accounts
of captured cities are variations on the Ilioupersis theme: the enemy
break in, begin a massacre, set fire to the town; the population resorts
to lamentation and despair (see note on 1. 29. 1 ff.).
33. 9. foedus . . . (in) columna aenea insculptum: cf. Cicero, pro Balbo 53
cum Latinis omnibus foedus . . . ictum Sp. Cassio Postumo Cominio consulibus
. . . quod quidem nuper in columna aenea meminimus post rostra incisum et
perscriptumfuisse. Cicero cannot be quoting directly from the inscrip
tion since it is clear from L. that only the name of Sp. Cassius appeared
on it as a party to the treaty. T h e implication of nuper is that the in
scription had in fact been removed by the time when he is speaking
(56. B.C.) and the obvious date for this would be shortly after 89 when
the treaty finally became obsolete. Since L. gives no hint that the
inscription has disappeared, he must have taken over this whole
passage from his Sullan source without troubling to verify it. in is
required ; cf. 39. 37. 16 monumentis litter arum in lapide insculptis.
3 3 . 10. Agrippa Menenius moritur: 32. 8 n. A notice from the
Annales developed into an obituary (16. 7 n.). T h e actual coins
sextantes (so too Pliny, JV.ff. 33. 138; Val.Max. 4. 4. 2 : cf. L. 3. 18. 11
(L. Valerius) quadrantes) are anachronistic since cattle were still the
medium of currency down to c. 450 B.C. Like quadrantes, they became
the proverbial small coin ('coppers': cf. Laberius ap. Aul. Gell.
320

493 B.C.

2. 33- J o

16. 9. 4) and for this reason would naturally occur to the pen of an
historian with a desire to give circumstantial verisimilitude to a public
funeral. It is significant that the only other cases of this custom concern
Valerii, L. Valerius in 3. 18. 11, and P. Valerius Publicola in Plutarch,
PopL 16: ? Valerius Antias.
The Corn Shortage
34. 2. caritas primum annonae: 9. 6 n., from the Annales. T h e mention
of Ostia may be accepted (Meiggs, Ostia, 18-19, 479)* If c o r n w a s
not available from the surrounding plains of Caere, Vulci, and the
Pomptine flats but had to be imported from farther afield, it will have
come up the Tiber to Rome. Ostia would have figured in the record.
T h e other regions are credible. T h e Sicilian corn will have come not
from Syracuse or the eastern end of the island but from places like
Segesta in the west where Carthaginian interest was strong enough
for the Romans to exploit their treaty with Carthage. T h e authenticity
of these notices is enhanced by the simultaneous foundation of a cult
of Ceres at R o m e (D.H. 6. 7. 12-14, 94. 3 ; omitted by Livy but see
3. 55. 7 n.). T h e main centres of the cult were Cumae and Sicily. It
was Demeter who guided the Chalcidians to C u m a e and Xenocrite, the
mistress of the tyrant Aristodemus, prided herself on being the priestess
of the cult. In Sicily there was a long-established tradition of Demeter
worship at Henna (Val. Max. 1. 1. 1). T h e connexion between the
cult of Ceres and the annona is well attested in later times (cf. Lucilius
fr. 200 Marx). See H . le Bonniec, Le Culte de Ceres, 242 ff.
ex incultis per secessionem plebis agris: cf. 34. n utantur annona quam
furore suo fecere. Contrast 32. 4 where the plebs secede per aliquot dies
only and do no damage to the countryside (neque lacessiti neque
lacessentes).
34. 3 . sed quaesitum in Siciliam quoque: quaesitum (supine) should be
retained, taking in Siciliam with dimissis. T h e merchants were to buy
corn in Italy and beg for it in Sicily.
34. 4. Aristodemo: 21. 5 n.
periculum . . . frumentatoribus fuit: a second-century note. T h e un
popularity usually arose when the corn merchants sold their corn
(4. 12. 10 n.), not when they bought it, but the development of Roman
trade made such perils household tales. Cf. Cato, de Re Rust, praef 3 ;
Cicero, Verr. 5. 157.
3 4 . 5 . Tiberi venit: cf. 4. 12-13, 52. 6. le Gall (Le Culte du Tibre, 56)
believes river traffic on the Tiber at this date to be an invention based
on the regular trade of classical times (Juvenal 7. 121), A guess it
may be, but a good guess, for the corn could not have come by any
other means.
pestilentia ingens: malaria ? T h e spread of malaria to the Pomptine
814432

321

2. 34- 5

492 B.C.

marshes is commonly associated with the decay of the drainage system

during the Punic Wars (the first references are in Plautus, Curculio 17;
Terence, Hecyra 357) but it could have been rife earlier. For disease
at Rome during the century see 3. 2. 1 n.
34. 6. Velitris auxere numerum colonorum: 31. 4 n.
Norbam: mod. Norma, not listed in the Alban section of Pliny's
register of the League of Juppiter Latiaris, a confirmation of the
authenticity both of that list and of this notice. It is named in the
separate non-alphabetical table of twenty-one associated cities which
precedes the main list (N.H. 3. 68), a table which seems to have been
compiled by Pliny or Varro from a variety of historical traditions,
not from a single early document. The colony at Norba, which was
a Latin colony (27. 10. 7) and not, as it is here represented, a citizen
colony, would have had its place in the Annales and it also figures in
the Latin League of D.H. 5. 61 (reading Nwpflavwv for Mwpcavwv).
After playing a long and stormy role in local history, it was de
stroyed by arson during the Civil War (Appian, B.C. 1. 94). Some
resettlement may have occurred later but Norba never regained its
old position, securing only scant immortality in a passing mention by
Pliny (N.H. 3. 64) and an entry in Suidas. The traditional date for
the settlement of the colony is confirmed by the archaeological evidence.
Philipp, R.E.9 'Norba ( i ) ' ; Rosati, Arch. Class. 11 (1959), 102-7.
34. 8. extorta secessione ac vi: the language of late Republican politics;
cf. Sallust, Jug. 31.6 (Memmius). The whole of Coriolanus' speech
which follows is characterized by a violent rhetoric typical of the first
century. In particular L. seems to have had in mind Cicero's dramatic
appeal to Catiline to quit Rome (in Catil. 1. 10).
34. 10. Tarquinium regent: the ronos recurs at 3. 39. 5.
Sacrum montem: 32. 2 n.
tertio anno: for tertio anno ante (46. 4; Vitruvius 9. 1. 10; Cicero, de
Fato 13). The usage could only be justified on the analogy of proximo
anno (Cicero, pro Sestio 131: see Lundstrom, Abhinc und Ante, 39-40),
ante must be inserted.
34. 12. arbitror: one of the few places where L. gives a personal
opinion on a moral issue. The effects of manipulating the annona for
political ends had been pernicious. It is noteworthy that the first of
Octavian's frumentationes occurred in 28 B.C. (Res Gestae 18; Dio Cass.
53. 2. 1) when he was readjusting his own constitutional position and
when L. was engaged on this book.
35. 1. nisi de tergo . . . satisfiat: the colloquialism was in fact de corio
alicuius satisfied, as in Seneca, Suas. 7. 13; Contr. 10 praef. 10. L.'s
taste recoiled from such strong language. He was happy to tone down
322

4 9 1 B.C.

2- 35- 1

the violent phrase linguam exertare which he found in Claudius Quadrigarius (Aul. Gell. 9, 13) to a mild linguam exserere (7. 10.5: McDonald,
J.R.S. 47 (1957), 167). So here he substitutes tergo for corio while
retaining the essentially popular flavour of the phrase to charac
terize plebeian complaints. The same demagogic tone is continued
in the following sentence (56. 8 n.). carnifex is Cicero's word for Verres
and his henchmen, while aut mori aut servire iubeat echoes the indignant
outburst of in Pisonem 15. Riots against corn shortages were frequent
in Rome after the Gracchi.
35. 3. auxilii. . . esse: cf. 56. 11.
35. 4. qua . . . qua: 2. 45. 3, 4, 16, 3. 11. 6 (J. Wackernagel, Archiv
f. Lat. Lex. 15 (1908), 213), a use confined to the first decade which
it is hard to classify. It is met with in Plautus (e.g. Miles 1113, Asin. 96)
but despite its comparative rarity in the intervening period and its
popularity with the archaizers (e.g. Claudius, I.L.S. 212. 25 qua ipsius
qua Jiliorum eiusperhaps from L.: see D.M. Last, Latomus 17 (1958),
484Valerius Maximus, Pliny the younger, and Fronto) it is difficult
to agree with Hofmann {Lat. Umgangsprache, 62) that it is an archaism
in view of its frequency in the letters of Cicero (e.g. ad Att. 2. 19. 3,
9. 12. 1, 15. 18. 2 ) .

35. 5. pro nocente donarent: a number of legal proceedings recorded

from the early Republic can conveniently be considered to
gether :
Dater
2. 35- 5 491
2. 41. 11 485

2. 52. 3

476

Accused

Prosecutor

Coriolanus
Sp. Cassius

tribunes
quaestors
(K. Fabius
L. Valerius)
tribunes
(Q. Considius
T. Genucius)
tribunes
(L. Gaedicius
T. Statius)
tribune
(Cn. Genucius)
tribunes
(M. Duilius
Cn. Siccius)
tribune
(A. Verginius)
quaestors
(A. Cornelius
Q. Servilius)

T. Menenius

2. 52. 6

475

Sp. Servilius

2. 54. 2

473

2. 61. 2

470

L. Furius
A. Manlius
Ap. Claudius

3. 11. 9

461

K. Quinctius

3- 24. 3

459

M. Volscius

323

Charge
perduellio

"

falsus test

491 B.C.

2. 35- 5
Date

Accused

3. 25. 2

458

M. Volscius

3-31-5

454

3-3'-5

454

T. Romilius

3. 56. 1

449

Ap. Claudius

4. 21. 4

436

L. Minucius

- Veturius

A. Servilius
4. 40. 4
4. 42. 3

M. Postumius
T. Quinctius
422 C. Sempronius

4. 44. 6

420

C. Sempronius

5. 11. 4

401

L. Verginius
M. Sergius

5- 2 9- 7

393

5- 32. 8

423

Q/ Pomponius
A. Verginius
391 Camillus

Prosecutor
quaestors
(T. Quinctius
M. Valerius)
aedile
(L. Alienus)
tribune
(C. Galvius)
tribune
(L. Verginius)
tribune
(Sp. Maelius)
tribune
(Sp. Maelius)
tribune
(G. Junius)
tribune
(L. Hortensius)
tribunes
(A. Antistius
M. Canuleius
Sex. Pullius)
tribunes
(P. Curiatius
M. Minucius
M. Metilius)
plebs

Charge
falsus testis

falsus testis
caedes civis
indemnati

.,

,.

tribune
(L. Apuleius)

T h e individual peculiarities of each case are treated in due place

but an account needs to be given of the processes of law as a whole.
T h e only crime about which the state took the initiative on its own
account wasperduellio (n. on 1.26.5). In all other cases, except for minor
offences which would be dealt with summarily by the praetor (consul)
or his officers, the initiative lay with the agnati. It was the agnati who
brought the prosecution and the agnati who were responsible for
exacting the penalty or vengeance. This is the procedure recognized
and codified in the Twelve Tables and which will have survived down
to 390. T h e state was concerned simply to provide a machinery for
determining the guilt or otherwise of the accused but the prosecution
rested not with the state but with the agnati. T h e machinery consisted
of the appointment ad hoc by the consul of quaestores whose function
was to investigate the charges and determine the culpability of the
accused. T h e quaestoreswere not judges, they did not sentence, they did
not possess any powers ofcoercitio. They were no more and no less than
324

491 B.C.

2- 35- 5

their name implied. They were most commonly appointed in cases of

parricidium (so in the Twelve Tables) but doubtless also in other
matters when the need arose. The significant change introduced by
the Twelve Tables lay in its famous clause de capite civis nisi per comitiatum maximum . . . neferunto which effectively removed the adminis
tration of the death penalty from the hands of the agnati to the state.
This process whereby the state gradually assumes control of private
blood-feuds is familiar from the historical development of most legal
systems. But in cases of parricidium as opposed to perduellio the initial
prosecution still lay with the agnati and the determination of culpability
with the quaestores. It was only the fate of the guilty which concerned
the comitia centuriata. The innovations made by the Twelve Tables did
tend to draw the procedures for perduellio and parricidium closer to
gether but the underlying differences remained fundamental. Thence
evolved the historical iudicia populi before the comitia centuriata, illus
trated by the cases of 212 (25. 4), 211 (26. 3), and 169 (43. 16) and
described by Cicero (de Domo 45; cf. Varro, De Ling. Lat. 6. 90). At
these, three sessions were held, the last of which was a day fixed (die
dicta) for the pronouncement of sentence. It became customary for
the accused if his guilt had been established at the preliminary
sessions to forestall the sentence by going into voluntary exile, unless
he were restrained under arrest (Polybius 6. 14. 7). Except for a
decree of aquae et ignis interdictio to prevent his return, proceedings
lapsed if the accused was no longer in Rome.
It will be seen that all mention oftribunician prosecutions at this date
is rigidly excluded. The tribunate was a revolutionary and unconstitu
tional cadre which had no place in the regular framework of government.
The tribunes were officers of the plebs and not of the people as a whole.
They could, therefore, have no possible jurisdiction over non-members
of the plebs any more than a Trade Union can discipline a member of
the public. It was only when the tribunate was absorbed in the constitu
tion after the Decemvirate, and especially after the Licinian-Sextian
laws and the legislation of 287, that the tribunes had a recognized
place in Roman legal procedure. It is more than doubtful whether they
had any jurisdiction even over plebeians in the early period.
It can, therefore, be categorically stated that all notices of tribunician
prosecution for the early period are false. This does not, however,
entail that there were no trials, merely that they were not conducted
by tribunes before the tribes. On the other hand, cases before quaestores
and duoviri concerned both the state and, on occasion, the religious
well-being of the state. They have as much claim as the corn supply
to be entered in the Annales. If we examine the individual trials cited
an interesting fact emerges. Excluding the trials of 461 and 449 which
cannot be trusted, and of 473 and 470 where no indication is given
325

2. 35- 5

491 B.C.

of the offence, the accusations fall into two main groups: (i) military
incompetence (476, 475, 423, 422, 420, 401, and 393 on which see
5. 29. 6 n.); (2) false testimony (459, 458, 436) and peculatus (454,
454, 391). These two classes correspond to two general categories of
crime: perduellio, tried by the duoviri, and the parricidium-type crimes,
investigated by quaestores. The significant point is that in two of the
parricidium-type trials quaestores are actually mentioned (and perhaps in
a third as well; see 5. 32. 8-9 n.), and in two at least of perduellio there
was a record of two judges although the names cited are patently
fictitious. I infer from this that the cases were entered in the Annales
under a bare note which alluded either to quaestores or to duoviri, and that
the trials were modernized by later historians who substituted the
legal procedure with which they were familiar, tribunician prosecu
tion before the tribes, and added appropriate names.
Sp. Cassius and Coriolanus are special cases because their stories
were more elaborately worked over and distorted. Both should have
been accused of perduellio. I think it likely that Cassius was and that
the process of falsification can be traced (41. 11 n.). Coriolanus is
more shadowy. As told by L. the trial reads like a misunderstood
iudicium populi, a iudicium populi in that there were preliminary hearings
and a final session (die dicta) at which the sentence was to be passed
but which Coriolanus forestalled by going into exile, but misunder
stood in that the deprecatio would have been made on the preliminary
hearings (Quintilian 7. 4. 18; Cicero, de Inv. 2. 104-8), that tribunes
could have had no part in it and that Coriolanus is alleged to have
been sentenced to exile, a fate which only prevailed from Sullan times.
In short, it looks as if the trial of Coriolanus was fabricated in the late
third century and brought up to date by Sullan Annalists.
See Strachan-Davidson, Problems, 1. 152-69; E. G. Hardy, J.R.S. 3
(1913), 25-32 ; C. H. Brecht,Perduellio, 282-3 \Z<tiL Sav.-Sttft. 59 (1939),
261 ff.; A. Heuss, rif. Sav.-Sttft. 64 (1944), 93 ff.; J. Bleicken, Das
Volkstribunat, 106 ff.; Staveley, Historia 3 (1955), 422; Walbank on
Polybius 6. 14. 7; Jolowicz, Historical Introduction, 321-4.
35. 6. in Volscos: Themistocles fled to the court of his personal enemy,
the Molossian king, Admetus.
percipiebantur: praecipiebantur N, which could only mean 'anticipate'
(in the imagination). But the Volscians have no need to anticipate his
emotion; what they might with profit anticipate is his intended action.
35. 7. Atti Tulli: Tullius is the nomen (1. 22. 1 n., 39. 1 n.), Att(i)us
the praenomen (16. 4 n.). The Tullii are deep-rooted in Latium (cf.
Servius Tullius; Plutarch, Cicero 1. 1), so that the tradition about
Tullius is likely to be old and genuine. Greek writers (D.H. and
Plutarch) were muddled by the names and took Tullus as the praeno
men on the false analogy ofTullus Hostilius (Miinzer, R.E., 'Tullius (3)').
326

491 B.C.

2. 36

The Dream of Latinius

Originally the dream was a separate episode. Macrobius' source
(Sat. 1. 11. 3), which has every circumstantial sign of authenticity,
dated the event in 279. He also called the main character not T.
Latinius but T. Annius, a more likely name since the Annii were a
plebeian family prominent from the middle of the fourth while the
Latinii only emerge during the second century in the praetorian
Pandusae and later the Latiares. When the episode was transferred
back into early history, the hero was at first anonymous (Cicero,
de Div. 1. 55; Min. Felix 7. 3) but soon Latinius was substituted for the
old Annius for the aetiological reason that a Latin should be, however
indirectly, responsible for the recovery of the Latin city of Corioli.
Greek writers have Aarlvos. (For a different view see A. Klotz, Phil.
Woch. 49 (1929), I33 1 -)
36. 1. ludi: 1. 35. 8 n. The appearance ofjuppiter indicates that these
were the ludi Romani magni, which in classical times occupied the
middle fortnight of September (Cicero, Phil. 2. n o ; C.I.L. i 2 ,
pp. 328 f.). At this date they can hardly have been annual (6. 42. 12,
8. 40. 2) and should still be votive games to celebrate particular
triumphs, in this case Postumius Cominius' victories of the preceding
year (so Cicero, de Div. 1. 55 bello Latino ludi votivi maximi). A record of
such a celebration might conceivably have survived in the Fasti. See
Habel, R.E., Suppl. 5, 'Ludi publici'; Wissowa, Religion, 449 ff.;
A. Piganiol, Recherches sur les Jeux Romains, passim; and for the origin
and procedure of instauratio, Ritschl, Parerga, 306 ff.; S. Monti, Rend.
Accad. Napoli, 1949/50, 153-79. Whenever a religious ceremony was
interrupted, was spoiled by a mistake or a slip in procedure, or was
found to have been performed under some pollution, it was held to
be invalid and had to be repeated from the beginning, either accord
ing to precisely the same ritual or with added observances so as to
appease the gods and render the ceremony effective (cf. incident at
the funeral commemoration of Anchises in Aeneid 5. 94 ff).
forte: the vulgate historical tradition placed the dream before
Coriolanus' departure from Rome. L. has altered this arrangement
for dramatic reasons and thereby leaves the motivation in the air.
He conceals the change by forte as he does in a similar situation where
once again he has rearranged the material (37. 20. 1 per eosdem forte
dies; K. Witte, Rh. Mus. 65 (1910), 300).
sub furca caesum medio egerat circo: caesum 'having been beaten' is
taken by Weissenborn and Nisbet on Cicero, de Domo 67, as the equiva
lent of a present pass, participle, but the slave will already have been
beaten before he was brought into the Circus. What is awkward is
327

2. 36. i

491 B.C.

the bare caesum, for elsewhere the instrument of flogging (virgis) is

added (e.g. 55. 5, 5. 8, 59. 11, 3. 37. 8 ; Epit. 5 5 ; Plautus, Menaechmi
943). I think virgis should be inserted here before caesum.
36. 2. irety ea consulibus nuntiaret: in direct speech z, haec consulibus
nuntia. ea is arresting but solemn and should on no account be deleted
(M. Miiller) or altered to et or ac (Weissenborn, Madvig, Novak;
36. 4 nieatpropere ac nuntiet consulibus is quite different). T h e imperative
i(te) et is found only once in L. and that for a special effect (38. 51. 10)
and elsewhere is studiously avoided until the Vulgate by all authors
except Petronius (115) and Valerius Flaccus (E. B. Lease, A.J.P. 19
( i 8 9 8 ) , 59).
36. 3. verecundia tamen maiestatis magistratuum timorem vicit: verecundia is
'shyness' (Conway) and certainly governs the /^-clause (cf. D . H .
7. 68 hi aloxvvTjs %Xeiv T TTpayiux Aa/fctV, dvrjp airrovpyos /cat yipcov
6vLpara TTpos TTJV fiovArjv K<f>piv . . . [xrj /cat ycXorra o(f>Xrj). Objection

has been taken to timorem (sc. Iovis: he was haud sane liber religione) since
from its position it seems to go with the following ne. Editors have
printed timorque (H. J . Miiller), timorve (Bayet), et timor (Madvig) or
deleted it altogether. But the verbal interweaving secures a forceful
effect which any emendation is bound to destroy just as it also destroys
the fine idiom verecundia timorem vincit (27. 12. 15, 28. 15. 9 (Gronovius);
cf. 3 7 - 4 3 - 4 . 3 8 - 5 - 3)36. 4. ne causa dubia esset . . . tunc enimvero deorum ira admonuit: there is
no manuscript authority for the text printed by Bayet (causa ei dubia
. . . deorum eum ira; after Conway). T o limit the application of J u p piter's lesson to Latinius alone destroys its universal effect. T h e
Romans as well as Latinius have much to learn about Juppiter's dis
pleasure (ira). See C.Q. 9 (i959)> 274.
in somnis: Stacey (see Lofstedt, Syntactical 1. 55 ff.; Gries, Constancy\
59-60) was the first to regard the phrase as evidence for the poetic
character of the language of the first decade which L. subsequently
modified (8. 6-11) or abandoned. T h e phrase does occur in poetry
(Ennius, Annales 219 V . ; Accius ap. Cicero, de Div. 1. 4 4 ; Virgil,
Aeneid 2. 270 (cf. Servius, ad loc.: out per somnos: out si insomniis legeris
erit synizesis), 3. 151) but it is equally common in prose, e.g. Cicero,
de Div. 1. 49, 54, 121, 2. 144; de Nat. Deorum 1. 82.
36. 6. consilio: it is hard to find actual examples of the family council;
those usually quoted (Val. Max. 5. 8. 2, 5. 8. 3, 5. 9. 1) are not very
good. T h e last passage gives an account of a serious historical case
where in addition to relatives nearly all the Senate are summoned to
join the consilium. It is doubtful whether there were any occasions on
which custom would require a consilium restricted to the family; the
paterfamilias could always act on his own authority (J. A. Crook,
Consilium Principis, 5).
328

491 B.C.

2-37

The Speech ofAttius Tullius to the Consuls and the

Expulsion of the Volscians from Rome,
The Coriolanus story began in an atmosphere of late Republican
politics. As it develops the atmosphere gradually changes to a spirit
of high tragedy and the conspiratorial speech of Tullius marks one
stage in the transition. T h e S. C. ut urbe excederent Volsci is reminiscent
with its consequences of the alien act of M . Junius Pennus (126 B.C.)
and may owe something to it but the language used by Tullius himself
so far from being coloured with political jargon is sharply etched
with archaic and poetic touches deliberately introduced by L. to lead
up to the final scene between Coriolanus and his mother.
37. 3 . arbitris remotis: Late Republican colouring, cf. 2. 4. 5.
quod sequius sit: 'I a m reluctant to say anything discreditable about
my countrymen'. In this sense secus is more common than the com
parative sequius (e.g. Cicero, ad Att. 1. 19. 1 1 ; ad Fam. 3. 6. 6 ; pro
Cluentio 124; Tacitus, Annales 2. 50). T h e only close parallel for the
comparative is Seneca, de Bene/. 6. 42. 2 'at vereor ne homines de me
sequius loquantuf (Drak.) where it conveys, as here, an air of selfimportance. While it is not a colloquialism, it is confined to the spoken
rather than the written word.
37. 4. nimio plus: 1. 2. 3, 28. 25. 14, 29. 33. 4, 39. 40. 9, an oldfashioned variant on multoplus, found often in Plautus (e.g. Bacch. 149)
and, as we might expect, in Lucretius (5. 564, 988). T w o other occur
rences are worth noting. Horace uses it when describing the reaction
of a resuscitated Democritus to modern theatre taste (Epist. 2. 1. 197-8)
and Antony affects it in a letter quoted by Cicero (ad Att. 10. 8 a. 1).
37. 6. memini . . . horret animus: cf. 28. 29. 4 (Scipio); Tacitus, Hist.
4. 58 (Dillius), a conventionally dramatic formula (cf. Virgil, Aeneid
2. 12; see Syme, Tacitus, 685 and n. 1).
Sabinorum iuventute: 18. 2.
37. 8. urbe excederent: urbem N but see 3. 57. 10 n.
The Speech of Attius Tullius to the Volscians
In this speech Tullius reverts to the political veinin contionis modum.
38. 1. caput Ferentinum: 1. 50. 1 n., the centre of the Latin League; but
no meeting of the League is intended nor has L. or his source confounded
the Volscians with the Latins. It was as convenient a rendezvous for
the one as for the other.
veniret: eveniret N, preferred by Rossbach (cf. Plautus, Rudens 631)
but in Plautus there is a clear sense of reaching a destination even
tually after alarms and excursions which is quite inappropriate here.
Cf. also Horace, Odes 4. 4. 65 and FraenkePs note in his edition of
Aeschylus, Agamemnon, p. 90, n. 1.
329

2. 38. 2

491 B.C.

38. 2. A troublesome passage. The position of inquit demands that

the direct speech begins 'ut omnia? inquit . . . a n d not earlier so as to
include veteres . . . Volscorum in the actual spoken remarks. This leaves
veteres . . . Volscorum without any verb to govern it, since exorsus must
go with orationem (21. 39. 10, 32. 37. 5, 36. 6. 4). To transpose the words
en bloc and insert them after alia (Walters) produces an intolerable
apposition and destroys the trenchant juxtaposition omnia . . . alia,
hodiernam hanc. There are two courses open, either to delete them as
a gloss on alia (and it must be conceded that it would have been bad
tactics for Tullius to have prefaced his remarks by gloomy reminis
cences of the clades Volscorum) or supply a verb, (exsecutus^) veteres . . .
(F. Walter in Phil. Woch. 57 (1937), 335; cf. 29. 17. 17) is paelaeographically and linguistically admirable: it might be improved to
exsecutusque.
contumeliam quo tandem animo fertis ? an echo of Cicero, in Catil. 1.
16.
The arguments used by Tullius may be imagined as the arguments
by which Catiline incited his supporters to open aggression (cf. his
speech in Sallust, Cat. especially 20. 9).
38. 4. quid eos qui audivere . . . quid (eos} qui . . . videre . . . quid eos qui
. . .fuere obvii: in such a highly rhetorical passage, the colon trimembrum should be preserved and I would insert an extra eos to secure it
rather than (with Karsten) omit the first one.
nos ab sede piorum, coetu concilioque abigi: 'that we are driven from
the place of the holy, from their throng and assembly5, difficult on the
score both of grammar and of sense. The sedes piorum should be the
evatfiiojv x&pos, the abode of the holy in the underworld, as in Horace,
Odes 2. 13. 23 sedesque discretaspiorum (see Heinze, ad loc.) or Cw/^295.
Tullius might mean that the Volscians are being deprived of their
chance of appeasing the gods and of securing favourable treatment
after death, but the natural interpretation in the context is that the
pii are (ironically) the crowd gathered at the games; in which case
Karsten was probably right to delete sede, thereby also easing the
grammatical awkwardness involved in taking coetu concilioque as epexegetic of sede.
38. 5. si hoc profectio ac nonfuga est: a turn of phrase familiar from
Caesar (B.G. 2. 11. 1, 6. 7. 8, 7. 43. 5).
hanc urbem vos non hostium ducitis: an old commonplace for which
cf. Cato, Or. fr. 195 Male.; Cicero, in Catil. 2. 17-26.
morati . . . moriendum: the jingle is deliberately rhetorical. The in
dicative with gerund (or gerundive) indicating obligation or necessity,
where a subjunctive might be expected, is characteristic of Cicero's
forensic style. Cf, e.g., de Domo 57.
si viri estis: 1. 41. 3 n.
330

491 B.C.

2. 39- 2

Coriolanus' March on Rome

39. 2. Circeios: i. 56. 3 n.
39. 3 . inde: in D.H. (and abbreviated in Plutarch, Coriolanus 28) the
campaign is in two distinct phases (8. 14-36): (i) Coriolanus begins
from Circeii and advances via Tolerium, BwXavwv crcpav TTOXLVthis
must be Bola: Sylburg emended Ba>Xas ACLTLVOJV ircpav TTOXLVLabici,
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 betterBovillae (/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: Notherwise 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. <hs tyyvs OVTOS rjSr] TOV SCWOV).
40. 2. armis viri: a deliberate juxtaposition. Derived ultimately from
Ennius (Norden, Aeneid 6, 368 n. 2 citing 1. 119, 9. 57, 620, 11.
696, 747; Horace, Sat. 2. 7. 100) and dramatically ushering in the
Aeneid^ it conveys the heroic character of the task which Veturia is
being urged to undertake. Gf. E. L. Bassett, C.P. 54 (1959), 13 and n.
40. 3 . agmen, is primo . . . dein: Bauer's correction of the manuscripts'
in prima, since inprimo is not found in L. primo is required to balance
dein, is to balance familiarium quidam.
40. 3 - 5 . A double TrcpincTeia. Coriolanus, when he recognizes his
mother (the tragic avayvojpLdLs) turns from disregard to affection,
Veturia from tears to anger. The scene is devised with brilliant economy
and the effect sustained by the language of Veturia's speech which is
throughout reminiscent of the tensest moments of Greek tragedy. At
the back of it lies the famous episode in the Phoenissae of Euripides
where Jocasta tries to reconcile her sons and the sentiments in 8 (nisi
peperissem . . .) recall the self-pitying Hecuba of the Hecuba or the
Troades. The impiety of ravaging one's motherland is denounced by
Amphiaraus in Aeschylus, Septem 580-3. (Line 16 of the same play
Tfj re prp-pl, <f>i\TaTT) Tp<x{>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 younor, wretched as
I am, shall I be so for long', nee . . . nee do not correspond strictly.
Instead of following up the alliteration and dramatic double compara
tive with which she began, Veturia breaks off and states her approach
ing end simply and directly. Had she continued in the same vein, a
corresponding clause would have been something like nee mihi ipsi
tarn diuturnum quam miserum (Meyer). See also P. R. Murphy, A.J.P.
79 (1958). 5 0 - 5 1 ; cf. 24. 5 n .
40. 9. -matura mors out longa servitus manet: she ends with a perfect
iambic line.
virum: note its position. He was a man but a woman won.
40. 10. complexus . . . movit: after the passionate appeal of Veturia
couched in high-flown language L. rounds off the whole episode in
two short sentences of the utmost simplicity.
40. 11. apud Fabium: 1. 44. 2 n. Although Fabius Pictor wrote before
the contamination of Coriolanus and Themistocles, he had already
given the story a Greek veneer. The saying multo miserius seni exsilium
esse\% an old Greek reflection, repeated often in tragedy (e.g. Sophocles,
O.C.) and in [Demosthenes], Epist. 2. 13, 3. 4.
335

2. 40-

488 B.C.

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.
Hernicinam ii quoque in armis erant: L.'s somewhat apologetic ex
planation hints at a longer account which has been concealed by the
change of source. D . H . (8. 64. 1) supplies details and divergences.
T h e difference in L. must be in part due to a difference of source, but
a keen desire to keep the following year clear for Cassius' lex agraria
and at the same time to minimize Cassius' good qualities may also
be responsible for his confining the war to a single year and making
it so indecisive.
aequo Matte: claimed, e.g. by Stacey, as a poetic phrase in view of
its use in Virgil, Aen. 7. 540 aequo dum Marte geruntur; Lucan 3. 5 8 5 ;
Sil. Ital. 5. 233, &c. A poeticism in this context would be utterly in
appropriate and the words, here as elsewhere (6. 10; 51. 2 ; 9. 44. 8 :
cf. 1. 33. 4), belong to the semi-official language of the W a r Office.
So Caesar writes (B.G. 7. 19. 3 ) : paratos prope aequo Marte ad dimicandum.
Note also Fl. Vopiscus, Aurelianus (= S.H.A. 26) 21. 2 cum congredi
aperto Marte non possent.
41. Sp, Cassius
T h e indisputable facts about the life of Sp. Cassius (the cognomen
Vecellinus is a later creation) are few. If, as one must, one accepts
the evidence of the Fasti, he was consul three times in 502 (17. 1),
493 (33- 3)> a n d 4^6- T h a t all subsequent Cassii were plebeians is not
so much an obstacle as a corroboration of the truth of the tradition:
for he is in good company and the praenomen Spurius is not adopted by
the later Cassii. During his second consulship he was responsible for
the treaty with the Latins. H e was condemned to death in the year
after his last consulship, 485. His second consulship coincided with
the Secession of the Plebs which was ended by the foundation of the
Tribunate. It also coincides with the traditional date for the dedica
tion of the temple of Ceres (41. 10 n.) and the institution of the largely
plebeian cult of that goddess. His third consulship coincides with the
treaty with the Hernici and a strong tradition records, despite in
dividual variations, that on his condemnation he and his were declared
sacri to Ceres. From these facts emerges a clear, if conjectural, picture
814432

337

2. 41

486 B.C.

of a man who was aware that the great danger to Rome was from the
powerful enemies (Voisci, Aequi) around her, that the duty of a states
man to rebuff this danger was to consolidate as strong an alliance of
neighbouring communities as possible and to encourage the Roman
people, who formed the backbone of Rome's fighting power, by
championing their aspirations. Hence the alliances with the Latins
and the Hernici. Hence the temple of Ceres and the leges sacratae. His
fall, like that of Themistocles, may have been due to the fact that
the plebs were not yet confident enough or vocal enough to come
to his rescue when the aristocracy counter-attacked. What is certain
is that his ascendancy coincided with a major disaster to Roman
arms in which many of the leading citizens fell at the hands of the
Volscians and that after his death the plebeians were discredited,
even disbarred, power passing to a narrow patrician oligarchy, led
by the Fabii. For a while the democratic process was baulked. It
bided its time with mounting momentum till the Decemvirate.
For L., faced with the difficulties ahead of constructing a coherent
narrative out of a scrappy series of isolated incidents, Sp. Gassius pro
vided an admirable focus. On the one hand he could be made the
archetype of subversive proposers of agrarian laws (dulcedo agrariae
legis ipsa per se . . . subibat animos) which would hold together the events
of subsequent years. On the other, following after Coriolanus, he
demonstrated how the Roman people, however great their strife,
would unite in the face of a threat to their liberty, whether from
within or without. L. was content to accept the form of the story that
was current in his sources without inquiring into its reliability.
The development of that form can be traced to a certain extent.
The oldest version, though even that is unhistorical (41. n n.), is
given by Cicero (de Rep, 2. 60) and will derive ultimately from Fabius
Pictor: de occupando regno molientem . . . quaestor (? K. Fabius) accusavit:
. . . cum pater in ea culpa esse comperisse se dixisset, cedente populo morte mactavit.

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 contradictiona 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 Aa<f>vpajv re KGLI Acta? taov fiepos. See 5. 4. 10 n.
4 1 . 3 . lex agraria\ throughout the century there is mention of such
agitation to distribute agerpublicus (in 482, 481, 476, 474, 467, 441, 424,
421,420, 416, 414, 412, 410: see 43. 3,44. 1,48. 2, 52. 2,54. 2 , 6 1 . 1,
63. 2, 3. 1. 2 , 4 . 4 3 . 6,47. 8,49. 11, 51. 5, 52. 2, 53. 2, 5.12. 3). Although
a shortage of land for pasture and cultivation was a factor in Roman
economy at the time, the record of these proposals is to be rejected.
The great majority of them are abortive threats which would never
have been documented. Moreover, it is only with the large acquisition
of ager publicus from the fourth century onwards that the need for such
measures arose. Whether they were intended to displace monopolistic
landlords holding large areas under uncertain title, or to settle new
land, they reflect the abuses and conditions of the century of the
Gracchi and many of them can be disproved in particular detail (see
notes). See L. Zancan, Ager Publicus; Clerici, Economia e Finanza,
290-301.
hanc: Praef. 4. Not merely a conventional reference to the distur
bances attendant on the proposals of Licinius Stolo, G. Gracchus,
and M. Drusus but a comment on the evils of more recent leges
agrariae, like Caesar's in 59 or Octavian's in 30 B.C., which were con
cerned with resettling veterans after campaigns.
4 1 . 4. fastidire munus volgatum a civibus isse in socios: isse An egisse M.
The Symmachian edition may have had, as Winkler believed, the
340

486 B.C.

2.41. 4

alternatives esse (which was the reading of Vorm.) and isse which are
combined in the conflation egisse found in M . If so, the true reading
was already in doubt in the fourth century since neither alternative
is right. (1) T o consider esse first: volgatum . . . esse must be taken
together as a dependent clause after fastidire. 'The plebs had begun
to resent that the gift was being disseminated from citizens to allies.5
So Rhenanus, Freudenberg, and others. T h e Thes. Ling. Lat. gives no
adequate parallel for such a dependent clause: the nearest is 6. 4 1 . 2
se inspici, aestimari fastidiat which is reflexive. In any case the past
tense is wrong. It was only in process of being disseminated. (2) Most
editors read isse (Aldus, Gruter, Heinsius, Bekker, Kreyssig, and
recently Bayet). 'The plebs had begun to resent that the gift had been
cheapened and had gone from the citizens to the allies.' Here again,
fastidire with ace. and inf. is uneasy and the naked isse cheap. Madvig
circumvented the first objection by putting a semicolon after volgatum
and taking a civibus isse in socios as a self-contained parenthesis stating
the reason for the resentment of the plebs. H . J . Muller improved it
by reading abisse, but the exisse of Luterbacher, Weissenborn, and
Meyer gives better sense with its connotation of dispersal and is
palaeographically attractive (cf. the similar mistake in the manuscripts
of Columella 11. 2. 101). Against this it must be said that a relative
clause quaeprimo coeperat. . . deinde . . . audiebat could not be broken by
such an abrupt insertion. Above all, the tense is wrong. Cassius' pro
posal is still only a rogatio. It is not yet on the statute book: the deed
is not yet done. A present, not a perfect, infinitive is required.
A passage of Seneca (de Benef. 2. 18. 6 munus suum fastidire te iniuriam
iudicaturus est) suggests that munus volgatum is the direct object of fastidire
here too. volgatum a civibus . . .in socios, despite the fact that elsewhere volgari in is apparently confined to diseases (4. 30. 8, 5. 48. 3 ; Curtius
9. 10. 1 ; cf. 4. 1. 3), must be right in view of the resumption in 41. 8 and
the inability to express the precise notion of the possession of the gift
passing from one body to another in any other way. T h e corruption
is therefore localized to egisse. None of the possible present infinitives
convinces (e.g. abigi or exigi). egisse should be seen as a corruption of
ipsis, where ipsis is used to underline the notion that it was citizens who
were being cheated in this way (Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana,
257). T h e line of argument was devised by G. Fannius in 126 B.G.
quid ita enim: 'for what (else) does this partnership with the Latins
mean ?' T h e force of quid ita is to pick out a particular happening and
hint a misgiving about it. So also 3. 40. 10, 6. 15. 11 : cf. the abso
lute use of quid ita? in Cicero, pro Mil. 17, et al. It corresponds to the
phrase quid attinet (6. 23. 7, 37. 15. 2) 'what is the point of?', so that
quid ita adsumi must be parallel to quid attinuisse . . . reddi. Most editors,
however, have adopted the manuscripts attinuisset and taken adsumi
341

2.41-4

486 B.C.

no less than reddi to be dependent upon it, the two being connected
by the repetition of quid.
socios et nomen Latinum: an anachronism, since, disregarding the
Latins and the Hernici, the Romans have as yet no other allies. But
note Cicero, Brutus gg (Domitius) unam orationem de sociis et nomine Latino
contra Gracchum reliquit and Appian, B.C. i. 23. A Gracchan touch.
4 1 . 7. intercessor: a loose use of the word since one consul could not
veto the actions of his colleague (see McFayden, Studies . . . F. W.
Shipley, 117).
plebi indulgere: the bidding for popular support is drawn from the
competition between C. Gracchus and M . Livius of whom Plutarch
(C. Gracchus g) says that he aimed imepPaXeaOai rov Taiov ya.pvri rtov
TToWtOV.

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 sacerpresumably, since the presence of
pontifices was not needed, by the supreme magistrate. In later times
consecratio bonorum was distinct from consecratio capitis and restricted to
offences against plebeian magistrates, in particular against the
tribunes (3. 55. 7). If a tribune was attacked he retaliated by con
secrating the goods of his assailant, which amounted to selling them
publicly and giving the proceeds to the temple of Ceres. By Cicero's
date the practice was obsolete. But in either case the validity of con
secratio seems to depend upon the position of the person who performs
the ceremony (consul or tribune) and the fact that Cassius' father
acts as a private individual confirms the suspicion that the story
is an invention. See further Wissowa, R.E., 'Consecratio'; StrachanDavidson, Problems, 1. 187; Nisbet's edition of Cicero, de Domo,
Appendix 6.
Ex Cassia familia datum: not 'given by the family of the Cassii'
343

2 . . 4 1 - 10

486 B.C.

(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 legendthe 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 aypa<f>oi
vofjLoi. If quaestores existed before the Twelve Tables, it is at least as
likely that duoviri did. Secondly, the reference to the trial before the
populus is universally admitted to be anachronistic, which casts doubt
on the rest of the details of tradition. Thirdly, the earliest version, in
Cicero's de Republica, speaks not of two but only of a single quaestor.
A more credible sequence, if there is any truth at all in Sp. Cassius'
trial, would be that he was tried by duoviri perduellionis a n d the
evidence of his father played some part in the trial, that when the
duoviri came to be forgotten only the memory of a trial and the part
played in it by Cassius5 father remained, that Fabius Pictor, gathering
the material for the first serious, annalistic history of Rome, found a
family tradition that a Fabius had been concerned in the trial and
designated him a quaestor or quaesitor because of the etymology and
obscurity of the office and the uncertainty as to how early R o m a n
trials were conducted, that the implausibility of his account led some
to substitute the family trial and others to improve on it by introducing
another quaestor and thereby preserving the important R o m a n prac
tice of collegiality, while at the same time speciously bringing them
into relation with quaestores parricidii. T h e source used by D.H. imparted
a more outrageous anachronism in the person of a tr. pi. C. Rabuleius
(8. 72. 1-4). See 3. 35. n n. In general see Mommsen, Staatsrecht,
2. 537 ff.; Munzer, R.E., 'Sp. Cassius'; K. Latte, T.A.P.A. 67 (1936),
2 4 - 3 3 ; C. H . Brecht, Perduellio, 267-79; H . Siber, Magistraturen, 56 ff.;
Zeit. Sav.-Stift. 62 (1942), 381 and 385; A. Heuss, 7. Sav.-Stift. 64
(1944), 93 ff- 5 E - s - Staveley, Historia 3 (1955), 4 2 6 - 7 ; Jolowicz 323.
L. Valerius: cos. 483 and 470, and praef. urb. 464. His presence may
owe something to the Lex Valeria de sacrando cum bonis capite eius qui
regni occupandi consilia inisset (8. 2 n.).
dirutas publice aedes: the demolition of the houses of persons found
guilty of perduellio or the like is well attested. Cicero {de Domo 101)
classes together the cases of Cassius, Sp. Maelius (4. 12-16), M .
Manlius (6. 20. 13, 7. 28. 5 ; Ovid, Fasti6. 185), and Vitruvius Vaccus
(8. 19. 4, 20. 8), and in each case the tradition is ancient and reliable.
Notice also the story of the Velia (7. 5-12). T h e temple of Tellus
was not built until 268 (Florus 1. 14) but it replaced an earlier shrine
that went back to the original demolition (C. Hulsen, Topograph. 1.
323: Weinstock, R.E., 'Terra mater', col. 804; le Bonniec 5 2 - 5 5 ;
Platner-Ashby s.v. Tellus). T h e house was situated on the Esquiline,
in Carinis (D.H. 8. 79).
345

2- 4 2 - 5 " . 3

485 B.C.
42-51. 3. The Fabii and Dulcedo Agrariae Legis

For this section Roman historians were faced with a disjointed series
of notices about battles and a long sequence of Fabii in the consulate.
Their problem was to form a connected narrative out of such material
and they did it by emphasizing the dominant position of the Fabium
nomen and by introducing as a recurring refrain the theme of agrarian
laws. T h e plebs agitate for the law: the patres resist: the Fabii attempt
unavailingly to reconcile the two sides and restore Concordia (47. 12):
a sudden invasion saves the day. T h e pattern is simple and in origin
goes back to Licinius Macer at least. L. adapts it to the scheme of the
book. In character and length the story of the Fabii (41-50) plays the
same part in the second half of the book as the episodes culminating
in Lake Regillus (14-21) play in the first. T h e symmetry is underlined
by the presence in each of a strongly marked 'Homeric' battle (45 n.).
L. also strengthens the pattern by an experiment of his own. Instead
of prefacing the opening of each year by a list of consuls, he weaves
their election into the course of the narrative (42. 2 termerepatres ut. . . ;
cf. 42. 7, 43. n , 48. 1,51. 1) and binds the whole section into a unity.
L. also abbreviates in order not to disperse the climax towards
Cremera, as a comparison with the parallel version of D.H. shows
(e.g. 8. 87 C. Maenius tr. pi.; 8. 90. 4-5 the interregnum of 482 5 9 . 2
Furius' operation against Veii; 9. 12 the exploits of T . Siccius; 9. 16
wars with Volsci and Aequi). At bottom the factual content of the two
writers corresponds with the historical situation when the mountain
peoples as well as the Etruscans were pressing down on Rome. But
already in their sources it has been supplemented by invention (the
agrarian laws) and political distortion (the ideal of Concordia, the
oppression of the plebs), D.H. utilizes at least two authorities (cf.
9. 18. 5 djLt^orepot Xoyoi): L. shows knowledge of only one, and per
sonal details (43. 3 n.), political bias (42. 1, 48. 2), and material
connexions (42. 5 n., 46. 4 n., 51. 1 n.) indicate that he is continuing
to trust Licinius Macer whose special interest in the gens Fabia is
evidenced by fr. 19 P. It is to be remembered that the Fabii and
Licinii were hand in glove between 384 and 354 B.C.
See Soltau 159; Burck 76-77; Klotz 244-6; Hellmann 6 7 - 6 8 ; see
also below on Cremera.
42. 1. dulcedo . . . subibat: cf. Tacitus, Agricola 3. 1.
fraudavere: 4. 51. 5 n., the political attitude is characteristic of
Licinius Macer.
In fact the legal position about praeda was always quite clear. All
immovables, land, houses, & c , belonged to the state (Pomponius,
Dig. 49. 15. 20. 1). T h e soldier had a right of plunder over whatever
movables came his way (Gaius, Dig. 4 1 . 1. 5. 7; cf. Aristotle, Politics
346

485 B.C.

2. 42. I

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, aTpaTVfxaray
itjrjeaav* Eiropios fxcv &ovpios eVt ra$ AIKCLVOJV TTOXGIS, Katacov 5c (Paj3to?
7rl Tvpprjvovs* Eiroplw fxev ovv a7ravra Kara vovv l-^oipi)o^vy ov\ v7TOfAivdvrojv els xfyaS ^Xdelv rcov iroXcfxlcov . . . . (3) Kaiaojv 8e <Pdflios . .

then the narrative as in Livy with several references to ol TvpprjvoL

In 44. 11 traditam ultro victoriam victis Aequis, signa deserta indicates

that the abortive war was fought against the Aequi, and 46. 1 supports
the same inference.
The inconsistency, first seriously pointed out by Sabellicus, has
been variously tackled. Sigonius, followed by Fayus, Klockius, Drakenborch of the older editors, wished to read Fabio in Aequos, in Veientes
Furio datur et in Veientibus quidem nihil dignum . . . . A simpler variation

of this is that proposed by R. K. Otto who would read Furio in

Veientes, in Aequos Fabio . . . . Both these suggestions are beset by two
obstacles. They reverse the allocation of provinces prescribed also in
350

481 B.C.

2. 43- 5

the parallel treatment of D.H. This fact must stand. T h e sources were
agreed that Fabius' battle was against the Etruscans. This is doubly
sure if the source was a Fabian sourcei.e. Licinius Macer. In
addition Otto's emendation requires one to suppose that Livy could
say that Fabius' war with the Aequi was not worth describing (nihil
memoria dignum) and then describe it for 20 lines. 43. 6-11 must relate
the doings of Fabius (43. 6 n.) and doings against the Veientes, not the
Aequi.
Glareanus seeing the difficulty of departing from the agreed dis
tribution of provinces, read victis Veientibus in 44. 11 and cum Veientibus
in 46. 1. This also, though logical, is palaeographically unacceptable.
T h e only other radical emendation is that of Conway and Walters
who read: ducendus Fabio in Aequos, Furio datur in Veientes. (in Veientes}
nihil memoria dignum gestum [est]; et in Aequis quidem Fabio aliquanto plus
. . . . This solution, commended by Bayet and Meyer, is equally in
admissible. It sacrifices the one certain correlation with D.H., and
produces un-Latin at the e n d ; in Veientes for in Veientibus would be un
paralleled in Livy and the chiasmus d. F. in V. in A. F. d. should be
preserved.
T h e text, therefore, must stand here and also at 44. 11 and 46. 1.
It is to be explained not as a change of source but, as Sabellicus saw,
as a mistake by Livy, partly perhaps through negligent forgetfulness
but influenced also by the fact that the Aequi, unlike the Etruscans,
were always being defeated. Note, in particular, 42. 1 above devictis
eo anno Volscis Aequisque, 3. 8. 11, 7. 30. 7; cf. C.LL. 6. 1308 devictis
Aequis et Volscis subactis. Whereas the Aequi to a R o m a n historian
were so much cannon-fodder, Veii was a serious proposition. Psycho
logically it was natural to write victis Aequis at 44. 11 and once it was
written cum Aequis in 46. 1 followed as a matter of course. Gf. also,
for L.'s fondness for recurring phrases, 3. 3. 10 in Aequis nihil deinde
memorabile actum.
4 3 . 6. unus . . .sustinuit: i.e. K. Fabius. T h e words are reminiscent
of the praise of another great Fabius, quoted in 30. 26. 9 sic nihil
certius est quam unum hominem nobis cunctando rem restituisse, sicut Ennius ait.
43. 8. etsi non . . . saltern: L. uses si non . . . saltern (5. 38. 1, 28. 40. 9,
31. 49. 11, 38. 53. 4) or etsi non . . . certe (22. 54. 6, 25. 6. 2) except
here where Muretus deleted et and Conway, unless the reading of the
O.G.T. is a misprint, divided et si. T h e construction, even if unparal
leled, can hardly be objected to, particularly in a section which shows
other traces of haste. See Bitschofsky, Berl. Phil. Woch., 1915, 882.
4 3 . 10. remedia: Praef. 9 n. As Hellmann (68 n. 2) observes, the whole
sentence is a comment by L. on the events of his own century. Unlike
Marius or Pompey the soldiers, and unlike Sulla and Caesar the
politicians, Augustus showed every sign of possessing both qualities.
351

2. 43' J o

481 B.C.

He was an Imperator. None the less he was applying remedia to the

social and political ills of Rome.
4 4 . 1 . velut processisset: i. 57. 3. The impersonal procedit with a dative
is extremely rare. Only two certain cases can be quoted. Caelius
(Cicero, ad Fam. 8. 12. 3) writes quibus cum parum procederet ut. . .,
where the /-clause may be assumed to serve in lieu of a subject. The
other case is Horace, Sat. 1. 2. 37
audire est operae pretium, procedere recte
qui moechis non vultis
on which Fraenkel (Horace, 82) comments that 'the syntactical con
struction removes it from the careful language of educated persons1.
A colloquialism is to be expected from Caelius too. Fraenkel, however,
by a strange contradiction, classifies the present passage as 'probably
an archaic or archaizing construction'. A colloquialism, on the other
hand, suits the lack of finish displayed in the whole section.
The Speech ofAp. Claudius
The sentiments and language are derived from Republican politics.
The suborning of one of the college of tribunes to thwart his colleague's
proposal only became a serious factor in politics when M. Octavius
opposed Ti. Gracchus and later when M. Livius Drusus outbid C.
Gracchus. The principle unum vel adversus omnes satis esse (that a single
veto outweighed the unanimity of the rest) was always implicit in the
constitution of the tribunate but seems first consciously to have been
formulated in the Gracchan era (Dig. 10. 3. 28, in re pari potiorem
causam esse prohibentis; Plutarch, Ti. Gracchus 10; Cato min. 20; Seneca,
Contr. 1. 5. 3). For the loaded term melioris partis cf. Cicero, pro Caelio
13; ad Brutum 2. 5. 3 : H. Strasburger, R.E., 'Optimates 5 ; for the con
junction of gratia and auctoritas as terms of political influence cf.
Cicero, Verr. 2. 106; Sallust, Catil. 20. 7 (H. Drexler, Rh. Mus. 102
(1959), 58); for salubres reipublicae cf. Cicero, de Domo 16.
44. 5. aliquid iuris: for the form of the expression cf. 39. 16. 7. The
difficulty of meaning does not seem to have been met. The consulares
are exerting the full force of any influence they possess over individual
tribunes to persuade them to oppose Ti. Pontificius. gratia is influence
as a result of past favours and services, auctoritas influence as a result
of age, standing, or character, aliquid iuris should therefore bear the
general meaning of 'some (moral) hold over'. But no other example
of such a general meaning can be quoted. In all passages, even those
usually adduced such as 3. 33. 8, 5. 35. 4, a code or convention which
makes the obligation binding is implicitnatural law, international
convention, and the like. None, however, can be conceived of here.
On the other hand aliquid iuris cannot be taken more closely in the
352

480 B.C.

2. 44- 5

sense of claim 'such as a creditor may exert on his debtor' (Conway)

with the sanction of the law ever hovering in the background, because
in that case the influence would not be gratia and auctoritas but veiled
threat and moral blackmail. The former meaning must be what L.
intends, although the expression is hardly felicitous. The closest
parallel would seem to be Ovid, Met. 2. 47-48 but even that is meta
phorical.
44. 6. novemque: M wrote noque which was corrected by Ratherius to
novemque, the reading of the archetype. The plural eorum (43. 4) pre
supposes a tribunate of at least three colleagues and removes any
possibility that L. is drawing on any of the authors who limited the
early tribunate to two (33. 3 n.) But no author made the first figure
as high as ten, and L. himself later calls attention to the increase to
that number (3. 30. 7). It would therefore be simple to accept the
correction made by Sigonius and read quattuorque, were it not that
throughout this part of the book L. has been guilty of several lin
guistic and factual slips, novem (cf. 4. 1.2) would be the natural figure
for any writer to give unless he thought about it, particularly after
evoking the atmosphere of late Republican party politics.
44. 7. auxilia convenerant: i.e. clients, slaves, and dependants. For D.H.'s
elaboration of this (TOVS eavrojv irevloTas eVayo/uevoi) see J. Heurgon,
Latomus 18 (1959), 7 I 3~23The Etruscan Debate
The arguments assumed consist of the familiar rhetorical common
places used by optimistic enemies of Rome.
44. 8. conciliis: the plural denotes not separate conclaves of separate
groups of Etruscans but a series of meetings of the Pan-Etruscan
Council at the fanum Voltumnae (5. 33. 9 n.).
aeternas: 4. 4. 4 n.
venerium: 3. 67. 6 n.
44. 9. opulentis: 50. 2 n.
duos civitates ex unafactas: 3. 67. 10 n.
44. 11. Aequis: 43. 6 n.
Battle with the Etruscans
The description of the battle has much in common with the account
of Lake Regillus (19-20) which was also from Licinius. The dis
tinguishing feature of both is that they combine a strong tincture of
Epic colouring with an admixture of realistic details from contem
porary warfare. This technique is most clearly seen in the celebrated
description of Valerius' combat with the Gaul. (Aul. Gell. 9. 11; see
814432

353

2. 45

480 B.C.

Marouzeau, Rev. Phil, 45 (1921), 164-5; A. H . McDonald, J.R.S.

47 (I957)> 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, >*<?
Schlachtschilderungen bei Livius (1934), 3 4 - 3 6 ; Hellmann 69-70, who
analyses the process by which the people are gradually brought
into a state of indignant fury at the insolent behaviour of the Etruscans
(cf. 3. 69. 1, 5. 7. 1).
4 5 . 1. nihil praeterea aliud quam: only here. Elsewhere L. uses nihil aliud
quam or, rarely, n. a. praeterquam (4. 48. 13, 5. 29. 6) but the pleonasm is
natural enough and does not merit correction. Fiigner, Lexicon, 910.
4 5 . 2 . diem tempusque: 'time and circumstances'. Cf. 22, 39. 12,
42, 50. 3.
45. 3 . qua . . . qua: 45. 4, 45. 16; cf. 35. 4 n. T h e repetitions at short
distance seem inelegant. See 1. 14. 4 n.
obequitando: the plight of the Romans and the bravado of the
Etruscans recall Numanus at the Trojan camp in Aeneid 9. 590 ff.
45. 4. remedium timoris: 3. 3. 5.
novum seditionis genus: i.e. if the Romans were really disaffected they
would not be sitting peacefully when they had arms at their disposal.
ad haec: haec for ea (normal in or. obi.) to give the illusion of direct
speech (A. Lambert, Die indirekte Rede, 34).
4 5 . 8. T h e crisp sentences mirror the style of military orders. A close
analogy, both in form and content, may be seen in Caesar's orders to his
army before Pharsalia {B.C. 3. 89. 4 : ioti exercitui imperavit ne iniussu suo
concurrent: se, cum id fieri vellet, vexillo signum daturum). T h e immediate
order is given simply and directly first. T h e comment follows.
45. 11. curritur: Wackernagel (Vorlesungen, 1. 146), comparing Quintilian 1.4. 28 and Virgil, Aeneid 6. 179, called attention to the use of
the impersonal passive as stressing the universality of the convergence
on the consuls (passim omnes).
tergiversantur: sc. consules.
4 5 . 12. Note the word-order and the chiastic ego . . .posse: velle . . .
ipsi which throws the stress on each word in turn, fecerunt ne: ne = ut
non is a not infrequent idiom in Latin after facio and similar words (cf
Tacitus, Agricola 6. 5 ; Val. Max. 1. 1.8: cf. R. G. Nisbet, A.J,P. 44
354

480 B.C.
r 2

2 . 4 5 . 12

an

( 9 3)> 7~43) d is not confined by L. to direct speech (24. 9. 10,

5. 19. 4, 32. 4).
45. 13. centurio . . .M. Flavoleius: D.H. 9. 10. 2 grades him as a irpifiomAos". L.'s rank is simpler and more dignified. A subtle change. T h e
name Flavoleius, though rare, is real, occurring on at least two in
scriptions from the region of Rome (C.I.L. 14. 2783; 6. 6893 C.
Flauleius Schulze 436) and also from Mutina. T h e family was not pre
tentious, and it is hard to visualize how the story could have been kept
alive for over two hundred years until the first historians enshrined it
in writing. Other indications also suggest that the story is retrojected
from a later period. T h e point of the story lies in the oath 'victor
revertar\ T h e wording of the oath shows that it was not, as has been
thought (Kromayer-Veith 305), the regular sacramentum which was
taken on enlisting and comprised simply a promise conventuros se iussu
consults nee iniussu abituros (3. 20. 3 n.). It is a special oath taken to
steady morale in a crisis, such as may often be found in the annals of
history as when at the Battle of the Standard Walter l'Espec, grasping
the hand of the Earl of Albemarle, ^aid, ' " I swear t h a t on this day
I will overcome the Scots or perish." "So swear we all," cried the
barons assembled around him' (Hailes). In his account of the ex
pedition to Cannae (22. 38. 2 - 4 ; Frontinus 4. 1.4) L. specifically
states that a battle-oath of the victor revertar type was instituted for the
first time then and so M . Flavoleius is consigned to the realms of the
fabulous. But a precedent would have been required to justify the in
novation. In the affairs of 216 a descendant of the Fabii, Q , Fabius
Maximus, was prominent. His son was one of the tribuni militum (22.
53. 1) who administered the oath. It is safe to hazard that the legend
of M . Flavoleius was concocted by the Fabii and that a Flavoleius (a
client or dependant) was then a leading member of the other ranks
in the army. L.'s description of the resolve to conquer or die is strongly
reminiscent of similar resolutions in Homer, e.g. Iliad 6. 3 0 7 - 8 ;
22. 1 0 8 - 1 0 .

deos fallet: cf. Kiessling-Heinze on Horace, Odes 2. 8. 10.

45. 14. sifallat: the technical phraseology was si sciens /alio (Paulus
Festus 102 L . ; 22. 53. 11 ; Iusiur. A r i t . = C.I.L. 2. 172). T h e object
of jalio is to be understood as deos not fidem (30. 42. 21 ; Ovid, Am.
3. 11. 4 6 ; Propertius 2. 20. 16; cf. L. 5. 51. 10) but is never expressed
in the formula.
Gradivum: 1. 20. 4 n.
iratos invocat deos 1 5 . n . 16. iratos is predicative, almost 'he calls on
the gods to be angry'.
in se quisque iurat: the administering of the oath follows the same
procedure as the administering of the sacramentum. Cf. Polybius 6 . 2 1 . 3 ;
Paulus Festus 250 L, 'praeiurationes facere dicuntur hi qui ante alios
355

2. 45- 4

480 B.C.

conceptis verbis iurant: post quos in eadem verba iurantes tantummodo dicunt: idem in me'.
4 5 . 15. armati: sc. iubent; 'now when they were armed let the lip-bold
enemy face them' (Foster).
4 5 . 16. Fabium nomen Fabia gens: so the manuscripts. Shafer, earlier
than Madvig, had realized that Fabia gens was a Nicomachean variant
on Fabium nomen: cf. Sulp. Sev. Mart 7. 7 beati viri nomen enituiL enite(sc)o
is scarcely found of people.
46. 1. detractant: 43. 3 n.
non magis secum pugnaturos quam pugnaverint cum Aequis: pugnaverint is
omitted by H, but the pleonasm is in L.'s manner. Pettersson com
pares Praef. 7, 4. 32. 2, 6. 14. 11.
cum Aequis: 43. 5 n.
46. 3 . vix explicandi ordinis spatium: Gronovius rightly took ordinis as ace.
plur., followed by Lallemand and Madvig, among others, on the
ground that the singular would imply spreading out the individual
soldiers who comprised the rank or ordo, whereas L. would seem to
mean spreading out the separate ordines in line of battle (1. 27. 6, 3. 60.
10). The singular is used by Frontinus (1. 4. 2; cf. the second hand
in Fronto 121. 9 van den Hout) but probably in the former sense.
pilis: anachronistic since the pilum belongs to the armoury of manipular tactis.
pugna iam in manus, iam ad gladios . . . venerat: in manus venire 'to come
to close quarters', with an army or a person as the subject, is usual in
the historians (Sallust, Jug. 101. 4 ; Tacitus, Annals 2. 80) but the
quasi-impersonal construction with the battle as the subject belongs
to the realm of military communiques. Cf. Bell. Hisp. 5 . 5 .
Mars est atrocissimus: unparalleled and not to be confused with
aequo Marte and similar phrases (40. 14 n.). It may be inspired by the
memory of the Homeric fiporoXoiyw !A.prjt [Iliad 11. 295, 12. 130).
46. 4 . tertio . . . anno: 43. 1.
praeceps . . . in volnus abiit: no wholly satisfactory explanation has yet
been offered for the phrase, praeceps (ab)ire is not infrequent for 'to fall
headlong' (Sallust Cat. 25. 4, 37. 4 praeceps <i)erat; Suet. Calig. 35;
Catullus 17. 9), ab- conveying the idea of falling from something, e.g.
a horse. This must be the meaning here, for abire 'to depart (life)' is
only followed by in when the direction is towards the ultimate des
tination, i.e. the grave, the underworld, or heaven. Yet if the meaning
is 'he fell headlong on to the wound' (cf. 1. 58. n ; Lucretius 4. 1049;
Virgil, Aeneid 10. 488), it is strange that the wound is not said to be
fatal and that his death has to be presumed from the context. The
explanation may lie in an attempt by Licinius to reproduce a Homeric
phrase like the obscure Trprjvrjs iXtdadt] (Iliad 15. 543).
356

480 B.C.

2. 46. 4

Conjectures do not convince (obiit Sigonius; labitur Cornelissen; cadit

H . J . Muller).
46. 6. consuli. . . consul: note the word-order emphasizing their rank.
verbisne: the reader is reminded above all of the reaction of the
Greek leaders to Agamemnon's ciriiTwX^ai^ (4. 220-421) and of Ajax'
heroism (cf. 12. 3640. for the opposition pugnando: adhortando). Cf.
Sallust, CatiL 58. 1.
46. 7. proceres: the word was felt to be high-flown from earliest Latin
literature. The sole occurrence in Plautus (Bacch. 1053) is para tragic.
Caesar avoids it entirely and Cicero allows it only once, and that
in a letter (ad. Fam. 13. 15. 1) where, as here, it may be intended as
a translation of the Homeric Trpofiaxoi, since he continues with a
quotation from Homer. See Lofstedt, Syntactical 2. 298.
infensis: = infestis; of weapons elsewhere only in Virgil (Aen. 9. 793,
10. 521 infensam contenderat hastam). infestis (Sobius) misses the nuance.
moverunt: both tense and verb are unexpected. A second historic
present would be natural after provolant and a compound verb (promoverunt Fiigner; provehunt Cornelissen) would clarify the picture. But
movere aciem is technical (4. 33. 6, 30. 34. 4) of an advance and the
aorist marks the end of that stage of the battle.
47. 4. vanior . . . acies: rara (opp. to densa) acies is technical (Frontinus
3. 10. 4 ; Tacitus, Hist. 3. 25; Curtius 4. 15. 20; Virgil, Aen. 9. 508)
and the Thes. Ling. Lat. quotes no parallel to vanior. rarior (Perizonius) should, therefore, be read. See Drakenborch's note.
se ipse coram qffert: like Agamemnon, with Diomede and Odysseus
in Iliad 14. 128-132.
47. 5. dum . . . tererent: for dum cf. 1. 40. 7.
praedae magis quam pugnae: cf. Tacitus, Hist. 1. 79.
tererent tempus: 1. 57. 9 n.
triarii: an anachronism from manipular organization. They formed
the third or back rank of the line.
ipsi: implies a contrast with Manlius consul and promotes the punc
tuation redeunL et sua sponte ipsi proelium renovant et Manlius
consul....
47. 6. incursantes . . .issent: to be taken together. Weissenborn well
compares Iliad 15. 1-2 e^-qaav favyovres. The construction is a Graecism.
globus iuvenum: 'a squad of young men', globus applied to people is
in origin a military term (Cato, Mil. fr. 11) and still retained that con
notation in classical Latin. Hence it is avoided by Cicero but liked by
Sallust (Hist. 3. 84 M.; Jug. 85. 10) and historians dealing with military
matters (Veil. Pat. 2. 58. 2 ; Amm. Marc. 24. 4. 9 et saep.). It is,
significantly, common in L. ( 1 . 5 . 7, 9. 12, 12. 9, 3. 47. 8, 4. 29. i,
4.61.6).
357

2- 47- 7-9

4 8 0 B.C.

47. 7-9. Note the staccato sentences.

47. 9. passim: its position at the end of the sentence marks the con
clusion of the battle in which the Romans had been successful on
every front.
47. 9-12. A record of a triumph declined would not be kept in the
Fasti Triumphales. If there is anything trustworthy in the story it will
be derived from a traditional laudatio or elogium of K . Fabius pre
served in the family, but see 6 i . 9 n.
4 7 . 11. gloria . . . redit: rediit manuscripts but cf. 1. 39. 4 n. It is a
proverbial saying (4. 57. 6, 22. 39. 2 0 ; Sallust, Cat. 54. 6 ; Seneca,
de Bene/. 5. 1.4).
47. 12. saucios milites curandos: cf. Tacitus, Annals 4. 63.
ulla re nisi salubri reipublicae arte: 'through nothing but arts that were
for the common good'. Gruter deleted re as being repetitious with
reipublicae arte but the resulting praise is faint and dubious in that it
implies that the Fabii did use some arts to secure their popularity,
although they were, as it turned out, consistent with the Public Good.
L.'s praise is unconfined. Cf. 1.8. 1.
4 8 . 1. bella: so the manuscripts. According to Pettersson, bella and
dilectus (ace. pi.) should be understood by a zeugma as the objects of
curam agere = curare (48. 8, 7. 26. 10). Cf. 17. 4. n. Hearne's conjec
ture belli was anticipated by Duker.
48. 2. priusquam quisquam . . . auctor tribunus exsisteret: 'before anyone
any tribuneshould emerge as an agitator for the agrarian legisla
tion'. T h e word-order shows that tribunus is added as an afterthought
and that it should be taken almost in apposition with quisquam which
retains its full substantive force, rather than closely with it ( = prius
quam quis[quam] (Wex)). For the juxtaposition priusquam quisquam
cf. 32. 20. 6.
sanguine ac sudorepartus sit: Cicero (de Officiis 1. 61), discussing the
language appropriate for denunciations and panegyrics, quotes a line
of Ennius as suitable for an outburst of righteous indignation: Salmacida spolia sine sanguine et sudore (also in Festus 439 L.). sanguine et sudore
parere was the stock phrase for lauding a great achievement (7. 38. 6 ;
Cicero, de leg. agr. 2 . 1 6 and 6 9 ; Val. Max. 7 . 6 . 1: Otto, Sprichworter,
334) and its employment by Fabius here gives a realistic note of
political oratory to the debate. Cf. also in Greek, Plutarch, Moralia
340 e (praise of Alexander) ri dviSpajrl, rl di/ai/xam . . .; for English
see Lord Elibank in the Sunday Times of 20 December 1959.
4 8 . 5. temeritate. . . consulis: L. has a series of standard psychological
explanations to account for Roman defeats which will not impugn
the character of the Roman people. O n e of his favourite reasons is the
temeritas of the general. Cf., e.g., 3. 4. 7-9, 5. 18. 7-12, 6. 30. 3-8.
358

479 B.C.

2. 48

Cremera
Each of the preceding four years (483-480) contained considerable
military activity undertaken by Veii. T h e record is trustworthy.
Recent events had forced Veii to take the initiative. T h e creation of the
new tribes of Claudia and Clustumina had deprived her satellite
Fidenae of most of her land and afforded Rome a stranglehold over
Veii's salt trade with the interior. T h e formation of the Latin alliance
had made Rome rather than Veii the centre of commerce in the area.
Veii's survival depended on her ability to regain control of the left
bank of Tiber upstream from Rome and so to reopen free communi
cation with Praeneste and the cities of the south. T h e campaigns
undertaken by Veii will have figured in the Annales. T o counter this
threat it was a natural experiment to plant a block-house near the
Cremera (mod. Fosso Valchetta) which would command the river
and enable the Romans both to harass traffic on the roads to Capena,
Fidenae, and Rome, and to have advance warning of impending
campaigns.
Such a reconstruction differs only slightly from the reconstruction
made by Roman historians and antiquarians from the bare facts in
the Annales. T h e Roman version, however, suffered distortion. T h a t
Fabi were responsible for the idea is possible (the old rural tribe Fabia
may have bordered on Veii and included Fabian estates; but see
Badian, J.R.S. 52 (1962), 201); that a large number of them were
involved and perished is likely enough; but that 306 Fabii should
be the sole casualties and leave only one survivor, is, in D.H.'s
words, irXda^iaaiv eot/ce OearpiKots (9. 22). T w o separate factors are
responsible for the embellishment. T h e gens Fabia were a lively re
pository of private traditions. Ovid can be shown to have learnt some
curious oddities about the family from Paullus Fabius Maximus.
Equally partisan was the family tradition which recorded the massacre
by the Etruscans of 307 R o m a n prisoners from the army of C. Fabius
Ambustus in 353 B.C. (7. 15. 10) or the death of 300 Romans under
Fabius Maximus in the Second Punic W a r (Plutarch, Vit. Par. Min. 4).
It seems, then, that the Fabii were themselves to blame for making out
of a notice of the destruction of a Roman praesidium at Cremera
a castrophe limited to their own family. W h a t started as a legion (306
+ 4,000) including a number of Fabii (Diodorus 11. 53) ends as a
corps d'elite of Fabii with dependants and retainers (Festus 450 L.,
Aul. Gell. 17. 21. 13; Servius, ad Aen. 6. 845).
W h a t guided the course of the story and may even have determined
the numbers involved was unquestionably the synchronism with the
Battle of Thermopylae (cf. Coriolanus and Themistocles, 33. 4 n.).
Gellius mentions that Cremera and the invasion of Xerxes coincided
359

2. 48

479 B.C.

although he does not point out the resemblance in detail between

Thermopylae and Gremera. At Thermopylae there were 300 Spartans
and 3,900 allies (Herodotus 7. 202); at Gremera 300 Fabii (Diodorus
loc. cit.) and 4,000 others (D.H. 9. 15; cf. Festus 450 L.). The position
is betrayed by a secret path over the hills; the 300 perish; an only son
survives (son of Megistias: Herodotus 7. 221). The pressure of the
Greek story may also account for the Fabian explanation that the
disaster occurred when they were recalled to Rome for a family
sacrifice (D.H. 9. 19. 1; cf. L. 22. 18. 8). A non-committal narrative
was reproduced by L.
D . H. knew of at least two accounts (9. 19. 1 Tu>eV, 9. 20. 1 erepos
\6yos\ cf. 9. 26. 1) which were probably combined in the source
before him. L. agrees in general with the second. The differences
can be attributed to his desire to concentrate attention on the tragedy
of the Fabii. He telescopes the time-sequence from three days to one to
secure an Aristotelian unity of action (cf. his chronology of Goriolanus).
He loses sight of M. Fabius; he omits all mention of the exploits of
T. Siccius (9. 14. 3 ) ; he discreetly forgets the presence of the turba . . .
cognatorum sodaliumque (49. 5). On one point, however, he may betray
the identity of his source. It is well known that Ovid {Fasti, 2. 195-242)
dated Gremera not to the traditional dies Alliensis, 18 July (6. 1. n ) but
to 13 February. It is held that in choosing this date he is deferring to the
private chronology of the Fabii who associated it with their festival of
the Lupercalia (15 Feb.) and, in particular, that he is acquiescing in the
views of Paullus Fabius Maximus. L. also must have had before him an
unconventional date (Mommsen, Rom. Chron. 26 n. 238). There are cer
tain marked inconsistencies between the narrative before and after 51.4
(see below), which indicate that L. changed his source at that point.
At 51. 1 Menenius is dispatched hurriedly to meet the crisis that
followed Gremera, whereas in 52. 3 it is implied that he was already
in camp nearby when the disaster occurred. The second (Valerian)
account squares with the accepted chronology. Menenius was consul:
it was summer (stativa) : he failed to relieve Gremera on 18 July: he
fought some unsuccessful engagements against the advancing Etrus
cans and was succeeded as consul on 1 August (3. 6. 1 n.). The first
account is much less amenable. There too Menenius is regarded as
being consul (51. 1 iam erant). There is no mention of stativa but a
scratch force is hinted at. Etruscan infiltration into Latium after
Gremera precipitates a corn shortage (51.2) because, one assumes, the
Romans were prevented from harvesting their crops. Since on the
accepted chronology the crops would certainly have been harvested
well before 18 July, these facts can only be harmonized with a chrono
logy which made the entry of consuls upon office 1 August, but dated
Gremera to 13 February. If it was winter, it is not surprising that the
360

479 B.C.

2. 48

fall of Cremera caught the Romans off their guard and that Menenius
was not in the field or in camp. Licinius Macer also rejected the syn
chronism of Cremera and the Allia, since he devises a different omen
to take the place of the Unlucky Day as a common link of misfortune
between the disasters (17 P.). It may be hazarded that L. has drawn
on Licinius and only suppressed niceties (48. 10 n.) which com
plicated the picture he was creating. Licinius Macer (and in this he
was following the lead of second-century scholars who were always
attempting to bring traditional legend into line with legal and con
stitutional realities) mentions a meeting of the comitia curiata and
implies the passing of a lex de imperio. He must, therefore, have nar
rated both a policy-making session of the Senate and a ratification by
the curiae. L., unconcerned with legal niceties, abbreviates and sim
plifies. It is more effective that the consul, K. Fabius, should command,
and that the sweep of the story should not be interrupted by dusty
antiquarianism. A trace of the curiae may, however, accidentally
survive in e curia egressus.
That Ovid presumably supplemented L. with personal knowledge of
his own is immaterial. Attention has often been called to the linguistic
resemblances between the two authors. What is also interesting
psychologically is that Ovid's ear was more fixed upon the sound and
appearance of words than their meaning. Note 49. 12 fusi retro ad
Saxa Rubra = 212 Tusco sanguine terra rubet; 50. 5 rara hostium apparebant
arma = 217 armentaque rara relinquunt; 50. n maximum futurum auxilium
= 241 posses olim tu, Maxime, nasci. See also 49. 4 n., 49. 8 n.
See further Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. 2. 246-8; O. Richter, Hermes
17 (1882), 425-40; Soltau, Phil. Woch., 1908, 9896.; Pais, Ancient
Legends, 168-84; A. Elter, Porta Carmentalis u. Cremera, (1910) ;H.Last,
C.A.H., 7. 504-6; Burck 8 3 ; Klotz 249; F. Bomer, Gymnasium 64
(1957), 113 ff.; J. B. Ward-Perkins, P.B.S.R. 29 (1961), 3 ff For Livy
and Ovid see E. Sofer, Livius als Quelle von Ovidius Fasten; Bomer's
introduction to his edition of the Fasti. For Silius Italicus' use of
Ovid see R. T. Bruere, Ovidiana (1958), 490-1.
48. 5. res proxime in formam latrocinii venerat: so the manuscripts. L.
uses proxime 'closest to' as a preposition, never as an adverb. Cf. 30.
10. 12 proxime speciem . . . navium, 24. 48. n . Rhenanus rightly deleted
in, a false echo from 46. 3.
48. 6. bellum quiete . . . eludentes: cf. Tacitus, Annals 2. 52. 3.
moturos se: the sense is clear'other wars are either actually im
minent or shortly to be expected'and the position of alia bella outside
out . . aut leads the reader to suppose that alia bella will be the subject
of instabant and the object of moturos. The intrusive se defeats that ex
pectation. Secondly, whereas bellum movere is common (21. 39. 1,
33. 45. 5, 43. 1. 11; Sallust, Cat. 30. 2 and a dozen more references in
361

2. 48. 6

479 B.C.

Thes. Ling. Lat.), examples of se movere 'to stir oneself to hostile activity'
are lacking in L. Seyffert's esse is preferable to Madvig's excision of se.
48. 7. quod . . . sinebat: (deleted by Wecklein (Jahrb.f. Class. Phil. 113
(1876), 632)) contains the substance of what troubled the Romans.
48. 8. tutam . . . maiestatem Romani nominis: recalling the rider to
the later R o m a n treaties in which the socius is bidden maiestatem populi
Romani comiter conservare (33. 3 1 . 8 ; Cicero,pro Balbo 35-36). T h e Fabii
can be depended on like a loyal ally. For the news of the incursion see
3.4. i o n .
48. 10. senatus consultum: so Festus 358 L. T h e Fabian expeditionary
force was regarded by Roman legal opinion not as militia legitima but
as a coniuratio (Servius, ad Aen. 2. 157, 6. 845, 7. 614, 8. 1), a force not
constituted according to the official dilectus but raised in an emergency
as and how volunteers could be found. T h e formation of such a
coniuratio could be the subject of discussion and approval in the Senate
but L. oversimplifies the issues when he states that a s. c. ratified the
whole expedition. T h e Senate could not by itself initiate war nor
could it regularize a coniuratio which by its very nature lay outside the
constitutional framework and did not even have to be commanded
by a magistrate. D.H. (9. 15) states unequivocally that in the original
form of the story the leader of the Fabii was not a magistrate, not, as
in L., the consul paludatus K. Fabius, but his brother M . Fabius. T h e
only body which could invest the commander with imperium and the
army with official standing was (in theory, at any rate) the comitia
curiata (5. 46. 11 n.).
49. 2. postero die: the manuscripts give postera die which, as Fraenkel
(Glotta 8 (1917), 58) observes, besides being the only feminine occur
rence of the expression in L., would violate the distinction between
dies fem., a space of time or the closing day of such a space, and dies
m a s c , a day or date. T h e feminine is unconvincingly claimed as a
variatio by Gatterall (T.A.P.A. 69 (1938), 314).
quo iussi erant conveniunt: echoing the sacramentum (3. 20. 3 conventuros
iussu consulis). L. unconsciously makes the expedition a militia legitima
to enhance the tragedy of it; cf. also consul paludatus (1. 26. 2). Con
trasted with the bleak formality of D.H.'s igrjevav avv euxaf? /ecu
Ovaiats the scene of departure in L. is solemn and full of pathos. It has
been inspired largely by the account in Thucydides of the departure
of the Athenian expedition to Sicily (6. 30, 31) adapted to a R o m a n
setting by the judicious insertion of peculiarly R o m a n prayers.
49. 3 . in vestibulo: i.e. of his house on the Quirinal (5. 46. 1-3 n.).
nunquam: cf. Thuc. 6. 30. 1, 31. 6.
4 9 . 4 . quorum neminem ducem sperneret egregius quibuslibet temporibus senatus:
so the manuscripts. Ovid, Fasti 2. 200, writes e quis dux fieri quilibet
362

479 B.C.
2. 49. 4
aptus erat which is less suggestive than Eutropius 1. 16, also dependent
o n L , qui singuli magnorum exercituum duces esse deberent. L. is saying that
any one of the Fabii was good enough to command the finest army of
any time and it displays an over-sensitive tenderness for constitutional
propriety that he should say so by laying the emphasis on the Senate
selecting the duces for its armies. Madvig, therefore, proposed sperneres,
egregius . . . senatus 'you would not reject any one of them as a leader,
and as a whole body they would have been a magnificent Senate at
any period of history'. T h e artificiality of the universal-second person
singular sperneres is matched by the absurdity of recommending an
efficient army for the sedentary duties of a Senate. T a n . Faber long
ago suggested exercitus for senatus and the same conjecture may be
found in Bentley's copy of Livy in the Wren library at Cambridge.
Two additional factors commend it. Eutropius is here an exact and
not a loose precis of L. Secondly, whereas egregius . . . exercitus is a
common collocation (7. 35. 4, 8. 13. 15; Tacitus, Agr. 17 magni duces,
egregii exercitus; Hist. 2. 47), egregius senatus is only found elsewhere
once, in the Theodosian Code (6. 4. 2 1 ; 372 A.D.) when egregius, as the
title vir egregius witnesses, had acquired a technical connotation. T h e
ready slip of a late-imperial editor should not be allowed to supplant
the true reading. For examples of this type of corruption in Greek
see Page on Euripides, Medea 1064.
49. 5. sequebatur: the 4,000 attendants, but under the influence of
Thucydides (6. 30. 2) L. has transformed them into a crowd of
spectators, propria alia . . . alia publica not two separate crowds, but one
crowd containing partly friends who had come for personal reasons
and partly the general public. T h e same make-up of the crowd is given
by Thucydides.
spem . . . curam: = /zer' eXirihos re dfia /cat SAofivpfitov in Thucydides.
49. 6. ire fortes, irefelices iubent: 5. 30. 5. T h e heading of a letter in the
Biography of Aurelian (Vopiscus4i. 1) felices et fortes exercitus s.p.q.R.
recalls the frequent incidence of a similar turn of phrase on property
inscriptions (cf., e.g., C.I.L. 6. 29778). It was a solemn formula to pro
claim the successful accomplishment of an undertaking, giving due
weight to the respective claims of god and man. There is harsh irony
in the allusion to the formula here which casts a very Roman shadow
over the departing army. T h e trochaic r h y t h m may be deliberate.
49. 7. faustum atquefelix: 1. 17. 10 n., the ritual language of prayer.
sospites . . . restituant: 2. 13. 6, ritual phraseology.
4 9 . 8 . dextro ianoportae Carmentalis: 'through the right-hand postern of the
Carmental gate' (Baker) and the same sense should be given to Ovid's
Carmentis portae dextro est via proxima iano (201 ; for text and interpreta
tion see Bomer's note). This is the natural interpretation of the Latin,
but there are difficulties. T h e Fabii are making for the Pons Sublicius.
363

2. 49- 8

479 B.C.

Even if it be conceded that the Porta Carmentalis, at the south-west

corner of the Capitol, could be thought of as existing in 478 B.C., that
such a gate could have had double entries, which is elsewhere vir
tually unattested, and that ianus could mean one opening of a double
gate, the route is absurd. To reach the Pons Sublicius if the troops
were coming through the city they would go directly by the Vicus
Tuscus and if they were starting from the Quirinal they would drop
down on to the Campus Martius and back into the city by the P. Car
mentalis. The alternative is to translate the phrase 'by way of the Janus
to the right of the Porta Carmentalis' (for the use oidextro cf. Ovid, Met,
11. 197 ff.), understanding Janus in an obsolete sense as an augurated
river-crossing, and identifying it not with the Pons Sublicius but with
a primitive bridge over the Insula Tiberina (see Holland, Janus,
242 ff.: cf. D.H. 10. 14. 2). This makes geographical sense but there is
no warrant that Livy or Ovid could have understood ianus so. I would
believe that the ill-luck connected with Porta Carmentalis had
originally no connexion with the Fabii or their route, and was only
pressed into this service by later antiquarians. Names are often older
than their explanations (1. 48. 7 n.): Festus speaks not of an unlucky
gate or path but of an ill-starred meeting of the Senate in aede Iani.
There are many instances of superstitions connected with passing
through doorways. See also Platner-Ashby s.v.; E. H. Alton, C.R. 32
(1918), 14-16; FelKAshby, J.RS. 11 (1921), 125 ff.; M. E. Hirst,
P.B.S.R. 14 (1938), 137-51; Saflund, Le Mura, 188 ff; Bomer,
Gymnasium, loc. cit.
49. 12. Saxa Rubra: mod. Prima Porta, 5 miles from Rome on the Via
Flaminia. Deriving its name from the red tufa rocks of the locality
(Vitruv. 2. 7), it was even in archaic times a strategic place command
ing the ferry to Fidenae, which lies on the south bank of the Tiber
just opposite Saxa Rubra, and being the meeting-place of several roads
from Veii and the neighbourhood. The fact that the Veientes had
their camp there is a strong indication that they were operating from
Fidenae, and not from Veii itself (see above). See also Nibby, Dintorni,
3. 31-32; Fell-Ashby, op. cit. 145-7; Philipp, R.E., 'saxa Rubra'.
insita: 41. 9 n.
50. 1. impetus incursantium: nX; incursantes ium P; incursantes lupi M. The
variants incur santes \ ium stood in the archetype and are at least as old
as the Nicomachean recension. The choice is open. With incursantes it is
necessary to supply in and in favour of this reading it could be argued that
incursantium would be the obvious correction when in was lost by haplography. 'The Etruscans made incursions: the Fabii made sudden
sallies against them.5 With incursantium the sense is that the Etruscans
ravaged the fields and sometimes, as they were so doing, attacked
364

478 B.C.

2. 50. 1

the Fabii. The latter is commended by 25. 36. 3. impetus incursantium

Numidarum arcebant; the former is palaeographically more satisfactory.
aequo campo conlatis[que] campis: the manuscript -que, linking two
ablatives of different logical status, was held to be an intrusion by
Karsten. Cf. 64. 5, 38. 41. 6, and see, for intrusive -que in L., 32. 10 n.
50. 2. opulentissima, ut turn res erant: opulentus conveys more than 'rich,
wealthy', containing also the notion of 'strength and power' implicit
in the substantive opes (1. 30. 4). Cf. 2. 63. 6; H. Drexler, Rh. Mus.
J
o2 (i959)> 58.
50. 6. insidias . . . locatas: cf. Ovid, Fasti 2. 223-4
Sic Fabii vallem latis discursibus implent
Quodque vident sternunt.
The stratagem of the Veientes was to lure the Fabii by easy successes
into an ambuscade. The flocks were allowed to graze at liberty guarded
by a few inadequate detachments (jara hostium apparebant arma) but
the real forces lay carefully concealed. Nothing, however, could have
been more calculated to put the Fabii on their guard than to unferret
some ambushes close to the road {circa ipsum iter). L. ought to be saying
that the Fabii overwhelmed some troops which were visible and
foolishly thought that they had thus removed the whole opposition.
As Ovid says, quodque vident sternunt. insidias, therefore, is infelicitous. It
must be assumed that L. wrote custodias or praesidia . . . locata(s) (cf.
11. 1 praesidio in Ianiculo locato).
50. 7. orbem colligere: 'contract their circle' not, as in the usual mili
tary image, 'form a circle'.
50. 10. duxit. . . collem: Herodotus 7. 225. 2.
iugo circummissus: the path of Anopaea at Thermopylae.
50. 11. satis convenit: 38. 57. 2. The implication is that L. consulted a
second source which differed as to the total number killed. As often
the citation of a variant is the prelude to a change of source (see below).
unum prope puberem aetate: the reading of the archetype causes dis
quiet. It is taken to mean 'one almost adult in age was left behind 5 .
The linguistic arguments against this are matched by common-sense
considerations. L. does not elsewhere write pubes aetate like natu minor.
What he does do is to qualify aetas by pubes ( 1 . 3 . 1 ad puberem aetatem,
1. 35. 1 prope puberem aetatem erant) as the lawyers in the Digest com
monly do (Ulpian 43. 30. 3. 6; Papin. 28. 6. 41. 7). puberem aetatem
is required by Livian usage (so Gronovius rightly) but here another
snag is encountered, unum p. p. a. could not stand for unum qui p. p. a.
erat: yet it is impossible to take p. p. a. with relictum. Such considera
tions led Kreyssig, although not in his edition, to suggest propter
puberem aetatem 'because of his (recent) coming of age', which was
approved by H. Kohler and M. Hertz. On this Wolfflin, in an
365

2. 50. U

478 B.C.

apparently forgotten note (Philologus 8 (1853), 384), remarked that

in any case the motivation of Fabius' being left behind is wrong, if he
is said to be nearly of age, since 'teen-agers' frequently accompanied
expeditionary forces. T h e author of the de Viris Illustribus (14. 6),
precising L., wrote unus . . . propter impuberem aetatem domi relictus, and
propter impuberem aetatem (also conjectured by Kreyssig and com
mended by Madvig, ed. tert. 1886) alone brings light into a dark corner
of the text. It is neither here nor there that ten years later (3. 1. 1)
the boy was consul.
51-65. Discordia: Laetorius and Ap. Claudius
T h e inconsequential events of the years 477-468 left only an exiguous
trace in the Annales. There was no single factor like Cremera or the
prominence of the Fabii which an historian could seize on to act as a
focus for his narrative. L.'s predecessors had obviously endeavoured to
build something on the material. They gave a character and a
position to the wraith-like Ap. Claudius (56. 5 n.) and provided him
with a foil in the person of C. Laetorius (56. 6 n.). They developed
the personality of Volero Publilius (55. 4 n.). Above all, they were
aware that historically these years were crucial for the Struggle of
the Orders and the emergence of the tribunes from purely revolu
tionary officers of the plebs to recognized magistrates of the populus.
Accepting this, they filled in the background with suitable episodes.
Ancestors of tribunes famous in later history are 'unearthed'. Tribunician prosecutions are invented (52. 3 n . ; 52. 6 n . ; 61. 2). T h e
right ofprovocatio is conveyed in a parable (55. 4-11). T h e election of
tribunes is made respectable. T h e constant theme of a lex agraria is
stressed (41. 3 n.). L. imposes a schematic arrangement which makes
the first generation of the Republic in chapters 22-33 (nexum'- Laetorius
Ap. Claudius: the tribunate: reconciliation) exactly parallel to the
second (51-65: Lex agraria: LaetoriusAp. Claudius: the tribunate:
no reconciliation).
It does, however, appear that he reverts to Valerius Antias for the
remainder of the book. T h e break is indicated at 51.4. In 51.1 Menenius
is hurriedly sent, one presumes from Rome, to face the Etruscans
exultant in the victory at Cremera (cf. 6. 1. n ) . T h e difference may
also involve a different date for the dies Cremerensis (cf. p. 360, above),
particularly since the two battles fought by Horatius and Menenius
are suspiciously like the two battles fought by Verginius and Servilius
(51. 4-9) both in topography and in outcome and D.H. (9. 24) knows
nothing at all about any fighting in the latter year. A writer who dated
Cremera to 18 July and the terminal date for the office of consul as
1 August would have to allocate the bulk of the fighting against the
victorious Etruscans to the consuls of the next year. But if Cremera
366

477 B.C.

2. 5!- 6 5

was on 13 February and the consuls had only been in office for seven
months, they had the rest of the year to face the Etruscans. Combine
the two chronologies and the same events will be recorded twice under
two pairs of consuls. T h e explanation will also account for the awk
wardness of in futura proelia (51. 3 n.) and cladem (51. 4 n.).
The passage, as a whole, has the closest affinities with 22 fF. (52. 2 n . ;
the description of Ap. Claudius; 59. 7 and 25. 1 night attack by the
Volsci; provocatio) which may be due to a common source. It also has
express links with the story of Coriolanus as told in 34 fF. (52. 4 ;
54. 6). Conspicuous is the pride shown in the town of Antium
(63. 6).
Soltau 156-60; Seemuller, Die Doubletten in der Ersten Decade (1904);
Burck 8 3 - 8 5 ; H. Bruckmann, Die romischen JViederlagen, 4 7 - 4 9 ; Klotz
25"35 1 . 1. cum . . . est, iam: Crevier's correction is certain. T h e indicative
is used when only the point of time is meant. Cf. 21. 39. 4, 23. 49. 5,
45. 39. 1. Horatius'praenomen is C. here (Licinius) but M . in 3. 30. 1 n.
(Valerius). He was son of the consul of 507 (2. 8. 4-5).
5 1 . 2. annona: 9. 6 n., from the Annales. T h e Etruscans, by investing
the city on both sides of the river, prevented access to the cornland
in Latium.
ad Spei: not, as commentators take it, the temple of Spes in the
forum Holitorium which was only built in the First Punic War (Cicero,
de Leg. 2. 28) but an ancient shrine on the Esquiline just inside the
later Porta Praenestina (see plan of Rome) which disappeared soon
after the foundation of the second temple but not before it had given
its name to the region (Frontinus, de Aqu. 1. 5 ad Spem veterem). Being
the highest point on the east side of the city, it was a strategic area
and had been the scene of a similar battle in 2. 11. 5 fF. See PlatnerAshby s.v.
aequo Marte: 40. 14 n., military jargon.
5 1 . 3 . in futura proelia: a curious expectation which suggests a com
promise with the sources.
5 1 . 4. Sp. Servilius: N has/?, servilius here but Sp. Servilius in 52. 6.
D.H. 9. 25. 1 gives the praenomen Servius, Diod. 11. 54. 1 Gaius. T h e
Fasti under 463 gives his son's filiation as P . Servilius Sp.f. P. n. which
corroborates Sp. here. For the symbol/?, see 15. 1 n.
proxima pugna: a certain correction by Gronovius. Since the battle
referred to is that ad portam Collinam in which the Romans were only
just superior and gained a psychological rather than an actual success,
it is very odd to call it a clades.
velut ab arce laniculo: cf. 10. 1. 7. For the manuscripts' Ianiculi
see Madvig, Emendationes, 63-64.
impetus dabant: 19. 7 n.
367

2. 51- 5

476 B.C.

5 1 . 5. ad inlecebras: the ruse and the result correspond exactly to the

battle described in 11. 5 ff. {ut eliceret praedatores). The scene is not de
finitely stated, traiecto .. . Tiberi (51.6) might be taken as evidence that
up till then the Etruscans had restricted their operations to the north
bank of the river, but it is unreasonable to press the point since the
Romans, virtually besieged in Rome, could only drive out flocks and
conceal ambushes on their own (south) side of the river. If that is right,
the scene of the ambush was the same as that in 11. 5 ff., in other words
in the vicinity of ad Spei, so that the case for identifying the two battles
is strengthened.
51. 6, traiecto: note the short, telegraphic sentences.
51. 7. hestema felicitate: hestemae Gronovius, but the enallage is
common when the noun and the dependent genitive form a single
concept ('victory') and the adjective is to be stressed: 'still somewhat
intoxicated by success which was only a day old'. See Lofstedt, Syntac
tical 2. 110 n. 2.
inopia: a duplication of the Annona of 51. 2.
quod . . . consilia: 'but chiefly because the scarcity of corn drove him
to adopt measures however impetuous provided they were ex
peditious', quamvis with praecipitia = in consilia quamvis praecipitia
(22. 50. 9). Inopia (nom.) is the subject of agebat with consulem under
stood as the object (9. 14. 15, 24. 27. 5). This reading involves only the
slight change from the nonsensical agebant to agebat (Rhenanus).
Although inelegant (Glareanus' urgebat would be an improvement),
it is preferable to inopia . . . [in] praecipitia . . . (sc. consul) agebat con
silia (Sigonius; so also Gudeman, Thes. Ling. Lat. 447. 20) where
consilium agere = c. inire, capere, a usage of which the only other instances
are very late. For praeceps consilium cf. Gurtius 7. 7. 20, Suetonius, lul.
20; for the commonplace, almost proverbial, thought cf. 9. 32. 3,
22.38. 13.
51. 9. occidione occisi: 3. 10. 11, 4. 58. 9, 9. 38. 3 et al. 'utterly slain'.
The expression has an odd history. Although such a. Jig. etym. might be
expected in early Latin, the first surviving instance appears in fact to
be in a formal letter from Cicero, when governor of Gilicia, to Gato
recounting the progress of his military undertakings (ad Fam. 15. 4. 7;
cf. also Phil. 14.36). In both passages the context is formal and solemn,
suggesting that the phrase belongs to official language. The per
functory character of the present passage, moreover, is close to official
reporting. The phrase passed into historical jargon (Tacitus).
52. 1. ex Campania: 9. 6 n., a detail preserved in the Annales.
52. 2. otio . . . lascivire: 1. 19. 4 n.
52. 3. Qj. Considius et T. Genucius: although not expressly stated, it is
assumed that they were tribunes. This in itself causes mistrust, for
368

476 B.C.

2. 52- 3

tribunician prosecutions at this date are inconceivable (35. 5 n.). The

mistrust is intensified by the identity of the prosecutors. Q,. Gonsidius
is otherwise unknown (Munzer, R.E., 'Gonsidius (6)'). The Gonsidii
are not heard of again until the first century when they emerge in the
persons of the rich capitalist Q . Considius, who had been juror at the
trial of Oppianicus in 74 (Cicero, pro Cluentio 107) and Caesar's expert
officer P. Gonsidius. The name indicates an Italian origin. All the
evidence combines to make this tribune a purely mythical figure, in
serted to do honour to a great family. The Genucii, on the other hand,
are old (3. 33. 3, 4. 1. 1, 5. 18. 2) so that there is no justification for
doubting their historicity (Sigwart, Klio 6 (1906), 285 ff.) but that does
not establish the tribunate of T. Genucius as real. Since the prosecu
tion is itself spurious, the names of the prosecutors cannot command
belief. It is likely that there was a record of an investigation by
duoviri perduellionis (Brecht, Perduellio, 284-7) a n c * that the anonymous
duoviri were given names by later historians. Under the influence of
contemporary affairs they gave them prominent plebeian or tribunician
names and thereby converted the trial into a tribunician prosecution.
Valerius Antias was certainly guilty of inserting a tribune Genucius
at 7. 42. 1-2. He may be responsible here too (Stein, R.E., 'Genucius').
Gf. Plutarch, C. Gracchus 3.3 vTrcp rewKiov TWOS hrnjbdpxov XoiSoprjdcvTos.
52. 4, ea oppressit: sc. invidia. earn of the manuscripts is senseless. The
ellipse of the object is surprising but none of the remedies (reum
oppressit Freudenberg; ea oppressit (eum)> Cornelissen) convince. For
invidia oppressit cf. 40. 10; 1. 5. 2.
pro Coriolano: 35. 5.
Agrippae: 32. 8-12.
52. 5. in multa temperarunt: 'in assigning a fine the tribunes were
lenient 1 . A very difficult sentence. The figures of fines in the early
years of the Republic are all fictitious and their very size displays their
arbitrary calculation (3. 31. 6: 10,000 and 15,000; 4. 41. 10: 10,000;
4 . 4 4 . 10: 15,000; 5. 12. 1: 10,000; 5. 29. 7: 10,000; 5. 3 2 . 9 : 15,000).
These were regarded as heavy fines so that a sum of 2,000 might seem
to be lenient. The sense, then, will be that the tribunes were moderate
in the fine, although they had aimed at the caput; i.e. after they dropped
the capital process they might naturally have been expected to impose
a very large fine. The Latin remains awkward. No better parallel for
tempero used absolutely can be quoted than Sallust, Jug. 85. 9 in
potestatibus temperate. Moreover, the parallel passage of D.H, 9. 27. 3
estimates the fine as very severe for those times (vTrcpfocs). The awk
wardness of L.'s language may betray a misunderstanding of a
common judgement. The switch from a capital charge to a fine has
been regarded as owing something to the case of Gn. Fulvius in
211 B.C. (26. 3. 6-8).

2. 52. 5

476 B.C.

anquisissent: 6. 20. 12, 26. 3. 7.

duorum milium: Reid's correction is necessary. To delete multam and
keep duo milia (Bayet) is inexplicable, edixissent, the reading of the
manuscripts, would mean not 'pronounce sentence 5 but 'to announce
beforehand that the sentence will be a fine, should an offence be com
mitted'. It may have arisen from a combination of the variants multam
and multae.
ea in caput vertit: 27. 23. 4, 45. 10. 11.
inde morbo absumptum esse: esse should be kept. L. simplifies the
manner of Menenius' e n d ; in D.H. melancholy induces voluntary
starvation but such a detail would only be distracting to L.'s terse
account.
5 2 . 6 . tribunis: 35. 5 n., 52. 3 n. with references. Statius is an old Italian
name, found often in Campania and the south of the peninsula as a
praenomen (9. 44. 13, 10. 20. 13). It was introduced into Rome as a
result of Rome's expansion in Italy and it is significant that it was an
early name for slaves (Aul. Gell. 4. 20.11). As a nomen it is not apparently
found before 106 (C.I.L. I 2 . 677 (Capua) P. Statius P.M.L.).
The
most distinguished man of the name was the Samnite leader in the
Social W a r who later became a member of the Senate. Like Considius above, it is inconceivable as a Roman name in 475. L. Caedicius
is somewhat more plausible in that the family of Caedicii is old (5. 32.
6 n . ; V. Basanoff, Latomus 9 (1950), 263-4) but, as in the previous
case, it looks as if an anonymous duumviral prosecution has been
embellished with names and personalities. Munzer (R.E., 'Statius (4)')
held that the whole prosecution was inspired by the trial of Q . Servilius Caepio in 104, Despite certain resemblances of name and cir
cumstance which may have contributed something to the legend, the
actual fact of the prosecution will have had independent and docu
mentary existence.
52. 7. et huic: 'Servilius, as well as Menenius, was charged with mis
handling a battle against the Etruscans; in his case at the Janiculum',
audacia: ablative.
52. 8. mutaverant animi: animum N. Cf. 9. 12. 3 adeo . . . animi mutaverant.
If animum were the object, the plural animos would be required (6. 33.
10, 24. 21. 1, et at.: contra, 43. 22. 5) but in that case the subject is
always the person or thing which caused the change of mind.
53. 1. Veiens bellum . . . quibus: quibus picks up Veientes understood from
Veiens, a common transition with ethnic adjectives but principally
found in loose writing (cf. Klotz on Bellum Hisp. 2. 1 ," Caesar, E.G.
1. 40. 5 : Wackernagel, Vorlesungen, 2. 88). T h e inelegancy is on a p a r
with the rough certamina Jinita, bellum exortum (without any auxiliary
verbs) which Gronovius wanted to refine by writing certamine . . .Jinito.
370

475 B.C.

2. 53- i

Sabini: 48. 6 n.
fl/ia: adverbial, sc. via, 'in different directions'. Cf. 30. 4. 2, 44. 43. 3.
5 3 . 3 . superatae sunt: L. omits that P. Valerius was awarded a triumph
for his services, a fact recorded in D.H. 9. 35 and the Fasti Triumphales.
5 3 . 4. sine Romano out duce aut auxilio: 3. 6. 5, 4. 45. 4 : see 3. 4. i o n .
This curious detail cannot have been invented but must have h a d a
place in the Annales, since it betrays a truth, which the Romans were
later anxious to conceal, that the earliest treaty with Latium and with
the Hernici was afoedus aequum which left the Latins and Hernici free
to act on their own initiative when they wished. It follows that if the
treaty with the Hernici was afoedus aequum the alleged partition of
their land by the Romans (41. 1) must be a confusion. See SherwinWhite, Roman Citizenship, 22.
54. 1. C. Manlius: the praenomen may be corrupt. T h e Decemvirs were
all consulars and advanced in years. One of their number was
A, Manlius (3. 33. 3 ; D . H . 10. 56. 2) and he is to be identified with
the cpnsul of 474, whose praenomen is given by D . H . 9. 36. 1 as AvXos
also (MdpKos in Diod. 11. 63. 1). Since L. drew his material for the
Decemvirate and the present passage from the same source, it would
not be quixotic to read A. Manlius here. See Broughton, M.R.R., s.v.
indutiae: the peace lasted till 437 (4. 17. 8), a period of 37 years but
no mention is made of the treaty being violated then, which may
indicate that it was of shorter duration than 40 years and was no
longer in force by 437. T h e treaty is to be connected with the crush
ing defeat which the Etruscans received at the hands of Hiero and the
Syracusans in 474 at Cumae. T h e coincidence is a valuable proof of the
soundness of the Roman archival tradition.
Cn. Genucius: 52. 3 n. For the prosecution see 35. 5 n.
arripuit: 3. 58. 7, Pliny, Ep. 4. 11. 1 1 ; short for arripi iussit.
54. 3. Vopiscum Iulium pro Verginio: D.H. 9. 37. 1, Diodorus 11. 65. 1
&nd the Fasti Cap. (
] lulus) all agree on the rival tradition that
Vopiscus Iulius was consul. The source of the mistake can be seen
from a fragmentary entry in the Fasti Cap. for 478:
E]squilinus.
T h e space on the stone leaves no doubt that this was the name of a
suffect consul and it has been plausibly restored as Opet. Verginius -f.
-n. Esquilinus (Degrassi 24, 356 ff.). In 478 the ordinary consuls were
L, Aemilius II and C. Servilius. In some authority the suffect consulate
was wrongly transferred from Aemilius' second to his third consulate
an,d was then mistaken for the second ordinary consulate of that year.
T h e singularity of the mistake is in keeping with what we know of the
libri lintei. For the praenomen Opiter cf. 17. 1 n. Vopiscus is a very
ancient Latin word meaning, according to Pliny, N.H. 7. 47, the sur
viving twin when the other has died after premature birth (? connected
371

2. 54- 3

473 B.C.

with ovicide: see Walde-Hofmann s.v.). Its use as apraenomen is archaic.

See Klotz, Rh. Mus. 86 (1937), 220; Miinzer, R.E., 'Iulius (301) 5 ;
H . Gundel, R.E., 'Verginius (18) 5 .
The Murder ofCn. Genucius
T h e whole conspiracy (54. 4-10), which ends with the murder of
Genucius and the triumph of the patres, is portrayed in the colours of
the late Republic.
54. 4. praetextam: sc. togam. praetexta is often used absolutely for the
purple-bordered toga worn by the higher magistrates, but the careful
rhythm of the sentence [consulares fasces, curulem sellam) is improved by
the presence of togam which could easily have dropped out by haplography after praetextam.
pompom funeris: the technical expression for funeral decorations, cf.
Nepos, Atticus 22. 4.
claris . . . destinari: the metaphor is changed from a funeral to a
sacrifice. T h e picture of a victim standing by the altar decked for
sacrifice is striking and for L. unusual, clara is the stock epithet for
insignia (Pliny, N.H. 16. 7) but infulis velatos (cf. Varro, de Ling. Lat.
7. 24 infulatas hostias quod velamenta his e lana quae adduntur infulae) is
evidently not the sacral phrase for the dressing of a victim, since
it appears to occur first here, but it is solemn and elevated, as is ad
mortem destinari (5. 40. 1 ; Seneca, Dial. 12. 11. 3 ; Virgil, Aen. 2. 129).
T h e character of the metaphor and the way it is introduced in indirect
speech, conflicting with the previous image, suggest that it may be
an adaptation from poetry, perhaps Ennius. It is copied by Florus
4- 2. 92.
54. 5. ad nutum imperiumque: imperium is used widely of behest. T h e
tribunes did not enjoy imperium in the narrow sense. T h e phrase is
strongly reminiscent of Ciceronian expostulations: cf., e.g., Verr. 1. 78,
2. 67.
54. 6. sibi proponant ante oculos: the received text is the equivalent of
vobis proponite in or. recta. T h e sense would b e : 'recall the fate of his
predecessors and imagine what will happen if a consul decides to take
positive action against the plebs\ Since the ex-consuls are trying to
enlist the support of the people, especially the patres, it is more appro
priate that they should end their efforts with such a direct appeal to
their audience than that they should tamely conclude: 'let any consul
who is thinking about taking steps against the plebs reflect on the
precedents [proponat)\ A further consideration is that only the plural
seems to be used in this oratorical commonplace: cf. 9. 5. 8 ; ad Herenn.
4. 48 vobis ante oculos proponite; Cicero, de Leg. Agr. 2. 53, et aL
54. 7. consilia: 4. 6. 6 n.
54. 8. erecta exspectatione: erecta nom, cf. 26. 22. 5.
372

473 B.C.

2. 54 8

desertam ac proditam: 27. 11, 4. 43. 9. A hackneyed lament: cf.

Cicero, Verr, 1. 84, et al,
54, 9. nuntiant. . . inventum: Genucius doubtless did die in office, and
a note of the fact may have survived, but the sinister discovery of the
tribune dead in bed has no older pedigree than Scipio Aemilianus
(129 B.C.; Livy, Ep. 59). Note also the death of M. Drusus in 91.
D.H. 9. 38 has no hint of the murder-plot of the patres,
54, 10. fecisse videri: 8. 15. 6, 23. 14. L. maintains the atmosphere of
contemporary politics by employing the phrase by which in Re
publican times a judge pronounced judgement. The use of videri in
the verdict, besides being an admission of the fallibility of any such
judgement (Cicero, Acad, 2. 146) may be supposed to convey both the
thoroughness of the investigation and the impartiality of the judge
(D. Daube, Forms of Roman Legislation, 73-77). Since fecisse videri is
the official formula (cf. Pliny, N,H, 14. 90; Cicero, Verr, 2. 9 3 : other
examples in Mommsen, Strafrecht, 448; Brissonius, De Formulis (1731),
457) it is wrong to translate 'desired to be thought its authors' (Foster).
Perhaps 'wanted to be found guilty' would be a modern equivalent.
Volero Publilius
The story of Volero Publilius is singularly tantalizing. At first sight
all seems credible. The Publilii were an old family in Rome as their
presence in the Fasti of the consular tribunes testifies (5. 12. 10, 13. 3).
It is likely enough that the name of Volero Publilius figured as
tribune in some documentary record (e.g. in the temple of Ceres) for
472 and 471. Unquestionably the year 471 was a turning-point in the
history of the tribunate and, whatever its exact content, a so-called
Lex Publilia in that year can hardly be denied, even if many of the
details are inspired by the activity of the great fourth-century reformer
Q,. Publilius Philo, the first plebeian dictator. But the story of the
appeal itself (provoco) could not possibly have been recorded. It is
conspicuously a doublet of the similar story in 27. 12, also involving an
Ap. Claudius. It contains patent anachronisms (55. 4 n., 56. 2 n.).
Above all, the whole point of it is to illustrate the right of a Roman
citizen not to be scourged. Like the case of Horatius, it gives a pedigree
to a controversial procedure. The issue at stake was whether a magis
trate by virtue of his imperium could scourge a Roman citizen. It was
only settled at the beginning of the second century by one or more of
three Leges Porciae (perhaps, especially, that passed by P. Porcius
Laeca, tr. pi, in 199; Cicero, de Rep, 2. 54; Broughton, M.R,R, Ap
pendix) . It is admittedly impossible to determine precisely the contents
of the law but the ancient references are unmistakable. L. says (1 o.
9. 4) pro tergo civium lata videtur and Cicero corroborates that by saying
(pro Rab, Pd, 12; cf. also Sallust, Catil. 51. 21): Porcia lex virgas ab
373

2. 55-

4 7 3

B G

- -

omnium civium Romanorum corpore amovit. T h e argument is clinched by a

coin of the moneyer P. Porcius Laeca (c. 104): 'soldier cuirassed with
sword stg. 1. and placing his hand on the head of a togate figure
behind him, lictor holding fasces; in ex., PROVOCO' ( = Sydenham no.
571). T h e anecdote, therefore, was 'developed' as the justification
for these laws. (Bleicken's view that the Leges Porciae were concerned
not with the question of scourging but with the extension of the
privilege of provocatio in the provinces takes no account of the ancient
evidence.)
T h e personality of Volero Publilius may, then, be real enough;
but this incident in his life must be fiction based on important con
stitutional issues. See J . S. Reid, J.R.S. 1 (1911), 6 8 - 9 9 ; Mommsen,
Strafrecht, 4 4 ; A. H . McDonald, J.R.S. 34 (1944), 19-20; J . Bleicken,
R.E., 'provocatio 5 ; W . Hoffmann, R.E., 'Publilius (10)'; E. S. Staveley,
Historia 3 (1955), 416-18; J . Bleicken, J?eit. Sav.-Stift. 76 (1959),
332-7755. 1. sub hoc . . . victoria: T h e uncertainty of reading in most passages
makes it almost impossible to determine the difference in meaning
between sub with abl. and sub with ace. Here the implication is that
the patres took advantage of their victory to announce the levy, i.e.
that there was a causal connexion between the two events and this
may also be the force of sub with abl. at 27. 15. 8 sub adventu Hannibalis
concessere. sub with a c e , however, generally denotes one event following
immediately after another, where sub with abl. would allow a timelag. In any case there is no need to change the case here.
dilectus edicitur: 28. 5.
55. 2. ad antiqua: 3. 9^14 n.
55. 3 . nihil auxilii: 54. 9.
quattuor et viginti lictores: 1. 7 n., 3. 36. 3 n. This does not conflict
with the fact that there were only 12 fasces, since the fasces were held
by the consuls in alternate months. During the month when one
consul did not have the fasces 9 he was still attended by lictors.
eos ipsos plebis homines: 'and plebeians at that'. Lictors had to be
citizens, because of the important role they played in certain cere
monials such as Manumission and the sessions of the Gomitia Guriata
(Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 333 n. 1 ; cf. edict ap. Dio 48. 43 fjLrjre SovXov
pafihovxeiv).

nihil. . . : 'no force could be more contemptible or less capable of

resistance, if people had but the spirit to despise t h e m ; it was every
one's imagination which made them terrible and awe-inspiring', ea
(neuter) refers loosely to the lictors considered as a force.
55. 4. Voleronem: the history of the praenomen is doubtful. Like Volusus
(cf. Volusius) it may be connected with valere and be a very ancient
374

473 B.C.

2. 55- 4

Latin name (Mommsen, Rom. Forsch. i. 45). For the Publilii cf.
5. 12. 10 n.
quod ordines duxisset: 23. 4, 7. 41. 4; cf. also ordinem ducere 3. 44. 4.
T h e use of ordines = centuriae seems to belong to army slang (LL.S.
206 (Claudius); Tacitus, Annals 2. 80: see E. Bickel, Rh. Mus. 95
(1952), 109-111). But to make Publilius a centurion is in any case an
anachronism. It is not known whether a m a n who had held rank as
a centurion had a right to refuse to serve in a lower grade unless he
had been demoted for some disciplinary reason. It had, however,
been a burning issue in 171 B.C. when twenty-three centurions on. being
called up appealed to the tribunes of the plebs. T h e case was discussed
in a contio during which one of the centurions, Sp. Ligustinus, made so
moving a speech that the memory of it was recorded (42. 32-34).
T h e case of Publilius is founded on it.
5 5 . 5 . spoliari... et virgas expediri: 8. 32.10,29.9.4. spoliari = 'stripped*,
L. employs the official police language. Cf., e.g., Cicero, Verr. 5. 161 ;
Val. M a x . 2. 7. 8,
(
provoco' inquit lad populunC Volero: the word-order with the separa
tion oiinquit from Volero (25. 18. 6, 33. 13. 11) is effective. It stresses
both provoco and populum, marking the importance and significance
of the appeal.
virgis caedi: 36. 1 n.
circumscindere: only here in Latin, perhaps coined by L. because it
sounded pseudo-technical.
55. 6. clamitans: L. has carefully built up the dramatic excitement of
the scene. T h e crescendo is marked by emphatic word-order and the
urgent use of the historic infinitives (circumscindere, spoliare). T h e storm
breaks with Publilius' appeal to the mob which is couched in lively,
colloquial terms. Yor Jidem imploro cf. 23. 8 n.; adeste . . . adeste, the
very ancient form of invoking the help of gods (2. 6. 7 ; Horace, Epod.
5. 53 ; Catullus 62. 5) or men (Sallust, Or. Lep. 2 7 ; Catullus 42. 1 adeste,
hemdecasyllabi: cf. Prinz in Thes. Ling. Lat. 923. 80-925. 49), is streng
thened by the repetition (cf. Val. Max. 4. 1. 12 concurrite, concurrite).
Particularly pathetic is the use of commilitones. It is only used by L. in
speeches (3. 50. 5 n., 6. 14. 4, 22. 59. 10, 28. 19. 8, 25. 38. 6, 25. 7. 3,
24. 30. 8) which shows that he employs it for special effect. T h a t it was
a sentimental term is obvious from its meaning; cf. Suetonius, Julius
67 nee 'milites' sed blandiore nomine 'commilitones* appellabat.
Like the English 'comrade 5 , L. felt it to be a form of address em
ployed by one member of the lower classes to another. Note the
chiastic shape of his last sentence (nihil est . . i opus est) ending in a
monosyllable (5. 54. 7 n.).
55. 10. audaciam.: 4. 2. 11, the Senate apply to Volero the stan
dard term of political disparagement used in the late Republic by
375

2. 55- io

473 B.C.

the boni against populates whom they suspected to be plotting the over
throw of the existing order. See Wirszubski, J.R.S. 51 (1961), 12 ff.
55. 11. ira: abl.
56. 2. post. , . habito: 'postponing his own resentment to the public
interest' (Baker). T h e tmesis does not occur elsewhere in L. (cf.
7, 36. 10, 8. 34. 2) but is frequent in the writing of other historians
(Tacitus, Hist. 3. 6 4 ; Sallust, Jug. 73. 6) and may be a feature of the
historical style.
ut . . . fierent'. 58. 1 n. L. fails to distinguish between plebs and
populus. At this date a tribune had no standing to introduce measures
ad populum.
sub titulo: 3. 67. 9. Gf. also the judgement on the censorship in
4. 8. 2 ff.
56. 4. actioni: the proposal made by the tribunes.
cum: the train of thought is: the patres resisted with all their might
and, although they could not secure the co-operation of a tribune to
use his veto, the proposal was so momentous that the struggle was
spun out for a whole year. T h e real reason for the delay is given by
D.H. 9. 48 who preserves the valuable fact that there was a severe
epidemic that year.
nee quae (neque N) una vis ad resistendum erat: 4. 26. 3, 5. 9. 7, 30. 16. 3,
44. 20. 3. T h e order is nee posset adduci ut.
molimine: only here in L., elsewhere molimentum (5. 22. 6), but found
also in Lucretius, Ovid, and Horace. It would, however, be misleading
to label the word 'poetic'. T h e -men termination is of more ancient
origin that -mentum and it is therefore natural that such words, being
more striking and more emphatic, should be at home in a passage
where L. is underlining the epoch-making character of Volero's pro
posal and in the artificial language of poetry where metrical considera
tions also play a part. See Lofstedt, Syntactical 2. 297; Schmidt,
Beitrage Liv. Lex. (1888), 4 ; J . Marouzeau, Mem. Soc. Ling. 18 (1912),
148.
56. 5. ad ultimum dimicationis: 1. 15. 2.
Ap. Claudium Appifilium: 3. 33. 7 n. He is probably to be identified
with the Decemvir but historians preferred to separate the two per
sonalities, a respectable consul in 471 and the monstrous Decemvir.
His character and behaviour duplicate throughout that of his father
(23-27). His reactionary attitude is in keeping with the legendary
vetus atque insita Claudiae familiae superbia (Tacitus, Annals 1. 4). It is
likely that this picture owes much to the work of Valerius Antias.
Cicero knows nothing of the early Glaudii; indeed, even in his attack
on Glodius, he disregards their very existencewhich at least is
guaranteed by the Fasti. Valerius, on the other hand, took a lively
376

471 B.C.

2. 56. 5

interest in them because the Glaudii and the Valerii were natural
counterparts in the politics of the age of Sulla. See especially 16. 4 n.,
2
3 - 15 n-> a n d references there cited.
invisum infestwnque: 5. 8. 9, 26. 39. 15.
56. 6. sic <C> Laetorius: the praenomen is given by D.H. 9. 46. 1 and is
required here by the convention which L. follows of introducing each
new historical character formally. It would easily have been lost by
haplography after sic (Munzer, /?."., 'Laetorius (1)'). Like his ances
tor M . Laetorius (27. 6 n.), G. Laetorius can be no more than a
fiction created to provide a foil for Ap. Claudius. Only one name in
each annual list of tribunes before 471 can be genuine and there is
every reason for supposing that in 471 the genuine name was Volero
Publilius. G. Laetorius has all the marks of a doublet. He is a tough,
blunt soldier (56. 7 = 27. 6 ; a family trait inspired by the Horatian
heroism of P. Laetorius who single-handed held the bridge to allow
G. Gracchus to escape in 121 (Val. Max. 4. 7. 2)). He is a hereditary
foe of the Glaudii, an enmity that may go no farther back than the
galling embassy of G. Laetorius to Ap. Claudius after the defeat of the
latter in 212 (25. 22. 2).
56. 7. ipse incusationem . . . exorsus: in accusationem N. exorsus is followed
by an ace. without any preposition. Of the proposed corrections,
incusationem was first put forward by Doring, adopted by Grevier,
and later conjectured independently by J . W. Mackail. It is a more
appropriate word for the irresponsible attacks which Laetorius was
unleashing than the formal [in] accusationem (proposed by Grevier),
but apart from a single occurrence in Cicero (de Orat. 3. 106) it is not
found until late and church Latin.
T h e remarks of Laetorius which follow are designed to be in charac
ter. His language is rough and crude whereas D.H. 9. 47 allows him
a polished and fluent speech.
56. 8. carnificem: 35. 1 n.
56. 9. quandoquidem: cf. 12. 15 for a similarly pompous use of the word,
introducing a concluding sentence. It has the overtones of the English
'be that as it may'. See Kroll on Catullus 101. 5.
non facile . . . quam = non tarn f . . . . quam. The ellipse of tarn in
negative comparisons of this kind is adequately attested in L. It is,
however, notable that almost all the examples are in direct speech
(35. 49. 7, 26. 31. 2 : cf. 25. 15. 9) which indicates that the usage may
be colloquial.
praesto: 'I make good what I have said'. In this sense, the word is
not used before Cicero and, significantly, he reserves it for familiar
correspondence (ad Fam. 5. 11. 3 ; ad M. Brutum 1. 18. 3). T h e touch
of the colloquial suits the speaker.
crastino die: the periphrasis for eras is first employed by L. and, like
377

2. 56. 9

471 B.C.

the ellipse of tarn above, is only employed in conveyed direct speech

(3. 2. 9, 10. 25. 2, et al.). T h e purpose of it is to give heavy emphasis
which the monosyllable eras might evade. It belongs to spoken not
to written language (cf. Petronius 15. 5 ; Aul. Gell. 10. 24. 8 ; Klotz
on Bell. Hisp. 2. 2).
ego hie out. . . : note the ponderous word-order. T h e oath belongs
to the original story; cf. D . H . 9. 48. 1. T h e following sentence is
punctuated in the editions occupant tribuni templum postero die; consules....
Besides an unnecessarily emphatic word-order with postero die at the
end of the colon, this precludes what was the obvious course of action
for the tribunes to adopt. In order to secure a hearing they had to
secure the rostra before the arrival of the people. They would do so
overnight. O n the next day the contio gathers: occupant tribuni templum;
postero die consules . . . . Compare the action of Clodius and Milo in 57
(Cicero, ad Att. 4. 3. 4).
56. 10. templum -.3. 17. 1, 8. 14. 12. templum denotes properly any
space marked off by the regular augural ceremonies. Here it is applied
to the platform from which auspicated assemblies were addressed,
later to be known as the Rostra when rebuilt and decorated with the
beaks of ships which C. Maenius, consul in 338, captured at Antium.
L.'s terminology, therefore, carefully avoids any anachronism (cf.
Cicero, de Inv. 2.52 ; in Vatin. 24), unlike 4.17.6 (n.). T h e site has been
identified with a rectangle of red tufa found in the lowest level of the
Forum. See Chr. Hiilsen, Rom. Mitt. 20 (1905), 29 ff.; K. Schneider,
R.E., 'Rednerbuhne'. See also 1. 18. 6 n .
submoveri. . .: Laetorius orders all who were not entitled to vote to
remove themselves from the comitia.
praeterquam qui . . . ineant: Laetorius might be objecting to the
presence of persons not entitled to vote because of their age (adolescentes) or because they were patricians {nobiles). Although the latter
suits the tone of the passage better, either objection would be ana
chronistic since the situation presupposes a recognized assembly in
which patricians had no vote and such a purely plebeian assembly was
the result of the Lex Publilia passed later in this very year (see below).
adolescentes nobiles: late Republican colouring. T h e semi-organized
groups of upper-class 'teenagers' were, like students in Middle Eastern
politics, a potent force in the city. Q . Cicero advises his brother
adolescentes nobiles ut habeas vel ut teneas {de Petit. Consul. 6). They figure
prominently in Sallust's portrait of Catilinarian Rome (Catil. 17. 5-6).
See the good remarks of C. Seignobos, de Indole Plebis Romanae apud
T.L., (1882), 41-45.
viatori: the attendant of the lictor.
56. 1 1 . non . . . popidi sed plebis: 35. 3.
56. 12. ilium ipsum: sc. magistratum, the consulate. Appius' argument
378

471 B.C.

2. 56. 12

is that not even consuls could by virtue of their office order people
discedere. H e could only request them. H o w much less right, then, had
tribunes to issue such orders. T h e argument is based on a linguistic
quibble.
si vobis videtur, discedite, Quirites: it is generally assumed that discedite is used technically of the division or vote in the comitia centuriata
(or, later, tributa), as described in Asconius' commentary on the pro
Cornelio (p. 71. 12 Clark): 'cum id solum superest ut populus sententiam ferat, iubet eum is qui fert legem discedere: quod verbum non
hoc significat, quod in communi consuetudine, eant de eo loco ubi
lex feratur, sed in suam quisque tribum discedat in qua est suffragium
laturus'. If that is the meaning the formula is very curious. A magis
trate in fact gave a simple order to vote (cf. Asconius cit. sup.; Cicero,
de Leg. 3. 11) and his order will have been conveyed in the unvarnished
imperative discedite. si vobis videtur has no place with it. O n the other
hand the senatorial address to the magistrate would have been couched
in the polite placet ut. . . si eis videatur (cf. Donatus on Terence, Adelph.
511 ubi enim aliquid senatus consulibus iniungit addit 'si eis videatur'; 22.
33. 9, 25. 41. 9, 26. 16. 4 ; often abbreviated in inscriptions to s. e. v.:
Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 1027 n. 2). Mrs. Henderson (J.R.S. 47
(1957), 85) suggests that the instruction in L. 'is an ignorant confusion
of the magisterial imperative with the senatorial address' and that
the whole anecdote with its linguistic quibbles was designed 'to prove
a limitation of the consul's imperium\ T h e legalistic wrangle has no
place in D.H.'s narrative but since it forms the kernel of the whole
incident it is more likely that D.H. has omitted it because the tech
nicalities were too obscure to be appreciated in Greek than that L.
has invented it. If, then, it goes back to L.'s sources, men who, unlike
L., were in touch with live politics and knew the workings of the
assemblies, it becomes incredible that they could have made such a
confusion or, at any rate, could have based such an argument upon it.
In fact, if discedite is to be taken as meaning 'vote', one must assume
that L., unfamiliar with Republican procedure, has misunderstood
and confused something in his source. He made comparable blunders
over senatorial procedure (1. 32. 12 n.). In that case nothing follows
about antiquarian quibbles to prove the limitations of imperium. In
this unsatisfactory position, a second solution might be entertained.
Appius is arguing that the tribunes have no right to order the dis
persal of people. His argument is a fortiori. He, a consul, has no right
pro imperio. How much less entitled are the tribunes. Discedite, there
fore, ought to be used not in the technical sense of 'to vote' but in
its literal sense 'to disperse'. T h a t discedere was used officially in the
literal sense is indicated by the solecism cited by Qiiintilian 1. 5. 36
siplures a se dimittens ita loquatur cabi' aut 'discede'; cf. also L. 3. n . 4,
379

471 B.C.

2. 56. 12

49. 5. T h e words should then be a prefatory formula at the opening

of an assembly requesting those who had no right to attend to depart
and those who were entitled to be present to distribute themselves in
a convenient manner for listening. See also Mommsen, Staatsreckt,
3. 390 n. 1.
facile [et] contemptim: contemptim must be taken with disserendo, facile
with poterat. Unless we are to suppose with Cornelissen that another
adverb has fallen out (facile, (superbe^) et contemptim . . . disserendo . . .
poterat'. cf. 37. 10. 2), we must delete et (so first Duker, not Drakenborch), an easy haplography.
56. 14. hominum: concitatae multitudinis is to be taken in apposition with
hominum. T h e accumulation marks the growing excitement of the
situation, an effect which is lost by deleting either hominum (Forchhammer) or c. m. (Ernesti). Note the double Trepnrlreia (violatus esset
ni. . . and certatum foret ni) and the terse word-order coorta pro tribuno
X

in consulem esset.
X

56. 15. Quinctius' attempts to assuage the tempers of the plebs and of
the tribunes have much in common with the arguments urged by
Seneca in the de Ira. Both depend ultimately on a common stock of
rhetorical commonplaces which L. draws on to fill out an idea.
Hence L. repeats them at 8. 32. 14. darent irae spatium = Seneca, Dial.
5- 2 5 - 2.
57. 2. advocabantur: contrast 3. 63. 7.
57. 3 . There is nothing in D.H. 9. 49 corresponding to the pleas of
the Senate and the protestations of Appius and L. has put into their
mouths, as so often, rhetorical cliches suited to the mood and the
occasion.
dum . . . rem publicam: inspired by Sallust, Jug. 4 1 . 5, unless both
authors derive it from the resources of the many orators' handbooks
which were circulating in Rome and were popular in the schools. T h e
thought goes back ultimately to Thucydides' analysis of Stasis (3. 82);
cf. also Seneca, Epist. 104.
consules tribunique: see C.Q. 9 (1959)? 212.
57. 4. prodi. . . deseri: 54. 8 n.
non . . . deesse: since L. elsewhere shows a detailed memory of the
first Catilinarian speech (1. 46. 5 n.), it is likely that he was here
inspired by Cicero's famous disclaimer non deest reipublicae consilium
neque auctoritas huius ordinis: nos, nos, dico aperte, consules desumus (3).
Sacro monte: 33. 2 n.
58. 1. tributis comitiis creati tribuni sunt: how had they been elected pre
viously (33. 2 n.)? L. gives no hint except that the new system hin
dered the patricians from influencing the elections per clientium sujfragia.
380

471 B.C.

2. 58. 1

an allusive reference to what D.H. 9. 41 calls specifically K rfjs

<f>paTptaK7Js i/j7]<f>o<f>optas, fjv ot 'Pco/zafot Kvpianv KOLAOVOIV. T h e annalist

tradition, then, was that the tribunes were elected by the comitia
curiata (so also Cicero). It is true that in such an assembly organized
by family and birth it was possible for the great houses to control the
votes, but the revolutionary character of the tribunate rules out the
idea that such an assembly could ever have been employed for the
elections. The tribunes were officers of the plebs, not the populus: they
had secured such recognition as they had by force, not negotiation.
It is, therefore, necessary to reject the notion that the comitia curiata
was ever used for the election of tribunes, as an attempt by some
second-century constitutionalist, aware that the comitia centuriata could
never have been the electoral body, to find a respectable origin for
the institution and election of tribunes. The tribunes must have been
chosen at some unofficial assembly of the plebsa concilium plebis, prob
ably based on a tribal organization (21. 7 n.). The first step to secure
official recognition was to form the tribal assembly into a legitimate
comitia. It was this which was achieved by the Lex Publilia, wrongly
so called since the law must have been the result of a decision by the
comitia centuriata to which the Senate had given its auctoritas. The comitia
tributa is not attested before 471: it features increasingly in the sources
thereafter for the election of minor magistrates (Tacitus, Annals
11. 22), less certainly for the election of the consular tribunes (5. 18.
1-2 n.), for certain acts of legislation (3. 71-72) so that the Lex
Valeria Horatia of 449 recognizing the decisions of the comitia tributa
(3. 55. 3 n.) may be partly grounded in fact. The patricians would
not have been slow to see the advantages of a tribal assembly over the
cumbrous machinery of the centuriata and were prepared to accept
a compromise proposal which, although it gave a certain measure
of de iure recognition to the tribunes, promised also to be of great
benefit to themselves. In other words the Lex Publilia brought into
being a legitimate comitia tributa, side by side with and sprung from
the unofficial concilium plebis. It would, of course, have been recorded in
the Annales. See further Ihne, Rh. Mus. 28 (1873), 353 ^ ? Mommsen,
Rom. Forsch. 1. 177 ff.; Staatsrecht, 3. 148; U. Kahrstedt, Rh. Mus. 72
(1917), 258ff.; G. W. Botsford, Roman Assemblies, 271-3; H. StuartJones, C.A.H. 7. 450-6; H. Siber, R.E., 'Plebs'; A. G. Roos, Med. Kon.
Nederland. Akad. Weten. 3 (1940); E. S. Staveley, Athenaeum 33 (1955),
3 - 3 1 ; R. Sealey, Latomus 18 (1959), 526.
numero . . . additos tres: it was advanced above (33 3 n.) that Piso was
right in saying that the tribunes were originally only two in number
and that L. had derived this information not from first-hand consulta
tion of Piso but through Valerius Antias. Here again there is no reason
to suppose that L. has himself studied Piso. Piso's views would have
381

2. 58- i

471 B.C.

been cited by Valerius. It is, however, less certain whether Piso was
right in saying that the number was now raised to five. Diodorus
11. 6 8 . 8 w r i t e s : TOTE Trpwrojs KareoTaSrjuav hrjiiapxpi rirrap^
-Tato?
EiKivios /cat AevKios iVe/iercupto?, npos 8e TOVTOIS MdpKog AovLXAios /cat

Ziropios '//a'Ato? (AKIALOS codd.). Diodorus' account of 494 is missing,

but the word-order proves that he is not saying that tribunes were
first instituted in 471 but that four were. In other words he agrees with
Piso and other authorities on an original number of two. Diodorus'
names agree with those given in L. by Piso except for the last name of
all, L. Maecilius. T h e name itself is unobjectionable, being of Etruscan
derivation (Schulze 185, 204; cf. C.I.L. 10. 4155) and being the name
of another tribune in 4. 48. 1 and of a legate in 23. 31. 6 (215), but
the similarity of Maecilius to Icilius favours the belief that, if the tradi
tional number of tribunes was raised from four to five for political
motives, M . could easily be a duplication. T h e main reform of 471 was
the creation of the comitia tributa and the election of tribunes by that
assembly. At this date the only tribes which were politically significant
were the four urban tribes since the drift from the land had not yet
begun. So the number four is certainly to be connected with the four
urban tribes. At a later date, when the Servian constitution was the
subject of tendentious interpretation, antiquarians were at pains to
conceal the radical nature of the tribunate and tried to explain the
historical number often tribunes by correlating it with the five Servian
classes (3. 30. 7 n.). T h e next step was to suppose that the original
number was five, or at least that it was increased to five in 471 B.C.
See further Niese, De Annal. Romanis, (1886), 13; E. Meyer, Hermes
30 (1895), 1-24; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 2 7 4 - 6 ; Beloch, Rom. Gesch.
270 ff.; E. Taubler, Hist. Stud. (1921); Lengle, R.E., 'tribunus plebis'.
58. 2. Cn. Siccium: the form of the name is unanimously agreed on by
the manuscripts here and in 61. 2, whereas Diodorus calls him Jato?
ZIKLVIOS. T h e difference may be significant. Siccius was the patrician
form, Sicinius the plebeian and, since Licinius Macer seems anxious
to introduce Sicinii wherever possible (40. 14 n.), the presence of a
Siccius points to a different source (Schulze 231).
L. Numitorium: a very old R o m a n family-name, connected with the
legendary king of Alba Longa, Numitor. T h e family never achieved
great prominence in Rome. Other than this tribune (and perhaps his
son, P. Numitorius in 3. 45. 4, but see below) they can only produce
a moneyer, C. Numitorius (c. 115) who came to a violent end in the
disturbances of 87, and his son, of equestrian status, mentioned by
Cicero (Verr. 5. 165). There are, therefore, no grounds for doubting
the historicity of this m a n (Munzer, R.E., 'Numitorius' (3) and (4)).
M. Duilium: the orthography of the name is doubtful. Originally
Duilius, it is found contracted to Bilius as early as Polybius (1. 22. 1,
382

471 B.C.

2. 58. 2

23. 1) and the false etymology from duellum led to a pseudo-archaic

form Duellius becoming fashionable in the late Republic (Cicero, Orat.
J
53 with Kroll's note; Quintilian 1.4. 15). T h e manuscript evidence
from L. is conflicting (see Conway's apparatus here) but on balance
it favours the spelling Duilius which is inherently likely since L. tends
to reach back beyond the antiquarianism of the late Republic to the
traditions of the late second century. T h e family produced one great
figure, C. Duilius cos. 268, and the whole of their history is influenced
by his shadow.
Sp. Icilium: a Latin name (Schulze 44-1) which, beyond a few epigraphic occurences (C.I.L. 3. 15017; 8. 16954), disappears completely
from history after the author of the Lex de Aventino publicando
(3. 31. 1 n.). It must, therefore, be genuine.
All four names appear again in the list of ten tribunes elected after
the Decemvirate (3. 54. 12 n.). T h a t list is so suspicious that one may
believe that a record of the election of ten tribunes was preserved
but without names which were supplied from prominent plebians
mentioned in the period, in particular from the college of 471. T h e
absence of a Maecilius in 449 is further evidence that he was only
inserted at a late date in 471.
58. 3 . Volscum Aequicumque: from the Annales.
58. 5. odio [quod] : see C.Q. 9 (1959), 214.
58. 6-59. The Army of Appius Claudius
T h e picture of the demoralization of Appius* army owes much to the
misfortunes of a later Ap. Claudius, praetor in 89, pro-praetor there
after, who had the allegiance of his army filched from him in 87 by
Cinna (Livy, Epit. 79). Ap. Claudius had also been impeached by a
tribune (Cicero, de Domo 8 3 ; cf. Appian B.C. 1. 6 5 ; E Gronov. ad
Cicero, in Catil. 3. 24), so that the circumstances are sufficiently
alike for his career to have furnished some materials for the shadowy
figure of his ancestor. There is nothing in D . H . 9. 50. 3-7 corre
sponding to the detailed account of Appius' behaviour as described
in 58. 7-9. Cf. also Val. Max. 9. 3. 5 ; Appian, ItaL 7; Frontinus
4- 1. 3458. 6. certamen animis imbiberant'. i.e. animum certandi imbiberant. imbibo
is found elsewhere in L. at 47. 12, a case of 'unconscious repetition'
(1. 14. 4 n.).
segniter, otiose, neglegenter, contumaciter \ apparently ordinary adverbs
but they may stand for familiar military offences if any reliance can
be placed on a passage in the Digest (49. 16. 6) where it is said that
the type of act punished under military discipline is omne quod aliter
quam disciplina communis exigit committitur, veluti segnitiae crimen vel contumaciae vel desidiae.
383

2. 58. 7

471 B.C.

58. 7. pudor . . . metus: 36. 3 n.

tardius . . . incedere: 33. 1. 5, technical for 'slow march'; cf. Vegetius,
Mil. 3. 6.
adhortator: 7. 32. 11, 9. 13. 2, 22. 5. 7, apparently coined by L. and
only adopted by Apuleius. For the scene cf. 45. 37. 9.
motam remittere industriam: a difficult phrase. It is taken to mean 'all
relaxed the effort which they had been making on their own initiative'.
It is more natural to take sua sponte with omnes . . . remittere than with
motam but the sense is less apt. The troops were prepared to work on
their own but resented Appius' encouragement. But movere industriam
is ill paralleled by movere bellum, indignationem, &c. and notam 'which he
noticed' (Clericus, Art. Critic. 3. 1. 4 : cf. Cicero, ad Att. 8. l i b . 1;
Amm. Marc. 27. 10. 10) is attractive.
58. 8. tacite: with exsecrari, echoing 43. 9.
58. 9. 'twitting the centurions from time to time and calling them
tribunes and Voleros'. Volerones: 13. 8 n.
59. 2. Fabianus exercitus: 43. 7 ff.
59. 3 . expressa vis: 13. 4 n. 'this compelled them to exert themselves
and fight', a very strained phrase, vis should be the force which com
pels the troops to fight (cf. Gurtius 4. 11. 2 nulla vis subegit sed iustitia
expressit ut. . .), not the force which they display in fighting, and what
is extorted should be the resolve to fight, not vis. The passage appears
hopeless: Cornelissen's experrecta vis (cf. Cicero, pro S. Roscio 141; in
Pisonem 27) loses the Livian expressa.
alioqui: a certain correction by Ruperti: for tantum . . . alioqui cf.
37. 46. 6.
59. 4. nihil infractus . . . animus: the standard phrasea cliche of the
Stoics to judge by Seneca, Epist. 28. 8. Cf. also Tacitus, Annals 4. 28. 5,
*5- 63. 3 (of Seneca); Hist. 5. 26. 1.
ne utique. . . : 'on no account to put his authority to the test'.
imperium . . . oboedientium: 5. 3. 8 n. (an Ap. Claudius again) an echo
of the sacramentum.
59. 7. signaque et ordines: an anachronism from later formations. The
juxtaposition is common but always in the form ordines signaque
(27. 1. 10), signa ordinesque (27. 14. 7), or signa et ordines (9. 27. 10,
30. 34. 10, 33. 9. 1), and in view of the force of-queet (1. 43. 2 n.) there
seems no adequate explanation of the double copula here, -que should
be deleted.
59. 8. per stragem . . . : 9. 40. 14, Livian battle colouring.
59. 9. proditorem . . . desertorem: the conventional terms of opprobrium
for soldiers. Cf. Caesar, B.G. 6. 23. 8; Tacitus, Annals 2. 10.
59. 11. duplicariosque: soldiers who were allotted double rations
(7. 37. 2) or double pay (23. 20. 2) as a reward for acts of heroism
384

471 B.C.

2. 59-

lx

(Varro, de Ling, Lat. 5. 90). For the rank see Fiebiger, R.E., 'Duplarii 5 ;
for the form of the word Lambertz, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v.
decimus quisque: the earliest recorded decimation, but it will hardly
have been preserved in any documentary source. As with many
Roman institutions an archetypal example was created to provide
a precedent for subsequent practice. It is notable that the first his
torically reliable instance occurred during the operations of Ap.
Claudius Gaecus and Q . Fabius Maximus Rullianus in Samnium in
296 (Frontinus 4. 1. 35) and the coincidence of names is striking. That
the origin of the punishment was mythical is made plain by Cicero,
pro Cluentio 128. For later examples see Polybius 6. 38. 2 with
Walbank's note and J. Sulser, Disciplina (Diss. 1920), 56.
60. 2. actae praedae: ea omnis: see C.Q. 9 (1959), 212. The plural is used
of the variety of spoil gathered: cf. 1. 5. 4, 5. 12. 5, 24. 2 et al. For the
allotment of spoil see 42, 1 n.
60. 3 . sibi parentem, alter'i exercitui dominum: 4. 42. 8, a piece of senti
mentality displayed by the armies of the late Republic which gradually
merged with other similar concepts into the symbolic ideal of the
Princeps as Father of his people. In the Republic, however, the general
as father to his army is to be sharply distinguished from compliments
in other spheres like patriae parens.
Thus Gn. Calpurnius Piso became so popular with his troops ut
sermone vulgiparens legionum haberetur (Tacitus, Annals 2. 55. 4 ; 3. 13. 2)
and Caligula was called castrorum Jilius et pater exercituum (Suet. 22. 1).
See A. von Premerstein, Vom Werden und Wesen des Prinzipats (1937),
102; A. Alfoldi, Mus. Helv. 9 (1952), 208. For dominus see Syme,
Roman Revolution, 155.
60. 5. patribus ex concilio submovendo: it is argued that the manuscript
reading may be defended and explained if patribus and submovendo are
separately ablatives of instrument (Lofstedt, Syntactica, 2. 163 n.;
Schmalz-Hofmann 597; Pettersson). The only passage adduced to
support this interpretation is Cicero, de Domo 1 ut. . . cives remp. bene
gerendo religionibus sapienter interpretando remp. conservarent but the diffi
culties of that text are considerable (see Klotz, Glotta 6 (1915), 215)
and the arguments which Nisbet puts forward for supposing it to be
corrupt and to have read something like remp. bene gerendo religiones,
religiones sapienter interpretando remp. are compelling. Similar considera
tions apply here. An inspection of the Mediceus shows that the ter
mination ib. was a correction made by Ratherius himself and that the
original reading was patres. It is possible that both go back as variants
to the Nicomachean recension but in any case patres is clearly to be
preferred here.
patres: it was only a theoretical truth that patricians were excluded
814432

385

cc

2. 6o. 5

471 B.C.

from the comitia tribute (cf. Laelius Felix ap. Aul. Gell. 15. 27. 4) since
from 200 at least no attempts were made to debar them from attend
ing. Their very numbers would have made their influence negligible.
This comment reflects the typical antiquarian rationalization of the
second century. See E. S. Staveley, Athenaeum 33 (1955), 4-7.
virium . . . additum . . . demptum: for the choice of words cf. 56. 16.
61. 1. 77. Aemilio: T. Aemilio codd. Titus Aemilius codd. at 3. 1. 1.
Diodorus n . 69. 1 Titus, 11. 74. 1 Tiberius. D.H. 9. 51. 1, 59. 1
Tiberius. It is likely that the consul of 470 is the same as that of 467
and that the authorities thought so too. In which case the praenomen
Ti. should be read in both places of L.
61. 2. causamque possessorum publici agri: 41. 3 n.
diem dixere: 35. 5 n.
The Trial of Ap. Claudius
An incidental interest of the section lies in the fact that it evidently
inspired the Emperor Claudius who, perhaps in A.D. 47, delivered an
attack on contemporary legal practice and especially against reliance
on adventitious aids to arouse pity {Bed. Griech. Ur. 611; see J. Stroux,
Sitz. Bay. Akad. (1929); F. von Woess, Zeit. Sav.-Stift. 51 (1931), 336 ff.;
D. M. Last, Latomus 17 (1958), 481-2).
61. 3 . iudicium . . .populi: 35. 5 n.
61. 4. modum . . . egressum: cf. Tacitus, Annals 11. 7, 13. 2 ; Quintilian
9. 4. 146.
61. 5. vestem mutaret: the habit of accused persons putting on mourn
ing dress and allowing their beards to grow was indeed a feature of
criminal trials of the late Republic (cf. Cicero, pro Plancio 29) but since
shaving was not known in Rome before 300 B.C. (Pliny, N.H. 7. 211;
cf. Aul. Gell. 3. 4), all accounts of such squalor reorum must be rejected
as apocryphal. It is remarkable that early mentions of it seem con
nected with the Claudii (3. 58. 1, 6. 20. 2). They may have originated
the custom in the fourth or third century. See Marquardt, Manuel,
18. 2. 63-64.
61. 6. spiritus: 'arrogance' not 'gusto' (cf. Pindarico spiritus ore in Prop.
3. 17. 40 with which Shackleton Bailey compares Quintilian 10. 1. 61)
or 'spirit' (35. 8).
61. 7. diem ,. . prodicerent: a misinterpretation of the usual procedure
before a iudicium populi which required three separate meetings at
stated intervals. Appius has already spoken at one ( = causam semel
dixit) but before the next is due he dies. The confusion is probably
a mistake by L. himself. See 35. 5 n. The nature of the trial is unknown.
61. 8. morbo moritur: 3. 33. 3 n. Historically the consul of 471 was
identical with the Decemvir, but family loyalties, wishing to divorce
386

470 B.C.

2. 6 1 . 8

the respectable reactionary from the monstrous tyrant, created two

separate individuals. This was a very late creation, probably no earlier
than Valerius Antias. D.H. 9. 54 has two accounts of his death:
officially he committed suicide but ol irpoariKovTes avrw alleged that
he was struck down by disease. L. may have abbreviated for the sake
of simplicity or D.H. may have found in Aelius Tubero the cynical
gloss of Licinius Macer on the decent obituary of Valerius Antias.
The Decemvir did commit suicide (3. 58. 6).
61. 9. laudationem . . . impedire: 47. 11 n. Since Ap. Claudius did not
in fact die now but survived to compass his own death, detested and
abhorred by plebs and patres alike, and since laudations in public were
a late development of what was originally a private ceremony in the
family or gens (Tacitus, Annals 13. 17) this detail must be an invention
springing from some imaginatively written laudationes such as family
historians evidently delighted to compose (Cicero, Brutus 61, 62;
8. 40. 4). The pattern may be surmised from the Elogia of the
Scipios and other leading personages. See Walbank on Polybius 6. 52;
F. Vollmer, Jahr.f. PhiL, Suppl. Band 18 (1892), 446-525.
tribuni plebis . . . conarentur: see Conway's apparatus, but the plural
is demanded both by D.H. 9. 54. 6 and because an unadorned
tribunus for tribunus quidam would be intolerable. How the tribunes
tried to prevent the laudatio is not clear since the speaker did not have
to be a magistrate or to have obtained a ius contionandi, but the legal
point should not be pressed.
62. 1. tempestas: clearly a prodigy and recorded as such. Cf. 21. 58. 8.
62. 5. id: the retreat of the Sabines to a fast place seemed to be an
admission of defeat. Valerius accepted it as such and retired to Rome,
although leaving the war in fact far from completed. The last four
words present difficulties. If inde is local; (9.43.1; Cicero, de Orat. 3. 75)
and governed by decedens, integro . . . hello must be an abl. abs.: 'while
the war was still incomplete 5 . Such an abl. abs. is not found and integro
hello could naturally be an abl. after decedens (34. 47. 5 decedere pugna;
Justin 18. 1.6 cedere proelio; Dictys 2. 38, 4. 6), in which case inde must
either be temporal 'thereupon', which would unique in that position
in L., or ano KOLVOV with decedens which would be harsh. It is a super
fluity which could well have arisen from 'zwtegro [inde] decedens'.
63. 2 . agrariae legis: introduced to maintain the continuity of atmo
sphere; see 41. 3 n.
63. 3. coacti . . . ah senatu: the language is loose and imprecise. The
Senate did not give orders to the magistrates: it gave recommenda
tions (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 1022 ff.). L., however, frequently
387

2. 63. 3

469

-G.

speaks as if the Senate did order the consuls to take certain actions
(8. 13. 1) so that Niebuhr was being over-sensitive in reading coacto
extemplo senatu here.
63, 5. Antium: 33. 4 n.
virtus militum . . . neglegentia consulis: a psychological explanation
typical of L.'s battle-descriptions. Cf. 48. 5, 6. 22. 6.
63. 6. Antium . . . opulentissimam: 50. 2 n. The exaggeration betrays
the partiality of the authority, as also may the mention of the port of
Caeno, unless it was recorded in the Annales. Gaeno does not occur
in any other place. It has left no trace in Strabo, Pliny, or the geo
graphers and although it has been plausibly identified by le Bas with
Nettuno (see also Nissen, ltd. Land. 2. 627; K. Lehmann-Hartleben,
Klioy Beiheft 14 (1923), 190 and n. 3), it must have been a place
familiar only to a man intimately connected with the area.
64. 1. pacis . . . sollicitaepacis: for such repetitions cf. 2. 9. 3, 4. 44. 13,
27. 12. 5, 5. 54. 4 (Pettersson).
64. 2 . interesse . . . noluit: D.H. 9. 57. 1 knows nothing of such passive
resistance. It was devised by L. to perpetuate the theme of Stasis.
A quorum was not required at meetings of the assemblies.
similem annum priori consules habent: seditiosa initia, bello deinde externa
tranquilla: tranquilla to be taken gramatically with initia but the sense
is rather 'the opening of the year was full of agitation but, when the
threat of war arose, the rest of the year was trouble-free'.
64. 3 . Crustuminos: 1. 9. 8 n.
64. 6. salubri mendacio: such timely lies play a decisive role in many
heroic battles. The Battle of the Standard was won by a precisely
similar cry (Scott, Tales of a Grandfather, 1. 27 ff.). The tone is thus set
for the character of the fighting which follows. It is in L.'s best manner,
with touches of epic and of contemporary jargon mixed together to
create the effect almost of a ballad. But a comparison with D.H. shows
that this is all L.'s workmanship and owes nothing to actual poems
on the subject.
dum se putant vincere vicere: Gonway compares Aeneid 5. 231. Both
doubtless go back to a common source in older epic.
6 4 . 8 . tacitis indutiis: 18. 11.
64. 9 . tertiafere vigilia: 25. 1.
64. 10. Hernicorum: in compliance with the treaty of 41. 1 n.
canere . . . iubet: D.H. has no hint of the stratagem. It seems, therefore,
likely that L.'s source has introduced it to improve the account of the
battle. He will have taken it from one of the many anthologies of strata
gems. Frontinus distinguishes a special category of ruses designed to
secure the most favourable moment for battle by exhausting the enemy
and obtaining a good night's sleep for the troops; cf. the ruse by which
388

468 B.C.

2. 64. IO

Epaminondas exhausted the guard of Onium throughout the night and

attacked them at dawn (Polyaenus 2. 3. 4). Some of the details recur in
other stratagems. Agis (1. 46) terrified the Peloponnesians by making
his pack-animals neigh and whinny in the night, while Antipater,
Agesilaus, and Eumenes are all recorded to have deceived their enemies
by mounting camp-followers on asses and pack-animals (4. 4. 3).
64. 11. fremitus', often of horses as well as of men; cf. Lucretius 5.
1076; Caesar, B.C. 3. 38. 3 ; Virgil, Aeneid 11. 607; Tacitus, Germania
10. The scene is undoubtedly picturesque but the Scholiast on Statius,
Theb. 9. 207 (frementem) exaggerates when he says poetis licet equis
humanos sensus dare.
aures agitante: 'teasing their ears'. A strong expression, for which one
should compare Seneca, EpisL 56. 7 aures ne quis agitet sonus. It does
not appear to occur before L.
65. 2. post principia: 3. 22. 6, a technical term of Roman Republican
army formation transferred to the Volsci. It denotes the position
immediately behind the first line. Cf. Sallust, Jug. 50. 2.
65. 3 . virtute militumfretus, loco parumfidens\ 7. 12. 4, 32. 10; loco dat.
cf. 3. 18. 8. The language is typical of the easy generalizations of
soldiers (cf. Bell. Hisp. 16. 3 or Amphitryo's military exploits in
Plautus 212 ff.) and, besides gratifying L*'s interest in the psychology
of battles, gives something of a flavour of a communique to the
narrative.
65. 4. saxa . . . ingerit: 9. 35. 4, 27. 18. 12 ; Sallust, Jug. 60. 6; Curtius
4. 4. 13; Tacitus, Annals 2 . 8 1 . 2 . The absence of the word from Cicero
and Caesar in this sense suggests that it is peculiar to the historical
genre.
65. 5. restitere . . .; deinde ut obtinentes locum vires ferebant, audent ultro
gradum inferre: N. The sense is clear. When the troops had secured a
good footing they gradually recovered strength and began to counter
attack, vires ferebant is meaningless and the conjectures do not satisfy
(vires refecerant Weissenborn; vires terebant Harant; vires reficiebant
Madvig; vim pro vi referebant Conway; vires tenebant Brakman; vires
recipiebant M. Muller (9. 3. 10); vires exserebant F. Walter (Phil. Woch.
57 ( I 937)s 334 J w m wpellebant Bayet). The interchange of the letters
and alteration o f / to c produces the right wordrevirescebant 'they
began to revive'. Parallels are abundant but cf. Cicero, de Prov, Cons.
34; Phil. 7. 1.
65. 7. ceciderant animi: only at 1.11.3 (n.) in L. The phrase, exclusively
confined to poetry (Virgil, Aeneid 3. 260; Ovid, Fasti 3. 225; Met.
7- 347) 11 * 537)? a n d the dactylic close to the book conspire to recall
the epic character of the struggle.
389

BOOK III
Introduction

The third book is the central book of the first Pentad and within its
framework the story of the Decemvirate and the fate of Verginia occupy
the central position (33-54). That such an arrangement is not for
tuitous is suggested by two considerations. Books 2-4 deal with the
hundred years from 510 to 404. The chronological middle of that
period is the years 451-450, the years of the Decemvirate. The rest of
the material is so compressed or elaborated that the Decemvirate is
structurally as well as chronologically at the very heart of the work.
Secondly, for L., who throughout the first five books is preoccupied
with the problem of acquiring and safeguarding liber tas, the whole
episode is the clearest illustration of the three outstanding dangers
which beset a newly independent peoplethe ambition of individuals,
the jealousy of classes or factions, and the hostility of outsiders. Book 3
is concerned with the need for restraint on the part of the government
(moderatio), iflibertas is to be upheld, but it closes with an illustration
that a corresponding restraint on the part of the governed (modestia)
is also requiredthe theme of Book 4. Such at least would seem to be
the implication of his comment (65. n ) : 'adeo moderatio tuendae
libertatis, dum aequari velle simulando ita se quisque extollit ut
deprimat alium, in difficili est cavendoque ne metuant homines
metuendos ultro se efficiunt, et iniuriam ab nobis repulsam tamquam
aut facere aut pati necesse sit iniungimus aliis.'
The book falls into three main sections:
(1) 1-32. The proposal of C. Terentilius Harsa and the events
leading up to the embassy to Athens.
(2) 33-54. The Decemvirate.
(3) 55~72- The aftermath culminating in the speech of T. Quinctius.
1-8. Wars with the Aequi and the Volsci

The first eight chapters form a continuous section dealing primarily

with foreign affairs. They follow abruptly the end of the preceding
book. In particular the casual mention of Antium as an opportune
et maritima urbs (1. 5) is remarkable after the elaborate account of
that city in 2. 63. 6 and the refugee movement from Antium to the
Aequi implied in 4. 3 is utterly at variance with the narrative of 2. 65.
6-7. A similar discrepancy can be detected in the reference to Aemilius'
390

467 B.C.

3- i-8

earlier activities (i. 2 n.). On the other hand, the section has much in
common with the previous Licinian passage which ended at 2. 51. 4.
The Fabii return to power (1. 1 n.). Political catchwords such as
largiendo (1. 3 n.) reappear.
The impression that L. has abandoned Valerius Antias in favour of
Licinius Macer again as his principal authority from the beginning
of the book is confirmed by the citation of Valerius as a variant source
at 5. 12 and the implied citation of the same variant at 8. 10 (n.).
Other possible additions from the same source are found at 3. 10 (n.),
and 4. 1 (n.). L. has made little attempt to create an artistic unity out
of his material but the increased wealth of details which the Annales
now supplied (1. 6 n., 5. 14 n.) would have made it difficult for him
to have done so without taking considerable liberties with the facts.
As it is, a comparison with D.H. reveals that L. and D.H. have fol
lowed different but related traditions (2. 1 n., 3. 10 n.), and that L.
has streamlined the data which he took over (4. 4 n., 5. 8 n.) and
confined himself to the essentials.
See Soltau 160-3: Burck 9-14; Klotz 253-8.
1. 1. Antio capto: 2. 65. 7. For the form of connexion between books
by the repetition of words cf. 5. 1. 1, 23. 1. 1, 24. 1. 1 (I. Nye, Sentence
Connection (1912), 136).
77. Aemilius: 2. 61. 1 n.
hie erat Fabius -fQuinctus qui unus: Quinctius is nonsense and is
generally assumed by editors to be a dittography of qui unus (Madvig,
Conway). It might be a corruption of Quintus caused by the rarity
of a postponed praenomen. The phenomenon of a praenomen following
the nomen is, however, found in Livy as well as of the nomen following
the cognomen (4. 23. 1 n.). It certainly occurs in verse (e.g. Ennius,
Annales 304 V.) and in some half-illiterate inscriptions (C.I.L. i 2 . 831)
but, outside L., there are no prose examples other than Varro, de
Ling. Lat. 5. 83 Scaevola Quintus, which is corrupt. There is one un
disputed instance of the mutation in L. (2. 32. 8 Menenium Agrippam)
but there the praenomen was sufficiently obsolete to make the change
easy (cf. 4. 17. 2 n.). At 30. 1.9 the Puteanus reads sub Lucretio Spurio
and at 29. 2. 11 the Puteanus and Spirensis traditions preserve Cornelium Servium but in both passages, as at 7. 22. 10, the manuscripts
are probably at fault. Besides the present passage, the archetype also
read Fabius Quinctius at 3. 29. 7 and Fabius Quintum at 10. 22. 1, where
Quintum can scarcely be right. Palaeographical arguments encourage
emendation throughout but some caution is advised by the case of
Menenius Agrippa and the disputed text of 1. 56. 11. In the latter
passage the archetype read Tarquinius Sextus . . . ut ignarus . . . esset rem
taceri iubent but the humanist correction Tarquinii, ut Sextus . . . [ut]
ignarus . . . esset, rem taceri iubent appears in most texts. There is, in any
391

3.

i. i

467 B.C.

case, no justification for Bayet's hie erat qui. The problem is discussed
by Mommsen (Rom. Forsch. i. 41) and G. Lahmeyer (Philologus 22
(1865), 468-75).
qui unus: 2. 50. 11. That Fabius would have been impossibly young
for a consulship if he was only a boy at the time of Cremera is a reflec
tion not on the reliability of the Fasti but of the traditional account
of that battle.
1. 2. iam priore consulate: there is no whisper of Aemilius' activity in
2. 61-62 although it is treated extensively by D.H. 9. 51. L. may have
suppressed it for artistic reasons but the inconsistency could be ex
plained by the change of source.
agrarii: those who hoped to gain from the agrarian law.
in spem . . . erexerant: 29. 14. 1, 33. 3. 12. It is favoured by Cicero
(de Domo 25; Phil. 3. 32). Notice the variation of tenses (erexerant. . .
suscipiunt. . . manebat).
utique: 'could be accomplished in any event with the assistance of
the consul'.
1 . 3 . principem civitatis: the language of first-century politics. For most
Romans of the late Republic the term principes (civitatis) described the
collective body of ex-consuls. Cicero himself uses principes as a synonym
for omnes consulares (Phil. 8. 22, 14. 17). princeps (civitatis), on the other
hand, was a value term applied to the man judged to be the most
prominent or influential of the principes (de Orat. 1. 225 (L. Licinius
Crassus); Deiot. 31 (M. Aemilius Scaurus); de Domo 66 (Pompey);
Brutus 80; ad Fam. 3. 11. 3). L. conforms to this Republican usage.
For principes as omnes consulares cf. 2. 2. 8, 16. 5, 46. 7, 3. 12. 1, 4. 6. 6,
5. 25. 11, 5. 30. 4 n.; {orprinceps, besides the present passage, cf. 2.16. 7
(P. Valerius) and 6. 1. 4 (Camillus). There is no hint of the Augustan
conception of Princeps, the ruler in all but name, which owed some
thing at least to Cicero's de Republica. See Syme, Roman Revolution, 10,
311, 519; L. Wickert, R.E., 'Princeps' with bibliography; H. Drexler,
Maia 10 (1958), 243-80.
largiendo: 2. 42. 6 n. The whole phrase is a proverbial commonplace
(Otto, Sprichworter; cf. Seneca, de Clem. 1. 20. 3 ; Epist. 16. 7 de alieno
liberalis sum).
1. 4. ductu et auspicio: technical, echoing the formal announcement of
the campaign. The phrase implies that the army was personally
commanded by the holder of imperium. When the general was only
a legate of a magistrate with imperium, he would be said to lead the
army (ductu) but the auspices would be those of his superior. As a
result he was not qualified to celebrate a triumph. So in an inscription
from Lepcis (Ehrenberg and Jones, Documents, no. 43): Marti Augusto
sacrum auspiciis imp. Caesaris Aug. pontificis maxumi patris patriae ductu
Cossi Lentuli cos . . . liberata civitas Lepcitana.
392

467 B.C.

3- i-4

See also 3. 17. 2, 42. 2, 5. 46. 6, 6. 12. 6, 40. 52. 5; Plautus, Amphitryo 196, 657; Bell. Alex. 43. 1.
agri captum ... aliquantum a Volscis esse: the reading capti transmitted
from archetype destroys the meaning of the sentence. The emphatic
position of the opening words shows that Fabius is recalling an historical
fact ('the previous year Quinctius captured some land from the
Volsci'), and not merely treating of an existing situation ('there is
some land captured the previous year from the Volsci'; cf. 42. 4. 3).
Gobet's captum is certain. Assimilation of endings is responsible for
other corruptions in L. (3. 15. 8 n., 19. 6 n., 4. 47. 3 n.).
1 . 5 . [propinquam] opportunam et maritimam urbem: Madvig objected to
the three adjectives on the ground that L. never writes a tricolon with
a copula only between the second and third members (i.e. A, B, and G).
His formulation of the rule is too rigid (Emendationes 82). Emendation
cannot eliminate passages like 44. 43. 6; cf. 5. 13. 6 n . A more
valid objection is that propinquam is both untrue and otiose. Antium
was over 40 miles from Rome so that it could only be said to be near
in so far that it was readily accessible {opportunam). propinquam is
probably a Nicomachean gloss on opportunam. For the conjunction of
opp. and mar. cf. 27. 30. 3, 45. 30. 4 ; Cicero, de Rep. 2. 5 ; but note also
41. 24. 8 opportuni propinquitate . . . sumus.
civitatem in concordia fore: Fabius sounds one of the themes of the
book (16. 3, 24. n , 33. 8, 52. 2, 54. 7, 57. 7, 58. 4, 65. 7) which is
resumed and elaborated in the great speech of Quinctius at the end
(67-68). But the connexion of the Fabii and Concordia is older than
L. and goes back at least to Licinius (2. 47. 12).
1. 6. triumviros agro dando creat: 4. 11. 5, 5. 24. 4, 8. 16. 14, 9. 28. 8,
10. 21. 9, 32. 2. 6. L.'s terminology is technically incorrect. Their
title historically was iiiviri agris dandis assignandis (Lex Lat. Bant. 15 ;
Lex Agr. 15) and they were not 'created5 by the consul (hence Gronovius' conjecture creant) but were elected in elections held by the
praetor after the passing of a special lex or plebiscitum (10. 21. 9,
34. 53. 2: so also the inscriptions cited above). Such inexactitude is,
however, typical of L. It is clear from the wealth of circumstantial
detail of magistrates, plagues, and prodigies which now begins to fill
the pages of L. that for this period the contents of the Annales survived
in a fuller form. The iiiviri would have figured by name there. For
Verginius see 2. 63, for Furius 2. 56. The names have the added chance
of being authentic in that 'the iiiviri who had founded a colony became
the hereditary patrons' (Badian, Foreign Clientela, 162). Squared-stone
tufa masonry at Anzio may belong to the colony or to the later settle
ment of 338 (Giovenale-Marchetti, Not. Scav., 1897, 240-1).
1. 7. fecit. . .fastidium copia: proverbial, cf., e.g., Plautus, Trin. 671.
Volsci: according to D.H. the other participants in the colony
393

3- i . 7

467 B.C.

were Latins and Hernici, not Volsci. That view is inherently more
probable and the mention of the Volsci by L. may be explained as a
misunderstanding of the fact reported by D.H. (7. 13) that the Volsci
were allowed to retain part of their possessions in the city after its
capture by the Romans.
1. 5. is venerat: abrupt and unexplained. D.H, 9. 59 devotes much
more space to Fabius' activities which suggests that L. has abbreviated
his material. The detail came from the Annales.
2. 1. Sp. Postumio: 2. 42. 5 n.
stativa habuit castra: see C.Q.g (1959), 217.
morbo: the nature of this and other plagues mentioned in L. cannot
be established with certainty. They were certainly recorded in the
Annales since the measures taken to avert them (3. 7. 8 n.) were of
importance pontifically, but no detail of symptoms is given. L. notices
the following cases:
490 pestilentia ingens (2. 34. 5; cf. 2. 35. 8).
466
463 annus pestilens urbi agrisque (3. 6. 2 ; cf. 6. 5, 7. 7-8, 8. 1, 9. 7,
13-2).
453 pestilentia foeda homini, foeda pecori (3. 32. 2).
437 pestilentia, inopia Jrugum (4. 20. 9).
436 pestilentia (4. 21. 2).
435 pestilentior inde annus (4. 21. 6).
433 morbo implicitis cultoribus agrorum (4. 25. 4).
432 vis morbi levata (4. 25. 6).
431 morbo (4. 26. 5).
428 stragem pecorum, volgati in homines morbi (4. 30. 8).
412 pestilentia minacior quam perniciosior (4. 52, 2).
411 pestilentem annum inopia frugum (4. 52. 4).
399 pestilens omnibus animalibus aestas (5. 13. 4).
392 pestilentia in agro Romano (5. 31. 5).
390 Gallos pestilentia urgebat (5. 48. 2).
Little help is provided by contemporary Greek records. There is
evidence of plague or malaria in Ionia in 494 (Herodotus 6. 12), in
Sicily about 475 (Pindar, Pyth. 3. 66), in Athens between 460 and 450
(27 Aristoph. Equites 84; cf. I.G. i 2 . 3 1 ; Plutarch, Pericles 37. 4), of
typhus in Athens from 430 to 427 ('The Great Plague'), of malaria in
Athens in 422 (Aristoph. Vespae 277, 281, 813) and, presumably, in
Sicily in 413, and of typhus in Sicily in 396 (Diod. S i c ) . These dates,
except for 428, scarcely correspond with the Roman epidemics. The
worst decade at Rome was 440-430, at Athens 430-420, but the Great
394

3. 2. 1
466 B.C.
Plague came from the east, not the west. It is, however, certain that
malaria first became seriously endemic in the northern Mediterranean
during the fifth century (W. H. S. Jones, Malaria and Greek History,
23-40; A. Gelli, Die Malaria; Glerici, Economia e Finanza, 26 n. 4) and
round Rome malaria was encouraged by the draining of the salt-lakes
at Ostia, since the Anopheles does not breed in salt water, and by the
extent of the Pomptine marshes. That fact taken in conjunction with
the total disappearance of several communities occupying strategic
positions in Latium during the century (e.g. Ardea, Laurentum,
Gabii, Longula, Polusca) is a strong indication that at least some of
the reports are to be identified as malaria. In particular, the epidemics
among the Volsci in 490 when they were operating in the Pomptine
area and among the Gauls in 390 who were encamped in the lowlying and swampy parts of Rome, together with the singling out of the
cultores agrorum as victims in 433, look like malaria. But malaria does
not attack animals (453, 428, 399) and it must be assumed that in
addition to a regular malaria curve several 'famine-plagues', perhaps
of the typhus species with murrain, also attacked the population. In
particular anthrax, the only disease known to attack cattle and men,
which certainly existed in Italy in Nero's time and being a persistent
disease might have been active for centuries previously, is a serious
candidate. See also Kind, R.E., 'Malaria'; Hofmann, R.E., Suppl., 8,
Tomptinae Paludes'; H. Zinsser, Rats, Mice and History, 104-49;
E. Kornemann, Intern. Monatsch. 14 (1919), 491 ff. D.H. 9. 60. 8
adds a further fact from the Annales that Postumius dedicated the
temple of Dius Fidius (Ovid, Fasti 6. 213-18).

The First Aequan War

2. 2. extra ordinem: 8. 16. 5. Until the Lex Sempronia of 123 B.C. it was
the responsibility of the Senate to designate the provinces to be held
each year. It was then for the consuls to draw lots (sortiri; 2. 58. 4) or
to reach a mutual arrangement (comparare inter se) for the allocation
of the provinces. In times of crisis it was open to the Senate to re
commend the direct appointment of the consuls to particular pro
vinces (6. 22. 6, 6. 30. 3, 7. 23. 2, 10. 24. TO, 37. 1. 7, 38. 58. 8; sine
sorte, sine comparatione, extra ordinem provincia data) in order to secure the
fittest man for the task. In still later times the will of the people was
liable to override the formal procedure and to dictate the appoint
ments. Although the machinery dates from an early period, the
notice about Fabius is questionable.
2. 3-5. For the chronological problems of the section cf. 3. 10 n.
Fabius' message is a finished product of rhetorical technique which
contrasts with the crudity of the direct speech attributed to the Aequan
395

3- 2. 3-5

465 B.C.

in 8-9. T h e two speeches, the suave Roman against the uncouth

foreigner, are deliberate counterparts and, being placed at the very
opening of the book in a dull and disconnected series of engagements,
raise the reader's expectation. Notice the careful antitheses: pacem . . .
bellum, armata quam pacatam, nunc testes, mox . . . ultores, paenitere . . .
quam pati hostilia, si paeniteat . . . sin periurio gaudeant, dis magis iratis
quam hostibus. The chiastic ex Aequis Romam, ab Roma Aequis and the
alliterative perfidia et periurio are also striking, quorum . . .fiat is an infi.
question dependent on testes, se tamen etiam nunc malle governs the rest
of its sentence, sua sponte referring to the Aequi not to Fabius (se).
Characteristic of the formality of Fabius' style is the use of dextera
which L. only employs 9 times instead of the contracted dextra which
occurs 40 times. For receptum ad clementiam cf. Cicero, pro Lig. 30.
2. 6. in Algidum: the first mention of the dramatic and commanding
pass by which the Via Latina passes through and out of the Alban
crater (see m a p ) . This was the earliest and for long the only route to
the south because it ran up the natural slopes of the lava-flow,
whereas any road from Rome circumnavigating the crater and going
through the Praeneste Gap had to run across the grain of the country
in a series of switchbacks. T h e pass was the scene of numerous en
gagements with the Aequi and Volsci, because it was a prize which
gave the possessor control of the communications (23. 5, 25. 6, 27. 8,
30. 3, 4. 26. 3, 45. 6). It ceased to be of importance to Rome, and so
to be mentioned in history, after Camillus' decisive victory over the
Aequi in 389. L. only uses the phrase in Algido (-urn), but the term
came subsequently to cover the range of hills stretching from T u sculum eastwards above the pass. There was, however, never a city of
the name, despite D . H . 10. 21, 11. 3. SeeHulsen, R.E., 'Algidus m o n s ' ;
T. Ashby, P.B.S.R.4 (1907), 3 ff.; 5 (1910), 409 ff.
2. 8. ostentare: the jibe is commonplace but elsewhere ostendere is used
(1. 11. 5, 2. 44. 12; Tacitus, Hist. 3. 48, 3. 78; Pliny, Epist. 2. 7. 2).
T h e frequentative underlines the vulgarity of the speaker.
2. 9. crastino die: 2. 56. 9 n.
erit copia pugnandi: the use of the future in first place without et after
a preceding imperative is typical of the spoken word; cf. 5. 51. 5
(Camillus).
ne timete: 'be not a-feared'. T h e harshness of the plain ne with the
imperative for ne with the subj. or nolite with the infinitive is remark
able. Outside Terence (Andria 868), legal documents which often pre
serve archaic forms (22. 10. 5), and Virgil (e.g. Aeneid 6. 544, where
Servius comments antique dictum, nam nunc lne saevias* dicimus; cf.
Norden's note), the construction is only found in two other places of
classical literature (Seneca, Contr. 1. 2. 5 ; Dial. 2. 19 4 : both charac
terizing) . See Wackernagel, Vorlesungen, 1. 214.
39 6

465 B.C.

3. 2. 10

2. 10. longam: predicative.

corpora . . . curant: 9. 37. 7, 34. 16. 5. Stacey regarded the phrase
as poetical since it is used by Ennius, Ann. 368. But Servius comment
ing on Georgics 4. 187, shows that euro is the mot juste in such contexts
without any special flavour, when he writes ''curare corpus' si de hominibus
dicamus, et cibo et lavacro intellegimus vel alterutro. Hence it is natural
that Petronius should use it in an informal passage of narrative (115).
Cf. also Gaius, Dig. 50. 16. 44.
ultima audere: 1. 48. 3 n., 22. 60. 23.
2. 11. contracti. . .periculi: 2. 23. 14.
2. 13. Cf. 2. 43. 5.
3 . 1. castris: 'having left a guard on their camp', egressi is to be taken
absolutely as at 5. 21. 1. Cornelissen transposed praesidio and castris,
taking castris with egressi but the change is superfluous and a pre
position would be required with castris.
3 . 4 . audita incerta: has a proverbial ring; see the commentators on
Lucretius 5. 1134-5.
cursus clamorque: 1. 48. 2 n. Notice the short, staccato sentences
mirroring the panic of the situation.
captae urbis: 1. 29. 2 n.
3 . 6. iustitio indicto: 5. 4, 27. 2, 4. 31. 9, 6. 7. 1, 7. 6. 12, 9. 6, 28. 3,
10. 4. i, 21. 3, the temporary suspension of all jurisdiction and legal
proceedings in an emergency (Aul. Gell. 20. 1 ; Cicero, Phil. 5. 31).
A iustitium could be declared either by the Senate (10. 21. 3) or by
a dictator (3. 27. 2) and since the duration was not defined, it lasted
as long as the emergency. While a iustitium was in force, all the courts
were closed and public business came to a standstill. T h e record of
iustitia, being of religious concern, was preserved in the Annales.
indicere or edicere is used indiscriminately for the proclamation, remittere or exuere for the termination. See Nissen, Das Iustitium (1877);
Kleinfeller, R.E., 'Iustitium'.
praefecto urbis: 1. 59. 12 n.
3# 9. census: 1. 44. 2 n. conditum lustrum: 1. 44. 2 n.
3 . 10. nihil memorabile actum: a surprising comment in view of the
elaborate campaign outlined in 2. 3-3. 8. It is not easy to believe that
the census divided the campaigning season and that a full-scale opera
tion was mounted against the Aequi before the census and another
one after it. T h e explanation may be traced to L.'s desire to create
unified actions and episodes. In D.H. 9. 60 Fabius' embassy to the
Aequi is dated to 466. For L., however, that embassy was a perfect
counterpart to the Aequan defiance and it was necessary to juxtapose
them. To achieve this he transfers it from 466, which is now left with
out content (2. 1), and places it in 465, grouping together other notices
397

3- 3- io

465 B.C.

and building up a consecutive episode. The distortion (2. 39. 2 n.) is

betrayed by his accurate recording of the fact that the Annales had
nothing of military importance for the year. See Weissenborn-Muller
ad loc.; Burck 11; Klotz, Rh. Mus. 87 (1938), 46.
4. 1. A. Postumius Albus: 2. 42. 5 n.
Furios Fusios scripsere quidam: it is impossible to determine who
quidam were. The spelling Fusius is archaic (1. 24, 6) and together
with Valesius is likely to have gone out of fashion in 312 when Ap.
Claudius was censor (Quintilian 1.4. 13; Macrobius 3. 2. 8). But the
antiquarian revival of the first century popularized the spelling again.
Valesius occurs significantly as the form of the name in the Elogium
of P. Valerius Poplicola (C.I.L. i 2 . 202). Fusios, therefore, like Vetusius
(8. 2 n.) might be either a genuine survival from pre-fourth-century
documents or be an example of second- or first-century pedantry.
Against the former it must be urged that the addition of the cognomina
Albus and Fusus is scarcely credible in official records of the fifth
century. I am inclined to believe that the eccentricity is of a kind to
be expected from the libri lintei and that L.'s comment substantially
reproduces Licinius' gloss on the passage. See H. Jordan, Hermes 6
(1871), 201-4; F. Miinzer, R.E., 'Furius'.
4. 3 . Ecetranum: 2. 25. 6 n. The Hernici make their report in accor
dance with the Cassian treaty.
confugisset ad Aequos: at variance with the account given at the end
of the previous book of the Fall of Antium and therefore from a
different source.
is miles: the soldiery who had escaped from Antium to the Aequi.
4. 4. sua sponte: with infidos, 'the colonists who were already on their
own account disaffected'.
The Second Aequan War
As in the case of the first war L. has compressed and shaped his
material. D.H. reports that Furius after his defeat (4. 8) sent messen
gers to Rome and during the night changed his camp so that the scene
of his defeat and of his beleaguering were different; L. omits the
whole night incident and imposes an Aristotelian unity of time and
place on the drama. Notice also that it is the Hernici who bring the
news (4. 9), not Furius5 messengers and that L. has excluded a
series of irrelevant details to be found in D.H. (e.g. a volunteer brigade
of 5,000 under Postumius). The effect is to focus the attention on the
psychological rather than on the external aspect of the defeat.
4. 7. temere: 2. 48. 5, 5. 18. 7-12. The Romans ex hypothesi cannot
possess such un-Roman qualities as faint-heartedness, so that a psycho
logical scapegoat has to be found to account for their defeat.
398

464 B.C.

3-4- 9

4. 9. quae forma s.c. ultimae semper necessitatis habita est: 6. 19. 3 ; semper
is tendentious. There is no evidence that there was any precedent for
such a S.C. before 121 when on the instigation of the consul Opimius
the Senate passed a resolution de republica defendenda notifying the
consuls that a situation had arisen which required emergency action
to be taken but not conferring upon them any legal powers which
they did not already enjoy by virtue of their imperium (Plutarch,
C. Gracchus 14; Cicero, in CatiL 1.4).
The formula of the S.C. was as given by L. here and more fully
by Cicero (Phil. 8. 14; ad Fam. 16. 11. 2 ; in CatiL 1. 4) uti consules
rempublicam defendant operamque dent ne quid resp. d. c. The title Senatus
Consultum Ultimum is not found before Caesar (B.C. 1. 5). It might be
expected that such a resolution would have its origins in a military
emergency before it was adapted to political circumstances, but if
there were any earlier precedents Cicero must have invoked them.
The present passage is therefore an invention by the post-Gracchan
annalists to supply a pedigree for the actions of 121 (Plaumann, Klio
13 (1913), 360; O'Brien Moore, R.E., 'senatus', cols. 755-8). The
S.C. ultimum was used subsequently against Saturninus and Glaucia
in 100 B.C., against Lepidus in 77, against Catiline in 63, and against
Caesar in 49. The invention may be older than Licinius. It may even
be due to Piso who was involved in the Gracchan disturbances. But
it is interesting that Licinius, L.'s source here, included it, since it is
a remarkable instance of his political interpretation of history.
negotium daretur (uty videret: cf. 4. 45. 4.
4. 10. pro consule: cf. 5. 2. 9; a curious anachronism to be compared
with the S.C. ultimum above. Since the chief magistrate at Rome was
almost certainly known as praetor until 450 (1. 60. 4 n.) and the office
of pro-consul was not regularized (8. 26. 7) until the Punic Wars, there
can be no doubt that the notice, as it stands, is not original. The
tradition, however, that a Quinctius had once acted as general of a
Latin army, which did not include Romans, is so strong (cf. 7. 38. 5 42. 7) that it cannot be set aside. It is to be seen against the back
ground of information provided by the antiquarian Cincius (ap.
Festus 276 L.; see Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 35, 662; A. Piganiol,
Mel. a"Arch, et a"Hist. 38 (1920), 285-313; U. Coli, Regnum, 145-68;
J. Pinsent, Class. Journ. 55 (1959), 81-85), from which it can be
inferred that from an early date Rome's special position in the Latin
League entitled her from time to time to appoint one of the two prae
tors of the league (8. 3. 9; D.H. 3. 34. 3) without contributing a
contingent to the army and that the ritual of such an appointment
survived and was transformed into the normal procedure for dis
patching pro-consuls and pro-praetors to the provinces. L. (or rather
his source, Licinius, since D.H. 9. 63. 2 also writes dpxfj KoafirjddvTa
399

3. 4- io

464 B.C.

avOvTrdru)) has blended antiquarian procedure with a known fact about

the Quinctii to create the S. C. dispatching T. Quinctius pro consule to
lead a Latin army. Note that the whole adventure of Furius' rescue by
T. Quinctius is strongly reminiscent of Cincinnatus' rescue of Minucius
(26-28), suggesting the reduplication of a legendary Quinctius.
The machinery of the Latin League can only be recovered in the
broadest outline. Since it was a league not between Rome on the one
hand and a bloc consisting of a Latin confederacy on the other, but
was a relationship entered into by Rome and each of the Latin states
individually, it effectively gave Rome a measure of hegemony which
her geographical position and resources warranted. The troops en
gaged in operations might or might not include a Roman contingent,
depending partly on Rome's other commitments and partly on the
size and the locality of the danger, but the actions were essentially
federal. A small raid by Volscians on the outskirts of Latium was a
matter for federal consultation but would be most efficiently tackled
by a force raised from the states in the immediate vicinity. This dis
tribution of force under the alliance is obscured by L. who tends to
regard the armies that fight federal battles as exclusively Roman (cf.,
e.g., 4. 37. 4 ff.) or else, in desperate situations when Rome is too pre
occupied, exclusively Latin and/or Hernican. The true federal nature
of the operations does, however, break through occasionally when
Latins, Hernicans, and Romans are reported as fighting in partnership
(2. 53. 4 m : 475 B.C.; 3. 22. 2-.459 B.C.; 4. 26. 12:431 B.C.; 5. 1 9 . 5 :
396 B.C.) or when there is a record of the confederates enjoying their
share of the spoil (2. 41. 1 n.: 486 B.C. ; 4. 29. 4 : 431 B.C.; 51. 7:
413 B.C. ,-56. 1,6: 408 B.C.). The interesting occasions are those when
the confederates are reported as fighting without Roman contingents
and with or without a Roman commander. Gincius shows that the
commander of the confederate army, known as the Latin praetor, was
appointed by some form of rotation from the member-states. How the
system worked in detail is not known or whether Rome enjoyed a
special position, appointing the commander, for instance, every other
year or at times of special crisis. There are three certain cases of con
federate action without any Roman participation (2. 53. 4: 475 B.C.;
3. 6. 4 : 463 B.C. ; 4. 45. 3-41419 B.C.) and one curious occasion where
the confederates ask to be allowed to take such action (2. 30. 8:
494 B.C.; cf. 3. 19. 8), which, distorted though it is by tendentious
propaganda, evidently reflects the fact that the Gassian treaty made
allowance for such defensive operations by one of the contracting
parties when the situation was not sufficiently serious to merit con
joint action by both or when the other party was prevented for any
reason from providing assistance. But the league would appoint a
commander annually, irrespective of whether an attack was ex400

464 B.C.

3 . 4 . 10

pected or whether the city which supplied the commander was likely
to be called on for troops. So, in the present passage, it has come to
Rome's turn to provide the Latin praetor but she does not provide
troops as well.
This is all that can be discovered about the workings of the league.
For the rest we have a series of notices dealing with the Latin reports
of enemy activity (e.g. legati ab Latinis atque Hernicis nuntiabant. . .).
They occur in 495 (2. 24. 1), 479 (2. 48. 6), 465 (3. 4. 9), 462 (3. 8. 4),
461 (3. 10. 8), 459 (3. 22. 2), 457 (3. 30. 2), 456 (3. 31. 3), 449 (3. 57. 7),
431 (4. 26. 1), 424 (4. 36. 4), 423 (4. 37. 4), 419 (4. 45. 3), 410
(4. 53. 2), 409 (4. 55. 1), and 408 (4. 56. 4). T h e historian is faced
with the choice of supposing that worthless notices have been foisted
on to the Annalistic record by antiquarians anxious to reconstruct
the early history of Rome from rituals still surviving in their own day
or believing that the Annales did record the appointment of the Latin
praetor when it was Rome's turn to provide one and so did have a
solid kernel. W e shall not attempt to sway his judgement. It will
depend entirely on his character.
4 . 11. subitarios milites: not mentioned outside L. and in L. only at
40. 26. 6, 28. 10, 4 1 . 17. 9 (cf. 41. 10. 3). Probably a Punic W a r
definition retrojected by the Annalist tradition to early times, repentina auxilia, 'irregular supporting troops', is not a technical expres
sion.
5. 1. superante multitudine: cf. Tacitus, Agr. 25. 4 superante numero, 'with
their superiority in numbers' (Vahlen, Opuscula, 1. 150). multifariam,
'in many places' (50. 3, 21. 8. 4, 33. 18. 7, 37. 5. 1).
5. 2. si qua for tuna daret: 'wherever fortune allowed'. T h e absolute use
of dare = 'permit' is rare (5. 27. 2 ; Cicero, de Inv. 1. 25) and only
secure, because of metre, in Galpurnius {Eel. 4. 118). Elsewhere L.
prefers the reflexive fors se dare = 'fortune offered itself (1. 45. 3).
5. 3 . L. Valerius: presumably the consul of 470 (2. 61. 1) for whom see
2. 41. n n., since the consul of 449 would be too young. Perhaps an
Annalistic notice (1, 60. 4 n.).
5. 4 . tumultu: technical; 'a state of emergency'.
iustitium: 3. 6 n,
5. 5. decumana: one of the principal gates of the Roman camp, so
called because the tenth cohort of each legion was situated there.
It lay farthest from the enemy (Polybius 6. 27 with Walbank's note).
Furium legatum: the consul of 472 (2. 56. 1) and iiivir of 467 (3. 1.6).
5. 6. studio persequendi: to be taken with vidit.
multis saepe: 11. 11 n.
5. 8. nulla deinde vi sustineri potuere cum compulsi. . . obsiderentur . . .
venissetque . . . ni T. Quinctius peregrinis copiis cum Latino Hernicoque
814432

401

Dd

3-5.8

464 B.C.

exercitu subvenisset: the text as it stands cannot be accepted (Pettersson,

Baehrens). If the first cum is rightly reported it must govern obsiderentur,
but the clause cum . . . obsiderentur with a strong stop after pares cannot
be taken with the preceding main sentence since either a causal 'since'
or a temporal 'when' is an absurd non sequitur. If, however, a strong stop
is put after potuere, and cum is taken to govern obsiderentur and venisset,
a main verb has either to be understood or a lacuna presumed. Neither
is satisfactory. These difficulties have led editors to emend cum (quin
Gronovius, following an earlier conjecture; ut Conway-Walters). An
objection to such an emendation is that non sustineri posse, unlike non
sisti posse, is never followed by a dependent clause in L. ( i . 41. 4,
2.47. 5, 7 sustineri deinde vis nequit, 2. 50. 5, 3. 63. 4, 5. 7.4). The deletion
of cum is the only remedy, and it is prescribed by the corruption at the
end of the sentence where cum must be transposed and put before
peregrinis (Seyffert); cf. 5. 19. $peregrina etiam iuventus, Latini Hernicique.
At some stage in the transmission cum was dropped from the text and
restored in the margin. Subsequent copyists tried to replace it with
the result that it was inserted both before compulsi and before
Latino,
The 7Tpi7rTia m . . . subvenisset is also embellished by D.H. 9. 64. 3.
It is as much a commonplace of Hellenistic battle-descriptions as the
picture of the second consul attacking the booty-laden Aequi on their
victorious return (repeated in 8. 7-10; 10. 36. 16: see H.-G. Plathner,
Schlachtschilderungen, 14).
5. 9. ferociter ostentantes: the sight of the general's head impaled has
always exercised a dispiriting effect on morale, as it did at the Battle
of the Standard (Scott, Tales of a Grandfather, 1. 28). Such details were
part of the stock-in-trade of the military historian. It was a notoriously
barbarian habit: examples may be found in Denniston's note on
Euripides, Electra 898; cf. also Bacchae 1141 ; Herodotus 9. 78 f.
5 . 1 2 . audet... Antias Valerius concipere summas: for Valerius Antias see
the Introduction; for the inversion of the nomen and the cognomen
see 4. 23. 1 n. L. came increasingly to distrust him, describing him at
one moment (33. 10. 8) as immodicus in numero augendo and at another
exclaiming that adeo nullus mentiendi modus est (26. 49. 3). A casual
glance at the figures which he gives shows that they are purely con
jectural, hazarded on the estimated strength of the forces engaged.
The figures 12,000 (frr. 30, 31, 35 P.) and 40,000 (32, 34, 36, 39) recur
like a refrain. He even computed the number of Sabines raped
(fr. 3 P.). But his reputation has been unduly tarnished; for he was far
from being the worst offender among Roman historians in the matter
of exaggeration. On at least two occasions Claudius Quadrigarius gave
substantially higher figures (25. 39. 12 : see Volkmann, R.E., 'Valerius
(Antias)'; Walsh, Livy, 120).
402

464 B.C.

3 - 5 - 12

5. 12 should be considered in conjunction with 8. 10 (also Valerian).

In both places the scale of the fighting described by L. leaves no doubt
that V.A. is being cited as a variant and is not the authority for the
whole narrative. Here L. has to recapitulate the events which he has
already related (5. 13 populabundi. . . vagabantur . . .: multitudinem
praedam agentem).
5. 14. ut Romam reditum est, iustitium remissum est; caelum visum est ardere:
for the text see C.Q. 9 (1959), 219. The style is deliberately pontifical
and unadorned (Pettersson 126 n. 3).
caelum ardere: 10. 6. The prodigy is of a recognized and commonly
reported type (22. 1. 12,31. 1 2 . 5 , 3 2 . 9 . 3 , 4 3 . 13. 3 ; Jul. Obs. 14, 15,
20, 5 1 ; Cicero, in Catil. 3. 18; Seneca, N.Q_. 1. 15. 5). The technical
language shows that the notice comes from the Annales. Apart from
the obscure allusion of 2. 42. 10 to prodigia caelestia and the legendary
portents in the first book, this is the first certainly recorded prodigy in
L. and confirms the impression that the Annales for this period were
fuller and better preserved. Before 390 the following prodigies are
also mentioned (the references in brackets are to later manifestations
of the same prodigy culled from Luterbacher, Der Prodigienglaube,
1880, 26 fT.):
461 ( 3 . 1 0 . 6 )

458
436
411
399
398

(3.
(4.
(4.
(5(5.

29.
21.
49.
1415.

9)
5)
1)
3)
2)

caelum ardere.
terra concussa motu (4. 21. 5, 35. 40. 7, 40. 59. 7;
Suetonius, Claudius 22; Aul. Gell. 2. 28. 2).
bovem locutam (24. 10. 10, 27. 11. 4, 28. 11. 4,
35. 2 1 . 4 , 41. 13. 2, 21. 13, 43. 13. 3 ; Jul. Obs.
15. 2 7 ? 43> 53; Tacitus, Hist. 1. 86).
carne pluit (24. 10. 7; 39. 46. 5, 56. 6, 42. 20. 5,
43- 13.5; Cicero, deDiv. 2. 58; Jul. Obs. 4, 6, 27,
43> 44)lupos a canibus fugatos (see 21. 46. 2).
crebris motibus terrae (see above).
Tiberis super ripas effusus (see note; cf. 5. 13. 1 n.).
prodigia.
locus in Albano nemore in altitudinem insolitam crevit
(see note).

For further details see Luterbacher op. cit.; Schonberger, Bayr.

Blatter fur Gymn. 55 (1919), 101 ff.; St.-Denis, Rev. Phil. 16 (1942),
126 ff.; P. Handel, R.E., Trodigium'.
aut obversata oculis aut vanas... ostentavere species: the syntax is awkward
ifobversata sc. sunt balances ostentavere, and led Nettleship to conjecture
audita after aut, 'the delusionary phenomena of visible or audible por
tents' (cf. 24. 44. 8 alia ludibria oculorum auriumque creditapro veris). The
reading would imply that for L. all prodigies were sham sensations
403

464 B.C.
3- 5- *4
(cf. 24. 10. 6) and, although it is true that L., influenced doubtless by
Cicero's de Divinatione, is often prepared to advance rational explana
tions for observed phenomena (8. 1,5. 13. 4 ; cf. 5. 14. 2) and although,
too, his reporting of prodigies is conditioned by the time-honoured
place which they held in Roman historiography (Syme, Tacitus,
522-3), yet there are too many passages which demonstrate that the
neglect of prodigies was associated by L. with resultant disaster
to individuals and to the state (27. 23. 4 ; on this point see Stubler,
Die Religiositat des T. Livius, 100 ff.; M . W. L. Laistner, The
Greater Roman Historians, 68 ff.; I. Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy,
46-52). It is therefore preferable to suppose that in the present
passage, as in 21. 62. 1, L. is being delicately non-committal. For
obversata, a technical word, cf. 2. 36. 4; Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 2. 52;
Suetonius, Claudius 37.
5. 15. Antiates mille: their nationality and numbers suggest the hand
of Valerius Antias, and the whole sentence has the air of an after
thought inserted from a variant source, since nothing is said of Antium
in the course of the narrative (4. 11). A mention of the colony in the
Annales may have inspired V.A., recalling perhaps the Spartans at
Marathon, to work up an incident of local interest. 'First at a feast,
last at a fray.' Cf. 27. 20. 3 ; Euripides, H.F. 1173; Plato, Gorgias
447 a 2 with Dodds's note; Plautus, Menaechmi 989; Capt. 870 (Vahlen,
Opuscula, 2. 297),* Tacitus, Hist. 3. 79 (Andresen).
6. 1. L. Aebutius: T.f. T.n, a son of the cos. of 499 (2. 19. 1 n.) and
uncle of Post. Aebutius (4. 11. 1 n.) and M . Aebutius (4. 11. 5).
P. Servilius: Sp.f. P.n., probably therefore a son of the cos. of 476
(2. 51. 4 n.) and father of the dictator of 435 and 418 (4. 21. 10 n.).
KaL Sext.: the evidence for the date of entry into office of the magis
trates up to 390 may be briefly summarized (Mommsen, Rom. Chron.
80 ff.; Leuze, Die Rom. Jahrzahlung, 350-62). T h e traditional date for
the first consulate of 509 was 1 March (D.H. 5. 1) but that date is
apocryphal: it was historically pleasing that the new regime should
commence with the opening of the Religious Year. An erroneous inter
pretation of the regifugium (24 Feb.) may also have contributed
(1. 60. 2 n.). Somewhat more secure is the evidence that from 509-479
the entry-date was 1 September (D.H. 6. 49. 2 ; Lydus, de Mag.
1. 38). In the matter of Cremera it was shown that the divergent
dates of Licinius Macer (13 Feb.) and Valerius Antias (18 July) were
both compatible with an entry into office of the consuls during either
August or September, but that 1 August (Kal. Sext.) is preferable
(2. 51-65 n.)the date specifically given here for 463 and implied for
462 by 3. 8. 3 (n.); cf. D.H. 9. 13, 14, 25. T h a t date will have persisted
until the suspension of the regular constitution by the Decemviri on
404

463 B.C.

3- 6. i

15 M a y 451 (3. 36. 3, 38. 1). Consular government was restored after
more than two years. T h e exact date is uncertain. Leuze argues that
it was 1 September 449, on the grounds that the consular tribunes who
preceded Papirius and Sempronius, consuls in 444 (4. 7. 10-12), had
held office for less than three months (D.H. 11. 62 ; cf. L. 4. 7. 3) and
that P. and S. began a new era on 13 December (D.H. 16. 63).
13 December is itself a more attractive date (but it is not, in fact,
certain that P. and S. held office for a complete year, or even that they
held office at all. In any event 13 December became and remained
the official date down to 402 (4. 37. 3, 43. 8, 50. 8) when the col
lege of military tribunes was compelled to resign and a new system
was inaugurated on 1 October (5. 9. 8). T h e sickness of 392 entailed
a further change. T h e consuls resigned (5. 31. 7) before the end of their
tenure and a new year was begun on 1 July with a college of military
tribunes (5. 32. 1). It is likely that 1 July remained the opening of the
magisterial year at least down to 329 (8. 20. 3). It follows from this
evidence, which was probably entered in the Annales, that there
was no fixed date for entry into office during the early Republic, but
that so long as magistrates held office throughout the year their suc
cessors succeeded on the same day as they had done. When, however,
both consuls died, resigned, or were superseded, the new government
dated the opening of its year from the point where it had taken over.
Thus the Decemviri instituted a new year on 15 May, Valerius and
Horatius probably on 13 December, the military tribunes of 402-1 on
1 October, those of 392 on 1 July. It follows that there can have been
no machinery for electing two suffect consuls to complete a year in the
course of which both consuls or the whole college of military tribunes
had ceased to act through death or other cause and thereby lost the
auspices, so that when Licinius inserts consules suffecti in 444 (4. 7.
10-12) his restoration is anachronistic and false. T h e reason for the
flexibility of date was religious. No makeshift could carry the auspices
over, except temporarily in the person of the interrex. A newly solem
nized year had to be commenced. T h e fixed date was first instituted
as 15 March in 222, and 1 J a n u a r y in 153.
6. 2 - 3 . grave tempus: perhaps a reminiscence of Thucydides' plague
description. Notice especially Thuc. 2. 52. 1. Hellenistic historians
regarded it as a challenge to imitate and better that account (see the
humorous comments of Lucian, Quomodo Historia 15).
morbi: 2. 1 n.
6. 4. Hernici: 4. i o n .
6. 5. ut anno ante: not with veniat, but like ut semper alias with laturos.
veniat ut anno are the first surviving words of the fourth-century codex
Veronensis for which see Mommsen, Ges. Schriften, 7.96-148; W. Jung, de
fide codicis Veronensis (Hanover, 1881); C. Knight, C.Q.8 (1914), 166-80.
405

3-6.6

463 B.C.

6. 6. referentes: sc. nuntium. Ver. read reportantes which editors have

accepted as a poeticism, comparing Virgil, Aeneid 2. 115 (see Gries,
Constancy, 56-57). Such a poeticism would seem to have no function
in the minor events with which L. is dealing, nor is reportare necessarily
a poetical usage. In late Latin portare usurps the place offerre as the
normal word for 'to carry, bear' (Lofstedt, Peregrinatio, 270; cf. Fr.
porter) and it is characteristic of Ver. that it substitutes the devalued
language of the fourth century for the classical. Cf. 6. 4. 5 where Ver.
reads contemnentium imperium against aspernantium imperium of N ; aspernor
is guaranteed by 25. 14. 3; Curtius 4. 1.5, 5. 7. 2, 10. 2. 5, 10. 5. 12;
contemno is the trivial word. Cf. also 3. 44. 5 n., 3. 61. 13 n., 3. 64. 5 n.,
4. 54. 8 n.
6. 7. agros Romanos: 5. 31. 5 n.
Gabina via: 2. 11. 7 n.
6. 8. principum, patrum: 5. 30. 4 n.
6. 9. circumitio ac cura aedilium plebi erat: 'the inspection and charge
(of the sentries) was in the hands of the plebeian aediles'. Plebeian
aediles have not been mentioned before. In origin they were not
magistrates at all, but keepers of the aedes Cereris (55. 13 n.). The
importance of that temple as the headquarters of the plebs and the
wide functions which its keepers performed allowed the gradual tran
sition of aediles from priests to magistrates but the transition did not
begin in 463 but only after the Decemvirate at the earliest. The present
passage must therefore be an anachronism designed to provide an his
torical justification for the duties of the later aediles which Cicero
(de Legibus 3. 7) summarizes as cura urbis, cura annonae, and cura ludorum
sollemnium. In particular the use of cura is designed to underline the
connexion with cura urbis. Whereas circumitio is a technical term (Jul.
Capitolinus 3. 3), cura (with vigiliarum) in the sense of 'overseeing the
watch' is not (32. 26. 17, 39. 16. 10) and the conjunction of the two
words led Ruperti to propose circumitionis cura or to delete ac cura as a
gloss. But as often (see Dodds on Plato, Gorgias 447 a 2) a technical
or metaphorical word is linked with a plain word which modifies
or explains it. So here cura interprets circumitio and recalls the cura
urbis.
7. 1. deserta omnia: 9. 45. 16.
di praesides ac fortuna urbis: 1. 46. 5 n. The di praesides (26. 41. 18,
28. 39. 15) are those gods, particularly Juppiter O.M., who have a
special concern for the welfare of Rome. L. uses fortuna urbis for
fortuna populi Romani here, because attention is directed to the city
which the enemy did not dare enter rather than on the people
(Kajanto). Note the indicative {quae . . . dedit) suggesting that L. him
self believed in the irrational agency of Rome's salvation.
406

463 B.C.

3- 7- 2

7. 2. eorum . . . eorum: for the repetition see examples cited by Shackleton Bailey, Cicero : lad Atticum\ 28.
tecta . . . tumuli: Novak objected that it was the plague, not the im
posing appearance of Rome, which diverted the Volsci a n d Aequi and,
further, that tumuli was a slighting term for the hills of Rome. He,
therefore, proposed reading bustaque, taking tumuli of funeral mounds.
But the TOTTos of a barbarian being deterred by the mere sight of the
city was borrowed from the story of Hannibal (26. 10. 3). Even as
late as the fifth century A.D. the emotions of Alaric and Genseric were
deeply stirred by the prospect of those hills and houses. T h e hills of
Rome are also described as tumuli in 5. 48. 2. Cf. Shackleton Bailey,
Cicero: cad Atticum', 58.
7. 3 . quid: with tererent, 'why were they wasting time?'.
transversisque itineribus: 2. 39. 3 n. Labicanos: 2. 39. 4 n.
tempestas belli: a striking phrase, used again at 31. 10. 6 (cf. Statius,
Theb. 3. 228). Perhaps taken over from Hellenistic historians since it is
a peculiarly Greek metaphor (cf., e.g., Sophocles, Antigone 670).
7. 4 . Romanam urbem: for the usual urbem Romanam, underlining the
duty of the Hernici and Latins to their confederates.
7. 5. Tusculano: valle would need to be understood with Tusculana,
the agreed reading of all manuscripts, including Ver., but the result
makes geographical nonsense. T h e Volsci have marched south-east
from Rome, through the Labicani agri to Tusculum. Continuing in the
same direction they would descend to the pass through which the
Via Latina ran and which was guarded at the east end by the narrows
of Algidus (see m a p ) . This pass must be what L. calls the Alban
valley. If so, the Tusculan valley would have to be a valley leading
down from Tusculum to the pass. There is indeed such a route but
it merely descends the side of the hill and could not be designated
a valley. Tusculano (sc. praedio or agro) must be read. Luterbacher, who
retains Tusculana, makes the Tusculan the valley of the Via Latina and
the Alban a valley running into it from the south-west near Algidus
but the Volsci could not then be said to be descending.
7. 6. M. Valerius: commonly assumed to be a corruption for M\
Valerius (Volusi f. Maximus) the brother of P. Valerius Poplicola, the
dictator of 494, since in the Elogium, quoted on 2. 30. 5, Manius is
named dictator, augur. I t is likely enough that the death of a Valerius, an
augur, was recorded in the Annales under this year but the identifica
tion of the augur with the dictator need be no more than a guess by
the author of the Elogium who in an endeavour to fill out a biography
gathered and combined material from every source. It is, in fact, im
possible that M \ Valerius Maximus who was already an old man
in 494 (D.H. 6. 39. 2) could have survived another thirty years, so
that the testimony of the Elogium can be discounted as an antiquarian
407

3- 7- 6

463 B.C.

reconstruction. T h e only other M . Valerius known in this period, also

a brother of Poplicola, was cos. in 505 and was killed at the Battle of
Regillus (2. 20. 3). T h e augur, although not a consular, might be his
son. Bibliography and evidence are given by Volkmann, R.E.,
'Valerius (243)'.
T. Verginius Rutilus: Cos. 479 (2. 48. 1). T h e cognomen, which was not
recorded in the earlier passage, is given by all the manuscripts includ
ing Ver., as Rutilius. T h e Gapitoline Fasti preserve ]et. n. Tricost. Rutil.
T h e cognomen, as in the case of the Nautii, was certainly Rutilus and,
despite the Etruscan origin of the Verginii, is to be connected with
the colour of their hair (cf. Rufus) and not with the Etruscan Rutili
(1. 57. 1 n.). Rutilius, however, was the nomen of several persons dis
tinguished in the later Republic, in particular of P. Rutilius Lupus,
and it is possible that L.'s sources under that influence actually gave
Rutilius as the cognomen, where the Capitoline Fasti were more exact.
It would be remarkable that in no single example of the cognomen in L.
(see the O.G.T. apparatus) was it correctly given by the manuscripts.
augures: 1. 18. 6 n., 10. 6. 3-8. At this period there were three or
possibly six augurs, although the number was gradually raised to 16
(Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 397). T h e evidence for the early augur ate is
collected by G. Bardt, Priester d. vier grossen Collegien (Progr. Berlin,
1871)T h e Annales supplied material both for the historian and for the
compiler of lists such as the Fasti. It is, therefore, an interesting
corroboration that the fragmentary list of augurs published by Dessau
(I.L.S. 9338) contains the entry:
Postu]mius A.f. P. nepos Albus [cooptatus
L. L\ucretio T.f. Tricipitino T. V[eturio T.f. Gemino cos.
post R. c. an. CCLXX[XXI
This shows that the Annales recorded the co-option of Postumius in
462 to fill a vacancy, caused presumably by the death of Valerius or
Verginius the previous year.
Sulpicius: cos. 500 (2. 19. 1 11.). Servilius is alleged as the praenomen
here by Ver., and at 2. 19. 1 by N and D.H. 5. 52. 1. In both places
it may be an accurate report of the libri lintei by Licinius Macer and
should be read.
curio maximus: cuius auctoritate curiae omnesque curiones reguntur (Paulus
Festus 113 L.). In the old curiate constitution each curia was headed
by a curio, one of whose number was appointed president. T h e office
was originally magisterial and the religious duties were incidental.
O n the expulsion of the kings the curiae may even have been the supreme
assembly and the curio the leading magistrate. With the supersession
of the curiate by the centuriate organization, only the religious func
tions remained except for a few ceremonial responsibilities such as the
408

463 B.C.

3- 7 - 6

passage of a lex de imperio. Hence the curio maximus came increasingly

to be regarded as a priest. Although at first confined to patricians, the
office was opened to plebeians in 210 (27. 8. 1-3) and was controlled
by the vote of seventeen tribes. As a leading dignitary of the oldest
constitution his death would have been recorded. Similar institutions
existed in provincial cities until the late Empire. See Kiibler, R.E.,
'curio maximus'; Wissowa, Religion, 402 n. 2,482 n. 2 ; Botsford, Roman
Assemblies, 9-11, 341; Momigliano, J.R.S. 53 (1963), n o .
7. 7. inops . . . auxilii humani: cf. Tacitus, Hist. 2. 16. 3 (Fletcher).
7. 7 - 8 . iussi: the two past participles in asyndeton (iussi. . . evocati)
are harsh and not, I think, exactly paralleled elsewhere in L. iussos
(Ver.), on the other hand, with a plural understood from populum, is
impossible with deos so near at hand. T h e reverse corruption is found
at 4. 7. 3 (usos N, usi sunt Ver.). It is probably best to punctuate, with
Madvig and Luterbacher, . .. vertit: iussi. . . deum. ad id. . ..
supplicatum ire: a rhetorical elaboration of a bare fact. L. indulges
his fancy, painting a graphic scene of public prayer. For stratae matres
cf. Tacitus, Hist. 1. 63 ; for crinibus verrere, a symbol of the meekest sup
plication, cf. especially Apuleius, Metam. 6. 2. pacem or veniam exposcere
belongs to religious phraseology (1. 16. 3, 3. 5. 14, 4. 30. 10, 7. 2. 2,
44. 44. 4 ; cf. Catullus 64. 2 0 3 ; Virgil, Aeneid 3. 2 6 1 ; Val. M a x .
1. 1. 1 ; and a plant prayer in Prec. Herb. 6).
8. 1. seu . . . sew. so also D.H. 9. 60. 7.
8 . 2 . interregna : i . i 7 . i - n n . During the Republic, on the simultaneous
death or resignation of both consuls, the whole system of magisterial
government came to an end and the patres, who were the source of
consular as they were said to have been of regal authority, regained
control. In such circumstances the patres nominated one of their
number, who had to have been a curule magistrate (Asconius, in Mil.
29) and, of course, a patrician, to serve for five days as interrex to reinstitute the magisterial system. T h e interrex was not himself a magis
trate, but a representative of the patres. His office was not listed among
the magistracies (Aul. Gell. 13. 15. 4). By virtue of his special pre
rogatives he selected two candidates whose names he presented to
the comitia for ratification. T h e comitia could either approve or reject
the names but no more. If the names were rejected the interrex or his
successors continued to submit names until agreement was reached.
T h e nomination by a patrician of only two candidates for approval
by the populus was greatly to the advantage of the patriciate, since the
populus would tend to accept the nominees rather than face a protrac
tion of a situation in which there was no regular administration
(4. 51. 1, 7. 22. 2, 28. 10, 8. 23. 14-17). Note that L. invariably, as
here, uses the phrase interrex . . . consules creat (4. 7. 10, 5. 31. 9, 6. 1.8,
409

3-8.2

462 B.C.

8. 3. 5, 23. 17, 9. 7. 15, 10. 11. 10), indicating that the populus had
'no claim to be responsible for any part of the creatio at such an
election' (Staveley, Historia 3 (1954), 199), whereas in elections
conducted by consuls or dictators he is liable to employ, in addition to
the technically correct consul creavit, dictator creavit (8. 37. 1, 10. 47. 5 ;
cf. 4. 11. 1 n.), the inexact populus creavit (4. 2. 7, 16. 7, 5. 14. 5, 6. 22. 5),
which mirrors the democratic nature of elections under the late Re
public. In addition to Staveley's article cited above see also Schwegler,
Rom. Gesch. 2. 150 ff.; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 649 ff.; Herzog, Philologus 34 (1876), 503 ; U. Goli, Regnum, 77 ff.; U . von Liibtow, Das Rom.
Volk, 188 ff.; E. Friezer, Mnemosyne 12 (1959), 308. Other interreges are
recorded for 444 (4. 7. io), 420 (4. 43. 9), 413 (4. 51. 1), 390 (5. 17. 4),
and 391 (5. 31. 8). Their names would have figured on the Annales.
Lucretium: for the cognomen see 1. 59. 8 n . ; for his triumph over Aequi
and Volsci see 10. 1-4. His filiation is T.f. T.n., so that he must be the
son of the consul of 508 and 504 (2.9. 1, 16. 2). H e was praefectus urbis
in 461 (24. 2). D.H. adds less credible details which seem to be mere
invention, such as that he defended K. Quinctius (9. 7. 5) and opposed
the Decemvirate (11. 15. 5). See Munzer, R.E., 'Lucretius (28)'.
Veturium: a son of the consul of 494 (2. 28. 1)? For the variant
spelling of his name see 2. 19. 1 n., and, for its evidence as to L.'s
source, 4. 1 n. He celebrated an ovatio (10. 4 n.). See Gundel, R.E.,
'Veturius ( i 8 ) \
8 . 3 . ante diem tertium idus Sextiles: 6. 1 n. P. Servilius must have survived
until near the end of his year of office, but the confusion caused by the
plague delayed the institution of the new year until after 1 August.
8. 4. Hernicis: 4. i o n .
8. 5. procedit: rather that prodit (Ver.) is the regular word to describe
the advance of armies (2. 5. 8, 4. 6. 1; Caesar, B.G. 6. 2 5 ; B.C. 1. 80,
3. 34; Gurtius 7. 3. 19). Such telescoping is a feature of Ver. (cf.
3- 57- 7, 5- 2 3 - r o ) 8. 6. praedonum agmen: incompatible with the large numbers given by
the variant source (Valerius Antias) in 8. 10. The strategy of the
Volsci, amplified with certain confusion by D.H. (68-69; s e e Klotz
256), resembles that of the campaign of the previous year. Tusculum
and the Alban pass were the key to Latium and so long as the Romans
or their allies retained control of it no prolonged threat to Rome could
be maintained.
8. 7. [in] re subita: a causal abl. is required, as at 1. 4 1 . 3 si tua re subita
consilia torpent and 1. 60. 1, not the circumstantial in re kept by Luterbacher and Conway comparing 2. 34. 5, 3. 51. 4, 4. 29. 6. Ver., which
reads res, wrongly adds -s at the end of a word before a succeeding
s- at 3. 30. 5, 35. 7, 38. 4, 4. n . 6, 13. 3, 34. 4, 54. 7, 5. 31. 8; cf.
3-31- i410

462 B.C.

3.8.7

Q. Fabius: cos. 467 (3. 1. 1 n.). D.H. 9. 69. 2 calls him Q,. Furius
but the text is to be regarded as corrupt. Ver. reads praefectus erat
urbis: armata against praeerat urbi: is armata of N. N. is right. When L.
is giving the title of a man he always employs praefectus, as at 9. 6
a praefecto urbis Q. Fabio (1. 59. 12, 60. 4, 3. 3. 36, 24. 2, 29. 4, 4. 36. 5)
but when he describes the appointment, he uses the verb as at 4. 31.
2 Cossus praefuit urbi and 4. 45. 8. So is also is needed. The syntax is
exactly parallel to 1. 24. 6fetialis erat M. Valerius; is . . .fecit.
tuta omnia ac tranquilla fecit: cf. Sallust, CatiL 16. 4.
8 . 8 . exploratis itineribus suis instructum: suis has been taken with itineribus
referring to the subject of the main sentence (hostes)'having ascer
tained the enemy's route in advance 5 or with instructum'having his
men ready in position5 (Doering). The latter is impossible and is not
saved even by Madvig's (cum) suis i. Against the former it must be
urged that the position of suis is disproportionately emphatic and that
the sense is already manifest without it. To delete suis, as was first done
by Duker, leaves instructum unevenly balanced with ad certamen intentum and the same objection holds against Alan's conjecture brevissimis. satis (Sorgel, commended by Wolfflin) makes good sense 'well
drawn up* but is palaeographically less attractive than subsidiis, for
which cf. Tacitus, Annals 2. 80. 6 subsidiis instructi. For instructus et
intentus cf. 1. 15. 2.
8 . 1 0 . The exaggerated figures hardly suit the description of the enemy
band as apraedonum agmen. The detail is evidently, as in 5. 12, supplied
from Valerius Antias, particularly since there is mention of signa
militaria. It is clear from references in the later books that Valerius
took pride in enumerating the number of military standards captured
(cf. 29. 4, 10. 14. 21, 30. 2 et al. and see Walsh, Livy, 127 n. 2).
8. 11. tertia: 8. 6, 8. 9. For the triumph see 10. 1-4.
9-14. The Lex Terentilia and the Trial of K. Quinctius
After having dispensed with the disjointed preliminaries of the book,
L. is now free to turn his attention to the first major episode which
leads up to the Decemvirate. It is symptomatic of his technique that
whereas in Book 2 he underlined the part played by agrarian agitation
in the Struggle of the Orders, now he develops a second issue, the
power of the supreme magistracy, and actually suppresses the mention
of a tribune, Sex. Titius, to whom his sources attributed agrarian
legislation (D.H. 9. 69. 1). The Decemvirate is to occupy the centre
of the stage in Book 3 and the rest of the material must be subordinated
accordingly. There are no strong grounds for doubting the historicity
of Terentilius' motion. His name and proposal would have figured in
the records. It was presumably passed as a plebiscitum by the assembly
of the plebs but, since at this date tribal legislation was not binding on
411

3-9-14

462 B.C.

the whole populus unless it were confirmed by a lex in the comitia centuriata (55. 3 n.), the proposal could not be put into force. It was
subsequently adopted in substantially the same form by the patres in
31. 8 (Staveley, Athenaeum 33 (1955), 23). T h e content has under
gone a subtle metamorphosis. T h e aim of the radical pressure-group
which culminated in the Decemvirate was the codification and publi
cation of the laws, while the strength of the patrician oligarchy lay
in their ability to govern by dypa<f>oi vofioi. This, and nothing else, was
the struggle of the mid-fifth century as it had been a century earlier
in Athens. Terentilius' proposal must, therefore, have been, as M o m m sen saw (Staatsrecht, 2. 702 n. 2), to appoint quinque viri consulari imperio
de legibus scribendis (9. 5) and not, as L. retails it, quinque viri legibus de
imperio consulari scribendis. T h e power and prerogatives of the consuls
could not have been subject to such investigation, whereas the De
cemvirate ultimately was just such a commission legibus scribendis. T h e
text of L. cannot be corrupt or even fortuitous since L. insists on the
nature of the commission elsewhere (9. 2, 24. 9, 31. 7; see Taubler,
Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Decemvirats, 54 n. 86) and it must be
supposed that a deliberate distortion has been carried out either by
L. or by his source. D.H. has no trace of it.
The opening sentence sic res Romana in antiquum statum rediit is obscure
and ambiguous. Was the 'old condition 5 that which prevailed before
the invasions of the Aequi or before the pestilence ? Such a rough re
sumption, coupled with the apparent inconsistency between Lucre
tius' return (10. 1-2) and his actual exploits which involved the defeat
of a mere praedonum agmen (8. 6), suggests a change of source and, as
elsewhere (cf. 2. 32. 2), the change coincides with the citation of a
variant (8. 10). T h e new source is unquestionably Valerius Antias
since Lucretius' triumph is in keeping with the grandiose casualty
figures that Valerius estimated and a renewed interest in Antium
emerges (10. 8). L. follows him without any sign of intermission
through chapter 21. Valerius subscribed to the political reforms of
Sulla which were directed in particular to prevent the possibility of
a single man with a large army being in a position to blackmail the
Senate. The danger re-emerged when in 74 B.G. M . Antonius Greticus
was given the command against the pirates. H e enjoyed imperium
which was equal to that of pro-consular governors in other provinces
but was undefined in area, because his operations involved land as
well as sea campaigns. Cicero calls it imperium infinitum (Verr. 2. 8,
3. 213 with U; see V. Ehrenberg, A.J.P. 74 (1953), 117) but he was
employing the political jargon of the day rather than the official
terminology (Beranger, Melanges Marouzeau, 19-27), and it is the same
catchword, the same fear of the military giant who would become the
military dictator, that is mirrored in L.'s immoderata, infinita potestate
412

3- 9~x4
(g. 4). In other words, Valerius Antias is to be seen as the person
responsible for distorting the proposed Quinquevirate from a legal
committee to a constitutional commission for reasons of contemporary
political propaganda. See also Soltau 100; Burck 14-17; Klotz 25 7 - 9 ;
J . Bleicken, Volkstribunat, 15-16.
Instead of relating the fate of Terentilius' proposals in one continuous
account, L. divides his material into a series of episodes, separated by
extraneous events. In that way the interest is maintained and the
story carried forward. For the same technique see 2. 22-33.
9. 2. C. Terentilius Harsa: the nomen, given as Tepdvnos by D.H.
10. 1. 5, is found on two late inscriptions from Rome (C.I.L. 6. 27151,
36411), but the family may well have emigrated from Praeneste (C.I.L.
i 2 . 2480). T h e cognomen is not found elsewhere; Harsa, rather than
Arsa, a Hebraic name (1 Kings 16. g), would be indicated by the
name Harsidius (C.I.L. 11. 4734) and was the reading of the arche
type. Schulze (357) argues for an Etruscan derivation but the cognomen
will in any case be a third-century addition.
9. 2 - 1 3 . L. presents the case for and against Terentilius' bill in two
short speeches, reported mainly in indirect speech but breaking out at
the end into an effective display of direct rhetoric. T h e speeches, like
the pair in 2. 4-9, appear to be of his own composition since D . H .
knows nothing of any opposition led by Q . Fabius and the arguments
which he attributes to the tribunes and the aristocratic opposition
bear no resemblance to L.'s speeches. As might be expected they
consist exclusively of the rhetorical commonplaces characteristic of
the late Republic. For the contrast between liberae civitati and dominos
cf. Augustus, Res Gestae 1; Tacitus, Hist. 4. 73; for soluti atque effrenati
cf. Cicero, de Rep. 1. 5 3 ; for libidinem ac licentiam cf. Cicero, Verr. 3 . 7 7 ;
for the antithesis between lex and libido see Nisbet on in Pis. 9 4 ; for
minarum atque terroris cf. Cicero, pro Fonteio 34; de Domo 131 ; pro Flacco
19; for insidiatum (to be taken airo KOIVOV with rempublicam) cf. Cicero,
pro Sulla 14; Tacitus, Annals 6. 8. 6; for tempore capto adortum cf. ad
Herenn. 2. 7 occasio . . . idonea . . . ad rem adoriendam. Fabius breaks into
direct speech with a personal appeal to the tribunes. Similar transitions
from or. obi to or. recta, when the speaker turns to address one person
particularly, occur also at 6. 6. 12, 15. 9, 8. 34. 11, 24. 22. 17
(Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 40 n. 1) and mark the peroration. Fabius'
plea is highly antithetical (ad singulorum auxilium, non adperniciem universorum; tribunos plebi.. . non hostes patribus; nobis miserum, invidiosum vobis;
non ius sed invidiam). Together the two speeches form a fine setting for
the political conflict,
9. 4 . immoderata . . .potestate: '(possessed) of unfettered and unlimited
power'.
metus legum: 1. 21. 1.
462 B.C.

413

3- 9-6

462 B.C.

9. 6. iugum acciperent: the emendation of the manuscript i. acciperet is

preferable to acciperetur (Drakenborch, Bayet); for, although L. does
occasionally use the passive form of the phrase (4. 37. 5, 37. 36. 5),
the active is guaranteed by the repetition in 10. 13 caveant ne i. accipiant.
For L.'s habit of repetition cf. 1. 14. 4 n.
praefecto urbis Q,. Fabio: 8. 7.
infesti circum[in\starent tribunwn: there are no certain instances in
L. of verbs compounded with two prepositions (Wolfflin, Livian.
Kritiky 11) and circuminsto is not found elsewhere, circum instarent (cf.
Virgil, Aen. 10. 118; Statius, Theb. 11. 243) would require the dative
tribuno, even if L. ever used circum adverbially (cf. 28. 5. 10).
9. 8. conluvione: 6. 3.
9 . 1 0 . non ilium: sc. Terentilium. nonillud, the reading of the manuscripts,
would need to be translated 'that, i.e. the prosecution of the consuls,
would be to make the tribunes not the consuls unpopular' which is
absurd. For the corruption of ilium and illud see Bulhart. Thes. Ling.
Lat. 340. 59-61.
9. 11. singulorum auxilium: the traditional attitude to the tribunate.
In R o m a n eyes it was set up for the purpose of protecting the individual
(Cicero, de Leg. 3. 9 ; Wirszubski, Libertas, 26).
9 . 1 2 . Notice the Ciceronian clausulae, consulum differat (-^ w - ) and
bello institere (
w )3 which L. employs in speeches in preference
to the dactylic clausulae of the narrative.
9. 13. dilata in speciem actione: 'for show, for mere display', a favourite
expression of L. (3. 40. 7, 4. 42. 4, 6. 11. 9 ; Plautus, Most. 123; Caesar,
B.G. 5. 51. 3, 7. 23. 5 ; cf. Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana, 125).
10. 1. exposita . . .praeda: 5. 16. 7, 10. 20. 16, 35. 1. 12. Confirmed
by the lawyers who add that slaves were returned to their former
owners (Pomponius, Dig. 49. 15. 20. 1). T h e spoil was exhibited in
the Campus Martius which was technically outside the pomerium,
because holders of imperium could not enter the city with their armies
except for a triumph (6. 16. 5). T h e principle is illustrated by Cicero's
predicament at the end of 50 B.C. [ad Atticum 7. 7. 4). For the disposal
of praeda see 2. 42. 1 n.
10. 4. triumphavit de Volscis Aequisque: the record of the triumph is
preserved independently by the Fasti Triumphales (Degrassi, Inscr.
Ital. 13. 537) where the relevant entry is restored a s :
[L. Lucretius T.f. T.n. Tricipitinus ann. CCXCT]
[cos. de Aequeis et Vo]ls[ceis]
[T. Veturius T.f -n.] Gemin[us Cicurinus an. CCXCI]
[cos. ovans de Aequjeis et [Volsceis].
T h e story of tribunician opposition to it is, however, based on the
common experience of the late Republic (cf. Cicero, loc. cit.).
414

461 B.C.

3- *o. 4

For the difference between a triumph and an ovatio see 2. 16. i n.

10. 5. P. Volumnius: the Volumnii were plebeian of Etruscan extrac
tion (Schulze 258: cf. velimna: there was a sepulchre of the Volumnii
at Perugia), although the cognomen Amintinus given by the Gapitoline
Fasti suggests an origin from the vanished Latin city of Amintinum.
T h e next Volumnius to be mentioned in the Fasti is the consul of 307
(but cf. Volumnia in 2. 40. 1), which has been used to discredit the
present consulneedlessly, for a plebian consul is still not impossible
in 461. T h e later Volumnii, forgetting their Etruscan background, may
have owned land near Amintinum which served to supply a cognomen
in due course for their ancestor. See Munzer, R.E., 'Volumnius (13) 5 .
Ser. Sulpicius: [Ser. f. S]er. n. (Fasti), the son of the consul of 500
(2. 19. 1). It is likely that in fact the delegate sent to Athens in 454
was the same m a n so named in D.H. 10. 52. 4), and that, since the
first college of Decemvirs was consular, he was also the Decemvir of
that name (D.H. 10. 56. 2), but L. on both occasions gives him the
praenomen P. (3. 31. 8, 33. 3). Since there was certainly another
Sulpicius, probably a brother, called Publius, who negotiated with the
plebs in 449 (3. 50. 15; cf. Asconius, in Cornel. 77. 25 Clark) and served
on an embassy in 446 (3. 70. 2-7), it is likely that Valerius Antias has
confused the two Sulpicii and wrongly attributed most of the activities
of Servius to Publius. If that be so the manuscript reading can be
retained at 31. 8 and 3 3 . 3 , since the error becomes an historical not a
palaeographical one. See Munzer, R.E., 'Sulpicius (36)'; Broughton
M.R.R., 454 B.C., n. 2.
10. 6. caelum ardere: 5. 14 n.
terra . . . concussa motu: the earthquake of 461 is to be connected with
the seismic disturbances reported from Greece during the same decade.
Diodorus (11. 63. 1-2) records that at Sparta in 469 they were aeta/iot
/leyaAot and that they continued for several years is indicated by the
Scholiast on Aristophanes (Lysistr. 1142CTCICT/IOIyap av\^ol iydvovro).
T h e climax of the cycle was the famous earthquake of 464 which pre
cipitated the Helot revolt (Thucydides 1. 128. 1, 2. 27. 2 with Gomme's
notes; N. G. L. Hammond, Historia 4 (1955), 379~8i). T h e accuracy
of the pontifical Annals is confirmed.
bovem locutam: the portent is said by Pliny (JV.fi. 8. 183) to befrequens in prodigiis priscorum.
came pluit: the abl., which was the archetype reading, is proper
to the style of prodigies; cf. 1. 31. 1 lapidibus pluvisse, 7. 28. 7, 40. 19. 2 ;
Pliny, N.H. 2. 147, reporting the same event but directly from the
records.
nihil odor mutaret: mutaret intransitive as at 5. 13. 2. In both places
the usage may be intended to suggest the bald and unliterary style of
the Annales (Wolfflin, Archiv Lat. Lex. 10 (1898), 1 ff.; Kroll on
4*5

3. io. 6

461 B.C.

Catullus 22. i i ) . Here at least it is certain t h a t L . has abbreviated the

original notice: for it is preserved more fully by Val. Max. ( i . 6. 5
neque odore taetro neque deformi aspectu mutatum) and D.H. (10. 2. 4 OVTC
ypoav fierafidWovTa

. . . ovre cnjTTe&ovi Sia\v6fiva;

K l o t z 258 n. 2) a n d

evidently alluded to the appearance as well as the smell of the flesh.

L. compensates for the omission by enhancing the style.
10. 7. libri: 4. 25. 3, 5. 13. 5, sc. Sibyllini. A collection of oracles in
hexameter form (Tibullus 2. 5. 16) introduced to Rome according to
legend by Tarquinius Superbus. Until their destruction by fire in
83 B.C., they were consulted by order of the Senate on occasions of
public emergency (22. 9. 8).
duumviros: 5. 13. 5 n.
fierent. . . abstineretur: notice the passives and the impersonal abstineretur, typical of the laconic style of the Sibylline books which were
couched in ambiguous language to avoid too specific interpretation.
'Strangers' are always an object of warning in horoscopes. In the same
way the Carmina Marciana bade the Romans beware of alienigenae
(25. 12. 5). For this oracular use of alienigenae cf. also Tacitus, Annals
11. 23. 4 and see D. M . Last, Latomus 17 (1958), 481.
10. 8. Ecetrae: 2. 25. 6 n., 'at E. Antian colonists were holding
public meetings'.
id caput, eas vires: 7. 1. Notice the repetition. There is nothing in D.H.
corresponding to the threat of the Volsci and Aequi in this year or
the obstruction of the tribunes. Although tribunician opposition to the
levy is a well-established element in the historical tradition of the
period (25. 9, 30. 5, 69. 5, 4. 1. 6, 30. 15, 53. 2, 55. 4 ; see Staveley,
Historia, 3 (1955), 417 and n. 3), yet the silence of D.H. coupled with
the linguistic repetitions and conventional phrases such as occidione
occisos (cf. 2. 51. 9 n.) and agmine acturi (cf. 2. 58. 7, 6. 28. 2 ; see
Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 28) indicates that L. has invented the
entire episode as a background for the story of K. Quinctius and as a
curtain-raiser to the daring exploits of Ap. Herdonius (Klotz 238),
11. 5. multum et consules se abstinebant: J. F. Gronovius cited ad Fam.
4. 7. 2 neque tu multum interfuisti rebus gerendis, for the use of multum.
Here, however, any reference to the degree of the consul's aloofness is
inapposite and Puteanus's emendation tumultu deserves more considera
tion than it has received. For the expression cf. 3. 10. 7, 4. 5. 3 et al.
The Trial of K. Quinctius
T h e case of K. Quinctius was evidently regarded in later times as
being the paradigm for vadimonium. None the less in almost every
detail grave suspicion attaches to the authenticity of the account. At
416

461 B.C.

3- H-14

first sight the charge is one of impeding the tribunes in the exercise
of their auxilium or, in fact, of violating their sacrosanctity. It cannot
be certainly known under what head such an offence would be classed
but it would appear to be a case of perduellio. Later, however, the
charge is one of parricidium (13. 3). When K. Quinctius absconds and
forfeits his bail, his father L. Quinctius Cincinnatus pays up and is
forced to live veluti relegatus, yet a few months later he is elected cos.
suff. (19. 2). Vadimonium was certainly defined for civil procedure in the
Twelve Tables (Aul. Gell. 16. 10. 8) but in criminal cases it can hardly
have existed at such an early date since it is the outcome of the stale
mate caused when tribunes used their auxilium to prevent the arrest
and detention in prison of criminal offenders. It was developed from
the civil vadimonium. Moreover, since the case was never concluded as
K. Quinctius left Rome before the trial, it cannot have been recorded
in the Annales. T h e prosecution of a patrician by a tribune is incon
ceivable before the Decemvirate (2. 35. 5 n.), and the figure of 3,000
asses (13. 8) is in itself proof of anachronism.
But if we are forced to reject uncompromisingly the whole story,
it is still possible to see how it came into being. T h e legend that Cin
cinnatus was called to high office from a humble retreat is too well
established to be fiction but the authorities differed on the precise
occasion. D.H. (10. 17. 4, 24. 1) reduplicates the story. C. is found
ploughing before his consulship (460) and before his dictatorship
(439; cf. 4 . 1 3 . 14). The anecdote was, therefore, not exactly dated and
Annalists felt themselves free to fit it into history where an opportunity
afforded. But to find an opportunity required devising an explanation
why a m a n of such distinction should have been encountered in such
circumstances. There was a satisfying artistry about a father im
poverishing himself for his son, which was heightened if the son should
have betrayed the country which his father was then called upon to
save. T h e story was then embellished. Concrete examples were re
quired to illustrate and justify the provisions codified in the Twelve
Tables. Both the issues involved in the case of K. Quinctius were
dealt with by the Twelve Tablesthe killing of indemnatus quisque homo
(Salvian, de Gubern. Dei 8. 5. 24) and vadimonium (Aul. Gell., loc. cit.).
It is, therefore, reasonable to suppose that the details of K. Quinctius'
trial were invented by jurists as a case-history to give historical sub
stance to the bald provision of the Twelve Tables. This hypothesis
is supported by the fact that these same issues were talking points in
the second century. Vadimonium was radically overhauled by the Lex
Aebutia at some date after 150 (Aul. Gell., loc. cit.) and caedes civis
indemnati (3. 56. 13, 4. 21. 4) was the subject of Cato the Elder's
speech de Decern Hominibus (Aul. Gell. 13. 25. 12) and became a
flash-point in the Gracchan troubles (Livy, Epit. 61).
814432

417

Ee

3- " - M r

461 B.C.

All, then, that is historically acceptable is the timeless legend that

Cincinnatus was called from the plough. T h e story was, however,
firmly established by the first century, for it is cited by Cicero (de Domo
86), and such doubts did not trouble L. who worked his material into
a dramatic narrative that leads up to Cincinnatus and the invasion
of Ap. Herdonius. Whereas for D.H. (io. 7. 2) the climax of the trial
is the testimony of Volscius, for L. it lies rather in the impetuous de
parture of Caeso from Rome with all that that foreshadows. As usual,
he telescopes events. Caeso leaves the same night: in D.H. he resides
in the city for several days. And, where D.H. is content to present the
trial as an dyd>v with two opposing speeches, L. captures the flavour
of a real trial by allocating the same material to four separate and
contrasted speakers (12. 2-9). There had been in recent memory one
case where the accusation concerned a brawl on the outskirts of Rome
which had led to the death of a leading citizen. Asconius describes the
incident as follows (in Milon. 31-32 Clark): Occurrit ei (Miloni) . . .
Clodius paulo ultra Bovillas . . . (servi) cum servis P. Clodi rixam
commiserunt. Ad quern tumultum cum respexisset Clodius minitabundus, umerum eius Birria rumpia traiecit. . . Clodius vulneratus in
tabernam proximan <in) Bovillano delatus est. A glance at 13. 2-3
(incidisse . . . rixam natam . . . pugno ictum . . . semianimem . . . ablatum)
convinces that L. had the incident of 52 B.C. in his mind as he con
structed the narrative. Cicero's pro Milone was, after the Catilines and
the Philippics, the most famous of his speeches. It is constantly re
ferred to by Quintilian. In the short section of chapters n - 1 3 there
are more than half a dozen striking echoes which cannot be attributed
to coincidence or a common rhetorical source (11. 7 n., 11. 8 n.,
11. 13 n., 12. 1 n., 12. 6 n.). T h e fact that there is no counterpart to
these echoes in D.H. demonstrates that it is the work of L. himself,
illustrating his aim to make history at once remote and relevant to
the Augustan age. T h e passage made a strong impression on Tacitus
who quotes from it twice (11. 9 n., 12. 8 n.).
T h e case of K. Quinctius is treated in most works on R o m a n law:
see especially Mommsen, Strqfrecht, 3 2 7 - 8 ; Strachan-Davidson,
Problems, 1. 160-1 ; A. Piganiol, Melanges d'Arch. et a"Hist. 38 (1920),
313-14; Brecht, Perduellio, 2 8 4 - 5 ; D. Daube, J.R.S. 31 (1941), 183;
Steinwenter, R.E., lVadimonium\ See 2. 35. 5 n.
1 1 . 6 . Caeso erat Quinctius'. 1. 58. 8. T o introduce a new character by
the formula erat X, following it by a thumb-nail sketch of his character,
and resume the narrative with hie or is (2. 33. 5 n., 4. 19. 1) is an estab
lished technique of Hellenistic writing when an important new episode
is commenced.
qua . . . qua: 2. 35. 4 n.
belli decora: not abstract qualities but concrete achievements
418

461 B.C.

3- i i . 6

(6. 20. 7), and therefore oddly assorted with facundiam. A further
awkwardness is that inforo . . . can hardly be taken with addiderat and
must be understood as dependent on facundiam as belli is on decora,
but Ver. evidently read an extra word which is not preserved in the
Nicomachean recension (see O.C.T. apparatus; this part of the
palimpsest is now illegible). Weissenborn proposed inforo (et curia) or
ut nemo (eo tempore). A verb, however, would solve both difficulties:
perhaps exhibuit. facundiam is used only here by L.
non lingua, non manupromptior: 2. 33. 5 n. T h e conventional summary
of the all-round m a n ; cf. Sallust, Jug. 44. 1 (see Gomme on Thucydides 2. 40. 2).
1 1 . 7 . velut. . . suis: so Milo is depicted as standing alone [pro Mil. 67).
procellas sustinebat: cf. pro Mil. 5 tempestates et procellas. . . semper
putavi Miloni esse subeundas.
11. 8. mulcatus: a rare verb, used only twice by Cicero, once in the
pro Milone (37). L. uses it again below (12. 9). T h e scene of anarchy
is strongly reminiscent of the gang warfare of the 50's.
1 1 . 9 . A. Verginius: the gens Verginia, Etruscan in origin and patrician
in sympathy, might seem unlikely to produce a plebeian tr. pi. but the
tradition is sound. Another is recorded in the annals of the early fourth
century (5. 29. 6) and although falsification has played its part in
the history of Verginia, a plebeian Verginius is possible. It is therefore
likely that his name is authentically reported, if one tr. pi. was recorded
each year. It is alleged that he was re-elected for five successive years
(19. 5, 21. 3, 22. 2, 24. 1, 9, 25. 4, 29. 8, 30. 6). See Gundel, R.E.,
'Verginius (3)'.
atrox ingenium accenderat: cf. Tacitus, Annals 4. 60. 3 (Fletcher).
iusto . . . bello: 1. 32. 5 n.
11. 10. pati reum mere: a Ciceronian phrase; cf. pro Rab. Post. 4 3 ;
de Off. 3. 55. See Nisbet on de Domo 141.
invidiaequeflammam. . . suggerere: cf. pro Mil. 98 cum a meis inimicis
faces invidiae meae subiciantur.
11. 11. ibi multa saepe: multa ibi saepe Ver. In the collocation multus is
generally placed next to saepe, either in the order m. s. (Plautus, Capt.
328; Miles 8 8 5 ; Ovid, Fasti 6. 108) or s. m. (Cicero, Verr. 5. 147; de
Officiis 2. 20) but that juxtaposition is not invariable (cf. Plautus,
Poen. 129; Lucretius 5. 1158; Cicero, de Rep. 3. 4 2 ; pro Sestio 109;
Horace, Ep. 2. 1. 219; Propertius 1. 15. 1 with Shackleton Bailey's
note). T h e determining factor in the present passage is that multa
rather than ibi carries the most emphasis and should therefore be
placed first. It was the number of rash words and deeds which damaged
Caeso's reputation, not the occasion on which they occurred.
inconsulte dicta factaque: cf. 2. 37. 6.
11. 13. exspectate dum consul: for a similar fear cf. Cicero's imaginary
419

3- " 13

461 B.C.

prognosis of what would have happened if Glodius had lived to become

praetor or even consul {pro Mil. 89-90).
12. 1. For Milo's heroic refusal to solicit sympathy cf. pro Mil. 92.
12. 2. T. Quinctius Capitolinus: 2. 56. 15 n.
12. 3. indolent tarn maturae virtutis: Ciceronian; cf. pro Caelio 39, 76.
primum militem: 'leading soldier'. L.'s source knew of only one
speaker, Gincinnatus. L. has dressed up the pleas which in the
original were used by Gincinnatus and distributed them over four
elder statesmen. Gf. D . H . 10. 5. 5.
1 2 . 4 . Sp. Furius 14. 1 n. After the name N inserts ipsum before missum
but the separation of ipsum from eum is intolerable (Jac. Gronovius;
cf. 9. 17. 7, 35. 42. 9). For similar dittographies in N cf. 5. 40. 9.
unum . . . rem restitutam: Furius refers to the rescue described in 5.
5-10 and hints that it was comparable with the greatest heroic de
liverances in Roman history. For the verbal allusion to Q . Fabius
Maximus Gunctator cf. 2. 43. 6 n.
12. 5. L. Lucretius'. 8. 2 n.
12. 6. suum quam alienum: there is nothing corresponding in D.H. but
cf. pro Mil. 104 ex hac urbe expellet quern omnes urbes expulsum a vobis ad
se vocabunt.
12. 7'. fervorem et audaciam; the usual pathetic TOKOS; cf. Cicero, de
Senect. 45 erat quidam fervor aetatis; qua progrediente omnia fiunt in dies
mitiora; CaeL 43.
cottidie magis: magis om. N. For cottidie = in dies see Clark on pro Mil.
34 but here the comparative magis is required to balance the intensive
force of crescere; cf. Cicero, ad Att. 5. 7. 1, 7. 5. 4, 11. 12. 3, 14. 18. 4,
16. 2. 4, and Tyrrell on ad Att. 1. 20. 7. Other examples in Thes. Ling,
Lat.
consilium: the opposition between audacia and consilium is another
rhetorical commonplace; cf. 21. 4. 5, 57. 3 ; Sallust, Catil. 51. 37
(Skard). Cf. yvwfn) . . . pcLfxr) in Gorgias, avSpeta . . . ovveois in Polybius, and see H. Fuchs, Mus. Helv. 4 (1947), 168; H . D. Kemper,
Rat und Tat (Diss. Bonn, i960).
12. 8. Cincinnato: 'curly-head' (Suetonius, CaL 35). T h e cognomen is
found in other families as well (C.I.L. 10. 8059. 420; 6. 4845). Cf.
Rutilus.
veniam error i atque adulescentiae petendo : a typically Ciceronian plea;
cf. pro Sulla 64; pro Caelio 30 erat enim meum deprecari vacatiomm adule
scentiae veniamque petere. error is the advocate's apologetic term for be
littling the offence; cf. Cicero, adFam. 11. 28. 5 ; Seneca, Dial. 10. 7. 1;
see W. Hooijbergh, Peccatum, 14. Cf. Tacitus, Annals 1. 58.
non dido, non facto: 11. 11 n.
12. 9. verecundia aut metu: 2. 36. 3 n.
420

461 B.C.

3- 13.

13. 1. M. Volscius Fictor: the name is gravely suspicious. Volscius,

which Schulze would connect with the Etruscan velscu (523), is no
more than an ethnic, while Fictor, a cognomen not elsewhere in use, is
derived a crimine in K. Quinctiumficto. Caeso's opponent, who originally
was anonymous, is m a d e to bear this name for dramatic effect. T h e
Quinctii were responsible for some of the most decisive victories over
the Volsci. It was fitting that one with the name Volscius should have
endeavoured to frustrate their endeavours at the s t a r t See Gundel,
R.E., 'Volscius (a) 9 .
ante aliquot annos: D . H . 10, 7. 1 says that he was a tribune of this year
(461) and therefore that he was re-elected for the next four years. If,
however, there is any historical truth about the man, L.'s version is
more likely to be correct. Only one tribune for each year seems to
have been recorded, and the subsequent fortunes of M . Volscius hardly
fit his position as a tribune (24. 3 - 7 ; 29. 6 n.).
13. 2. in Subura: see m a p .
13. 3 . exsequi rem: this, the order of Ver., is rightly preferred by
Wodrig and J u n g . T h e emphasis is on exsequi: Volscius was prevented
from doing anything about the outrage. So in Suetonius, Domit. 7. 2
nee exsequi rem perseveravit; Ulpian, Dig. 47. 10. 35.
13. 4. vi contra vim: cf. pro Mil. 1 vi vis inlata.
13. 6. sisti. . . pronuntiant: 'they notify their pleasure that the accused
should appear and that a sum of money should be pledged to the
people in case of his defaulting'. T h e terminology is legal. For sisti =
'to appear in court on demand' cf. Gaius 4. 184 vadimonium ei faciendum
est, id est ut promittat se certo die sisti; Dig. 45. 1. 81. But placere is loose.
The Senate rather than the tribunes framed their recommendation
with placet. Cases of bail in lieu of arrest in criminal proceedings, where
there was a danger of the accused absconding before trial, must have
been more frequent than the few examples preserved in the sources
(25. 4. 8 ff.; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 74; Sallust, Jug. 35. 4 ; cf. Gicero,
de Rep. 2. 6 1 ; Paulus Festus5ig L . ; Hitzig,R.E., 'career 5 ; Steinwenter,
R.E., 'Vadimonium'). In civil cases the defendant advanced his own
bail, in criminal proceedings others went surety for him.
13. 8. vades dari placuit: for placuit see above. T h e passive dari is re
quired. T h e Senate were not offering to advance the bail themselves.
tribus milibus: the figure is anachronistic at so early a date. It is
perhaps inspired by the suprema multa, 3,020 asses, under the Lex
Julia Papiria of 430 (4. 30. 3 n.). It was the oldest and largest sum
which antiquarians of the second century would know of, if they were
seeking a standard for assessing early figures.
decern finierunt: 'they defined the number as 10'.
publico: i.e. the aerarium. But the received text publicos is unobjec
tionable.
421

3- 13.8

461 B.C.

abiit: Milo also retired precipitately before the verdict, to Marseilles.

In D.H. Caeso stays in Rome for several days. T h e choice of in Tuscos
is peculiar (de Viris Illustr. 17 ad Volscos et Sabinos) because Etruria
did not enjoy a ius exilii with Rome. In Cicero, de Domo 86, Caeso was
condemned comitiis centuriatis.
13. 9. solum vertisse: 'shifted his ground', i.e. 'gone into exile'; the
legal expression, for which see Nisbet on Cicero, de Domo 78.
13. 10. trans Tiberim: 26. 8 n.
14. 1. iudicium et... lex: Ver. omits et wrongly. For similar loss of et
in that manuscript cf. 4. 7. 12, 5. 32. 4, 4. 35. 2, 4. 33. 10, 6. 4. 6,
4. 7. 8, 13. 9, 13. 12, 3. 61. 13, 6. 1. 8.
14. 3 . id maxime quod . . .fuit: 'that part especially which consisted of
Caeso's club-mates'; cf. 5. 34. 5 n. A partitive genitive is essential
(sodalium) and excludes Ver.'s sodalicium, read by H . J . Miiller and
Luterbacher, from consideration. Ver. inserts c in the middle of words
at 3. 24. 3 dicens, 3. 62. 1 redicturum, 4. 25. 9, 5. 24. 1, 5. 27. 15.
sodalicium does not occur elsewhere in L . ; for sodalium, a tint from late
Republican politics, cf. 2. 3. 2.
iras . . . animos: 'anger . . . courage'.
14. 4 . nemo unus: repeating 12. 4.
mille pro uno : 9. 4.
14. 5. benigne salutare: carrying out the precise recommendations
made by Q . Cicero to his brother for courting popular support; cf.
Comm. Petit. 35-45.
14. 6. refecti. . . in insequentem annum, ne voce quidem incommoda, nedum
ut ulla vis Jieret. paulatim . . . mansuefecerant plebem. his per totum annum
artibus lex elusa est: Bayet's punctuation gives excellent sense. T h e
tribunician election passed off peacefully, unlike the heated affairs of
other years, because the tribunes managed to civilize theplebs. By such
methods the issue of the Lex Terentilia was shelved till the following
year.
permulcere et tractare could only describe the management by the
tribunes of their own supporters, not the young nobles' display of
benevolence and courtesy to the tribunes (14. 5 above). But no one
would ever conceive of civilizing people by violence or harsh words
so that ne voce . . .Jieret cannot logically belong to mansuefecerant. Harsh
words and violence are, however, to be encountered in elections and
the attachment of the phrase to the previous sentence is confirmed by
the fact that nedum ut, where ut supports nedum, is only found at the end
of a sentence: e.g. Tacitus, Dial. 10.2 ; Seneca, Dial. 2. 8. 3, 10. 7. 4 ; see
Nettleship, Journ. Phil. 20 (1892), 179 (for Quintilian 12. 1. 39 see
A. F. Wells, J.R.S. 39 (1949), 204). A further objection to the order
of Conway and Walters, defended by them in C.Q. 5 (1911), 1-2, is
422

461 B.C.

3. 14. 6

that the sentence his artibus . . . elusa est is the natural clausula to a
section,- cf. 29. 9,155. 13, 4. 27. 1, et aL For incommoda voce cf. Plautus,
Casin. 152; for mansuefacio cf. 38. 17. 7 and mansuetum (o the plebs)
in 16. 4.
15. 1. C. Claudius Appi films \ a son of the original founder of the gens
(2. 16. 4 n.) and historically a brother of the Decemvir (^or. 471), but
when annalistic invention distinguished two Ap. Claudii to secure a
good consul and a bad Decemvir, the exact relationship of C. Claudius
became obscured. D.H. follows two sources in naming him the uncle
and the brother of the Decemvir (10. 20) on different occasions.
Like other Claudii he is a true patrician. After his activity against
Herdonius (18. 5) and the death of Valerius, he opposed plebeian
pressure to permit consideration of the proposal legibus scribendis (19. 1),
resisted the Lex Icilia de Aventino publicando, and stood out against the
re-election of Cincinnatus (21. 7). His patrician pride was matched
by his fairness. He could register sufficient disgust at Appius' tyrannical
behaviour to withdraw from Rome to Regillum (35. 9, 40. 2-5, 58. 1)
and yet be the first to come forward in Appius' defence (58. 1-5) and
to attack the radical consuls Valerius and Horatius (63. 8 ff.). See
Miinzer, R.E., 'Claudius (322)'.
P. Valerius: cf. 2. 52. 6.
15-18. Appius Herdonius
P. Valerius in magistratu mortuus est: Tusculanis gratiae actae: Capitolium
purgatum atque histratum. Three facts contain the germ of the whole of
the episode. It is easy to see how the rest of the story evolved. A legend
that a Herdonius once threatened Rome and was thwarted by the
loyalty of the men of Tusculum was evidently a part of the family
legend of the Mamilii (1. 49. 9 n.) which they blended into the history
of Rome in their great days during the third century. No other ex
planation accounts for the duplication of the event under the Tarquins. It was inevitable, too, that if the Capitol required purifying
because of some pollution, the death of the consul P. Valerius must
be connected with it. The association in the consulate of a Valerius,
the democrat, with a Claudius, the patrician, must be a significant
stage in the Struggle of the Orders. So the whole historical setting is
built u p : Herdonius takes advantage of political dissension to seize
the Capitol; the Roman people, immobilized by their internal bicker
ings, are only saved by the intervention of their loyal allies; the de
secration of the Capitol requires special measures.
Such was the development of the story by the beginning of the
first century. L. inherited it but, as a comparison with D.H. reveals,
besides streamlining the narrative, made two notable alterations. In
recent memory the lower classes had been stirred into insurrection by
423

3- ^ 1

460 B.C.

Catiline. L., therefore, introduced Catilinarian overtones to remind

the reader of the historical possibility of such insurrections (15. 9 n.).
O n the other hand the desecration of the Capitol afforded him
the opportunity of illustrating the baleful consequences of neglecting
religion. This he does through the revivalist appeal of P. Valerius (17.
2-8), of which there is no trace in D.H. T h e whole speech, as Reichenberger puts it, 'gives the characteristic religio-political touch which
distinguishes L.'s narrative of Herdonius from just another episode of
danger in Rome's history'. See also R. Bonghi, Nuova Antologia, 19
(1880), 339-442; Pais, Storia, 1. 5 2 9 - 3 1 ; de Sanctis, Storia, 2. 32. 2 ;
Munzer, R.E., 'Herdonius (1)'; A. Reichenberger, Studien zum Erzahlungsstil des T.L. (1931); Burck 17-21; Klotz 259; Reichenberger,
CW. 37 (i943),28-29.
15. 3. ante Sacrum montem: 2. 33. 3 n.
15. 4. et a Volscis: et 'furthermore', not linked with the following et.
15. 5. exsules servique: Catiline's army was largely composed of such
riff-raff but he dispensed with the service of slaves at the very end
(56. 5). For the anachronism of slaves at this time cf. 5. 22. 1 n.
ad duo milia . . . et quingenti: D.H. 10. 14. 1 gives the number as
4,000 clients and slaves. Rather than suppose that L. has subtracted
1,500 clients from the total, we should restore the text of L. to quattuor
milia, as the archetype read. It is not clear whether the discrepancy
between 4,000 (D.H.) and 4,500 (L.) was caused by D.H. giving
only a partial total or a round number. The quotation of exact figures
where none could have been preserved is characteristic of V.A.
(5. 12 n.).

Appio: 2. 16. 4 n., a Sabine praenomen.

Herdonio: 1. 50. 3 n.
node: D.H. extends the operations over three or four days.
15. 6. Capitolium atque arcem: cf. 1. 33. 2. It was a traditional centre
of Sabine settlement at Rome.
confestim: notice the agitated sentences which follow, with repeated
antithesis (e.g. sedabant tumultus, sedando interdum movebani). The effect
is sharpened by the absence of subordinate clauses. Short, staccato
propositions follow each other paratactically.
W arma': the traditional call to arms (3. 50. 11, 6. 28. 3, 9. 24. 9 ;
Caesar, B.G. 7. 70. 6, often repeated ad arma, ad arma (Horace, Odes
1. 32. 5 ; see Fraenkel, Horace, 252 n. 3). Akin to the Greek OTTXOJV
onXwv Set. See W. Schulze, Kl. Schriften, 163 ff.
15. 7. incerti: for similar hesitation in an emergency cf. the behaviour
of Romans in Sallust, Catil. 3 1 . 2 . D.H. knows nothing of such waver
ing.
15. 8. praesidium satisJidum \Jidum 'trustworthy' is adequate sense since
the question at issue concerns the reliability of the R o m a n forces
424

4 6 0 B.C.

3- 15.8

(Seneca, Agam. 917) hat firtnum is the natural epithet (45. 2, 23. 34. 12,
34. 25. 10; Cicero, Verr. 1. 153; de Leg. Agr. 2. 103; ad Att. 1. 19. 6;
ad Fam. 15. 4. 14) and the correction, proposed by Luterbacher, is
attractive, fidum by assimilation of ending after praesidium.
15. 9. se. . . causam: cf. Sallust, CatiL 35. 3 publicam miserorum causam
pro mea consuetudine suscepi (Skard). T h e whole of Herdonius' policy
echoes that propounded by Catiline.
omnia extrema: take concitaturum with Volscos et Aequos, t. with 0. e.
There is no trace of the speech in D . H . Cf. Sallust, CatiL 26. 5.
16. 1. dilucere: 8. 27. 11, 25. 29. 10; first in Varro. Here perhaps
suggested by Cicero, in CatiL 3. 6 cum iam dilucesceret.
16. 2 - 4 . The threat from the Aequi does not feature in the account of
D . H . and may be at least partly inspired by Catiline's negotiations
with the Allobroges.
16. 4. mergentibus malis: 6. 14. 7, 17. 2, 9. 18. 1, 41. 3. 10; Virgil,
Aeneid 6. 429, 615, 11. 28. T h e use oi mergere is not due to poetic
influence (Stacey, Rettore) but to the prevailing diction of the Augus
tan age (Gries, Constancy, 49).
malum . . . quiesse: only here, but Scheller's emendation of the manu
script -que esse, also proposed by Freudenberg, is palmary. Pettersson,
following Ruperti, unsuccessfully defends the received text by suppos
ing an ellipse: malum exoriens (sc. erat) tumque . . . sopitum videbatur.
16. 5. at id: 'but in fact it bore down almost more heavily than any
thing else upon their sinking fortunes' (Foster).
16. 6. concilium . . . legi perferendae: see CQ. 9 (1959), 279.
17. 1. discedere: cf. Sallust, CatiL 36. 2.
se ex curia proripit: cf. Sallust, CatiL 32. 1 deinde (Catilina) se ex curia
domum proripuit.

The Speech of P. Valerius

17. 2 - 8 . O n e of L.'s early essays in free oratorical composition, it

shows signs of immaturity both in the formality of its structure and
in the lack of cohesion between content and context (17. 2 n., 17. 3 n.,
17. 5 n., 17. 7 n.). T h e germ of it may have lain in some such
expression in Valerius Antias as D.H. (10. 16. 2) transcribes
OvaXeplco 8c ra <f>povpia TToXiopKelv 6 Salfjuov <f>rJKv. See R. Ullmann
La Technique, 52 ; A. Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 41-42.
Exordium
17. 2 . quid hoc rei est: 1. 48. 1 n., a defiant opening.
425

3- '7- 2

460 B.C.

ductu et auspicio: i. 4 n.
rem publicam eversuri: Cicero, pro Mil. 24; Phil. 10. 12 et al.
non commovit: oratorically it is effective to point out the grotesqueness
that free citizens should be duped by a man who could not even incite
slaves to insurrection but factually it is nonsense, since the slaves have
risen (15. 5). The factual inexactitude is overlooked in the search for
effect, so that Schott's nunc for non is unnecessary.
supra caput: proverbial; cf. Cicero, ad Q.F. 1. 2. 6; Sallust, Catil.
52. 24; Virgil, Aen. 4. 702.
Tractatio: (1) pium
17. 3. Notice the repeated v sounds.
cura tangit: a strongly religious association; cf. Virgil Aen. 12. 933;
Ovid, Heroid. 8. 15.
at vos: 1. 41. 3.
Iuno regina: [regina] Ruperti. L. makes Valerius draw attention to
the plight of the Capitoline Triad, apparently oblivious that the cult
of Iuno regina was only introduced after her evocatio from Veii (5. 22.
3-7) some two generations later. L. has again been carried away by
his oratorical enthusiasm.
17. 4. tantum hostium: 'such a force of enemy*. Note the elaborate
arrangement of words forum curiaque . . . in for 0, in curia with the clauses
deliberately balancing each other in shape and length (rd/couAa; cf.
ad Herenn. 4. 27) e.g. velut cum otium superat, -|- senator sententiam dicit,
-|- [alii] Quirites suffragium ineunt.
velut cum: apparently only here in L., and therefore intended for
special effect (Ennius, Annals 84, 443 V.).
[alii] : if alii is read, it will carry the common meaning: 'others,
that is the ordinary citizens' (5. 35. 1 n.). Here, however, the word is
superfluous and spoils the close parallelism. In view of the common
corruption to which Quirites gives rise (5. 6. 15 n.), it seems wise to
delete it.
(2) dignum
17. 5. deos hominesque: J. F. Gronovius proposed a famous emendation,
cives for deos, arguing that dii male sunt hie advocati cum TO armatos
et currere . . . inepte refer an tur ad deos'. deos hominesque is a formal
cliche (2. 9. 3) which comes facilely to L.'s lips despite its utter in
congruity to the situation.
17. 6. mentem . . . da: cf. Cicero, in Catil. 1. 22.
qua quondam: L. employs a very ancient formula of prayer in which
the worshipper invokes some past action of the god as a precedent for
the present hoped-for action (Fraenkel, Horace, 173, with examples;
Page, Sappho and Alcaeus, 16-17). The reference is to 1. 12. 10.
tu . . tuam . . . tuae: the religious character is maintained by the
sevenfold repetition of tu/tuus, which is not matched elsewhere in L.
426

4 6 0 B.C.

3. 17.6

The repetition is inherent in the formulae of Graeco-Roman prayers

(Norden, Agnostos TTieos, 143-66) and is well exemplified by Lucretius
1. iff.; Virgil, Aen. 8. 2936.; Horace, Odes 1. 35. i f f ; Apuleius,
Met.

11. 25.

Conclusio
17. 7-8. The dramatic climax of the speech lay in the invocation of
Romulus. For the practical instructions L. switches to or. obi. and
details them in short, succinct sentences with all the precision of a
military command.
iam: conscium Bayet. Valerius appears to forget that he is consul
and that any measures he might adopt would depend on the sanction
of his consular imperium but Bayet's logic is too Gallic. Valerius' inten
tion is to stress that he would go to any lengths without any respect
for persons to ensure the deliverance of Rome; and if he overstates
his case it is only in keeping with the exaggerations already observed.
17. 9. vim ultimam: 2. 63. 2.
nee . . . tamen: tamen belongs in sense to the second half of the dis
junction : 'the law could not be passed and at the same time the consul
could not proceed to the CapitoP. See Fraenkel, Horace, 332 n. 2.
cessere: 60. 7 n.
17. 10. sermones . . . serere: 2. 2. 4 n., 28. 25. 5, political slang from the
late Republic ('club gossip 5 ); cf. Cicero, ad Att. 2. 18. 2 sermo in circulis . . . est liberior quamfuit.
17. 11. penates publicos privatosque: 22. 1. 6, 25. 18. 10, 45. 24. 12. The
penates publici were the penates of Troy, who had been taken to Rome
from Lavinium where they were first enshrined. They were none
other than Castor and Pollux, enjoying on coins the legend Di Penates
Publici or Di Penates. The official oath of the Republic was in the name
of Juppiter and the di penates. The penates privati, on the other hand,
were the individual penates of private households throughout Rome.
Together they formed a venerated circle to which Roman orators,
especially Cicero, directed emotional appeals. See de Domo 144 with
Nisbet's note; Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 112-3.
17.12. discesserant: 'had made separate rounds of the gates and walls'.
18. 1. et Tusculum: 'to Tusculum also' or 'even to Tusculum'.
18. 2. L. Mamilius: 1. 49. 9 n. The grant of citizenship as a token of
thanks in 29. 6 is sufficiently historical to confirm the truth of the whole
tradition (see Munzer, R.E., 'Mamilius (i)'). The dictatorship at
Tusculum, also mentioned at 6. 26. 4, is paralleled by dictatorships
in other Latin cities such as Aricia and Nomentum. It was probably
replaced in 381 by a college of three aediles when Tusculum passed
finally and completely under Roman sovereignty (de Sanctis, Riv. Fil.
10 (1932), 437; cf. Rosenberg, Der Stoat der Alien Italiker, 72 ff.).
427

3. i8. 2

4 6 0 B.C.

magnopere censet: a strong recommendation (cf. Cicero, de Fin. 4. 79);

censet suggests senatorial procedure.
18. 3 . Jidemfoederum: Tusculum had subscribed to the Latin treaty.
demerendi: 'to lay under an obligation 5 .
18. 4. placet: 13. 8 senatorial.
prima luce: Tusculum is at least 15 miles from Rome so that such
a night journey is inconceivable. L. has compressed the time sequence.
H e also omits the concession m a d e to the plebs in D . H . that the Lex
Terentilia will be debated after Herdonius has been crushed. L.
treats each episode as a self-contained unit.
18. 6. si se doceri sensissent: Rhenanus's emendation (si edoceri se sissent)
is generally read (except by Bayet who proposes a se si doceri se sissent).
O n the other hand, se would be more naturally situated in second
place (1. 13. 2 n.) and the corruption could more easily have arisen
from a variation of word-order resulting in the duplication se doceri
se. If so, si se doceri sissent would be preferable.
populi colendi: i.e. Poplicola (2. 8. 1).
18. 8. P. Volumnius: 10. 5 n.
1 8 . 1 0 . templum: Ver. has the plural templa and it is true that more than
one temple (e.g. Terminus) was situated on the Capitol and therefore
involved, but L. has concentrated attention on the temple of Capitoline Juppiter ( 1 8 . 8 vestibulum . . . templi) in a properly dramatic way.
For similar omissions of final m before a succeeding vowel in Ver. cf.
3- 3 8 - 3> 3- 61. 8, 3. 65. 2, 3. 66. 4, 4. 13. 2, 4. 14. 6, 4. 24. 4, 4. 59. 5.
suae . . . est: 'each man suffered the penalty appropriate to his
station', i.e. slaves were crucified, free men beheaded (1. 26. 6 n.).
T h e repetition quisque . . . quoque is unpleasing.
purgatum atque lustratum: with water, fire, or sulphur. For details
see G. P. C. T r o m p , de Romanorum piaculis, 135-6.
18. 1 1 . quadrantes: 2. 33. 10 n., Valerian embroidery. ferretur is read
by both Ver. and N.fero, for effero 'carry the dead to burial', is occa
sionally found (e.g. Ovid, Met. 13. 696; Trist. 1. 3. 8 9 ; ArsAmat. 3. 20)
but effero is the regular term in inscriptions (C.I.L. 14. 3 2 1 ; 11. 1946)
and in literary texts (28. 28. 12, 30. 45. 4, 4 1 . 16. 4 ; Cicero, ad Alt.
14. 10. 1, 14. 14. 3) and should be read here.
19-21. L. Quinctius Cincinnatus, 'cos. suff.'
T h e aftermath of the liberation of the Capitol is portrayed as a period
of intense political agitation in which Cincinnatus carried on the antiplebeian policies of his son and emerged as the leading statesman of
the day. L.'s treatment of his material differs in several particulars
from D . H . Instead of building up the character of Cincinnatus by
direct narrative, L, allows it to be disclosed in a pair of speeches
428

460 B.C.

3- J 9 - 2 1

(19. 4-12 ; 21. 4-7) which are evidently original compositions designed
for this very purpose. Apart from minor details both authors retail
the same basic facts, but little credence can be placed upon them.
T h e record that Cincinnatus was cos. suff. in 460 could be genuine but
the flesh and blood of the narrative consists of highly tendentious
explanations of R o m a n institutions. In particular, the prominence
given to provocatio (20. 7), to the sacramentum (20. 3-6), to the military
origin of the comitia centuriata (20. 6), and to the illegality of a m a n
holding successive consulates, all reflect the quarrels and speculations
of the second century. Such arguments did not interest L. T h e secondcentury annalists had provided him with the materials for a picture
or exemplum of an homo vere Romanus and that was enough for L.
(Burck 22; Klotz 259-60). T h e moral of the whole story of Cincinnatus
lies in 20. 5.
1 9 . 1 . paceparta: for the phrase and order cf. 1. 1 9 . 3 , 5 . r - I >3-45- J 5
Tacitus, Hist. 5. 10 pace per Italiam parta; Suetonius, Aug. 22. Ver.'s
order is to be preferred to N's.
deos manes fraude liber aret\ Valerius had promised that a condition
of plebeian co-operation in the defeat of Herdonius should be that
the Lex Terentilia would be discussed. To go back on that promise
was to implicate the soul of the dead Valerius in afraus. For deos manes
as the equivalent of the soul of one particular person cf. 3. 58. n ,
21, 10. 3 ; Dessau, I.L.S. 880 dis manibus L. Caecilii Rufi\ Aul. Gell.
10. 18. 5. It is a loose and late extension of the original collective
meaning 'powers of the underworld'. See W. F. Otto, Die Manen;
Weinstock, J.R.S. 39 (1949), 166. See 58. n n.
19. 2. Decembri: 6. 1 n.
19. 3 . consilium fet modum]: adhibere modum is common in other authors,
e.g. Cicero, de Officiis 2. 5 5 ; Nepos, Epam. 4. 6 ; Tacitus, Annals 13. 4 4 ;
Suetonius, Nero 37, but does not occur elsewhere in L. It is not a
particularly happy bed-fellow with consilium which has been specifically
mentioned earlier (12. 7) as the quality in which Caeso was most
defective. It is therefore to be regarded as a Nicomachean gloss
(cf. 26. 9, 44. 4, 35. 7, 62. 2, 56. 12, 6 1 . 12, 4. 21. 7, 24. 7, 17. 1,
5 . 4 1 . 4 , 4 4 . 3, 55. 1).
19. 4 - 1 2 . Cincinnatus 5 oration, with its characteristic switch from
indirect to direct speech (1. 57. 7, 2. 7. 9, 3. 9. 11, 48. 3, 5. 21. 2), is
planned according to the formal arrangement of the schools but is
distinguished by a few linguistic highlights which serve to convey the
vehemence of the speaker and the urgency of the occasion.
Exordium: principium ab adversariis
19. 4. perdita domo: a curious expression, meaning not a house of illfame but a home where the rules and conventions of family life have
429

3- 19- 4

460 B.C.

broken down. T h e TOKOS is thoroughly Greek and stems perhaps from

Euripides, e.g. HeracL 476 ff.; cf. also Herondas, Mime 3.
19. 5. semina discordiarum: semen, applied to people, is a rhetorical com
monplace going back at least to Demosthenes, de Cor. 159: cf. Cicero,
Phil. 2. 55. For the metaphor cf. 3. 40. 10 d. serere, 4. 2. 12, 8. 27. 5,
25. 35. 7; Suetonius, Calig. 26. 4. T h e expression appealed to Tacitus
who repeats it (Hist. 1. 53, 4. 18).
19. 6. hercule: 2. 28. 4, 5. 3. 6, et al.
qui: equivalent to si quis, is found only in colloquial passages of
old Comedy (e.g. Terence, Hec. 608) and is air. Aey. here in L. Karsten (Mnemosyne 24 (1896), 10) wished to read si quis (cf. 6. 11. 4) but
qui must be intended to jolt the reader's attention and focus it on
Cincinnatus' words.
bellum: bella N (by assimilation to armd) but there was only one war
(16.5).
servis . . . exsulibus: the refrain of the speech; cf. 19. 7, 19. 10.
Tractatio: (1) honestum
19. 7. pace loquar: the old ritual formula pace (deum) dixerim, by which a
speaker sought to forestall any divine objection to his words (10. 7. 12,
38. 46. 12; Plautus, Miles 679; Juvenal 11. 196 et al.) evolved by
popular usage into a more general and secular disclaimer. In Cin
cinnatus' mouth it is arresting. Cf. praefiscini and see Hofmann,
Latein. Umgangssprache, 131.
pudet deorum hominumque: 17. 5 n., 22. 14. 4, 'it is an outrage in the
sight of gods and men'. For this, also Ciceronian, use of pudet where
the gen. signifies the person before whom one is ashamed, cf. Cicero,
Phil. 12. 8 pudet huius legionis . . . . There is thus no call for Ruperti's
pudeat. Here the words have a ring of old-fashioned outrage; cf.
Plautus, Trin. 912 deum hercle me atque hominum pudet.
19. 8. attingere arma: not literally 'to put one's hand to' (Bickel in
Thes. Ling. Lat.) but, on the analogy of a. bellum (Sallust, Jug. 44. 3),
a. militiam (Suetonius, Cal. 43), 'to undertake a military operation'.
Only here in L. For the facts see 4. 10 n,
(2) dignum
19. 9. scilicet: a touch of oratorical irony; cf. 4. 5. 3, 5. 4. 12, 31. 29. 8,
32. 21. 27, 34. 7. 11, 40. 12. 13, 42. 42. 2 (Ullmann, tude, 49).
de vestra plebe: 5. 40. 9 n.
19. 10. nulla ope humana: Ver.'s word-order conforms to an established
pattern (2. 20. 12 is different) by which, where the phrase humana
ope occurs positively, the words are in that order (e.g. 5. 22. 3 ; Virgil,
Aen. 12. 427; Veil. Pat. 2. 79. 3 sed virum humana ope; Pliny, N.H.
37. 1; Tacitus, Annals 6. 12. 6), but where the phrase is in a negative
430

460 B.C.

3. 19. 10

clause the order is reversed as at Columella 3. 1. 2 non ope humana;

Seneca, N.Q. 5. 18. 6 ; Tacitus, Annals 15. 44. 7; Hist. 4. 81. 14.
19. 11. at enim: introducing not an objection but a threat.
Mo die quo: cum Ver., but the correlative is always quo and cum is
a clever but superficial attempt to supply a correlative to turn typical of
Ver. (cf5- 2. 11, 3. 5, 3. 7,40. 7).
si tuleritis: doubt has been cast on these words which are found
both in N. and in Ver., on the ground that the clause is inept and
tuleritis is the wrong word (Ruperti, Madvig). So far from being inept,
the clause gives the surprise that the argument demands. 'You say
that you will pass the law. Then indeed my election was a major
catastrophealways supposing, of course, that you do manage to
pass it.' T h e use of the simple verb picking up the compound which
has immediately preceded it is an idiom more commonly illustrated
from Greek than Latin writers, but see the examples collected by
W. Clausen, A.J.P. 76 (1955), 49-5 1 Conclusio: amplificatio.
19. 12. iam primum omnium: 1. 1. 1 n.
depraeterito qaam re ipsa: a locus communis serves as the peroration.
20. 1. patres restitutam credebant rem publicam: was this intended to have
a contemporary echo for Augustan readers (Syme, Roman Revolution,
3 2 3)?
peragendis: sc. actionibus. Cf. 24. 1 rem susceptam peracturos.
20. 3 . in verba iuraverint: 2. 45. 13 n. T h e dispute over the validity of
the sacramentum mirrors the demoralized state of the Roman army in
the Punic Wars (cf. 22. 38. 2-4) and suggests that the whole passage
was a retrojection of a contemporary issue into the past by annalists
of the late third century.
20. 4. sacramento adacti sint: 4. 5. 2. sacramento is abl. 'to bind by an
oath'. Cf. Caesar, B.G. 6. 1. 2 quos . . . consulis sacramento rogavisset ad
signa convenire et ad se prqficisci iuberet with Kramer-Dittenberger's and
Meusel's notes.
20. 5. neglegentia deum: Praef. 9 n., 56. 7 n., 6. 4 1 . 8, 8. 11. i, 10. 40. 10.
L.'s attitude is throughout sympathetic to the traditional belief that
the proper maintenance of the pax deorum was the only security for
human happiness. See Hellmann, Livius-Interpretationen, 30; P. G.
Walsh, A.J.P. 79 (1958), 358. For other signs of pessimism cf. 4. 13. 4.
20. 6. de prqferendo exercitu: prqferendo 'delaying' is clearly sound (proterrendo Gronovius; perturbando or perterrendo Ruperti). T h e tribunes re
sorted to delaying tactics when they found that they could not prevent
the levy. But prqferre is only so used with nouns signifying an event or
process (e.g. auctionem in Cicero, ad Att. 13. 12. 4) or with nouns of
time like dies (Cicero, ad Att. 13. 13. 44). exercitu must therefore be
43*

3. 20. 6

460 B.C.

wrong. In fact Ver. can clearly be deciphered as reading exercitus

exitu proferendo as one line, thus confirming Bayet's adaptation of
Perizonius's admirable conjecture.
auspicato: i. 36. 6 n. T h e fear of an assembly held outside Rome
owes much, no doubt, to the disturbances of the Hannibalic W a r
when religious factors played their part in the political wire-pulling
(Scullard, Roman Politics, 26-28; note in particular the events of 217)
but much too to the crucial assembly of the Athenians at Golonus
(Thucydides, 8. 66-67).
20. 7. mille passuum: the extension of the ius provocationis outside Rome
itself became controversial towards the end of the third century.
'As Roman citizens began to move more freely outside Rome they
would claim their full privilege of appeal against the magistrate, re
gardless of the old territorial restrictions' (A. H. McDonald, J.R.S. 34
(1944), 19 and n. 68). T h e extension of the right to Romans throughout
Italy was effected by one of the Leges Porciae, perhaps in 199.
20. 8. non ita . . . ut: 'the state was too ill to be cured by conventional
remedies'.
sine provocatione: another antiquarian fiction. T h e powers of the
tribunes were in 460 quite extra-constitutional. They could obstruct
magistrates not by any legal right but by mob violence so that the
consul and the dictator were on the same footing in that both were
technically free from provocatio and tribunician veto. T h e myth of the
superior position of the dictatorship grew u p after 300 when the Lex
Valeria restricted the jurisdictional competence of his office and tales
were spun about its former range (Festus 216 L. optima lex; see
Staveley, Historic 3 (1955), 427" 8 )2 1 . 2. s. c. faint ut: the plural is to be preferred. There were two s. c,
the first dealing with the immediate situation, the second with future
policy. For similar haplographies in N cf. 13. 2, 21. 4.
magistratus continuari: from at least the fourth century a plebiscite
had enforced a ban on holding the consulship twice within ten years.
T h e restriction had to be lifted temporarily in the Hannibalic
W a r when the shortage of competent men became acute (M. L.
Patterson, T.A.P.A. 73 (1942), 321) so that Marcellus, Fabius, and
Fulvius Flaccus all held repeated consulships within a short space. Cincinnatus' reaction was invoked or invented by historians to provide
authority against iteratio within ten years. See Scullard, Roman Politics,
48 n. 2, 85, 234; A. E. Astin, Lex Villia Annalis before Sulla. L.'s lan
guage is impeccably constitutional. For contra rem publicam esse cf.
Cicero, de Har. Resp. 15; ad Att. 1. 16. 12.
21. 3. inpatrumpotestate (cf. 2. 56. 16, 3. 52. 10, 9. 10. 1 ; also 4. 26. 7 in
auctoritate esse, 56. 10, 5. 9. 4, 6. 19. 4) : the technical expression for the
432

460 B.C.

3-2i. 3

consul's acquiescence in the Senate's recommendation (Mommsen,

Staatsrecht, 3. 1034 n. 2).
21. 4 - 7 . The speech, of which there is no word in D.H., is composed
by L. to illustrate through Cincinnatus' own mouth another side to
his character. Its contents are, as usual, stock.
21. 4. in continuandis magistratibus solvit: in, found in both traditions,
but deleted by Conway and Bayet, exemplifies an Augustan idiom by
which the plain instrumental gerund is amplified by in: cf., e.g., 4.44.9
in parcendo uni malum publicam fiat. Linsmayer would remove the whole
phrase.
levitatis ac licentiae: notice the alliteration.
21. 6. imitamini... et. . . peccate: attempts have been made to salvage
the unanimous manuscript lection peccatis, most recently by Bayet who
improves on an emendation of Gruter's and proposes imitamini. . .
inconsultam. at qui. . . debetis . . . peccetis. Such attempts, however, over
look the fixed idiom by which the action which is to be imitated is
linked by et or atque with the verb imitor, in the same tense and person.
So 7. 26. 7 hunc imitare et sterne catervas; Plautus, Casina 954. peccatis was
caused by assimilation to debetis. The thought is a commonplace, for
which cf. Seneca, EpisL 7. 8.
dum ego ne imiter: dum . . . ne 'provided that. . . not' does not occur
in classical Latin outside the present passage except in official docu
ments and the like, although dummodo ne is occasionally found in
epistolary style. It is an archaic use (cf. Plautus, Cure. 36) which be
came fossilized in the vocabulary of the lawyers. The solitary instance
of it here is, therefore, particularly effective, suggesting, as it does,
Cincinnatus' determination to stand by the mos maiorum. See Lex.
Anton, de Termess. 34 ( = C.I.L. i 2 . 589) and other examples in Thes.
Ling. Lat. 2225. 21-39.
21. 7. gloriam spreti honoris: 2. 47. 11 n., a commonplace.
invidiam quae . . . impenderet: the verb impendeo, for immineo, occurs
only here in L., and the surrounding phrases demonstrate that L. has
in mind Cicero, in Catil. 1. 29.
21. 8. id suffragium non observaturos: the consuls could technically
refuse to accept the names of candidates for election.
2 2 . 1 . d. Fabius: 3. 1. 1 n. The cognomen Vibulanus is said by
Mommsen (Rom. Forsch. 2. 292) to be derived from a long-extinct
village where the Fabii originated, but no trace of such a village can
be found. The nomen Vibulenus is of Etruscan origin.
L. Cornelius Maluginensis: Ser. f. P. n., son of the consul of 485
(2. 41. 12). He was in fact the father of the Decemvir (35. 11 n.),
although the annalists, in particular Valerius Antias who wrote before
the careful researches on the Fasti undertaken by Varro and Atticus,
814432

433

Ff

3- 22. I

459 B.C.

regarded him as the brother (40. 8, 41. 4). For the problem of his
military operations see 23. 7 n. See also Miinzer, /?.., 'Cornelius
(256)'. The cognomen Maluginensis is also said to be derived from a
lost home-town of the Gornelii.
census actus: 1. 44. 2 n. lustrum . . . condi: 1. 44. 2 n.
religiosum: 5. 40. 10. The notice, coming ultimately from the
Annales, is probably derived from a different source (see below).
22. 2 - 2 3 . Military Operations during 459
L., abruptly changing his source, narrates in a bald style a series of
military operations without making any attempt to weld them into
a coherent story. The switch is indicated by the unique repetition of
the consul's names (22. 1, 22. 2 ; for 9. 29. 1 see apparatus of O.C.T.),
and the omission of cognomina on the second occasion argues for a
different tradition, which was possibly older but at least kept closer
to the spirit of the original Fasti. It would appear that L. reverts to
Valerius Antias at the beginning of 24 since in 24. 8 the consuls return
triumphantes. There is nothing in L.'s account in 22-23 to justify
a triumph, but it is known from D.H. that one branch of the annalist
tradition mentioned that Antium revolted and was recaptured by the
efforts of the two consuls and the same tale, recorded in the Fasti
Triumphales, is alluded to as a variant in 23. 7. Valerius Antias must
have dealt with that stirring episode of Antian history and it follows
that L. has temporarily abandoned him. The same conclusion ensues
from the duplication of Roman gratitude for the recens Tusculanorum
meritum (23. 1 = 31. 3 (Valerian)) and from the contradiction
between 22. 1 census actus and 24. 10, suggesting as it does the duplica
tion of the same event as a result of its being reported under separate
years in two different authors. See Lachmann, De Fontibus, 59; Soltau
162; Burck 22-23; Klotz 261.
22. 2. principio anni: 4. 1. 1 n.
bellum ingens: sc. imminere or the like. Allen, worried by the ellipse,
proposed ingruens for ingens, which is not, however, attested (cf.
10. 21. n ) . For bellum ingens cf. 9. 32. 1 and for nuntiare bellum 'to
announce a threat of war', cf. 31. 8. 3, 35. 50. 2.
Latini: 4. 10 n.
ut bellum praeverti sinerent: 'allow the war priority'.
22. 3 . Fabio ut. . . duceret datum: a variation on exercitus ducendus datur
(2. 43. 5). There is thus no necessity for (negotium) datum (Allen).
22. 4. exfoedere: 4. 10 n.
22. 6. observari: observare N with socios as subject understood, which
Pettersson rightly would retain, since the phrase is a technical
military command and as such would be given directly in the active:
so, e.g., Sallust, Jugurtha 51. 1.
434

459 B.C.

3. 22. 6

pariter et socii: understanding cives but we should perhaps read

pariter (civ.es} et socii since in L. both terms are always expressed in such
equivalences e.g. publicis pariter ac privatis (1. 34. 12, 54. 4, 2. 33. 10,
4- 59 6, 5. 3. 8), pariterpatribusplebique (3. 64. 11, 34. 1, 4. 22. 4, 42. 9,
5-39-4)? cooptati pariter et qui cooptaverunt (5. 11. 4).
22. 8. adeptus: sc. hostes.
22. 9. silva texisset: N has the plural silvae texissent. Certainty is im
possible but the wrong division in M (silva etexissent) engenders the
suspicion that Ver. preserves the true reading. For a similarly vague
use of the singular cf. Virgil, Aeneid 6. 443-4. But cf. T a c , Agr. 26. 4.
23. 2. recens: 18. 1-10.
datum: Ruperti judiciously observed that dare auxilium is a preroga
tive of gods (6. 29. 1; Virgil, Aeneid 2. 691) whereas mortals are said
ferre auxilium as in the resolution of the Tusculan Senate (18. 4) placet
ferri auxilium. latum, which he proposed, is inescapable.
23. 3 . cocti. . . cibi: Val. Max. 2. 7. 2. The normal provision for the
Roman army was seventeen days' rations (Kromayer-Veith 423-5)
although Josephus records an emergency manoeuvre when the troops
took supplies for only three days (B.J. 3. 95).
23. 4. subire potuit: editors, misled in the first instance by Gronovius,
have tended to emend into oblivion a peculiar idiom of L.'s who used
potest with an act. infinitive as the equivalent of an impersonal, 'it is
possible to, one can'. Cf. 3. 27. 7. ut nocte ad hostem pervenire (-iri
Gronovius) posset; 6. 37. 8 numqui. . . segnius rem publicam administrare
potest post p. Licini Calvi tribunatum (administrari [potest] Rhenanus);
7. 6. 2 neque earn voraginem . . . explere (-eri ed. princeps) potuisse; 2. 1. 6
ut bonam frugem . . .ferre posset (possent Aldus); 22. 34. 7, 35. 30. 4,
42. 65. 2. The idiom was first recognized by Welz and first illustrated
by Pettersson.
23. 5. quo postquam ventum ad extremum est: ad extremum in L. must be
temporal and cannot mean 'extremes of hunger' (see Fiigner, Lexicon
s.v. ad). The sense must therefore be 'when they finally reached that
condition (of starvation)' i.e. quo not qua ventum est (1. 59. 7).
23. 6. Columen: mod. la Colonna, a prominent outcrop near Tusculum (Nissen, Ital. Land. 2. 601). Although the modern name is not
attested before the eleventh century, the site is old, deserves the name,
and is topographically in position.
23. 7. eodem anno: the revolt of Antium, threatened in 22. 2, is de
scribed at length by D.H. 10. 21, who seems to follow the tradition
ascribed to.plerique by L. He details an extensive account of a massed
attack by 6,000 Aequi on Tusculum, of the treachery of Herdonius,
of the flight of the Aequi to Algidus where they are defeated by
Fabius while Cornelius surprises and recaptures Antium. The focus on
435

3- 23- 7

459 B.C.

Antium and the precision of figures both point to Valerius Antias as

being D.H.'s source and therefore included by L. among the plerique.
It follows that L.'s main source for 22-23 1S n o t Valerius but should
be Licinius. Licinius is not necessarily older than Valerius since vetustiores scriptores may refer to the authorities cited by the Sullan annalists.
Thus L. applies vetustior to Calpurnius Piso (10. 9. 12).
24-29. The Dictatorship of Cincinnatus
After a brief digression on external events L. returns to his main
theme, the political situation at Rome and the contrasting characters
of the politicians. He concentrates the attention on the personality of
Cincinnatus. Whereas D.H. merely suggests that the popular clamour
was for a dictatorship, L. narrows it to a cry for Cincinnatus. D.H. is
interested in all the superficial detailsthe ploughing scene, the
military operations, the circumstantial background; L. is interested in
Cincinnatus because Cincinnatus is a homo vere Romanus, the perfect
foil to Appius Claudius the Decemvir. Cincinnatus is reluctant to
assume office, discharges it with exemplary devotion, and resigns it
with speed. Claudius intrigues for power, misuses it, and has to be
forced to abandon it. The two men are counterparts, representing the
Roman ideal and its reverse, and for a reading public familiar with
the evils of prolonged and usurped power L.'s message was clear. That
the contrast between Cincinnatus and Claudius is deliberate and not
fortuitous is demonstrated by the fact that the climax of their careers
occupies the central section of the first Pentad (26-48) and that the
curtain is raised on that section by the unique formula operae pretium est
audire (26. 7 n.).
It is not impossible that the Annales contained mention of the
successive trials of M. Volscius (24. 3, 25. 3), of the triumphs (24. 8),
of the peace with the Aequi (24. 10), of the census (24. 10), of the
mission to the Aequi (25. 6), of the grant of citizenship to L. Mamilius
(29. 6), of the military operations of Nautius and Fabius (29.7-8), and
of the religious events (29. 9). But Cincinnatus' dictatorship itself,
like the exploits of Coriolanus, is fluid in date, and cannot have been
firmly embodied in the documentary tradition (26. 6 n.). Likewise
the defeat of Gracchus Cloelius by Cincinnatus is only one manifesta
tion of an apparently timeless legend of the gens Quinctia in which a
Cloelius is defeated by a Quinctius. The story reappears in substan
tially the same form in 4. 9. 12-10. 9 (cf. the similar duplication of the
Mamilius-Herdonius conflict). See A. Solari, Studi Liviani, 67-80.
24. 1. hoc bello perfecto: abrupt, since the only war that could be meant
is'the recapture of Antium, which L. has denied ever revolted. The
reference must be to the account in Valerius (plerique) which L. was
436

459 B.C.

3- 24. 1

not at the time following. For similar unexplained references con

cealing a change of source cf. 4. 1. 1 n. hos secuti; 4. 37. 3 n. his rebus
actis.
frustrationem . . legis tollendae: 'a deception consisting in, or aimed
at, doing away with the bill5. The genitive, describing the object or
purpose of the trick, is a favourite idiom of historians, cf, e.g., Sallust,
Catil. 6. 7 and see Lofstedt, Syntactical 1. 171 n. 1.
24. 2. L. Lucretius: 8. 2 n. praefectus urbis: 1. 59. 12 n.
24. 3. A. Cornelius: can hardly be the consul of 428 (4. 30. 4) since the
standing of his colleague Servilius suggests that he must have been
a man of maturity. Nor is he likely to be the pontijex maximus of 431
(4. 27. 1 n.). If the praenomen A. is correct (and it is only reported by
L.) he must be a brother of the consul of the year, L. Cornelius, but
since quaestores parricidii appear to be persons of consular rank, A. may
be regarded as a mistake or corruption for Ser. and Cornelius be
identified as the consul of 485 (2. 41. 12), whose death is reported in
453 (3 2 - 3 n 0 - See Miinzer, R.E., 'Cornelius (12)'.
Q,. Servilius: to be identified with Q . Servilius Priscus, consul in 468
and 466 (2. 64. 2).
quaestores: 2. 35. 5 n. M. Volscius was accused of false testimony,
a crime which could not be classed asperduellio (2. 41. 11 n.), but which
could legitimately count as parricidium if the result of the evidence had
resulted in a capital penalty or its equivalent. Since quaestores parricidi
did exist before the Twelve Tables, the whole notice may be regarded
as historical (Mommsen, Strqfrecht, 635 n. 2 ; Brecht, Perduellio^
264 n. 1).
24. 4 in publico visum: the order of words given by Ver. is clearly
superior to N's visum in publico since it secures an effective chiasmus
in p. visum j adsurrexisse ex morbo and throws the emphasis on in publico
as is required by the implied contrast with the possibility of his having
been seen about the house.
24. 5. Jrequentem :jrequente Ver.; "que which is supplied by N produces
an impossible combination 'at that time and assiduously5. N also adds
-que wrongly at 3. 43. 6, 4. 21. 10, Ver. at 5. 44. 7 frequentesque. See
also 52. 7 n., 2. 32. 10 n.
24. 7. comitia: after their investigation, the quaestores brought their
findings to the comitia centuriata.
24. 8. triumphantes: in the Fasti Triumph.:
L. Corne]lius Ser.f. P.n. M[aluginensis] an. CCXCIV
Uriti]nus cos. de Volsceis [A]ntiatib. IV id, Mai.
24. 9. extremum . .. anni: 6. 1 n. The assumption must be that consuls
and tribunes were elected at the same time, presumably in July, and
entered office at the beginning of August.
437

3- 24. io

459 B.C.

24. 10. Aequis: but they renew hostilities in 25. 5. If sufficient trust
could be placed in the evidence for the revolt of Antrum, it would be
tempting to associate the peace not with the Aequi but with the Volsci
Antiates.
census: 22. 1. T h e event must have been reported by different
authors under separate years. For the figures cf. 1. 44. 2 n.
decimum: the twentieth is noticed in 293 (10. 47. 2). T h e fact is
doubtless genuine. As, however, there was as yet no fixed interval
for the ceremony lustrum condere it is impossible to base any conjectures
on it as to the antiquity either of the pontifical records or of the city of
Rome itself.
25. 1. L. Minucius: P.f. M.n., a son of the consul of 492 (2. 34. 1). H e
was a prominent figure in the history of the next twenty years: for
even if his inclusion in the second college of Decemvirs is false (35. 11 n.)
and as a consequence the activities alleged to have been undertaken
by him against the Aequi (41. 10, 42. 5-7) no more than imaginary,
he is indissolubly associated with the fate of Sp. Maelius and his name
perpetuated both by the entry cpraefectusy in the libri lintei for 440 and
439 (4. 12. 8 n., 13. 7-8) and by the statue decreed him by the Senate
for his services in informing against Maelius (4. 16. 2 n.). A prosecution
levelled against him for false testimony in 436 is mythical (4. 21. 3 n.).
L. lists him as the ordinary consul with Nautius but the Capitoline
Fasti for the year record that he -was cos, suff. and that he succeeded
Carven[ who died in office. A garbled version of the same tradition
survives in Diodorus (11. 88. 1) who ascribes to Minucius as cos. ord. the
impossible cognomen Kapovrlavos. T h e late chronographers who de
rive from imperial Fasti also supply the cognomen Atratinus. T h e entry
in the Capitoline Fasti should be restored as [M. Papirius - f. -]n. Carven[tanus] and be regarded as a doublet of 4. 52. 4 n., where the libri
lintei gave M . Papirius Atratinus as the colleague of C. Nautius in the
consulship. See further Hermes 89 (1961), 379 ff
C. Nautius: cos. 475 (2. 52. 6).
25. 2. M. Valerio Manif.: Valeri f. manuscripts. Valeri could be a
corruption for Volusi but there is no evidence of a father and son
Valerius at this date both called Volusus (4. 49. i n . ) . It is a ducto
graphy of Valerio. In restoring the filiation M\f.
rather than
M.f.,
thereby making him the son of the dictator of 494 (2. 30. 5), it is
assumed that he is to be identified as the consul of 456 (31. 1 n.) whose
name is given in its entirety by the Capitoline Fasti as M\f.
Volusi n.
(Volkmann, R.E., 'Valerius (246)'). D.H. (10. 8) in his version of the
trial does not name the quaestors: M . Valerius here may owe some
thing to the interpolations of Valerius Antias. For the trial see 24. 3 n.,
2. 35- 5 n.
438

458 B.C.

3- 25. 2

T. Quinctio: cos. 471 (2. 56. 5).

25. 3. iusto acpio helium'. 1. 32. 7 n.
25. 5. primo anno: 24. 10 n.
Gracchum Cloelium: for the name Cloelius cf. 1. 23. 3 n. Gracchus
is surprising. It is not held by anyone before the Sempronii and of that
family first by Ti. S. G., consul in 236. T h e name is Etruscan in origin
(Schulze 172). O n all counts, its etymology and its anachronism and
its employment as a praenomen, it should be viewed with misgiving.
T h e doubts harden when it is realized that the whole narrative is a
duplication of the exploits of Aequus Cluilius (4. 9. 12 n . : see Pais,
Ancient Legends, 191 ; Miinzer, R.E., 'Cloelius (1) and (7)'). T h e later
story has some historical foundation. A peril was invented worthy
of Cincinnatus' mettle. See also next note.
25. 6. in Lanuvinum agrum, inde in Tusculanum: D.H. 10. 22. 4 has only
iAdaas /xe'x/0*- TVUKXOV 7roAeojj. Editors from Cluver and Gruter have
emended Lanuvinum to Labicanum, arguing by analogy from 7. 3 that
the Aequi, who were situated to the east and south of Rome could
not have been operating on the coastal plain, the area liable to inroads
of Volsci. In 4. 9. 12, however, Gracchus Cloelius' exemplar, Aequus
Cluilius, is a Volscian and is operating in agro Lanuvino round the town
of Ardea and it is credible enough that details of geography should
have been transferred as well as those of identity.
legati: may be a duplication of the embassy in 466 (2. 3 n . ; cf. D.H.
9. 60. 3-6), when Q,. Fabius also demanded retribution from the
Aequi. For Q . Fabius see 1. i n . , for Volumnius 10. 5 n., for Postumius
2. 42. 5 n.
et ex \eo~\foedere: cf. 1. 23. 7 exfoedere . . . repetitae sint (Sigonius). The
mention of the specific treaty is too far back (25. 5) for the demon
strative to refer to it.
25. 7. ad quercum iubet dicere: an archaic detail of folk-lore is incor
porated, which is to be connected with the religious origin of the
iugum (first mentioned in 28. 11). Like the tigillum sororium (1.26. 13 n.),
the trixylon or arch made of three staves (D.H. 3. 22) or spears had the
magical property of divesting the enemy of their power to do harm.
By passing under the yoke the enemy were immunized (Warde
Fowler, Essays, 70 ff.). T h e belief in divine power latent in wood
should be associated with the Latin conception of Juppiter as an oakgod (A. B. Cook, C.R. 18 (1904), 362-79), as at Tibur (Pliny, N.H. 16.
237), Laurentum (Virgil, Aeneid 11. 851), and Querquetulani; cf.
the cult of Juppiter Feretrius at Rome (1. 10. 1 ff. n.). It was a pre
dominantly Latin cult and the retribution brought upon the Aequi
by their contempt of it can be seen as a vindication of the Latin gods
against the less effective gods of their enemy. T h e motif of telling an
inquirer to voice his complaints to an inanimate object is primitive;
439

3- as. 7

458 B.C.

see the examples in Stith-Thompson, Motif Index of Folk Literature,

D 1311. 4. The oaks of Algidus were still famous in L.'s day (cf.
Horace, Odes 4. 4. 58).
cuius umbra opaca: opaca must be nominative agreeing with sedes
and umbra be a dependent ablative on opaca, as at Tacitus, Hist. 5. 3
rupem nemore opacam. 'whose shadow made a shady seat'. The parting
remark of the legate which follows is strongly sacral in style. It is
implied that they are Fetiales officially declaring war (D.H. 10. 23. 1).
25. 8. quercus: i.e. Juppiter. Cf. the formula in 1. 32. 9 n., echoed here.
quidquid deorum est: 17. 5, 2. 5. 7, 23. 9. 3. Compare the prayer which
opens Horace's fifth Epode.
adsint: 2. 55. 6 n.
26. 1. foedati: often means little more than 'covered with blood'
(Plautus, Amph. 246; Virgil, Aeneid 3. 241), but usually with the
primary notion of defilement where the locality is sacred (18. ro).
The word is unexpected here but was evidently in L.'s mind at the
time for it occurs again at 32. 4 and elsewhere only once, 7. 34. 1.
A case of subconscious repetition (1. 14. 4 n.). nudati agri was suggested
by Cornelissen (44. 27. 4).
26. 2. Eretum: 29. 7, 38. 3 and thereafter only mentioned as a poststage on the Via Salaria (Strabo 5. 228; Jtin. Anton. 306). It lay
17 miles from Rome and the site is identified by Ashby (P.B.S.R. 3
(1906), 27-30, following earlier antiquarians) near Casa Cotta. Its
insignificance in later history, due in part to the spread of malaria,
indicates that the importance ascribed to it in the present campaigns
is historically authentic. A road from Capena and Lucus Feroniae
leads to a Tiber crossing there.
comparati ad earn: 'compared with', ad + ace. in this idiom, instead
of the dat., does not appear to be found before L. except in Terence,
Eunuch. 681. Its frequency in late Latin (Lofstedt, Syntactica, 1. 188)
might favour the view that it was a colloquialism (Introduction p. 21).
reddidit: 60. 5, Nautius returned the Sabine plunderings with in
terest.
26. 4. crevit . . . audacia: 2. 47. 8.
26. 5. tarn nee \iri\opinatum\ 1. 57. 7 nee [injopinato viri adventu; 6. 40. 3
neque novum neque inopinatum. The manuscripts present inopinatus once
and necinopinatus, a monstrous word, twice, necopinatus occurs twelve
times in L., inopinatus also at 34. 28. 10; moreover, necopinatus, a
Ciceronian word, dies under the early Empire (last occurrence is in
Florus) and was entirely replaced in general usage by inopinatus. At
6. 40. 3 the form inopinatum is guaranteed because the jingle resulting
from neque nee- would be intolerable and because the combination of
novus with inopinatus is a rhetorical cliche. In the two other places the
440

458 B.C.

3- 26. 5

intrusive in must represent the redaction made in the fourth century

when the obsolete necop. was glossed as inop.
26. 6. L. Quinctius . . . dicitur: it is doubtful whether the dictatorship
of Cincinnatus was securely dated in the Annales, since it is duplicated
twenty years later in 439 (4. 13. 12) and his method of treating
Minucius in 29. 2-3 betrays the embarrassed attempts of antiquarians
to square the dictatorship with the absence of any record in the Annales
that the consuls resigned. The two main incidents of his life, the call
from the plough and the rescue of the trapped army, are purely
legendary. The ploughing incident is not tied to any one phase in
his career; D.H. attributes it both to his sufFect consulship (10. 17. 3)
and to his dictatorship while Cicero (de Senect. 56) places it at the
time of his second dictatorship. It sits very uneasily even in L.'s
narrative since it is hard to see how Cincinnatus could still be quasi
relegatus after paying his son's vadimonium, if he had been consul in the
meanwhile. It is also worth recalling that the mutineers of 342
(7. 38. 5-42. 7) elected as general a T. Quinctius, living on a farm at
Tusculum. The call from the plough was, therefore, a timeless episode
involving a Quinctius. The rescue also occurs more than once in the
pages of history: T. Quinctius relieves the consul Furius in 464
(4. i o n . ) . The reason for anchoring it to 458, the consulship of Minu
cius and Nautius, seems to be none other than that a descendant of
Minucius, M. Minucius C.f. Rufus, dictator in 217, was involved in
a precisely similar predicament and had to be rescued by Q . Fabius
Maximus (Polybius 3. 103-5). See Pais, Ancient Legends, 191; Hirschfeld, Kl. Schriften, 247; Piganiol, Mel. a" Arch, et d'Hist. 38 (1920),
288-91; J. Pinsent, C.J. 55 (1959), 83.
26. 7. operae pretium est audire: a magnificent exordium ushering on to
the stage the one man who exemplifies the highest Roman qualities
of character. The phrase, 'an old introductory formula which in all
probability originally belonged to forensic oratory' (Fraenkel, Horace,
81), can be illustrated from Greek (Aristophanes, Equites 624; Andocides 1. 124; Isaeus 6. 35) and Latin (Ennius, Annals 465 V . ; Horace,
Sat. 1. 2. 37; Plautus, Cos. 879; Terence, Andria 217: the references
are FraenkePs) but is employed only here by L. (Praef. 1 n.). This
uniqueness stresses the emphasis which L. wishes to place on the moral
character of Cincinnatus. It is a new opening. We are now to witness
the contrast between contemporary decadence and ancient simplicity,
between Cincinnatus and Appius Claudius.
ubi effuse qffluant opes: qfluo, read by M, was a technical term devised
by Cicero to translate the Epicurean airoppelv: it had no wider vogue
(B. Dombart, Neuejahrb.f. Class. Phil. 115 (1877), 341-7; Stocklein,
Prog. Dillingen, 1894, 31 ff.; Sinko, Tkes. Ling. Lat. s.v. 'affluo'). For
opes qffluere 'abound' cf. Sallust, Cat. 36. 4. The word-order shows that
441

3- 26. 7

458 B.C.

effuse must be adverbial and be taken with affluant (e.g. i. io. 4 against
40.44.12).^
26. 8. navalia: the docks on the left bank of the Tiber in the Campus
Martius (see plan). First mentioned in connexion with the victory
over the Antiates in 338 (8. 14. 12) and perhaps referred to in a line of
Ennius (477 V.), they figure prominently thereafter (references in
Luglij Fontes, 5. 58. 46-58). For the site see Platner-Ashby s.v.;
Weiss, R.E., 'Navalia'; A. Elter, Rh. Mus. 46 (1891), 128.
prata Quinctia: four iugera of land in the ager Vaticanus on the right
bank of the Tiber (Pliny, N.H. 18. 20; Festus 306 L.). It is probable
that the name was old and that the site of Cincinnati^' farm was sub
sequently localized there for etymological reasons to explain the
name. T h e aetion was elaborated, for there is later mention of a Vicus
Raciliani (C.I.L. 6. 975) and a collegium iuvenum Racillanensium (see
Platner-Ashby s.v.).
salute data: 10. 18. 11.
26. 9. quod bene verteret: 1. 28. 1, 3. 35. 8, 62. 5, 7. 39. 13, 10. 18. 14,
35. 14, 29. 22. 5. Elsewhere the pious aside is confined to Plautus (e.g.
Aul. 175, 257, 272; Trin. 502) and Terence (Eun. 390; Phormio 552).
Nero used the formula in his prayers at the opening of the work on the
Corinth canal (Suetonius 37).
satin salve: 1. 58. 7 n., the archaic greeting.
Raciliam: a Latin name (Schulze 443). T h e only other known holder
of it was L. Racilius, tr. pi. in 56.
26. 1 1 . navis: a detail inspired by the two ferries which the ports in
the Aurelian Walls prove to have plied there in later times.
amici, turn: Ver. reads amid tui et turn, which may represent an old
variant in its exemplar but the wrong insertion of et (5. 32. 8, 50. 5)
in that manuscript is an argument against reading amid turn et here.
turn et is not found in the first Pentad.
26. 12. et virum in ipso imperio vehementiorem: I accept Walters' imperium
for imperii but there is no need to follow Doujat in deleting in; see
Gronovius's note.
27. 1. L. Tarquinium: so also D.H. 10. 24. 3. Tarquitium in the Capitoline Fasti (Sigonius) is a pedantic emendation by the compilers
(Degrassi 24 f., 362 f.) under the influence of the fact that, whereas
Tarquinii are virtually unheard of in the late Republic, Tarquitii are
well known, e.g. C. Tarquitius, quaestor in 8 1 ; L. Tarquitius (Cicero,
ad Att. 6. 8. 4).
sed qui cum . . . fecisset: to be retained. A double opposition is implied.
Tarquinius is a patrician but too poor to be a knight, Tarquinius
fought in the ranks but his prowess made him the leading figure in
the army (Mikkola, Konzessivitdt, 45).
44^

458 B.C.

3. 27. 2

27. 2. iustitium: 3. 6 n.
27. 3. duodenis: hardly credible, since in Per. 57 ad septenos vallos is a
severe fatigue, while the usual complement was three or four (Polybius
18. 18. 8). D.H. 10. 24 does not specify the number but Ver. by its
reading:
val[lisque
ante solis[
suggests that with 19 letters as the average for the line duodenis is too
short. I would propose quaternis.
[Martio] in campo : the order of words would be unprecedented. For
the rare in Martio campo cf. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 13; Val. Max. 9. 2. 1.
T h e choice lies between deleting Martio as a gloss (Niebuhr) or re
arranging, as in M. c. (H. J . Muller) or in c. M. (Luterbacher).
2 7 . 6 . itineri. . . proelio: technical; cf. Tacitus, Annals 13.40. 2 ; Curtius
3- 8 - 2 3 quas tempus ipsum poscebat adhortationes: the encouragement is framed
in short, passive sentences that distinguish Latin military style (pbsideri,
clausos esse, incertum esse, verti;cL E. Fraenkel, Eranos 54 (1956), 189-94)
and is couched in archaically colloquial language suitable to the age
(maturato 1. 58. 5 n . ; for adderent gradum 'put on the pace' cf. 10. 20. 10,
26. 9. 5, Plautus, Trin. 1010 adde gradum, adpropera). T h e thoughts
are cliches (Thucydides 7. 69. 2 ) : for puncto . . . verti, a Greek senti
ment, cf Cicero, Phil. 5. 26; Tacitus, Annals 5. 4.
27. 7. pervenire posset: 23. 4 n.
27. 8. iAdcelera>: without the destination expressed is a military
command; cf. Caesar, B.G. 7. 87. 3 accelerat Caesar.
28. 1-10. Notice the careful variation of the structure. T h e initial
reconnoitre is described in long, periodic sentences. As soon as the
time for action comes the operations are related in short sentences
without any connecting particles. L. manages to adapt the rhythm of
his language to the rhythm of the battle.
28. 7. prohibenda: for the infinitive cf. 4. 2. 12, 5. 49. 8, 22. 60. 3.
T h e marvellous circumvallation of the Aequi does not figure in D.H.
10. 24.
28. 8. prior: added to expand and explain ilia (nom. = pugna).
28. 9. ut: where two clauses, the first negative, the second positive, are
introduced by ne, it is usual, as at 46. 9, for the second to be linked to
the first by an adversative et or atque (cf. Curtius 8. 14. 35 ; see Walch,
Emendationes, 227). Allen proposed etfov ut here, but the passage is so
carefully balanced (a proelio / adpreces; hinc . . . hinc) that two indepen
dent clauses (ne . . . ponefent, ut sinerent) suit the rhythm better.
infensus: M a d v i g ; cf. 29. 31. 12, 1. 53. 10 n. T h e incensus of the
443

3- 28. g

458 B.C.

manuscripts would require odio, ira, or the like expressed. See Wolfflin,
Livian. Kritik> 14.
28. 10. iugum: 1. 26. 13 n. L.'s explanation is a rationalization
of a primitive apotropaic rite, examined by S. Eitrem, Symb. Osl. 25
(1947), 39-40 with bibliography.
28. 11. sub hoc iugum: the ace. is invariable with sub after mitto in the
phrase.
29. 2 - 3 . The resignation of Minucius is entirely duplicated from the
case of M. Minucius in 217, described by L. 22. 29. 711. It is intro
duced to account for the fact that there was no primitive record of
Cincinnatus , dictatorship in this year and hence no mention of any
abdication by Minucius. In constitutional theory the dictatorship
would put all the other magistracies into suspension (Mommsen,
Staatsrecht, 1. 249). See Walsh, Livy> 9 0 ; T. A. Dorey, J.R.S. 47 (1957),
92-96 (unreliable).
29.3. coronam auream: the difficulty of the phrase has not been felt, since
at 26. 48. 14, which is usually cited as a parallel, the right reading is
corona <J)aurea. Golden crowns were of three categories: (1) a large
golden crown held by a slave over the triumphator's head (Pliny, N.H.
33. 11; Juvenal 10. 39); these were of very late institution; (2)
golden crowns contributed by allied states as tokens of gratitude and
carried in the triumph (Paulus Festus 504 L.; Aul. Gell. 5. 6. 5-7);
(3) golden crowns dedicated in the temple of Juppiter Gapitolinus out
of the spoil (2. 22. 6, 3. 57. 7, 4. 20. 4, 7. 38. 2, 32. 27. 1, 36. 35. 12,
43. 6. 6, 44. 14. 3). A presentation of a golden crown to the dictator
by the army is unprecedented. It is possible that there was preserved
in the Capitoline Temple a crown of the third category with some
inscription as Quinctius dictator vovit which was misinterpreted by
Valerius Antias as being a gift to Cincinnatus in recognition of his
success whereas it could have been a dedication by the genuine T.
Quinctius Cincinnatus Gapitolinus, dictator of 380, who is known to
have set up at least one inscription on the Capitol (6. 29. 9 tabula . . .
his ferme incisa litteris fuit: 'Iuppiter atque divi omnes hoc dederunt ut T.
Quinctius dictator oppida novem capered).
praefecto: 1. 59. 12 n.
29. 4. triumphantem: in the Fasti Triumph.:
L. Quinjctius L.f. L.n. Cincin[n]atus an. CCXCV
dict(ator)] de Aequeis idibus Septembr.
militaria signa: 3. 10 n.
29. 5. carmine triumphali: L. describes a Roman triumph one of whose
most prominent features was the ribald and impromptu singing in
versus quadratus that accompanied the procession. There are numerous
444

458 B.C.

3- 29- 5

references to the custom (4. 20. 2, 53. n , 5. 49. 7, 10. 30. 9; D.H.
2. 34, 7. 72 ; Plutarch, Marcellus 8; Aem. Paullus 34; Appian, Libyc. 66;
Pliny, N.H. 19. 144).
29. 6. Mamilio: not in D.H., but not necessarily a doublet of 18. i o n .
Citizen-rights were a talking-point in the second century (Appian,
B.C. 1. 23) and the precedent of L. Mamilius was cited (cf. Gato
fr. 25 P.). It was part of the oldest historical tradition.
comitia: 2. 41. 11 n.
in exsilium abiit: 13. 8; the preposition is only omitted when it can
be understood airo KOLVOV (Catullus 33. 5; Val. Max. 3. 8. 4). D.H.
follows another tradition which keeps Volscius continuously in the
tribunate with Verginius for five years ending with 457.
29. 7. sexto decimo: the figure was probably inspired by the reflection
that a trinundinum had to elapse between the report of the investigating
magistrates (25. 3) and the vote in the comitia. Gincinnatus5 tenure of
office represents two-thirds of that interval. Gf. 4. 34. 5; 47. 6.
Fabius [QJ ".3. 1. 1 n.
29. 8. crearet: Ver.; for the singular cf. 4. 16. 7.
29. 9. lupos: 5. 14 n.
lustratum: 18. 10.
30-32. Annalistic Notices: the Preliminaries to the Decemvirate
The character and career of Gincinnatus have been depicted. It is
now time to pass on to his opposite, Appius Claudius. In L.'s sources,
however, a considerable quantity of material interposed which L. is
eager to hasten over. His record for this year is both terse and defec
tive. The concision can be judged by D.H.'s treatment of the Lex
Icilia (31. 1) for he devotes several paragraphs to what L. dismisses in
six words. The omissions include the Siccius episode (43. 2 n.) which
figures largely in D.H. (10. 37), and the Lex Aternia Tarpeia (31. 5 n.).
It follows that L. felt obliged to deal with the details in his sources
but had no wish to linger over them. His style is equally impatient.
There are no indications that L. has abandoned Valerius Antias.
Such evidence as there is points to the opposite conclusion. The
allusion to the Tusculani (31. 3) is a doublet of the similar note in
the Licinian 23. 3. L.'s source was late Republican, evidently active
after 80 B.G. (31. 5 n.), and followed the tradition of Piso (30. 7 n.).
How far his facts were reliable is difficult to judge but if, apart from
the embassy to Athens (31. 8 n.), the figures for the fines (31. 6 n.)
and the casualties at Algidus (31. 4)typically Valerian sums both
-are bogus, the remaining core looks impressively authentic.
See Soltau 160; Burck 289; Klotz 263-5.
30. 1. Q. Minucius: P.f. M.n., a brother of the consul of the preceding
year.
445

3. 30. i

457 B.C.

M. Horatius Pulvillus: for the praenomen see Broughton, p. 27, n. 1 ;

for the cognomen see 2. 8. 4 n. He was consul in 477 (2. 51. 1 n.).
30. 2. exarserant animis: as at Tacitus, Annals 1. 51. 8; cf. Sallust, Hist.
2. 44 animi exarsere.
30. 3. subitarium: 4. 11 n. (Valerius).
30. 4. additus terror: Ver.'s reading (. . ditur terros) suggests that a
switch of final consonants occurred in an early stage of the trans
mission, which was emended to additur terror in the Nicomachean
recension. The past tense is required: cf. 25. 9, 38. 4, 9. 40. 13.
agros Romanos: read agrum Romanorum (cf. 2. 43. 1) with Ver. Where
agri is used in the plural it denotes individual fields. Here Roman
territory in general is meant.
30. 5. perculit: 38. 6.
parvum: parum is enticing.
30. 7. tricensimo sexto anno: allowing for the two pairs of consuls whom
L. omits in the story of Coriolanus, and assuming that 492 (2. 34. 1)
was the first year a primis, the figure agrees with the number of
eponyms contained in L.'s narrative. See 33. 1 n., 4. 7. 1 n.
decern: it was argued above (2. 58. 1 n.) that in 471 the tribunes
were increased from two to four, not five, in number, and that they
were associated with the four urban tribes. The subsequent number
ten, which prevailed in historical times, was the result of the assimila
tion of the tribunate into the Roman constitution, whereby tribunes
became magistrates and not extra-constitutional commissars. Such
a change cannot be dated before the Decemvirate. An explanation
may be found in the fact that the consul of 449, who initiated several
democratic reforms, was also a M. Horatius (Barbatus). Hence the
increase in the tribunate was associated with the wrong M. Horatius
and transferred from 449 to 457. See references at 2. 58. 1 n. For L.'s
omission of the Siccius episode see 48. 2 n.
30. 8. Ortonam: 2. 43. 2 n.
multos mortales occidit: 1. 9. 8 n.
31. 1. M. Valerius: 25. 3 n.
Sp. Verginius: A.f. A.n., son of the consul of 494 (2. 28. 1).
annona: from the Annales.
de Aventino: archaeological and literary evidence agree that the
Aventine, lying outside the city walls and the pomerium, was only
sparsely populated before the middle of the fifth century (A. Merlin,
UAventin; Bayet, tome 3, 126-9; F. Castagnoli, Topogrqfia . . .di Roma,
18; G. Lugli, IMonumenti Antichi, 3. 548-59). But the establishment by
Servius Tullius of the Latin cult of Diana on the Aventine points to
the fact that already it was beginning to be felt as the focus not so
much of the plebeian element in the state as of all the emigrants from
446

456 B.C.

3-3 1 - *

Latium and abroad. T h e land in R o m e itself was monopolized by

indigenous Romans. T h e outsiders had to look elsewhere. As their
numbers increased they could bring growing pressure on the Senate
until they succeeded in extorting the necessary permission to settle
on the Aventine. T h a t the right to build on the Aventine was gained
at this date (456) is also suggested by the fact that whereas the First
Secession was to the Mons Sacer, the Second in 449 was to the Aven
tine. But whether the bill was proposed by the tr. pi. Icilius as is
implied by 32. 7 and described in detail by D.H. is more doubtful.
T h e name of the mover would not be associated officially with the
terms of the bill and, in any case, a tribune could not be responsible
for legislation. See E. S. Staveley, Athenaeum 33 (1955), 12-23.
3 1 . 2. refecti. insequente: the conjecture found in U is certain. Ver. by
its corrupt refectis his sequente shows that the text was already disturbed
before the fourth century and Nicomachus' refecti. hi sequenti is a mere
emendation of it, a bad emendation because sequente for insequente
would be unique here (Stacey, Archiv Lat. Lex. 10 (1898), 61 ; Fiigner)
and since there is no preceding insequor to make the prefix carried over
(19. n n.) and nothing in the context to call for an unusually striking
word, the normal insequente is needed. T h e ellipse of the demonstrative
can be paralleled by many passages in L. (1. 50. 8, 5. 44. 3, 7. 40. 2,
8- 3- 55 9- 41. 2 ; Pettersson). T h e corruption arose from isequente.
T. Romilio: the antiquity of the family is proved both by the legend
of Denter Romulius (Tacitus, Annals 6. 11) and by the existence of
the tribus Romulia. He is, however, the only member of the family to
reach the Fasti. Cf. 33. 3 : see Alfbldi, Hermes 90 (1962), 206.
C. Veturio: son or grandson of the consul of 499 (2. 19. 1). See 32. 3 ;
Gundel, R.E., 'Veturius (10)'.
iaceret: 'lie dormant'. T h e use is colloquial. Other than 4. 51. 4,
another plebeian outburst, the only times it appears to occur in this
sense are in racy letters; e.g. Cicero, ad Att. 7. 23. 3 ; Caelius, adFam.
8. 6. 4.
31. 3. recens . . . auxilii: = 23. 2.
in Algido: D.H.'s Avriov is no more than a textual corruption for
AXytiov (Klotz264).
3 1 . 4. praeda: 2. 42. 1 n.
3 1 . 5. Sp. Tarpeio, A. Aternio: 65. 1 n. Mystery enshrouds both men
(Krebs, R.E., 'Aternius'; Miinzer, R.E., 'Tarpeius (4)'). Neither
name is found again in the Fasti, or indeed in any prominent con
nexion in R o m a n history. Aternius is perhaps Etruscan in form (Schulze
269) althoughBorghesi (QEuvres, 9. 55) derived it from the river Aternus
in southern Italy. It is found on late inscriptions (C.I.L. 6. 16628;
10. 5162: I.G. 2 2 . 4245, 3992). Tarpeius (1. 11. 6 n.) likewise
may be Etruscan. In that case it must be supposed that they were
447

3-3i. 5

454 B.C.

representatives of two old Roman families which died out after the
fifth century. Romilius affords an obvious parallel. On the other hand
they are always associated as a pair, and always in connexion with
the Lex Aternia Tarpeia, a law regulating the payment of fines
in money instead of cattle (Aul. Gell. 11. i. 2 ; Festus 270 L.; Cicero,
de Rep. 2. 60). The fact that there was another tradition, doubtless
inspired by political motives, which made them extraordinary tribunes
(65. 1) because the law to which they gave their names ought to have
been a popular, i.e. tribunician, measure and not a consular one, gives
rise to the possibility that originally they had no fixed place in the
Fasti or in the orthodox chronology. Like Papirius and Sempronius
of the Ardeatine treaty (4. 7. 10 n.) they were inserted into it later.
Money fines before 430 are difficult to credit. L. himself makes no
allusion to the law.
C. Calvio [Claudio] Cicerone: a surprising name. D.H. (10. 48. 2 52. 5) attributes the prosecution to the plebeian hero, L. Siccius
Dentatus, and has not a breath about Cicero. The legend about
Siccius is ancient (Munzer, R.E., 'Siccius (3)'; Klotz 264; Klio 33
(1940), 173-9). He has all the characteristics of a timeless Roman hero.
Cicero, on the other hand, is an upstart. The earliest recorded Calvius is
M. Calvius A.f., a merchant at Delos in 74 B.C. (B.C.H. 8 (1884), 146 ff.).
The cognomen Cicero was unheard of before a novus homo from Arpinum gave it a certain notoriety in the 8o's. In short, it would seem
that Valerius Antias has substituted, out of compliment to M. Tullius
Cicero, a putative ancestor in the person of C. Calvius Cicero. The
substitution gave a spurious air of antiquity to the name. Claudio is
a less choice dittography for Calvio. A similar objection may be brought
against L. Alienus. Quite apart from the impossibility of an aedile
prosecuting at so early a date (6. 9 n.; it is an anachronism: for the
subsequent jurisdiction of the aediles in historical times see Mommsen,
Staatsrecht, 3. 492), the name Alienus is not to be found before C.
Alienus, subscriptor of Q . Caecilius in the preliminaries of the Verrine
case conducted in 70 B.C. (Div. in Caec. 48).
31. 6. decern milibus: 2. 52. 5 n.
31. 7. consenuerat: 'lapsed', cf. Cicero, de Orat. 1. 247.
aequandae libertatis: 39. 8 n., 56. 9, 67. 9, 4. 5. 1, 38. 50. 8. aequa
libertas was a political slogan of the late Republic (cf. Cicero, de Rep.
l
- 43> 53> 69), with a peculiarly Roman meaning. Unlike the Greek
cXevdepia which was equivalent to equality of political rights (laovofita
and larjyopia), aequa libertas was not so radically democratic, meaning
no more than equality before the law (Cicero, pro Cluentio 146).
libertas was not incompatible with government by a few who possessed
dignitas or auctoritas. It was incompatible with laws of personal excep
tion, privilegia. aequa libertas significantly is used with regard to cor448

454 B.C.

3- 3"- 7

porate bodies, not individuals. The interpretation of the Decemvirate

as an attempt by the plebs to secure relief from adverse discrimination
under unwritten laws was, therefore, devised by Sullan annalists.
Valerius Antias is cited at 38. 54 ff. as advancing such an inter
pretation of the trial of Scipio in 187 B.C. See further C. Wirszubski,
LibertaSy 9-15.
31. 8. daturum: the distinction between a lex data (e.g. 9. 20. 5) and a
lex rogata is clear and unambiguous. Mommsen argued that since the
Decemvirs possessed extraordinary powers they did not have to submit
their laws to the comitia. In fact, they did submit them for approval
and the consulare imperium with which they were invested could not
have dispensed them from the obligation in any case. Read laturum
with Klockius: cf. Cicero, Or. fr. A. 7. 8 legem . . . dedit. quid est hoc
^dedif? an tulit> an rogavit, an hortatus est?
The Embassy to Athens
On the contested question of the historicity of the embassy to Athens
two preliminary points may be stated. L. presents the purpose of the
embassy as being to secure a new code of laws. As a matter of historical
fact the issue was not the supersession of an old system by a new
system. It was the codification and publication of existing laws. Till
the Decemvirate, Roman laws were unwritten and by their very
nature, therefore, arbitrary and tyrannical. The plebs was pressing
for open justice. Secondly, the existence of certain Greek elements and
concepts in the Twelve Tables cannot seriously be denied (Wenger,
Die Quellen des Rbmischen Rechts, 1953, 364-72; see the review, by A.
Momigliano, J.R.S. 33 (1943), 102-3, who inclines to ^scepticism;
B. Friedmann, Die ionischen und attischen Worter im Altlatein). .
The earliest version merely states that Decemvirs were appointed
qui et summum imperium haberent et leges scriberent (Diod. 12.26; Cicero,
de Rep. 2. 61). There is no whisper of Athens. Subsequently, in part
no doubt as a result of Sex. Aelius Paetus' commentary on the Twelve
Tables which will have drawn attention to the Greek elements in them,
the notion of an embassy to explore Greek models was adumbrated
(Pomponius, Dig. 1. 2. 2; cf. Dio = Zonaras 7. 18). Once the idea
of a Greek origin had taken root it was natural that it should grow and
that it should be invested with circumstantial details, names of people
and places. Two main lines were followed. Varro claimed to have seen
a statue Hermodori Ephesii in comitio legum quas decemviri scribebant interpretis, pub lice dicata (Pliny, jV.//. 34. 21). Hermodorus was then alleged
to have been a contemporary of Heraclitus and, being banished from
Ephesus, to have fled to the West with the secrets of Ionian justice
(Strabo 14. 642 ; Diog. Laert. 9. 2: Diels-Kranz, Frag, der Vorsokr. 22 B
121 ; for a possible work by Hermodorus see Wilamowitz, Abhand. Akad.
814432

449

eg

3-3i.8

454 B.C.

Berlin, 1909, 17). Munzer, however, has advanced the attractive view
that the statue which Varro saw was none other than the dedication by
Heraclitus and Hermocrates who were sent as delegates from Ephesus
to Rome towards the close of the Mithradatic War in 80 B.C. (C.I.L.
6. 373 = Dessau, I.L.S. 34). It was tempting for antiquarians familiar
with the traditional connexion between Rome and Ephesus as
symbolized in the cult of Diana (1. 45. 2 n.) to antedate such contacts.
To most Romans, however, law meant Solon's laws and it was in
evitable that sooner or later the Twelve Tables should be associated
with Athens. The first suggestion of it may have been made by L.
Aelius Stilo Praeconinus (Suetonius, Gram. 3; E. Ruschenbusch
(Historia 12 (1963), 250 ff.) would attribute it to Servius Sulpicius
Rufus in 55-52 B.C. but the evidence is inconclusive). It is difficult to
believe there is any substratum of truth at all. True, Rome was emer
gent and ambitious, but there were sources of Greek law much nearer
to hand than Athens. One might have expected, if there were relations
between the two cities, that Rome would have played some part in the
events leading up to the colonization of Thurii in 443. But neither
over that matter nor on any other does Rome leave a mark in the
Greek sources (for Thucydides 2. 37. 1 see Gomme's note). There is no
necessary connexion between the Twelve Tables and the reforms of
Ephialtes. The whole episode is a fiction of the early first century.
See further Helbig, Atti Acad. Lincei, 6 (1889), 79 ff.; F. Bosch, de
XII Tabularum lege, Diss. Gottingen, 1893; Berger, R.E., 'tabulae
duodecim'; Volterra, Diritto Romano, 84; Taubler, Untersuchungen zur
Geschichte des Decemvirats, 14-63; G. Ciulei, #7. Sav.-Stift. 64 (1944),
350-4. i L. Ferrero, Storia del Pitagorismo, 129 f., who detects Tarentine
influence.
Sp. Postumius: 2. 42. 5 n. A. Manlius: 2. 54. 1 n.
P. Sulpicius: 10. 5 n. All three names were selected because they
were known to have been Decemvirs (33. 3 n.).
32. 1. P. Curiatio: -f. -n. Fistus Trigeminus according to the Fasti.
He is also listed as a Decemvir in 451 (33. 3). The Curiatii were
legendary (1. 24. 1 n.) but, beyond a tribune of the plebs in 401 (5. 11.
4 n.), no other Curiatii achieve mention until two second-century
moneyers C. Cur{iatius) Trigeminus) and his son C. Cur(iatius) Trig(eminus) f(ilius). The other authorities, however, all conspire on the
same nomen and praenomen (references in Broughton; Munzer, R.E.,
'Curiatius (6)'), except for D.H. who in both places calls him P.
Horatius. Since the list of Decemvirs is to be trusted, we may trust
Curiatius too and regard D.H.'s Horatius as a mere conjecture based
on the rarity of the name Curiatius or a recollection of the feud be
tween the Horatii and Curiatii. See 1. 30. 2 n.
450

453 B.C.

3* 32. 2

32. 2. pestilential 2. 1 n., from the Annales.

32. 3. flamen Quirinalis: 1. 20. 1 n.
Ser. Cornelius: cos. 485 (2. 41. 12).
augur: 7. 6 n. Horatius, the consul of 477 and 457, is not recorded
in the extant fragments of the augural Fasti.
32. 4. mortuus: according to D.H. 10. 53. 3 he was succeeded by Sp.
Furius (cos. 464) as suffect consul but Furius did not long outlive his
predecessor. There is no indication of the death of either consul in the
Fasti (Degrassi 93-94).
32. 5. C. Menenius: Agrippae f. Agrippae n., a grandson presumably
of the famous consul of 503 (2. 16. 7 n.). See Festus 270 L.; Munzer,
R.E., 'Menenius (18)'.
P. Sestius Capitolinus: Q,. f. Vibi n. Capito, according to the Fasti
unless Capito (cf. Priscian 4. 7) is a cutter's error for Capitolinus.
A member of the first college of Decemvirs (33. 3, 33. 10 n.). No
other consular Sestius of the period is known but that should not
encourage belief that he has been interpolated from his famous name
sake, the first plebeian consul of 366. The manuscripts read Sextius
here as at 33. 3 and 33. 10 against Sestius in 33. 4 (also in all other
authorities). The choice is difficult and unimportant. See Munzer,
R.E., 'Sestius (9)'; Sigwart, Klio 6 (1906), 279, 283.
32. 6. sine provocatione: 54. 14 n.
32. 7. lex Icilia: 31. 1 n.
sacratae leges: 2. 33. 3 n.
33^42. The Decemvirate
Historically the first half of the fifth century, after the expulsion of the
kings, was a period in which the gradual emergence of a patrician
oligarchy led to the hardening of political divisions within the state
of Rome. The prestige enjoyed for a long succession of years by families
like the Fabii was based primarily on their military success in with
standing Etruria and extending their influence over Latium. Rome
lay between two fires, between the Etruscan empire to the north and
the joint infiltration of the Volsci and Aequi to the south-east. Only
a strong and sizeable alliance could guarantee her independence and
it was to the credit of the ruling oligarchy that they had built up that
alliance along the lines which Servius Tullius had already indicated
and Sp. Cassius prepared.
It is in the nature of oligarchies to be exclusive. Whereas under
the kings patricians and plebeians enjoyed if not parity of esteem at
least equality of opportunity, in the fifth century the leading patrician
families tended to concentrate power and prospects into their own
hands. If one consequence of this was to promote efficient government,
another was to arouse in the hearts of the suppressed elements in the
451

3- 33-42

451 B.C.

state a desire to assert their 'rights', particularly when Rome began to

recover from the economic doldrums of the 490's. The growing tension
can be seen in the First Secession, in the creation of the tribunate, in
the limitation of the consular magistracies to patricians, magistracies
which had been held by plebeians like Sp. Cassius in the early days
of the Republic. One of the principal weapons which oligarchies have
always employed to maintain themselves is the control of the processes
of justice. Conversely, as can be seen in Athens after the reforms of
Pericles and Ephialtes, the hall-mark of democracy is the openness
with which it conducts its business. All laws and transactions are
publicly recorded and displayed. It is, therefore, to be believed that
at Rome the patricians resisted the pressure from the rest of the com
munity to have the laws published, because it was easier to manipulate
justice to their advantage if the laws were aypa<f>oi vofAoi. The Decemvirate marks a retreat from the oligarchic stronghold, a concession to
democratic demands. Rome did not need a charter or a constitution
she had thatbut she did need a legal codification to which all
citizens of every degree could have access. The popular outcry of the
fifth century should be compared with that at the end of the third
century when it was felt that the priestly colleges, as an eminence grise,
were able to wield undue power.
The outline account of the Decemvirate and the Twelve Tables
as presented by the sources is, therefore, to be accepted in substance.
It is proof against the most radical scepticism, for the parochial charac
ter of some of the surviving provisions of the Tables (e.g. trans Tiberim;
occentassit; conubium) is only compatible with a fifth-century date. The
precise details are more blurred. It is uncertain whether Ap. Claudius
and his colleague actually entered office as consuls and then co-opted
eight legati to act collectively as Xviri legibus scribendis (so Cicero, de
Rep. 2. 6 1 ; Fast. Capit.; cf. 56. 9) or whether the constitution was
entirely suspended and a special college of decemviri appointed with
plenary powers. The former is perhaps more in accordance with
with Roman practice but, wherever the truth lies, that body of ten,
with the possible exception of T. Genucius (33. 3 n.), is trustworthy.
Taubler has shown that their names would have stood at the head of
the original Tables or at least been recorded in the Fasti. Equally,
the second college is fictitious from start to finish (35. 11 n.). It is not
difficult to trace how and why the fiction came about. Tradition knew
that the Decemvirate was by intention a board designed to conciliate
the disaffected plebs. Equally, tradition knew that it failed to do so
and that it was replaced by a consular pair (Valerius and Horatius)
who inaugurated more sweeping democratic measures. The plebs
had demanded the safeguard of a codified legal system. When they had
won it, they were profoundly dissatisfied with it because it revealed
452

451 B.C.

3- 33-42

and enshrined the full extent of the disabilities under which they lay.
Discriminations like conubium, which previously had enjoyed merely
the sanction of social convention, now acquired the force of law. No
wonder that they reacted against the Decemvirate and secured by a
second secession substantial improvements under the Valerio-Horatian
laws. It is no accident that archaeologists are agreed that the decisive
break with Etruscan contact came not at the end of the sixth century
but around 450 when Greek imports suddenly cease.1 The process
which was started by setting up the Decemvirate ended with a total
victory for the Roman plebf who established their rights and asserted
the independence not merely of their community but of Rome.
Roman historical tradition dealt somewhat differently with the
facts. It was known that the Decemvirate lasted for more than a year,
so it was natural on Roman principles to think of two Decemvirates.
There may also have been an archaeological indication that pointed
the same way. Although the Twelve Tables are always regarded by
jurists as a single document, the sources consistently speak of the
Ten and the Two (37. 4 ; Cicero, de Rep, 2. 6 3 ; Diodorus 12. 26;
Zonaras 7. 18; one of the Two dealt with conubium) which were said
to have been added subsequently either by the second college or by
Valerius and Horatius. The most reasonable explanation of the pecu
liarity is that the Ten and the Two were preserved on separate in
scriptions. It may even be that the Two were restored after the Gallic
sack, and hence gave the appearance of being more recent.
However that may be, two colleges of Decemvirs were postulated,
a Good and a Bad, and names invented to fill the second. The excesses
of the second college provided a dramatic transition to Valerius and
Horatius. Since the law on conubium was passed by the second college,
the drama was heightened by the introduction and elaboration of the
myth of Verginia (see below on 44 ff.). It provided a fine touch of
tragic irony. The story reached its fully developed shape during the
third century and, like many other Roman legends formulated in that
period, owes something to Greek models. The duration of the whole
Decemvirate, a little over two years, may be influenced by the
activities of the archon Damasias, and the general behaviour of the
second college is reminiscent of the behaviour of the Thirty Tyrants.
The daily rotation of the Decemvirs may be drawn from the same
period (33. 8 n.).
The effect of the process was to crowd out of the picture all the
other reforms for which the Decemvirate is commonly held to be
responsible. Attention was focused exclusively on the tyrannical
character of the Decemvirate and, in particular, on Appius and
1
The evidence is reviewed by A. van Gerkan, Rh. Mus. 100 (1957), 82-97,
R. Bloch, R..L. 37 (1959), u8ff.

453

anc

3- 33-42

451 B.C.

Verginia. The reform of the calendar, the creation of consuls as well

as praetors, the establishment of a permanent magistracy of quaestors,
the reorganization of the census and the judicial procedure were
banished from the main stream of Roman history and were left to be
inferred from a few scattered allusions as being part of the work of the
Decemvirs. The Decemvirate was of interest to Romans only politically
and morally. In consequence it is clothed in the full dress of contem
porary politics. In L.'s account there are many touches which are
clearly late Republicanthe crowds outside the Curia (39. 6, 41. 4),
the altercatio in the Senate (39. 2 n.), the division into populates and
optimates (39. 9), the bonorum donatio (37. 8 n.). Klotz and Volkmar
have even endeavoured to prove that the whole narrative in L. is
closely modelled on the career and conduct of Caesar in 59 and 49-44,
from which it would follow that either L. was drawing on a source
later than 44 (perhaps Aelius Tubero) or that he was himself re
sponsible for all these additions. The hunt for anachronisms of this
kind is, however, treacherous (see Syme, J.R.S. 35 (1545), 107) and
it can be shown that all the Caesarian parallels have impressive Sullan
counterparts (35. 8 n.; 36. 3 n.; 36. 9 n.; 38. 8-13 n.; 38. 9 n.;
39. 1 n . ; 4 0 . 711.).
In outline and in detail the account which L. adopts had been fixed
by 70 B.C. It contains some startling discrepancies with D.H., who,
for example, omits entirely the episode ofJulius and Sestius (33. 9-10),
and there is nothing to refute the suggestion that it is in the main the
work of Valerius Antias which L. continues to follow. His own
improvements on it are artistic. He is concerned with the psychology
of the principal actors, above all of Appius. His treatment of the events
in 38-41 does not so much inform the reader what actually happened
as show him what effect the events had on the various parties. The
narrative of the Decemvirate is for him a curtain-raiser to the myth
of Verginia. She occupies the central part of the book; the happenings
that lead up to the myth are subordinated to it. They are of signifi
cance to L. only in so far that the Twelve Tables were among the
noblest of Roman institutions (34. 6), that the Decemvirate could be
interpreted to mark a stage in the development of the Roman con
stitution, and that its whole course was an illustration of the moral:
'adeo moderatio tuendae libertatis, dum aequari velle simulando ita
se quisque extollit ut deprimat alium, in difficili est . . . et iniuriam
ab nobis repulsam tamquam aut facere aut pati necesse sit iniungimus
aliis.'
The most important modern contribution to the subject is the study
by E. Taubler, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Decemvirats und der
Zwolftafeln. For other detailed discussions see Lambert, N.R.H. 26
(1902), 149-200; Rev. Gen. Droit 26 (1902), 385-421; 27 (1903),
454

451 B.C.

3- 33-42

13-22; Pais, Storiay 1. 550-605; W. Soltau, eit. Sav.-Stift. 38 (1917),

1-20; J. Elmore, Class. Phil. 17 (1922), 128-40; V. Ragusa, Le XII
Tavole (1924); G. de Sanctis, Riv. Fil. 52 (1924), 266; Baviera, Studi
Perozzi, 1925, 1 ff.; Beloch, Rom. Gesch. 236-43; H. S. Jones, C.A.H.
7. 458-62 ; A. Berger, R.E., Tabulae Duodecim'; Jolowicz, Historical
Introduction to Roman Law, u - 1 3 , 106-11; J. M. Nap, Die Romische
Republik, 400-29; V. Arangio-Ruiz, Storia del Diritto Romano, 53-82;
L. Wenger, Die Quellen de&Rom. Rechts, 357-72; J. Bleicken, Das Volkstribunat, 14, 112 ff.; for the Greek elements see Zarncke, Commentationes Philologicae 0. Rib beck; Goossens, Latomus 5 (1946), 278-9;
for anachronisms see A. Volkmar, de Annalibus Quaestiones; A. Klotz,
Rh. Mas. 87 (1938), 46; for L.'s treatment of the material see Burck
31 ff.
33. 1. anno trecentensimo altero: = A.U.C. 302. For the meaning of
alter0 cf. Cicero, pro Mil. 98; Manilius 4. 466 with Housman's note;
Sigonius and others have wished to understand it as 301. If the text
is sound, L. gave a date one year behind that of the Varronian chrono
logy which dated the first Decemvirate to 303. The few absolute dates
which are to be found in L. are probably not taken over from his
sources but are the result of his own computation. If you add to the
figure given for the duration of the kingdom (1. 60. 3 n.) the actual
number of consular lists, omitting the extra college found in the
manuscripts of 2. 15. 1 (where see note) and adding two consular pairs
deliberately suppressed by L. in the account of Coriolanus (2. 34 n.) the
total of 302 is reached, which agrees also with tricensimo sexto in 30. 7 (n.).
The next absolute date is 4. 7. 1 where the consular tribunes are
instituted anno trecentensimo decimo = A.U.C. 310 which again is in
harmony with the actual eponymous lists since it is clear that
although the second Decemvirate in L.'s view extended into a second
year (38. 1, 40. 10; 39. 9, 55. 1), it did not last for more than an
extra six months at the most (from May to December). It would there
fore be mistaken to suppose that L. attributed three years in all to the
whole Decemvirate. He made the duration of the Decemvirate some
what over two years and allowed the rest of the third year to the con
sulship of Valerius and Horatius. (The date in 5. 54. 5 is not relevant
to the argument because it occurs in a speech, not in the narrative:
see note; for the later dates see Bayet, tome 1, cxii-cxxvi.) It can be
demonstrated that similar calculations based on the magistrate lists
given by Licinius or Valerius would be substantially different. Valerius,
for instance, must have included the consulship of P. Valerius III
and M. Horatius II (507 B.C.) which Licinius omitted 2. 15. 1 (n.).
Valerius' absolute date for the Decemvirate would as a result have
been the Varronian, not the Livian. See further Mommsen, Rom.
455

3- 33- '

451 B.C.

Chronol. 121 ff.; L. Holzapfel, Rom. Chronol. 18, 28, 63 ff.; G. Costa,
/ Fasti Consolari Romani; Bayet, loc. cit.; A. Momigliano, J.R.S. 35
(1945), 144; Ogilvie, J.R.S, 48 (1958), 43 (the views there expressed are
substantially modified in the present note); G. Perl, Krit. Untersuchungen zu Diodors Rom. Jahrzdhlung, 35 ff. L. gives absolute dates
only for events of the first magnitude.
mutatorforma civitatis: a distortion of the facts, since the Decemvirate
was a'-legal commission, not a formal constitution, but it is in keeping
with the distortion of the terms of the Terentilius proposal (9. 5 n.).
Echoed by the Emperor Claudius (LL.S. 212): quid a consulibus ad
decemviros translatum imperium (commemorem) ?
33. 3. decemviri creati: D.H. 10. 56. 1 gives substantially the same list
except that he gives Veturius the praenomen TITOS, Postumius TIOTTXIOS,
and Sulpicius ZcpovlXios. He also lists P. Horatius for P. Curatius.
Of these differences the last is probably a textual corruption (32. 1 n.).
The case of P. Sulpicius is a confusion due to Valerius Antias (10. 5 n.)
so that the disagreement over this praenomen should not be disturbed
by emendation. TIOTTXIOS looks like a trivialization of ZWptos, which
should be restored in the text of D.H. (cf. 9. 60. 1). In the name of
Veturius the fault lies rather with Livy. The presumption, explicitly
stated by D.H. 10. 56. 2, being that the Decemvirs were all consulars,
since there is no consular L. Veturius, either T., the consul of 462
(8. 2), or C , the consul of 455 (31. 2), is possible. T. is preferable and
the necessary change should be incorporated in the text. While the
lists of D.H. and L. can be made to square and are in general agree
ment with the fragments of the Fasti, Diodorus 12. 23. 1 contains
several minor divergences (P. Claudius, C. Sulpicius, Sp. Veturius)
and one major innovation, Tiros MLVOVKLOS for T. Genucius. The
variations ofpraenomina may result from the fact that in the original
documentary sources only nomina were transcribed. Historians were
at liberty to identify the Decemvirs with any members of the gens
and consequently the sources of Diodorus and of Livy and D.H. could
enjoy considerable latitude, but Perl has shown that both Diodorus
and his copyists have been reckless in their treatment of the material.
It was only by the middle of the first century that a conventional list
had been settled. The case of Minucius for Genucius is more debat
able. The nine other Decemvirs belong to patrician Roman families
and they had all held the consulate (for detailed evidence see 2. 42.
5 n.,; 43. 1 n.; 54. 1 n.; 61. 7 n.; 3. 31. 2 n.; 32. 5 n.) but no Genucius
appears in the Fasti before M. Genucius, who is credited with a
consulship in 445 (the evidence is not above suspicion 54. 1. i n . ) , and
Cn. Genucius, consular tribune in 399 and 396. The Genucii were
otherwise a plebeian family who may have migrated from Etruria to
Rome towards the end of the fifth century under the pressure of the
456

451 B.C.

3- 33- 3

Celtic invasion. They only rose to prominence in the fourth century.

The Minucii, on the other hand, are well attested in the early Fasti
(consuls in 497, 492, 491, 458, 457). Diodorus preserves the authentic
name which has been supplanted by Genucius for the usual reason
of family pride. The Genucii were a talking-point in Gracchan times
(Plutarch, C. Gracchus 3. 3). See further Taubler 80-84; Beloch, Rom.
Gesch. 239; Munzer, Rom. Adelsparteien, 10.
33. 4. The motive for Sestius5 election may be retrojected from 366
where, according to L. 7. 1. 2, plebs consulatum L. Sextio, cuius lege
partus erat, dedit. In D.H. Sestius' colleague was ill: but L.'s inuito may
only be a simplification rather than a variant tradition.
33. 5. condenda . . . iura: 34. 1, 34. 6. 8; the phrase has a somewhat
pejorative flavour (cf. Gaius, Inst. 1. 7, 4. 30). The Decemvirs were
'laying down the law'.
33. 7. aurae popularis captator: political cliches of the late Republic.
For aura pop. cf. 22. 26. 4, 29. 37. 17, 30. 45. 6, 42. 30. 4 ; Cicero,
Har. Resp. 43; Horace, Odes 3. 2. 20; for captator cf. Horace, Epist. 2 . 2 .
103. The picture of Appius is identical with that of his father (cf. 2.
5 6 - 5)33. 8. decimo die . . . singuli reddebant: 'each administered justice one
day in ten', not 'each administered justice for ten days at a time',
must be the meaning of the Latin (cf. Zonaras 7. 18, drawing from
Dio and so indirectly from L., fjpijav . . . c^' r/fjuepav CKCLCTTOS). The
system would have been unworkable so that it is hardly surprising
that D.H. improves on it by making each Decemvir take the chair
els crvyKifjLv6v nva rjfjLcpwv apidfjiov. In default of actual facts about the
workings of the Decemvirate, later writers, clinging to the tradition
that the Twelve Tables were modelled on Attic and, in particular,
Solonian law, borrowed one of the typical features of the (pace
Hignett) Solonian constitution of Athens in its later development
whereby the presidency of the Boule rotated day by day. D.H.
modified it because of the difficulties it involved.
praefectum iuris: an unexampled expression. D.H. speaks of him
simply as rjyefjLwv, a word which he uses elsewhere for the praefectus
urbi. Niebuhr conjectured urbis for iuris here, an easy change, but the
p. u. was always a deputy or substitute for the king or the supreme
magistrate, whereas the powers of the praefectus are here absolute.
qui consensus . . . interdum inutilis esset: D.H. does not throw light on
this obscure sentence. He says that the Decemvirs dealt with ra
ISiwTiKCL avfju^oXaia /cat ra SrjfjLOcria fjuera iraorjs . . . cVttKta? re /cat

SiKaiocrvvrjs (10. 57. 2). The general sense is that the unanimity of
the ten ensured that the citizens had a fair deal. As the text stands
two interpretations of the relative clause seems possible: (1) esset
hypothetical'which unanimity might sometimes have been
457

3- 33- 8

451 B.C.

dangerous for the common citizens but in fact resulted in fair dealing'
(Bayet). inutilis here carries a very pregnant meaning. (2) M. Breal
(Rev. Phil, 7 (1883), 8 0 tookprivatis in the archaic technical sense =
reis'which unanimity proved on occasions no blessing to criminals'.
While the relative and subjunctive without a causal force can be
paralleled, the meaning claimed for privatis has no authority in L.
Both translations neglect the force of inutilis. There appears to have
been a proverb to the effect that unanimity is often useless: it does not
necessarily produce results. So in the Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum
(1. 5, p. 370. 38) ut mutua eorum conspiratio non habeatur inutilis which is
rendered in Greek by aKapTros . . . cru^pa^i?. The force here will be
that while you might have expected that the unanimity of the Decem
virs would not produce results, in fact it resulted in fair dealing all
round; alternatively, that the unanimity of the government, which
had not always produced results in the past, now did have the desired
effect of promoting fair dealing. The former interpretation requires
est for esset (Doring): keeping esset, we must accept the latter.
33. 10. L. Sestium: P. Sextium nX, Sextium fi. The praenomen in nX is
shown to be worthless by its omission in ft. It is a simple case of the
insertion of p or p = p(roprium nomen) in the manuscripts of L. before
a proper name (2. 15. 1 n.). Since the Sestius concerned is patently
not the Decemvir, we should replace the praenomen L., which had been
supplanted by the note p.; it is preserved in Cicero, de Rep. 2. 61.
As the Verginia myth illustrates the clause on conubium, so the tale of
Sestius is designed as a case to exemplify at least two other of the
provisions of the Twelve Tables, the law quae de capite civis Romani nisi
comitiis centuriatis statui vetaret ( = Tab. 9. 1-2) and the law hominem
mortuum in urbe ne sepelito neve urito (= Tab. 10. 1).
decessitque [ex] iure suo: 46. 3 ; cf. d. officio 27. 10. 1, 36. 22. 2. In such
contexts decedo is only used with ex when the thing relinquished is a
province (cf, e.g., Cicero, Div. in Caec. 2 ; Verr. 1. 52). Harant's ei is
intolerable: ex is a palpable dittography influenced by iudex above.
demptum . . . adiceret: 'that he might add to the liberty of the people
what he subtracted from the power of the magistracy'.
34. 1. cum promptum: 'while men of high and low estate alike were
receiving from them this prompt justice as pure as though it proceeded
from an oracle'. The reference is to the Delphic oracle which was
supposed to have fathered several constitutions, notably the 'Lycurgan'
at Sparta and the Sacred Law of Cyrene, and also to have adjudicated
in various disputes. Details in Parke and Wormell, The Delphic Oracle,
i.85ff.
contionem: L. contrives to give an air of authenticity to the remarks
which follow. The speech opens, as was the formal custom, with a
458

451 B.C.

3- 34- i
prayer (39. 15. 1 ; Pliny, Paneg. 6 3 ; Servius, adAen. 11. 301). Note the
solemn legere leges, the rhetorical commonplace plus pollers multorum
ingenia (as old as Homer, Iliad 10. 224-6), and the colloquial agitarent
sermonibus (5. 15. 5). The implied procedure, which is also narrated
by D.H., whereby bills were displayed and amended by popular
correction before their formal promulgatio at the comitia, is unpre
cedented. See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 393 n. 4.
34. 6. edito: a very old corruption, since it is common to Ver. and N.
edo is a technical term for the promulgation of laws and other publica
tions (see Thes Ling. Lat. s.v. 91. 71 ff.), so that edito legum capite could
be defended as meaning propositis decern tabulis but in that case the
plural correctae viderentur is superfluous. We would require unumquicque
legum caput editum satis correctum videretur. Duker's editos with rumores
is certain. Cf. Caesar, B.C. 3. 29. 3 quae opinio erat edita in vulgus.
in hoc. . . cumulo: the solemnity of the assertion is emphasized by
the hyperbaton between hoc and cumulo which is the longest I have
observed in L. Similar effects are achieved at Praef. 5 and 1. 41.
3(n.)-. .
publici: cf. the definition of publicum ius, quoted by Weissenborn,
from Ulpian, Dig. 1. 1. 1. 2 in sacris, in sacerdotibus, in magistratibus
consistit. omne corpus is used by jurists to denote the complete collection
of laws (F. Wieacker, Textstufen Klassischer Juristen, i960, 124).
34. 7. desiderium: a simplification of the more elaborate proceedings
in D.H. whereby the Decemvirate was continued by a formal S.C.
and popular vote.
34. 8. cedentibus. . .decemviris: the general sense must be that the
plebs did not even demand the restoration of the tribunician auxilium
since the Decemvirs' administration of justice was an effective sub
stitute. The tribunes by their auxilium had safeguarded the right of
appeal: the safeguard was rendered superfluous because the Decemvirs
allowed appeals as a matter of course. Since each Decemvir held the
supreme authority for one day, an appeal from his jurisdiction would
be made to his successorin turn (in vicem). The dative appellationi
(Drakenborch) is needed after cedentibus as at 2. 27. 12 nee cessisset
provocationi consul. The ablative, found in Ver. and N, has been
defended but without adequate support. It can hardly be taken with
cedentibus 'departing from an appeal, i.e. disallowing an appeal' nor is
an abl. after invicem attested ('in turn as appeals were made': see Thes.
Ling. Lat. s.v.). Bayet translates appellatione 'en cas d'appel' but does
not give authority for his rendering.
35. 1. in trinum nundinum: 'the elections were announced for the third
market-day'. A minimum period of three nundinae or eight-day periods
had to elapse between the promulgation of a bill or an election and
459

451 B.C.
3- 35- i
the assembly that voted for it (Mommsen, Staatsrecht^ 3. 375). John,
analysing the history of the phrase in Rh. Mus. 31 (1876), 410 ff.,
points out that this is the first use of trinum nundinum as a neuter noun
= the third market-day, TPLTTJ dyopd (D.H. 9. 41 ; Plutarch, Coriolanus
18) or trinundinus dies (Macrobius 1. 16). In early Latin it occurs as a gen.
plural = trinorum nundinorum 'of three eight-day weeks', as in the S.C.
de Bacchanalibus 22 (=I.L.S. 18) and in Cicero, de Domo 41 and 45
(where see Nisbet). T h e hypostasized neuter, formed on the analogy
of sestertium, occurs after Livy in Quintilian 2. 4. 35. T h e change of
form was accompanied by the change of meaning from a period of
time to a particular terminal day. W. Kroll, R.E., 'Nundinae 5 is
worth consulting for further details. There is no authority for trinum
nundinium read by N under the influence of the late imperial nundinia
(cf, e.g., C.I.L. 8. 4508 (202 A.D.)).
35. 2. contenderant: contenderent (N, Ver.) is wrong in both point of tense
and time.
35. 3 . dimissa : demissa Gronovius. T h e two words are constantly con
fused but neither is used elsewhere with in discrimen. T h e closest
parallel I have found is Plancus' letter in Cicero, ad Fam. 10. 8. 2
cum in eum casum me fortuna demississet. Since at 8. 32. 4 L. prefers
committo, I am inclined to think that the variation of prefix is for
alliterative effect and that in consequence dimissa should be re
tained.
35. 3 - 7 . Goossens argued that the account of Appius 5 canvass owes
something to Greek tragedy, and in particular to the picture of
Agamemnon's devices to secure command and his volte-face after
he had done so in Euripides, LA. 334-400. Tragic effects and re
miniscences are, as would be expected, frequent in L. but here the
parallel is far-fetched. There were enough instances nearer at hand
from Republican history of unscrupulous men who sang one tune
to purchase votes and another in office. T h e language of the whole
passage shows that L. is thinking of the recent not the remote past.
All the phrases belong to the jargon of politics and are found frequently
in Cicero. T h e parallels may be found in speeches with which there
are good grounds for supposing that L. was familiar. For in foro
volitare cf. in Cat. 2. 5; for se plebi venditare cf. Har. Resp. 48; for in
ordinem cogere cf. 51. 13 n. adversaries criminando benevolentiam captare is
the recommendation of the author of the treatise ad Herennium 1. 46
(cf. Sallust, Catil. 38. 1).
35. 4. Duillios Iciliosque: 2. 58. 2 n.
35. 6. fore: A. Hudson Williams (C.Q.o, (1959), 66 ff.) draws attention
to the idiom, found also in Statius, Theb. 1. 494-7 and Val. Flacc.
3. 2, where 'the oblique form of the future indicative is used in a
potential sense to express an assumption'. 'A man of such arrogance
460

451 B.C.

3- 35- 6
5

must have some ulterior motive for his geniality. The idiom is collo
quial (Plautus, Persa 645) and so appropriate to express the halfvoiced misgivings of the other Decemvirs.
35. 8. nemo unquamfeci/sset: claimed by Volkmar as evidence that L.'s
source for the Decemvirate was published after 44 B.C. since he be
lieved that Appius' behaviour mirrored Caesar's high-handed treatmeant of the consular elections after 49 (Suetonius 76. 2-3). But
already in 87 B.C. (Marius et Cinna) . . . se ipsos renuntiaverunt (Livy, EpiL
80) and in 85 L. Cinna et Cn. Papirius Car bo ab se ipsis consules per biennium creati (Livy, Eput. 8 3 ; cf. also de Viris Illustr. 69). Cinna, not
Caesar, was a second Appius and it was natural for a Sullan annalist
to reflect it in his account.
35. 9. per coitionem: contio (codd.) and coitio are constantly confused
in manuscripts. It is hard to see how the Quinctii could lose the
election by a contio. A coitio, however, was the normal method of
rigging elections: see the advice in Cicero, ad Q.F. 3. 1. 16.
35. 11. The second college of Decemvirs is a fabrication elaborated
doubtless at the end of the third century. The fact that Diodorus
(12. 24. 1) preserves only seven names, omitting Fabius, Antonius,
and Duilius, adding Sp. Veturius, and reading IJOTTXLOS for Poetelius,
is not material evidence if Perl is right in arguing that Diodorus, and
his copyists, were frequently negligent in their transmission of names.
Nor is the fact that whereas the first college can be shown to be con
sular and patrician the second contains five plebeians (Oppius,
Duilius, Poetelius, specified by D.H. 10. 58. 4 ; Antonius, Rabuleius)
and five patricians, and only three consulars (Claudius, Minucius,
Fabius), a wholly damaging criticism (4. 3. 17 n.). More to the point
is the character of the names themselves. The provenance of the
Poetelii is unknown, although the name is Etruscan (cf. Paetelius;
Schulze 205), but apart from the tr. pi. of 441 (4. 12. 3-5 n.), they
do not emerge until the fourth century when C. Poetelius Libo Visolus
is consul in 360. The tr. pi. of 441 may be genuine; if so, he supplied
the fabricator of the list with a name. N o historical conditions can be
visualized which could have permitted such a nonentity in fact to
have been elected to a board of legislators. The Oppii are also old,
as the Mons Oppius with the eponymous Opiter Oppius shows (Varro
ap. Festus 476 L.), and may have come to Rome in the regal period
from Praeneste, where the name is frequent in inscriptions, or even
immigrated with the Sabines. Yet the first historical Oppius was tr.
pi. in 215. It is suspicious that no less than three Oppii are concerned
in the events of 450-449, C. Oppius, a member of the spurious college
of the ten tribunes (54. 13), M. Oppius the tribune of the soldiers
(51. 2-10), and Sp. Oppius. When we note that K. Duilius is alleged
to be a Decemvir, and M. Duilius one of the college of the ten tribunes,
461

3-35-

"

450 B.C.

we are forced to the conclusion that it was a family tale among the
Duilii and Oppii of the third century that their ancestors had been
involved in the 'troubles* of the fifth century and it may be con
jectured that historians inserted the names of Duilii and Oppii into
the story accordingly. The Sergii were patrician, closely linked with
the Servilii. They claimed descent from the Trojan Sergestus (Virgil,
Aeneid^. 121: both Hyginus and Varro wrote works de Familiis Troianis)
but, in fact, the hereditary cognomen Fidenas (4. 17. 7 n.) points to the
more mundane view that they originated from that city (Schulze
230). They were established at Rome before the end of the sixth
century (Tribus Sergia; see L. R. Taylor, Voting Districts, 40). They
do not reach the consulate till after 440. Of Rabuleius and Antonius
( Q . Antonius Merenda was consular tribune in 422; see F. Cornelius,
Untersuchungen, 59 ff.) nothing can be asserted, except that they form
odd company for the respected Q,. Fabius, the consul of 467. The
cognomen Merenda ('luncheon'; probably not to be identified with
the Etruscan Merenna) was used by a branch of the Cornelii for the
space of a hundred years from the consul of 274 to the praetor of 194
and is not attested elsewhere. This also suggests 250-200 as the period
of the fabrication. The name Rabuleius is found in a few scattered
inscriptions of late date (Schulze 91) and is Etruscan, but the false
etymology from rabula 'a pettifogger' made him an appropriate
candidate for any anarchical or demagogic body. M. Cornelius is
equally unknown; he may be intended to be the son or the brother of
L. Cornelius, the consul of 459 (see Broughton, 450 B.C., n. 2). The
names, then, are implausible. The principles by which all were chosen
cannot be discerned. Beloch pointed out that three of the patrician
names (Cornelius, Sergius, Fabius) were also the names of tribes,
which would afford a possible explanation for their choice but more
fanciful conjecture is futile. What can be established is that since
only one list can ever have stood in documentary sources connected
with the Twelve Tables, the second college is an invention, and an
invention not earlier than 250 B.C.
Once such a list became established, it was open to later historians
to improve on it by making further suggestive additions. For instance,
Oppius' cognomen may be inspired by Cn. Oppius Cornicinus, the only
other person known to have a comparable cognomen, who was on
Cn. Pompeius Strabo's staff at Asculum in 89 (I.L.S. 8888) and who
played a notable role in the politics of the next thirty years (details
in Munzer, R.E., 'Oppius (28)').
(Diodorus gives Sergius' praenomen as C , but D.H. agrees with
Livy who has M. here but L. at 41. 10. Duilius is called C. both by
Ver. and by N here, but Caeso at 41. 10 and in D.H. 10. 58. 4, while
Rabuleius is M. here, M \ at 4 1 . 9 , Mavios in D.H. 10. 58. 4, 11. 23. 1.
462

450 B.C.

3-35- "
Sigonius was clearly right to restore K. Duilius and M \ Rabuleius
in the present list.)
36. 1. suo . . . vivere ingenio coepit: cf. i. 56. 7. L.'s treatment of Appius'
character is a good example of the RomanStoicpreconception
that a man's character cannot change and that he is at twenty what
he will be at fifty and that what he is at fifty he must have been at
twenty. K. Buchner (Der Aufbau von Sallusts B.J,, Hermes Einzelschr.
9, 1953) has shown how this attitude to character has conditioned
Sallust's arrangement of his material for the life of Jugurtha. It also
explains 'the uniformly dark portrayal of Tiberius by Tacitus'
(G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 44 (1954), 158; cf. Annals 6. 51. 6 and see
E. Dutoit, Mus. Helv. 2 (1945), 39). So for L., because he believed with
Sallust and with Cicero (pro Sulla 77) that 'a man is at any one point
in his life what he always was and always will be', Appius had always
to be crudelissimus et superbissimus, and any apparent contradiction of be
haviour had to be attributed to deception and pretence (35. 6 apparere nihil sinceri esse).
36. 2. impotentibus . . . consiliis: 'despotic plans'.
coquebant: 40. 11. 2 clandestina coda sunt consilia. The metaphor is
Augustan; cf. our 'he's cooking something up'. It is common in later
Latin (e.g. Statius, Theb. 2. 300). Plautus, Miles 208, is an elaborate
joke.
rari aditus: Weissenborn takes aditus as genitive of quality. At 24. 5. 5
Gronovius rightly restored contumeliosa dicta, rari aditus for the reading
of P contumeliosa dictari aditus. rams is not elsewhere predicated of
aditus but facilis, difficilis, and the like are frequent in Cicero. In view
of 24. 5. 5, it is scarcely possible to accept Weissenborn's interpretation
or the rari aditu conjectured in the Delphin edition. It must, however,
be confessed that the resulting change of subject is exceedingly harsh.
Perhaps we should regard rari. . . difficiles as a parenthesis explaining
hand dissimulando superbiam. Weissenborn's interpretation is unsuccess
fully defended by Catterall (T.A.P.A. 69 (1938), 304).
3 6 . 3 . ad Idus Maias: 6. 1 n. The Decemvirs retained power for a further
six months until December.
initio . . . magistratus: see C.Q. 9 (1959), 282.
unusfasces: 1. 50. 3 n. The fasces were to a Roman the normal symbol
of law and order, but they also had more sinister overtones for the
apprehensive imagination. They were the symbol of the Tarquins
(Fraenkel, Horace, 295 n. 2). Tittler, comparing 24. 4. 9, Horace,
Odes 3. 14. 10, and Martial 4. 58 for the corruption, would insert
vices between decemviri and servassent, 'maintained a rota' on the
ground that servo ut = T make sure that' was not found; but cf.
39. 14. 10; Pliny, JV./f. 17. 124.
subito . . . prodiere: Volkmar compares the entrance of Julius Caesar
4^3

3- 36. 3

450 B.C.

with 72 lictors (Dio 43. 19), but Valerius Antias is more likely to have
had some precedent of Sulla in view. The Epitome of Livy says of him
(89; cf. Appian, B.C. 1.100): dictator/actus, quod nemo unquamfecerat, cum
fascibus viginti quattuor processit. As it stands the statement is unin
telligible, since from earliest times the dictators were preceded by
24. fasces (Polybius 3. 87. 8; D.H. 10. 24; Plutarch, Fabius 4), but the
comment suggests an innovation. The figure given by the Epitomator
may be corrupt. In the present situation the Decemvirs all appeared
preceded by lictors and fasces, whereas in the previous year each
Decemvir had held the real fasces in turn, as was constitutionally
proper, while the others had been followed by their twelve lictors in
attendance. This suspension of the principle of alternating the fasces
issignificantlyonly otherwise attested under the second Trium
virate: it was restored by Octavian in 29 B.C. See 2. i . 8 n .
36. 4. sine provocation: 55. 14 n.
36. 5. caedis causam: a political catch-phrase for which Shackleton
Bailey (Cicero: ad Atticum, 11) cites Cicero, ad Fam. 12. 25. 4 ; de
Domo 115; Phil. 3. 30.
out in senatu out in populo: N has in populum, but where L. varies the
construction he prefers apudpopulum (30. 1.5).
etiam: with ceterorum, 'to intimidate the rest of the population as well'.
36. 6. cum . . . tulissent: 'whereas the first Decemvirs had been con
tent that judgements passed by themselves should be corrected by
appeal to one of their colleagues'. Cf. 34. 8.
36. 7. hominum . . . haberet: 'the Decemvirs were all for personalities,
not circumstances, as was natural since for them influence had the
force of right'.
36. 8. iudicia conflabant: political slang; cf. Cicero, Part. Orat. 121;pro
Sex. Roscio 5.
36. 9. foedus clandestinum: regarded by Klotz and Volkmar as a clear
imitation of the so-called First Triumvirate in 59 B.C. Suetonius
alleged that Caesar societatem iniit (9. 2). Such conspiracies or collusions
were not a novel feature of Roman politics. A better example would
be the pact which Sulla made with Cinnain 88 (Plutarch, Sulla 10).
37. 2. The analysis of the patrician attitude to the Decemvirs and
to the plebs has no counterpart in the narrative of D.H., although
a few of the sentiments occur in different contexts (e.g. D.H. 11. 2. 1
they expelled the patricians ols ov /card yvcofirjv r<x TrpaTTo/xeva U7r'
avTtbv ?Jv = nee probare quaefierent).
The whole of the next passage down to 41 is unusually characterized
by rhetorical cliches of the late Republic inserted to suggest the
anarchy and troubles of that period (37. 5 n., 37. 8 n., 39. 7 n., 40.
10 n.).

464

450 B.C.

3- 37- 2-3

37. 2 - 3 . avide ruendo . ^ . elapsos iuvare: nolle cumulate quoque iniurias:

'they were content that the plebeians in their greedy rush for liberty
had slipped into subjection; they were reluctant to pile on maltreat
ment as well, in order that the plebeians should come to long for con
sular government again'. I retain the reading of the manuscripts but
restore the punctuation employed in the early editions. The patricians
maintain their middle course. They hate Decemvirs and plebs alike.
They are glad at the fate of the plebs but they will not join the Decem
virs in oppressing the plebs further for fear that they should have to
identify their interests with them and so lose the chance of returning
to power themselves. Only by this punctuation does nolle have its
right place in the sentence and quoque have any meaning, non . . .
quoque ' n o t . . . as well' is a sound, but sometimes overlooked idiom;
cf. 4 - 3 - 7 sipopulo R. liberum suffragium datur et non praeciditur spesplebeio
quoque; Cicero, de Orat. 2. 227; pro Roscio Am. 91. iuvare is impersonal
as often (iuvat in direct speech) followed by ace. and inf. elapsos (esse).
Recent editors have punctuated after nolle, taking iuvare as personal
'to assist*. It must be objected that whether we read cumulare 'they
were even multiplying the plebeians' wrongs' or cumulari (Madvig)
'they preferred that the plebeians' wrongs should even be multiplied',
quoque is forced to bear the sense of immo or quin etiam, which it cannot
do. A further objection to cumulare would be, as Madvig argued, that
the patricians could not be held responsible for the wrongs done to
the plebeians. I do not see how Bayet's cumularent meets these diffi
culties.
elapsos: cf. Aul. Gell. 10. 12.4 adperniciem elabuntur ingenia where the
force of the prepositional prefix e- is equally weak, lapsos (Gronovius),
delapsos (Ascensius), relapsos (Guilelmus) are not needed.
37. 5. plebs agitabat: see C.Q,. 9 (1959), 274. The construction id
agitat aliquis followed by an indirect question is found at 29. 10. 8,
35- 34- 2> 39- 55- 5- *d dgitat (sc. exercet) aliquem is not written.
munimentum libertati: cf. 3. 45. 8, 53. 4. The view that the tribunate
was the bulwark of freedom was common currency in the first century
and doubtless enjoyed its widest circulation in the 8o's and 70's when
the office was first suppressed and then restored. See, with Wirszubski,
Libertas, 26 n. 5, Cicero, de Leg. Agr. 2. 15. By contrast the Decemvirs
have to protect themselves with a bodyguardsaepserant latera. The
expression is equally contemporary: cf. Sallust, Or. Lepid. 15; Cicero,
pro Sest. 9 5 ; Phil. 2. 112.
37. 7. L. paints the Decemvirs in colours which remind, as they were
intended to do, his readers of the traditional portrait of a tyrant, so
beloved by all romantic historians in antiquity. The Decemvirs have
a bodyguard ofpatricii iuvenes, they administer justice in secret, they
corrupt, seduce, bribe, and bully. They are just like Tarquinius
814432

465

Hh

3- 37- 7

4 5 0 B.C.

Superbus ( i . 49 nn.). O n e of the conventional traits in that portrait

was the ruthless philosophy of property based on the doctrine of
'Might is Right'. It is Callicles who first makes the philosophy memor
able (Plato, Gorgias 484 c 1-3), and it is reiterated often thereafter.
An appreciation of the fact may help to elucidate the text of this cor
rupt passage which is presented in the manuscripts as hiferre agereplebem
plebisque res cumfortuna qua quidquid cupitum foret potentioris esset. Conway
(followed by Bayet) is the only editor to defend the transmitted read
ing (C.Q.5 ( i 9 n ) , 3 ) . It is not clear what sense he gives to qua (P'where
anything was coveted') but he takes quidquid as an indefinite, equiva
lent of quicque or aliquid, citing Lucretius 1. 289 where O ' Q h a v e ruit
qua quidquid fluctibus obstat. T h e usage he regards as colloquial or, at
least, as a quotation of 'some old saw'. T h e Lucretius passage [pace
Munro) can hardly stand (see Bailey's note) and is not in fact now
printed by modern editors. With it goes the argument for the manu
script text here. Since quidquid cupitum foret is good grammar, qua
must be corrupt. So also must cumfortuna be, which is now left without
any construction. T h e sense should be that the Decemvirs pillaged
the plebs, claiming as their justification Callicles' doctrine that what
ever is coveted is the property of the stronger, that is ferre agere plebis
res (not quia (Perizonius), cum (Gronovius), or et (Harant) but) quasi . . .
potentioris esset. There remain the words cumfortuna. O n e of the com
monest collocations in Cicero to describe the totality of a man's
possessions is res etfortunae (Verr. 1. 54, 2. 16, 3. 11 ; ad Fam. 6. 5. 1,
13. 4. 3, 13. 19. 0 - So also in L. (e.g. 3. 68. 4 n.). Gronovius had
already proposed res et fortunas which meets the demands of sense
admirably. Palaeographical considerations might be reconciled better
by ferre agere plebem plebisque (cwn) res turn fortunas, quasi. . .potentioris
esset. Madvig reads aequa for qua, Buttner iniqua.
37. 8. tergo . . . abstinebatur: the atrocities are listed in the current
vocabulary, to bring them home to a Roman audience. Cf. Sallust,
Or, Macri 26; for gratuita crudelitas cf. Sallust, Cat. 16. 3 ; for licentiam . . .
libertatem see 9. 2-13 n; for bonorum donatio cf. Cicero, Phil. 4. 9 quos non
bonorum donatio, non agrorum adsignatio, non ilia infinita hasta satiavit.
We should insert <a/> after caedi with the editors of 1480. A single
alii for alii. . . alii is not found, nor can it be maintained that the whole
population was whipped but only part beheaded. T h e two punish
ments are invariably linked as parallels (cf., e.g., 36. 5, 2. 5. 8 et al.).
The Threat of War and the Summoning of the Senate
38* 2 . imperiumque . . . indignabantur: the subject must be the neighbour
ing people whereas the subject oicoepti erant is the Romans. T h e change
is harsh and the parallels unconvincing: Weissenborn cities 1. 50. 9
but see note; 1 . 4 . 3 , where the change is between act. and pass.; and
466

450 B.C.

3- 3. 2

2. 28. 5, where the change is between the subject of a dependent clause

and the main clause. I have found no exact parallel in L., but accept
the text in preference to Perizonius's and Wesenberg's imperium qui (an
impossible word-order) or Gronovius's imperium[que] . . . indignantibus.
38. 3 . Eretum: 26. 2 n.
38. 5. alia ex parte: ex alia parte Ver. N's word-order is standard
(Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 2. 6 3 ; ad Att. 10. 4. 2 ; Caesar, B.G. 3. 22. 1,
4. 26. 1; Columella 2. 10. 10; Seneca, EpisL 29. 1; Frontinus, de
Aq. 7; Pliny, N.H. 8. 209), whereas Ver.'s is not found. At 4. 9. 14
where the manuscripts give et alia parte, Gronovius proposed ex a. p.
but cf. 4. 29. 2. parte ex alia is confined to poetry (e.g. Virgil, Aen.
10. 362).
excursionibus: Ver.'s excursationibus is a late, rare word, perhaps found
only at Val. Max. 2. 3. 3 and E Cicero Gronov. D . 303. 14. Such
erroneously added syllables are a feature of Ver. (cf. 4. 21. 10, 57. 12,
5. 24. 6, 4 1 . 4 , 4 3 - 6 ) 38. 8-13. T h e picture of a deserted Rome, abandoned by its leading
citizens who had taken refuge in agris, must have suggested to many
Romans, as it did to Volkmer, the desolation of 49 B.C. in very similar
circumstances. Caesar was reluctant to call the Senate to secure
authority for the prosecution of the war against Pompey (cf. Cicero,
ad Att 9. 6 a; 10. 4. 8-9), because of the large number of senators who
had left the city and were either with Pompey or in agris. But the
events of the 80's provide a much better model. In 84 Carbo prevented
the acceptance of Sulla's terms (Livy, Epit. 84). It was only when,
like Charles I, he and Cinna required authority to conduct and
finance the war, that they had consented to the session of the Senate,
(Livy, Epit. 83). As to the condition of Rome during those years Cicero
graphically sketches its emptiness and desertion (Brutus 308): triennium fere fait urbssine armis sed oratorum out interitu autdiscessu autfaga . . . .
Velleius Paterculus (2. 23) refers to the flight of the nobles in 86
either to Sulla in the East or to their country estates.
38. 9. quod solitum: 'in that anything was happening which was
familiar in a democracy'.
solitudinem: so Cicero of the Cinnan times: erat ab oratoribus quaedam
in for0 solitudo (Brutus 227).
38. 10. Bayet rightly restores the archetype reading ipsi consensu invisum imperium. T h e double clause (et. . . et) is somewhat unbalanced.
In both halves interpretations or reasons should be being given for
the non-attendance of the senators but whereas in the second half this
is stated regularly (quia .. . non esset, non convenire), in the first the
reason which the Decemvirs saw, namely that their own power was
universally detested, is given not as a causal clause parallel to quia . . .
non esset but as a main clauseinvisum sc. esse.
467

3- 38. io

450 B.C.

caput fieri: cf. 8. 19. 13 capita coniurationis, 9. 26. 7, 10. 1.3, 39. 17. 6.
haec fremunt [plebes]: deleted by Fugner. T h e plural is intolerable
after the singular plebs abnuat and L. relishes the vaguer phrase with
the subject left unexpressed when he speaks of popular murmurings:
cf, e.g., 26. 35. 7, 34. 37. 1.
38. 11. suarum: 'they devoted themselves to their own affairs and
neglected the affairs of state'. For the genitive cf. 36. 7, a case of
'unconscious repetition' (1. 14. 4 n.).
38. 12. pignera capienda: 'to exact fines'. Senators who absented them
selves from meetings of the House without due cause or, subsequently,
leave of absence were liable to a fine. See Aul. Gell 14. 7. 10 ; Cicero,
Phil 1. 12.
The Debate in the Senate
T h e debate was a feature of the Sullan narrative, for it is reproduced
in D.H. 11. 4 ff. in substantially the same form. It was a show-piece,
a carefully contrived agon between opposed speakers. In D.H. Appius
proposed the motion for a levy, Valerius who then sprang to his feet
was prevented from speaking, but Horatius secured a hearing. He
was followed by C. Claudius, M . Cornelius, and L. Cornelius. Finally
Valerius was allowed his say (19-20). L. has simplified the proceedings
by omitting M. Cornelius and by limiting the participation of
Valerius to his first protest. T h e result is a neater and dramatically
more effective scene. It is more than probable that the contents of the
debate owe much to the proceedings of the Senate in 84 B.C. when
Cinna and Carbo summoned a meeting to vote supplies for war but
were foiled by L. Valerius Flaccus, the princeps senatus, qui orationem in
senatu habuit . . . ut legati ad Sullam de pace witterentur (Livy, Epit. 8 3 ;
see also above).
39. 2. L. Valerium Potitum : P.f. P.n., son of the consul of 475 (2. 52. 6)
who died in 460 during the course of his second consulship (18. 8).
T h e cognomen, held by several descendants in the fourth century, is
anachronistic because its meaning (potitus rerum or 'statesman'; see
Cornelius, Untersuchungen, 37 ff.) shows that it was ascribed by tradi
tion to him as the result of the prudent measures of his consulship in
the following year (449; 3. 55 nn.). See Volkmann, R.E., 'Valerius
(304);ordine: 1. 32. 12 n.
de republica: it was open to any senator at a meeting of the Senate
to propose as a matter of priority an emergency motion on the state
of the nation (de republica). Such a motion if accepted took priority
over other business. Historical examples are afforded by 21. 6. 3 (the
embassy of Saguntum), 22. 11. 2, 26. 10. 2 (Hannibal at the Gates);
468

4 5 0 B.C.

3- 39- 2

Cicero Phil. 8. 14 (Gracchus); in Catil. 3. 13 (Catiline); Caesar, B.C. 1.

1. Valerius' procedure was, therefore, technically correct. It is modelled
on the later instances.
The Speech of Horatius
39. 3 . M. Horatium: M.f. L. (or P.) n. His filiation indicates that he
was not regarded as directly descended from the consul of 509 or from
C. Horatius, the consul of 477 and 457. D . H . calls him an dnoyovos of
the first consul, perhaps a great-nephew. Neither on the score of
his name nor on that of his career are there valid grounds for doubting
his existence. For a son cf. 4. 35. 1 n.
decern Tarquinios: cf. Cicero, pro Sulla 21 ; Phil. 2. 114; et al.
Valeriis et Horatiis: the contents of Horatius' speech were traditional.
They are closely reproduced in D.H. 11. 5. 1-5, e.g. Tarquinios ~ rov
TapKVviov Kivov v8v6fivoL; pulsos reges r**' asnoyovoi TOJV e^eXaadvrwv

T7jv rvpavviha; vetando libere loqui ~ Xoyov a<f>*\eioQe; privato ~ OVK

ISiwrat, rep vofjicp yeyovare. T h e difference between the two writers is
one of emphasis. L. has expanded (or, less likely, D.H., with a Greek
audience in mind, has suppressed) those features which were calculated
to make the strongest impression on a Roman reader, e.g. the meaning
and connotations of rex and the nature of Roman constitutional
government (39. 8 n.). But the whole speech reflects the sentiments
and the propaganda of the novi homines of the post-Gracchan period.
T h e inconsistency, therefore, between Horatiis ducibus and the narra
tive in 1. 57ft0., where Horatius is not mentioned in any capacity, is
only apparent and should not be used as evidence for a difference of
source.
39. 4. Iovem: Iuppiter Rex was not a cult-title (Aust in Roscher, s.v.
Iuppiter, cols. 751-2) but he is often so called by popular and poetical
imagination (Carter, Epitheta Deorum).
reges [appellors']: Madvig's deletion is required if reges is to be
parallel with Iovem and Romulum.
sacris: 2. 2. 1 n.
39. 5. quae si in rege turn \eodem : the text, as it stands, is meaningless;
eodem could only refer to Romulus whereas Tarquin and his son Sextus
are palpably intended. In rhetorical arguments of this kind L. favours
the strictest formal symmetry (4. 2. 2 n.). Here in the second half of
the sentence {quern laturum in tot privatis), privatis answers rege, but
there is nothing to answer turn (we might expect nunc) and, conversely,
there is nothing corresponding to tot in the first half (e.g. uno). T h e
corruption, therefore, is too deep-seated to be cured by the mere
deletion of eodem or even turn eodem (Bekker). Nor does Walters's
transposition of eodem convince, since the object of laturum has already
been expressed once in quae, carefully placed outside the n-clause to
469

450 B.C.
3 39- 5
indicate that it is the subject of one clause and the object of the other.
The sense and the form both demand that turn eodem should conceal
the counterpart to tot, one king as opposed to ten privati, so that we
may leave out of consideration all conjectures which do not take
account of that (tumido eodem Brakman; turn eodemque etiam Bayet).
Editors who, having seen that some part of unus is needed, retain
turn or another temporal adverb (in rege tunc uno Konighoff; in rege
et uno quondam Zingerle) must face the objection that a corresponding
adverb is anticipated in the main clause. Others, who argue that turn
conceals uno but retain eodem as well, produce an over-elaborate
phrase to balance in tot privatis, e.g. in uno et rege eodem Novak; in rege
uno et eodem Karsten; in rege et uno eodem Madvig. Sense and palaeo
graphy would be satisfied by in rege unico, 'in the case of one, single
king', a suggestion made to me by Mr. N. C. F. Barber, but the use of
unicus is hard to parallel. I favour in rege uno tandem.
39. 7. libertate . . . dominatione: for the political language cf. 2. 28. 7,
6. 18. 6; Sallust, Jug. 31. 16; Cat. 58. 11. (The text is usually read in
libertate . . . in iniusta, but only the second in has any manuscript
authority at all, being read in TTX but not in /x. Since there is a straight
choice between the two halves of the tradition (cf. C.Q. 9 (1959),
'i 74 ff.), it seems wisest to follow the reading o f / 1 ; in is not required
(see Gronovius's note), it is an easy dittography, and if it were to be
accepted it would be necessary to insert the second in before libertate
against the whole consensus of the manuscripts. So also Luterbacher.)
39. 8. vicissitudinem imperitandi: 4. 5. 1 ff.; a rallying cry borrowed
from the Greek. Cf. Aristotle, Politics 1317b2 eAevOeptas 8e iv [JLCV
TO ev fiepei apxecrOai /cat ap^etv (Wirszubski II n. 1, who comments
that 'a smattering of Greek ideas in the post-Gracchan period is
not surprising').
39. 9. populares . . . optimates: 35. 4, g; 4. 9. 5, 8, 11 ; 5. 24. 9. T h e
distinction is one familiar from Cicero who defines the two groups:
'those who have wished their deeds and words to be pleasing to the
multitude have been held to be populares and those who have conducted
themselves in such a manner that their counsels have met the approval
of all the best men have been held to be optimates' (pro Sestio 96; see
the discussion in L. R. Taylor, Party Politics, 11-14). T h e terms were
constantly bandied about at Rome but denoted little more than the
people who at any one moment happen to be on my side and those
on the other side.
tunc ita habeant: tunc before i is allowable (4. 25. 13) but the tem
poral sequence is wrong. Although the tenses vary between past and
dramatic present in the course of the speech, habeant shows that nunc
(Ruperti) is needed here.
470

450 B.C.

3. 4 0 . 1

The Speech of C. Claudius

In D . H . 11. 7 Claudius is given a long and turgid speech. L. casts
him in a different mould, as the sententious appeaser, anxious to
avoid trouble and violence.
40. 1. nee irae nee ignoscendi: a conventional pair; cf. 2. 3. 3 ; Seneca,
Dial, 3. 3. 5 ; Contr. 10. 3. 1.
40. 2. oratio fuit precibus quam iurgio similior, orantis: similis perorantis is
read by N but perorantis will hardly suit the abject tone used by C.
Claudius (cf. 40. 3 orare) and the comparative is secure (Wolfflin,
Livian. Kritik, 14). The error in the archetype arose from the following
per. See C.Q. 9 (1959), 280.
per manes: a typical form of oath, for which cf. Virgil, Aen. 10. 524.
40. 5 . nullum placere s.c. fieri: the normal formula for opposing a
motion in the Senate was to propose nils. c. faciendum (Cicero, adFam.
8. 8. 5 ; ad Alt. 1. 14. 5 ; ad QF. 2. 10. 3 ; Tacitus, Annals 1. 79. 5 nil
mutandum censuerat). Mommsen (Staatsrecht, 3. 979 n. 2) held that L.
had misunderstood senatorial procedure in imputing that the effect
of such a proposal would be to establish that the session of the Senate
was technically invalid (40. 7 privatos). L. does betray ignorance and
misunderstanding elsewhere (1. 32. 12 n.). H e was not himself a
senatorbut the sophistry may be older and go back to the deliberate
legal quibbles of earlier annalists (2. 56. 12 n.).
40. 7. patricios coire: 8. 2 n . ; for the text see C.Q. 7 (1957), 78. For
Caesar in 49 B.C. permagni interest rem ad interregnum non venire (ad Att.
9. 9. 3). But a generation earlier Carbo, as sole consul, had con
trolled the elections and, by preventing the Senate from appointing
an interrex (Appian, B.C. 1. 7 8 ; Plutarch, Pompey 5), had maintained
his position.
censendo quoscumque: the ellipse (ut essent magistratus quicumque essent
or the like) is impossible. L. means that, whatever motion they passed,
by the very act of passing it they were recognizing the validity of the
Decemvirs, i.e. quodcumque (Madvig) sc. censuisset; cf. 33. 24. 6.
L. Cornelius: cf. 22. 1 n.
The Speech of L. Cornelius
The material of Cornelius' speech is also traditional. Notice especially
qui. . .petissent. . . oppugnarent ~ D.H. 11. 16. 4 OVTOL ydp dyavaKrovvres
OTL . . . ivLKrjaav . . . del 7ToAefov(iiv CLVTOLS ; nunc demum . .. serant r^j
II. 16. 5 6p<i)VTs fV avavTaTOv Trjv %d)pav V7TO TWV 7roAe/uojv yevofiivrjv
. . . 7repl TToXireias Kocrfiov vvv d^LovaLv y/ids" GKO7TIV j sibi placere r^j
II. 18. 34 dXXd TGLS fjiev TOVTWV <j)iAoviKLas eacrare ^atpetv . . . rov npos
AIKOVOVS KCLI Ua^lvovs TTOX^IOV i7TLKvp<x)oaT. All that L. has done is to

omit the long and sarcastic apostrophe in D . H . with which the

471

3- 40- 8

450 B.C.

Romans address their enemies and request them to postpone the

war until the Roman people have had a chance to vote on the legiti
macy of the Decemvirate.
40. 9. out soli out ii maxime: socii read by the manuscripts is impossible,
as is demonstrated by the corresponding passage of D . H . n . 16. 4
fJLTLOVTaS CLVTOVS T7JV TWV &KCL dpX^V,

fjS CLVTol VVV KaTTjyOpOVdLV^

VLK7}(jaV

iv apxoLipecrtaLs eVtrTySetorfpot (fxxvevres. T h e present opponents of the

Decemvirate had not been associates or colleagues in seeking that
office; they had been rivals. Crevier's soli is inevitable. Cornelius is
arguing that the sole or at least the chief agitators are disappointed
rivals. There is no need for further alteration: cf. 26. 41. 11.
40. 10. quid ita: 2. 4 1 . 6 n. Cornelius uses to effect a familiar Greek
commonplace that a city which adopts a defensive strategy in the
face of invasion is liable to be rent and ultimately betrayed by internal
factions. It was Miltiades' greatest service to Athens that, having
observed the fate of Eretria, he did not allow the same fate to over
take Athens (Hdt. 6. 109. 5).
4 0 . 1 1 . ceterum neminem \maiore cura occupatis animis verum esse praeiudicium
rei tantae fieri: auferri N. It must be remembered that ceterum should
mean 'and further', adding a new reason for taking no action until
the crisis is past in addition to the reason given in the preceding
sentence that the agitation was motivated by disloyalty, and not
'therefore', introducing sibi placere, the substantive part of his motion.
This is clear from the passages adduced in the Thes. Ling, Lat. Secondly
the parenthesis proposed by Walters ceterumnonne enim . . . auferri
sibi placere leaves ceterum hanging in a way for which I can find no
parallel in L. It follows that ceterum must introduce the clause which
ends (in the manuscripts) with auferri and that a strong stop should
be put at that point. Cornelius has given his reasons: he now gives his
proposals which beginsibi placere (cf. mihi placet: for the stereotyped
order cf. ad Herennium 2. 1. 1). His last reason, the ceterum sentence,
evidently states that it is wrong {verum esse must = 'to be fair') for a
preliminary decision of any kind to be taken when men's minds are
preoccupied with other things. Quintilian's definition (5. 2. 1) and
statements of the jurists say that a praeiudicium was an action in which
'the plaintiff demanded the ascertainment of a fact or a legal relation.
Such an action is sometimes preparatory to another lawsuit. T h e
plaintiff may, for example, assert that the defendant is his freedman.
If this is proved, the plaintiff may go on to sue the defendant by another
action based on the previous decision'. Here the term is being used
more loosely. It is contended that a s.c. of any kind would serve to
determine the assertion of the legal validity of the Decemvirate and so
form the basis of further actions. Previous speakers had urged that they
should either pass no s.c. which would have the effect of making a
472

450 B.C.

3-40.

"

praeiudicium that the Decemvirs were not valid and did not possess the
authority to convene a meeting of the Senate, or that they should pass
a s.c. ad prodendum interregem which, as was pointed out, would be the
equivalent of a praeiudicium that the Decemvirs were valid, since if
the s.c. was valid then a fortiori the magistrates who had convened the
session were valid ('magistratus esse qui senatum haberent iudicabant'). Cornelius' argument could be either positive (it was right
that there should be no praeiudicium) or negative (it was not right that
there should be a/?.). Since neminem must be wrong, as it has nothing
to govern or agree with, editors have mainly adopted the former
approach: ceterum nemini non . . . auferri (Rhenanus); nonne enim . . .
auferri (Walters, Bayet). But auferri cannot be used to mean 'be
forestalled, prevented, postponed'. It means 'be removed, stolen'.
Hence etenim . . . haud fieri (Madvig); omnino . , . haud fieri (Seyffert);
differri (Sigonius). But it is far easier to accept the correction fieri for
auferri and adopt negative argument, praeiudiciumfieriis the t.L (5. n .
10; 25 examples in Vocabularium Iurisprudentiae Romanae, s.v. facio,
col. 753). It is crucial to note that M read nemini se not neminem. In
deciding what the archetype read there is a free choice between the
two variants. Accepting M's text I postulate a lacuna for which,
exempli gratia, I would propose nemini (videri pos)se. 'Further, no one
could think it right that when men's minds were preoccupied with
greater anxieties a matter of such importance should be prejudged.'
For praeiudicia in Roman law see Pissard, Les Questions prejudicielles au
droit romain (1907); Beseler, Rev. d'Hist. du Droit 10 (1930), 170; Siber,
Festschrift Wenger, 1 (1944), 46.
40. 12. et iam nunc: continues Cornelius' motion, se = Ap. Claudius.
'That Ap. Claudius should at once prepare himself to explain in
reference to the election which he had held for the appointment of
Decemvirsbeing one himselfwhether they were chosen for one year
or until the missing laws be enacted.' Conway accepts decemvirum (M)
as a genitive plural with unus understood: but decemvir (XTT) has equal
authority and should be read here and at 9. 34. 1, since there is no
parallel for the ellipse in Gudeman's article in the Thes. Ling. Lat.
40. 14. praeverti: 'the levy should take priority over everything else'.
4 1 . 1 . coorti: M adds 'Valerius Horatiusque contra sententiam Maluginensis' which is shown to be a marginal gloss by contra where L.
would use in (2. 17. 2, 43. 4, 56. 14, 4. 3. 3). It was intended as a
chapter heading. It formed part of the commentary written, in late
antiquity, on L., for which see L. Voit, Philologus 91 (1936), 308 ff.;
G. Billanovich, Italia Med. e Uman. 2 (1959), 110-11.
de re publica: 39. 2 n.
imaginariis: the sole occurrence of the word in L. is also its first
473

450 B.C.
3- 4*. i
appearance in Latin. It is generally taken to mean 'fictitious' or
4
putative' in the general sense, found later e.g. in Seneca, Dial. 2. 3. 3,
that the fasces were not real. T h e origin of such a striking word does,
however, call for investigation. As a study of Berger's article 'imaginarius' in R.E. shows, it was employed commonly in the late jurists as
a t.t. for the crime of 'false pretences'imaginaria venditio, emptio, &c.
(Gaius, Inst. 1. 119; Ulpian, Dig. 40. 1. 4. 2, 7). Rather than believe
that L. coined the word, we may suppose that the legal
use was the primitive use which was subsequently extended to
bear a general meaning, and that Valerius is deliberately calling
attention to the illegality of the Decemvirs' conduct. They are privati.
To appear with lictors is to be guilty of false pretences. Cf. the legal
arguments about praeiudicia earlier. (P.J. Pearse (P.C.P.S. 85 (1910), 6)
had already seen the difficulty in the conventional interpretation of
imag. but the connexion which he proposes with imagines seems far
fetched (cf. Juvenal 8. 227; Polybius 6. 53).)
4 1 . 3 . non erit melius: melius erit with the infinitive belongs to the
language of official orders. So also at 48. 3, 5. 30. 6. T h e force of the
expression can be seen, for example, in Ulpian, Dig. 42. 1. 15. 7. For
the Greek aptivov see Bond's commentary on Euripides, Hypsipyle,
P . 85.
lictorem accedere: 2. 55. 4-7 nn.
4 1 . 4. Quiritium: 2. 23. 8 n.
a curiae limine: Volkmer compares the incident of 59 B.C. when
Cato was imprisoned for obstructionism (Suetonius, Julius 20) but
the comparison is misleading. Valerius was not in fact arrested.
complexus: literally as a suppliant (2. 40. 10; Caesar, B.G. 1. 20. 1).
non cui: N read the dittography non quid cui but cui is certain.
Cornelius pretended to be supporting Valerius while he was really
forwarding the interests of Claudius by preventing the wrangle ending
with a public trial of strength.
diremit: 7. 14. 5, 33. 39. 1, 39. 22. 9. dimittit, a variant in M, is not
so used.
4 1 . 7. praeesse exercitibus: it is natural to expect that the two clauses
describe two alternatives. T h e Decemvirs had to decide which of their
number were to stay and which to go. Yet, as they stand, the clauses
supplement one another, since, a fortiori, those who were to command
the armies were to go to the war. (The anaphora excludes the other
possibility that the first quos = 'which of the legions', and the second
= 'which of the Decemvirs'.) Strothius, who first drew attention to
the difficulty, conjectured rebus civilibus which Bayet improved to
urbanis rebus. A simpler correction would be urbi, if the corruption
sprang from the contracted ex'citib. But it is conceivable that exercitibus
is right. L. is hurrying ahead to the story of Verginia and often at the
474

450 B.C.

3- 41- 7

tail-end of a duller passage he admits quite irrational carelessnesses

(2. 43. 5 n., 44. 6 n.). (oporteret shows Cobet's comparant to be mistaken.)
4 1 . 8. minus . . . ingenium esse: Fabius was regarded as unsuitable to
manage the ticklish situation at Rome which called for Appius'
ruthlessness, because his education in tyranny had not yet converted
him into an old lag (navum in malitia). So far it had simply induced
him to depart occasionally from the straight and narrow (minus in
bono constans). Cf. 2. 40. 8 n.
4 1 . 9. suisimilis: 36. 1 n.
M\ Rabuleio: for the names see 35. u nn.
42. 2. ductu atque auspicio: 1. 4 n.
42. 3. Fidenas Cms turner iamque: 1. 14. 4-15 n., 9. 9 n.
42. 4. certamini: certamine N, defended by Conway who quotes 5. 18. 8
nee . . . aequo loco hosti commisit where, however, a dative is supplied to
specify what Titinius did not commit himself to. T h e dative is, there
fore, demanded here (cf. 4. 59. 2, 31. 22. 7), as in Val. Max. 1. 1. 2
Martio certamini commissurus; Amm. Marc. 29. 5. 29.
natura . . . armis: L. employs the usual military cliches (cf., e.g.,
Caesar, E.G. 7. 50. 1) but, unlike Caesar, is interested in the psychology
(dedecus, flagitium) not the details of battles.
42. 6. arma ferre: ferre arma Ver. A standard expression always in the
order a. f. posse (1. 44. 2, 3. 4. 10, 5. 39. 13; Caesar, B.G. 1. 29, 2. 28,
4. 19, 7. 71, 7. 75, 8. 7; Bell. Afr. 36). Notice the string of infinitives
suggesting the atmosphere of haste in which the measures were
adopted. T h e responsibility of the Senate for conducting wars, implied
in the present passage, may owe something to the historical disputes
of the late second century when its competence was called into ques
tion by the Quaestio Mamilia and by Memmius.
42. 7. arma Tusculum ac supplementum: ad nX. L. writes in not ad supplementum = 'as a reinforcement'; cf. 28. 37. 4, 29. 13. 8 and decerno ad
'to vote something for' only with helium (65. 6, 7. 17. 7) or ludos
(36. 36. 1, 40. 52. 1). T h e sense therefore must be that the Senate
voted that arms and reinforcements be sent to Tusculum, arms because
they had lost everything at Algidus and reinforcements because there
had been considerable casualties. Cf. 25. 5. 5 novae urbanae legiones et
supplementum veteribus; 42. 10. 12.
L. Siccius Dentatus
T h e story of L. Siccius, the R o m a n Achilles, like the legend of Coriolanus, is one of those timeless episodes which have no proper place
in the annals. There is no trace of Siccius in the Fasti and, therefore,
no firm date from which to anchor his exploits. H e was remembered
475

3-43

450 B.C.

as a warrior of incredible prowess and endurance. His first appearance

in the pages of history belongs only to the time of the Punic Wars.
M . Sergius Silus, the ancestor of Catiline, was a hero of no less super
human proportions. T h e two were evidently bracketed as a pair
(Pliny, N.H. 7. 104; hence the confusion L. Sergio Dentato in Festus
208 L.), the legendary and the contemporary champions. T h e his
torians who first inserted Siccius into the narrative of Roman history
can have had little to go on. T h e primitive legend may have con
nected Romulius Denter and Siccius Dentatus and late historians
have rationalized that connexion by associating Siccius with T .
Romilius who was consul in 453 and was also one of the Decemvirs.
L. minimizes his importance. H e excludes the events of 455 (30-32 n.)
although mentiones ad volgus militum serentem suggests that he was aware
of them. T o turn the spotlight on him would be to destroy the propor
tion of his account of the Decemvirate. So he confines himself to the
bare essentials which he could not in decency omit, but in passing he
cannot forbear to bring out the modern parallel. Siccius and Sergius
were so familiar a pair to R o m a n minds that the manner in which
Sergius' descendant, Catiline, met his end was appropriately recalled
by verbal associations in the death of Siccius.
T h e story enjoyed great popularity in later R o m a n writing. It was
taken up by Varro, from whom the authors of the Exempla derived it
(cf., e.g., Aul. Cell. 2. n . 1 ; Val. Max. 3. 2. 24). For further details
see Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen> 1. log n. 88; Pais, Ancient Legends,
183; Munzer, R.E., 'Siccius (3)'; A. Klotz, Klio 33 (1940), 173-9,
whose views on the ultimate source of Livy and Varro should be
treated with caution. There is no external or internal evidence for
believing that L. has abandoned Valerius Antias. D.H. 11. 25-27 is
prolix and exaggerated.
4 3 . 6. in medio iacentem: cf. Sallust, Cat, 60. 7. T h e description of
Catiline's end has also influenced L.'s treatment of Decius Mus the
elder (8. 10. 10) and the younger (10. 29. 19). See Skard 32-33.
43. 7. erant castra: this, the word-order of Ver., seems preferable to
castra erant because the contrast between the camp and the city is more
effectively brought out by the chiasmus.
44-49. Verginia
'Ah, woe for young Verginia, the sweetest maid in Rome.' Over
characters as diverse as J o h n Webster and Macaulay, Alfieri and Lessing, the story of Verginia has exercised a curious fascination. T h a t
fascination is in large measure due to the skill and poignancy with
which L. has constructed what is one of the noblest episodes in his
narrative. Verginia was for him a supreme example of the virtue
476

450 B.C.

3- 44-49

ofpudicitia, a supreme condemnation of libido. T h e moral lesson might

be conventional but the telling of it was enhanced by all the art
which L. could bring to bear.
Yet for all its beauty the story of Verginia is entirely devoid of
historical foundation. It reaches its fullest maturity in the pages of L.
but we can trace the stages of its growth back to the nakedness of its
beginning. T h e legal issues which dominate L.'s narrative were only
introduced into the story after the Gracchan period. They are present
for the first time in Pomponius (Dig. i. 2. 2. 24) and betray the same
desire as was seen in the case of P. Sextius (33. 9-10), to illustrate the
Twelve Tables by paradigms and thereby provide circumstantial de
tails for the narrative. In the same period Verginia becomes a plebeian
(eV TOV 7T\rj0ov$)9 whereas in the earlier strata she was a patrician.
The change discloses the hand of historians anxious to squeeze
political interest out of the episode. Before the Gracchan age the story
was simple (Cicero, Rep. 2. 6 3 ; Diodorus 12. 24). A father kills his
daughter rather than allow her to be the object of a tyrant's lust.
And it was anonymous; the participants are unnamed (napOevos,
Koprjy ol xa/tueWaToi). T h a t fact allows us to hazard that the very
name Verginia was simply a hypostatization of virgo and that the
identity of her father as Verginius and the names of the remaining
characters were all gradual embellishments.
In its primitive form, then, the story is of a familiar, recurring kind.
It is the story of Lucretia, the story of the Maid of Ardea (4. 9. 4).
It begins as a legend associated with a shrine, in the case of Verginia
the shrine of Venus Cloacina (48. 5 n.). If any of them have an historical
basis, it is Lucretia and it is easy to see how her example could be
duplicated. It was known that the Decemvirate, although a concession
to popular pressure, had not sufficiently satisfied that pressure. By
codifying the law they had brought out into the open and canonized
some of the most unpopular disabilities, such as conubium, from which
the plebs suffered. In face of continued agitation the Decemvirs gave
place to more radical legislators in the persons of Valerius and
Horatius. But that sequence of events, which seems easily compre
hensible to modern judgement, was improved on by the ancients who
inserted the tyrannous second Decemvirate to supply a sharper
motive for the change. If Appius was a tyrant, then Valerius and
Horatius 'restored' liberty. As the first tyranny had fallen on account
of a woman, so must the tyranny of Appius fall. Beyond that there is
no need to go. Certainly there are no good grounds for supposing
that the fall of the Second Decemvirate was really a garbled recollec
tion of the expulsion of the Etruscan kings, since contact with Etruria
seems to break offarchaeologically e. 450, and hence that the story of
Verginia was the original from which Lucretia was fabricated when
477

3- 44-49

450 B.C.

the early history of the Republic was 'invented 5 . T h e archaeological

break is, rather, to be explained both by the recession of Etruria
after the Battle of Gumae and by the self-sufficient austerity of the
Romans who were beginning to become alive to their own national
independence. T h e same phenomenon can be seen in the mounting
agitation of the plebs.
L.'s sources presented the story as a paradigm of the causa liberalis
as defined in the Twelve Tables. L. preserved the legal fustian but
betrays his ignorance of the procedure of the law, which matches his
ignorance of senatorial procedure, by confusions (44. 5 n., 44. 12 n.,
46. 7 n., 47. 5 n.). For him it is not the law that matters but the
drama. A comparison with D.H. shows how L. has constructed his
account as two distinct scenes, the scene at Appius' tribunal (44-46)
and the scene on the following day in the Forum (47-49)- H e has
eliminated all the subsidiary details which appear in D.H. such as
the detailed account of how Icilius and Numitorius accomplished
their journey from Rome to the camp, and the events which trans
pired in the intervening night between the two scenes. In this way L.
preserves the unity of action. In the treatment of the actual scenes L.
has his eye on the dramatic. Where D.H. transcribes an exact account
of the trial with the speeches, L. deliberately eschews such rhetorical
fantasies (47. 5 n.) and concentrates instead on the suspense and excite
ment. Primo stupor omnes . . . defixit; silentium inde aliquamdiu tenuit. It is
significant, too, that in the speech which he gives to Icilius the theme
is the evils of libido and not, as in D.H. 11. 31-34 and presumably in
their sources, of tyranny. T h e whole plot builds up to the climax of
Verginius' words in 48. 5, stark and effective. There is as well, perhaps,
a further interest in L.'s account. Verginia is an exemplum pudicitiae,
but the words which sound the refrain are in libertatem vindicare.
L. repeats them constantly even at the expense of legal exactitude
(44. 12, 45. 11, 46. 7, 46. 8, 48. 5). T h e emphasis on liberty is conscious
because the hazards and dangers attending liberty, which formed
the framework of Book 2, remain as a persistent thread through the
later books. No sooner has regnum given way to libertas than libertas
is menaced by personal ambition, party faction, foreign invasion.
Liberty must always be safeguarded. Did not Augustus stamp the
challenging title LIBERTATIS P . R. VINDEX (cf. 56. 6) on a coin of
28 B.C. {B.M.C. I m p . Aug. 691, from Bithynia) ? T h e story of Verginia
had a message for L.'s generation.
O n the historical issues see Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 1. 299;
Ed. Meyer, Rh. Mus. 37 (1882), 618; E. Kornemann, Rom. Geschichte,
1. 9 5 ; Pais, Ancient Legends, 185-203; Taubler, Untersuchungen, 14 ff;
Beloch, Rom. Geschichte, 246; H . S.Jones, C.A.H., 7. 471 ; A. Kurfess,
Mnemosyne 6 (1938), 272; H. Gundel, R.E., 'Verginia'; on the legal
478

450 B.C.

3- 44-49

issues see M . G. Nicolau, Causa Liberalise 99 If.; P. Noailles, Fas et

Ius, 187-221 (the earlier works by Schmidt, Puntschart, Maschke,
Ubbelohde, and Taubenschlag are no longer of value); J . C. van
Oven, Rev. d'Hist. du Droit 18 (1950), 159-90. For L.'s treatment of
the story see Soltau 110; Appleton, Rev. Hist. Droit 3 (1924), 592 fT.;
Hellmann, Livius-Interpretationen^ 4 8 ; Burck 36 ff.; Klotz 2 6 7 - 8 ;
Bayet, tome 3, 133-45.
44. 2. plebeiae: according to Diodorus 12. 24. 2 evyevovs irapdivov
irevixpas. T h e Verginii were predominantly patrician (but see 11. 9 n.)
and therefore Diodorus is likely to have preserved the earliest tradition.
L. Verginius: the father is not named in Diodorus. In Cicero, de Rep.
2. 63, he is called D. Verginius, possibly a textual error or perhaps
an older version before the legend became fixed, since Pomponius
(Dig. 1. 2. 2. 24) merely calls him Verginius quidam, implying that the
praenomen was not common knowledge. Nothing is to be argued, how
ever, from Cicero's omission of the name in the pro Cornelio of 65 B.C.,
for Asconius (77. 15 Clark) explicitly comments: scilicet quodnotissimum
est . . . patrem virginis L. Verginium.
44. 3. liberique: Verginia was an only child. T h e use of the plural liberi
is said by Aulus Gellius to be archaic (2. 13. 1), citing a quotation of
Sempronius Asellio in support. Wackernagel (Vorlesungen, 1. 95) claims
that it is a mere accident of language that Latin did not have a word
for a child as opposed to a son or a daughter (see also Lofstedt, Syn
tactical 1. 39) but the fact remains that the use is designed to play
upon the emotions and evoke sympathy. T h e charge that she was
supposititious may be based on the memory of a custom whereby
children were smuggled in to maintain the continuity of a family
(cf. I.L.S. 7998).
desponderat: technically only the father betrothed, although courtesy
and convention would lead him to take his wife's opinion (38. 57. 6).
T h e plural desponderant (Ver.) cannot be defended, even in the light
of Donatus' note on Terence, Andria 102 despondi proprie non desponsa
dicitur quia spondet puellae pater, despondet adulescentis. For similar intru
sive rt's cf. 3. 11. 13, 12. 7, 12. 8, 35. 2, 38, 4, 44. 12 (postumlant),
62. 4, 67. 6, 68. 7, 68. 8.
L. Icilio: 31. 1 n., 32. 7.
rdens
44. 4. amore amens: 47. 4 n. N had the dittography amens.
animadverterat: for postquam with pluperfect cf. 26. 4, 23. 27. 3,
25. 23. 8, 33. 7. 9. Ver.'s animadvertit, accepted by J u n g , is the result of
assimilation to convertit. Cf. 5. 39. 12.
44. 5. clienti: M . Claudius, presumably a freedman or the descendant
of one. L. gives no account of the origin or character of clientela, an
old Italic institution, but accepts it throughout his history as a familiar
phenomenon of R o m a n society. The client has been well described as
479

3-44-5

450 B.C.

an inferior entrusted, by custom or by himself, to the protection of

a stranger more powerful than he and rendering certain services and
observances in return for this protection' (Badian, Foreign Clientele i).
He was in fide alicuius. The degree of the relationship varied with the
different methods by which the inferior passed infidem. The two that
are relevant to the early books of L. are manumission, where the
patron retained a high degree of coercive power over his former slave,
and application in which a free citizen applied to a prospective patron
for protection (cf. Terence, Andr. 924 ff.; Eun. 1039 ff.) but which
conferred no legal potestas on the patron. The status of client and
patron was inherited from generation to generation, so that M.
Claudius could be the descendant of one of the Claudian clientes
mentioned in 2. 16. 4. In general the responsibilities of the patron
were to protect his client's interests at law (Horace, EpisU 2. 1. 104)
and to safeguard his livelihood. They were real responsibilities (Aul.
Gell. 5. 13; Virgil, Aeneid 6. 609) and the Twelve Tables stipulated
the ultimate penalty for dereliction (8. 21 patronus si clienti fraudem
fecerit saceresto). The client's duties, listed by D.H. 2. 9, were various.
He was expected to follow his patron to war (2. 49. 5 n.; cf. Scipio
Aemilianus in 134 (Appian, Hisp. 84): in the late Republic Q .
Metellus, M. Crassus, and, above all, Pompey raised armies from their
clients outside Rome), to come to his aid in financial straits (5. 32. 8;
38. 60. 9), and to support him in political campaigns (2. 56. 3, 64. 2 :
both passages with their implicit and false assumption that plebeians
could not have clients are highly tendentious and reflect the ideo
logical struggles of a quite different age when a radical democrat
would resent the powerful blocs based on clientela by the great dynastic
politicians). L. preserves nothing of value about the primitive clientela.
Instead he gives a picture of it at work as it must have been in the
first century B.C. See Premerstein, R.E., 'clientes'.
libertatempostulantibus: Ver.'spetentibus is an instance of its trivializing
tendency. Cf. also 3. 6. 6 n., 61. 13 n. For the legal questions see below.
ratus: Mommsen, following Ver.'s omission of ratus, would punctuate
vindicias: quod . . . esse. In that case quod . . . esse is part of what Appius
told his client M. Claudius, expressed in or. ob., rather that what
Appius thought, ratus would seem to be wrongly interpolated at
5. 39. 7 (n.) but that is no argument for the present passage where it
is more in keeping with L.'s methods that Appius' psychology rather
than his instruction should be analysed: ad crudelem superbamque vim
animum convertit. Ver. may have been misled by the apparent finality
of locum iniuriae esse into omitting ratus.
44. 6. ludi: for tabernaculis see 48. 5 n. The ludi are anachronistic,
perhaps inserted into the story to account for the association of Verginia with that quarter of Rome. The first school at Rome was opened
480

450 B.C.

3- 44- 6

by a freedman of Sp. Garvilius, consul in 234 (Plutarch, QjR. 5 9 ;

cf. Aul. Gell. 4. 3. 2 ; 17. 2 1 . 44). Before that all Roman children, a
fortiori girls, were educated at home (Pliny, Epist. 8. 14. 6 ; Plutarch,
Cato maior 20). Ludi are frequendy mentioned in Plautus (e.g. Batch.
420 ff.) so that they must have become fashionable quickly. See
Gwynn, Roman Education, 28-30. There may be some connexion
(? contemporary propaganda) between this detail of the story and
the Edict of the Censors of 92 B.C. against the Latin rhetoricians
(text in Suetonius, de Rhet. 2 5 ; discussion by Bloch, Klio 3 (190*3),
68-73). See also Marrou, History of Education, 250 ff.
The 'in ius vocatio'
T h e first move in a legal proceeding was for the plaintiff to invite
the defendant to come with him to the praetor. If the defendant de
clined, the plaintiff appealed for witnesses. T h e procedure is laid
down by the first clause of the Twelve Tables (si IN IUS VOCAT, NI IT,
ANTESTAMINO) a n d illustrated by Plautus (e.g. Pers. 745 ff.). Here it is
implied by the words se sequi iubebat, although, stricdy speaking, L.
reverses the order of events.
The 'manus iniectio'
If the defendant continued to decline to accompany the plaintiff,
the latter laid his hand on him as a symbolic gesture before witnesses
that he summoned the defendant before the judge. This step is also
laid down by the Twelve Tables (si CALVITUR PEDEMVE STRUIT MANUM

ENDO IACITO) and illustrated by Plautus (e.g. True. 762). T h e manus

iniectio was a stage in a legal action, not an act of violence. L. has either
misunderstood or distorted the legal meaning of manum . . . iniecit by
glossing it by vis (vi abstracturum, iam a vi tuta erai). Hence the double
entendre oise iure grassari non vi.
serva . . . appellans: 1. 40. 3 n.
(se) sequi iubebat: sequi Ver. esse sequique se N. N's text will construe
if esse is taken with appellans, but the simple sequi in Ver. suggests that
N has reproduced a dittography of a familiar type "?". se is required
(cf. 42. 43. 6 se sequi iusserunt) and it is easy to see how if it was lost
before sequi by haplography the divergent texts of Ver. and N would
have resulted. Place a semicolon after appellans.
44. 7. Quiritium: 2. 23. 8 n.
celebrabatur: the imperfect, offered by N , is preferable to the (historic)
present (celebratur) or the perfect (celebratum sc. est: Ver.) since the
action is continuous a n d maintained. For other telescoped "words in
Ver. cf. 8. 5 n. a n d 44. 8 n. below.
' r K
44. 8. multitudine concitata: echoed in 46. 1 and 49. 1; Ver. h a d
:
concita.
814432

48 [

II

3- 44- 9

450 B.C.

44. 9. vocat puellam in ius, auctoribus qui aderant ut sequeretur: I accept

the punctuation and interpretation given by P. Noailles, which is also
that of editions before Doujat. The whole sentence reiterates the
procedure of in ius vocatio and manus iniectio. Claudius invites the girl
to come with him to the praetor. When she declines he invokes the
crowd as witnesses to the invitation conveyed by the manus iniectio
and to testify that she should follow him to the tribunal. (Recent
editors take auctoribus. . . sequerentur (plural, as read by N ; i.e. the
girl and her nurse) with perventum: 'they were advised by their sup
porters to follow him and they went before the tribunal'. The punctua
tion obscures the legal point. The plural makes nonsense of 44. 6 where
it is only the girl who is invited to follow.)
tribunal: a movable wooden platform from which the praetor
administered justice. Originally it stood in the comitium (27. 50. 9)
but was moved, probably in the second century, farther east near
the Puteal Libonis (Horace, Epist. 1. 19. 8 and Porphyrio's note)
and the Basilica Aemilia. L.'s topographical information is too
scanty to allow us to conjecture which site he had in mind or whether
Augustus' large reconstruction had yet occurred. See Platner-Ashby
s.v.; H. D. Johnson, The Roman Tribunal (Johns Hopkins University
Diss., 1927); C. Gioffredi, Studia et Documenta Hist, et Juris 9 (1943),
227 ff.; J. Paoli, Melanges de Visscher, 4 (1950), 302 n. 54.
The 'vindicatio in servitutem'
When the two contestants come before the praetor the formal pro
cedure is enacted {legis actio per sacramentum in rem). The procedure is
basically the same whatever the nature of the case, whether it be a
question of status as here {causa liberalis) or of ownership. The plaintiff
makes his assertion, and the defendant makes a counter-assertion.
This first hearing or confrontation between the parties is held before
the praetor as magistrate who decides on the legal propriety of the
case (in iure). The whole procedure is then re-enacted before a index,
who may be the same person as the praetor or may be a body of
jurors, to decide on the facts of the matter (in iudicio). On the first
hearing (in iure) of a causa liberalis, the praetor was guided by rule to
pronounce vindiciae sunt secundum libertatem: that is to say, he held for
the man who was claiming to be free, since if he pronounced for the
other side, they could, in the interval between the hearing in iure and
in iudicio, gain possession of the man and make away with him. The
bias is analogous to the English presumption of innocence. The
procedure is not detailed in the surviving fragments of the Twelve
Tables but can be recovered from the later jurists. Gf. Ulpian, Dig.
6. 1. 1 . 2 ; Gaius, Inst. 1. 134. The adsertor servitutis affirms 'meum esse
aio\
482

450 B.C.

3- 44- *

The ' vindicatio in libertaterrf

With one vital exception it was open to any qualified citizen to
make the counter-claim that the defendant was a free m a n . T h e
Twelve Tables stated ADSIDUO VINDEX ADSIDUUS ESTO : PROLETARIO
QUIS VOLET VINDEX ESTO. T h e sole exception is in the case of defendants

who are not sui iuris, where only the paterfamilias was competent to make
the counter-claim ""filium meum esse aio\ Since Verginia was a minor
and not sui iuris, her supporters could not make a claim on her behalf
and so her case went by default. Legally there was no vindicatio in
libertatem because there was no one present competent to make it.
44. 12. rem integram . . . vindicias: L. has confused the issue. Since
there could be no vindicatio in libertatem in the absence of the father,
it is nonsense to request Appius to pronounce vindicias secundum liber
tatem. All they could do was to appeal to his sense of fairness and hope
that he would postpone making any pronouncement until the father
arrived and made his contra vindicatio, whereon Appius would be com
pelled to pronounce in Verginia's favour.
vindicias det: cf. Pomponius, Dig. i. 2. 2. 24.
The 'addictio'
T h e defence has gone by default. It is now for the praetor to
pronounce his judgment which can only be that the adsertor servitutis
is free to remove his property and that in so doing he will be acting
legally. This authorization would take the form of a decree, if we m a y
believe the definition vocantur decreta cum fieri aliquid iubet {praetor). In
making the decree the praetor concludes the proceedings. It is, there
fore, fantastic that L. should suggest that the authorization was only
provisional and temporary until the arrival of the father (45. 3
placere patrem arcessiri). T h e very idea, which is itself contradicted in
45. 5 (n.), betrays L.'s failure to grasp the legal position. W h a t did
happen was that Appius was forced under pressure to withhold his
judgement until the following day.
45. 2. personis: the t.t,
qui: masc. as always in general legal statements which involve men
and women.
in iis . . . cedat: 'in the case of those who were claimed as free, since
anyone was entitled to bring an action, their request was legal: in
the case of one who was under the authority of her father, there was
no one to whom the master should yield ownership'. T h e second
sentence makes the exception to the general rule that anyone can
bring an action in a causa liberalis. W e might expect this to be made
clearer by in aliis (Karsten) for in iis but the language is legalistic.
(Ver. reads adsignare under the influence ofadserantur at the beginning
483

3- 45- 2

450 B.C.

of the sentence, lege agere is the t.t.; adsignare is meaningless in the

context. For other instances of a similar corruption cf. 5. 23. 12,
49- 9, 5 1 - 3-)
45. 3 . adsertorem: the noun is first found here but is presumably
much older, adserere (commonly with manu) is the t.t. already in
Plautus.
45. 4. P. Numitorius . . . avus: 54. 11 n. For the family see 2. 58. 2 n.
Nothing else is known of him or his son (46. 5) other than his election
to the fictitious college of tribunes in 449 (54. 11). His association
with Icilius suggests that he is a duplication of the tribune of 471.
See Miinzer, R.E., 'Numitorius (3)'.
45. 5. decresse: the lictor declares that the proceedings are over and
that Appius has given his judgment. In fact Appius is forced to re
tract so far as to withhold giving judgment that day.
45. 6. placidum . . . ingenium: so Adherbal in Sallust {Jug. 20. 2).
The Speech of Icilius
L. has elaborated material taken over from his source. According to
D.H. ( n . 31. 4-5), Icilius exclaimed simply that Appius would re
move Verginia over his dead body and incited him to take a sword
to his neck to see whether ^eydXojv /ca/ctDv apfet 'Paj/xat'ot? 6 ddvaros
ovfjids rj fjbtydAajv dyadu)v. In L. this has become an emotional defiance
tricked out with all the colours of contemporary rhetoric and illus
trated with commonplaces which can be paralleled from Cicero.
taciturn/eras: 1. 50. 9 n.
45. 7. expediri: 2. 55. 5 n.
45. 8. arces: 37. 5 n. Cf. Cicero, pro Cluentio 156 in arce legis praesidia
constituere.
regnum: cf. pro Quinctio 94; for regnum in cf. Propertius 3. 10. 18;
Horace, Odes 4. 4. 2.
45. 9. saevite: cf. D.H. 11. 31. 4.
pudicitia: cf. Verr. 1. 68.
implorabimus: cf. pro Quinctio 94; pro S. Roscio 29; Verr. 1. 25. There
is a certain unbalance between the three appeals. T h e first two state
both the appellant (ego, Verginius) and the object of appeal (pro sponsa,
pro unicafilia), the third limb of the tricolon contains only the appel
lant (omnes) and not the object. Hence Boot with some reason proposed
inserting pro ingenua before implorabimus.
45. 10. consideres: cf. Cicero, Verr. 5. 174 moneo videos etiam atque etiam
et consideres quid agas, quo progrediare.
45. 1 1 . sciat sibi: condicionem quaerere means 'to make a match' as in
the Laudatio Turiac (= C.I.L. 6. 1527; cf. Suetonius Aug. 69; Marcian.
Dig. 23. 2. 19).
Since Verginia is betrothed to Icilius, it is right to say that Ver484

450 B.C.

3-45-

"

ginius has made a match for her with him. Icilius threatens that if
Verginius on his return meekly accepts Appius' decision then he will
have to find another husband for her since he (Icilius) will have
nothing to do with her. (The point is purely rhetorical because, if
Verginia is judged to be a slave, Verginius would no longer be in any
position to make any match for her.) The question therefore is not
that Verginius will have to make a match but that he will have to
make another match. We must insert aliam with Doring, comparing
Cicero, Phil. 2. ggfiliameius . . . aliacondicionequaesita. Palaeographically
sciat (aliam) sibi is easier and linguistically more forceful than filiae
(aliam) (Doring) or cesserit (aliam) (Boot).
vindicantem: Icilius is neither competent nor prompt enough to
enter a vindicatio (see above). The whole sentiment is mere rhetoric.
The double cretic clausula [deseret quam fides) is noteworthy.
46. 2. spirantem: governing tribunatum, 'still making plans for the tri
bunate'. Despite the evidence collected by Heraeus for a genitive
dependent on a noun (Vindiciae Livianae 2, Progr. Offenbach, 1892,
n ; cf. Lofstedt, Syntactica, 1. 215: cf. 6. 27. 9; 22. 25. 10), there re
mains no parallel for quaerere locum and the gen. We should follow
Gronovius and read seditioni; cf. 50. 14.
46. 3 . patrio: 'the name of "father"'. For this use of patrius cf.
Propertius 2. 7. 20 and Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana, 282.
ius . . . dicturum: in the praetor's formula do, dico, addico.
46. 7. sponsoresque daret: since Verginia was not technically a de
fendant Appius cannot be demanding that she give surety to appear
on the following day (Gaius, Inst. 4. 184). Instead, he must be exacting
from Icilius and Numitorius a guarantee (stipulatio) that they will
produce her on the following day. L. uses exceedingly loose, untechnical, and misleading language when he writes: ita vindicatur Verginia
spondentibuspropinquis. There is no connexion with the Greek c'yytfyox?.
46. 8. crastina die: 2. 49. 2 n. Read crastino.
The Speech of Verginius
Delivered in the pathetic vein.
47. 2. circumire: 1. 47. 7 n.
in acie stare: 23. 16. 10, 37. 53. 19, 44. 36. 13; cf. Bell. Hisp. 28. 1;
Cicero, Phil. 11. 24. The standard phrase.
strenue ac fortiter: even Bayet keeps the manuscripts' ferociter, but
strenuus etfortis is the conventional Latin way of describing a soldier of
exemplary record (4. 3. 16 n.), and to introduce ferocitas is to strike
an entirely false note. It would not be calculated to arouse sympathy.
The case for fortiter (Doujat) is demonstrated by Wolfflin, Livian.
Kritik, 22.
485

450 B.C.

3- 47- 2

incolumi urbe: an old plea, used, for example, by Cicero, de Domo

98.

47. 4. amentiae. . . amoris: the play on words is old and proverbial;

cf. Plautus, Merc. 82; Terence, Andria 218; Apuleius, Apol. 84.
per ambitionem: ' that judgement had not been delivered in his favour
the day before through partiality'.
47. 5. forson \ a comment by L. himself, speaking propria persona, as is
betrayed by forsan. Common in the poets,1 the word is used in classical
prose only by the author of the Bellum Africum (45), by L. here and in
another aside at 10. 39. 14 (for the text of 23. 23. 3 see O.C.T. appara
tus), and by Columella (3. 9. 1).
Although Appius allegedly adjourned proceedings as an act of grace
to allow Verginius the opportunity of appearing and making a contra
vindicatio, he never expected him to arrive in time. When he did make
his appearance, Appius was forced to change his plan, since he was
obliged by the rule of proceedings in iure, if two vindications were
duly made, to pronounce in favour of Verginia (i.e. secundum libertatem)
pending the hearing in iudicio. To have done so would have been to
lose his hold over the girl. Therefore without even allowing Verginius
to make his claim, he substitutes a new judgement founded on a new
ground, namely that Verginia had been stolen (44. gfurto translatam)
and that Verginius was to be held as a thief caught in possession [fur
manifestus). On this basis he frames his decree and elaborates argu
ments in support of it which L. omits either because they were too
complicated for him or because he regarded them as distracting to
the reader but which are, however, reproduced in D.H. n . 36.
Provisions against theft were laid down in the Twelve Tables (8. 14-18)
and the new legal twist to Verginia's story was no doubt evolved to
illustrate them.
47. 6. silentium: such silences are psychologically arresting and also
serve to break the narrative in two sharply divided sections. Appius
appears to be on top. Suddenly the situation changes. For other
instances of this device cf. 32. 33. 1, 40. 8. 20, 12. 2 ; and see P. G.
Walsh, Rh. Mus. 97 (1954), 103-4; Dutoit, Melanges Marouzeau,
141-51. See also 1. 13. 4 n., 16. 2 n., 28. 8, 50. 8 n., 2. 2. 8 n.,
3- 5- 4> 56. 6 n., 4. 18. 6, 4. 48. 15 n.
47. 7. Icilio, inquit, Appi: the juxtaposition of names is abrupt.
ferarum ritu: the blind and impetuous intercourse of animals was
proverbial (4. 2. 6) and Verginius' blunt words are meant to shock.
Cf. Petronius, Eleg. 28 {Poet. LaU Min. XLIII. 101)
non ergo ut pecudes libidinosae
caeci protinus irruamus illuc.
1

Cf. Charisius, Gramm. 1. 185. 16. poetis relinquemus.

486

450 B.C.

3- 47- 7

isti: presumably the general crowd, as opposed to illos, that part

of it which was armed.
non spew: Verginius does not trouble even to conceal his threat.
48. 1. alienatus . . . animo: 25. 39. 4 for the abl.
48. 3 . erit melius: 41. 3 n. Appius is menacing and imperative.
<7), inquit: 1. 26. 7 n. T h e official command, as is da viam (cf.
Plautus, Cure. 280).
mancipium: 'his property, his slave'.
intonuisset: a very strong word, used only here by L. and only once
before in Latin prose (Cicero, pro Murena 8 1 ; cf. Statius, Theb. 2. 668).
It underlines the harsh arrogance with which Appius delivers his
orders. For a similar use of a striking word cf. 1. 50. 3 n. mussitantes.
The Death of Verginia
T h e scene was justly famous in antiquity as can be judged from
three echoes of it in Tacitus: 48. 4 = Hist. 3. 4. 1; 48. 7 = Annals
2
- 75- 15 49- 3 = Annals 2. 80. 4.
48. 5. prope Cloacinae: sc. templum, between the Basilica Aemilia and
the comitium, in reality not a temple but an open shrine as the remains
(Hiilsen, Mitt. Deutsch. Arch. Inst. 17 (1902), 4 4 ; 20 (1905), 62) and
the representation on a coin of L. Mussidius Longus, monetal of
43-42 B.C. (Sydenham no. 1093), reveal. It is called a sacrum by
Plautus (Cure. 471). T h e double name Venus Gloacina and the
antiquity of the cult, attributed to Tatius (Pliny, N.H. 15. 119),
suggest a fusion between Venus and a deity Gloacina. This is con
firmed by the cult-image which comprised two draped figures, the
left hand of which clasped a myrtle branch. T h e cult was associated
with the twin ideas of purification (Pliny, loc. cit. cluere enim antiqui
purgare dicebant; cf. 15. 120) and, perhaps, of concord ((myrtum) coniugulam, fortassis a coniugiis, ex illo Cluacinae genere), but it was Gloacina's
capacity as a purifier, above all from the taint implicit in stuprum (for
which see Noailles, Fas et Ius, 1-28), that made her shrine the natural
setting for Verginia's death. Indeed it would be true to say that the
myth of Verginia is the aetiological myth of the cult. A similar myth
explained the cult of Pudicitia Plebeia (10. 23. 411) and the two
may be related, or even duplicate. See Dressel, Wiener Studien 24
(1902), 418 ff.; Pais, Ancient Legends, 196-9; Basanoff, Rev. Hist.
Relig. 126 (1942), 7 ff.; R. Schilling, La Religion romaine de Venus,
210-15; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 186 n. 3.
ad tabernas: the original shops (9. 40. 16 argentariae) on the north
side of the Forum were burnt in 210 (26. 27. 2). Rebuilt at some date
before 192 (Festus 258 L.), they were called Novae and the area where
they stood came to be known as sub novis (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 59).
487

3- 4^. 5

450 B.C.

The reconstruction of the Basilica Aemilia in 78 and 55 B.G. (dedicated

in 34 by L. Aemilius Paulus, according to Dio Gassius 49. 42) must
have involved the removal of the shops. In writing nunc Novis est nomen
L. must either be reproducing a comment from his source or else be
loosely commenting on the survival of the name to designate the
area. Gf. 2. 33. 9, and see Platner-Ashby s.v., with references.
consecro: the singularity of the formula has passed unnoticed. Verginius was neither priest nor magistrate with sanction of official
ceremony to conduct a consecratio capitis (55. 7 n.). Yet L. means
evidently to convey something more potent than a curse. By writing
consecro he hints at magic, where a mere curse or exsecratio would be
dramatically too mild. There is nothing resembling it in the narratives
of D.H. We are forced to conclude that L. has invented a fine-sounding
formula for dramatic effect, perhaps influenced by the vengeance
scenes of Greek tragedy (e.g. Euripides, Electra 1142-6). This is borne
out by the balanced structure te tuumque caput \ sanguine hoc consecro;
cf. 1. 24. 4.
48. 8. cetera: typical of the triter side of L.'s moralizing; muliebris
dolor was proverbial (Cicero, pro Cluentio 13; pro Scauro 9), particularly
for its loquacity: cf. Euripides, Andr. 93-96.
49. 4. hinc atrox rixa oritur: the climax of the scene with its description
of a mob riot is sketched in fast-moving, staccato sentences, culminat
ing in the pithy videt imperium vi victum.
49. 5. pro imperio: cf. 48. 2. A negligence, since Valerius had no
imperium with which to challenge the validity of Appius' position.
He was not even a tribune.
49. 6. agitatus deinde consiliis atque: two difficulties arise from the
received reading of the manuscripts. (1) atque can only link agitatus
and assentiendo in which case a strong stop must be made after trepidaverat. So Luterbacher. (2) There exists no parallel in L. for agitatus
= exercitus 'harried by' whereas the active agitare consilium 'to act,
devise an opinion' or the passive consilium agitari are frequent (1. 48. 9,
4. 58. 12, 6. 2. 1, 18. 3, 28. 10. 5, 35. 15. 7; 4. 25. 7, 10. 21. 4.
22. 24. 2, 43. 7, 33. 31. 7). AsSigonius, followed by Gronovius, rightly
says, L, must have written agitatis. Many people offered advice to
Oppius, many views were aired. If agitatis is right, then atque links
nothing. Either a second verb to balance agitatis has dropped out,
e.g. iactatis, or else atque is corrupt and should be emended. Stroth's
ad quae is usually accepted (Madvig, Gonway, Bayet) but it cannot
go with adsentiendo which already governs auctoribus nor with trepidaverat, for trepidare ad in L. gains only modified support from 37.
30. 5. I would revive an old conjecture of Drakenborch's who pro
posed postquam. The corruption is easy (cf. Fiigner, Lexicon, 325) and
488

450 B.C.

3- 49- 6

the sense excellent. 'Many suggestions were voiced and after Oppius
had hesitated, as he agreed (in turn) with their numerous authors on
every side, he eventually gave orders for the Senate to be convened.'
5 0 - 5 4 . 5 . The Second Secession
The Second Secession is as credible as the First (2. 32-33). Whatever
duplications may have been made subsequently, the actual event is
secure. Its roots are too deep in the Roman tradition. Elaboration
can be detected to some extent by considering the site of the secession.
In the oldest accounts the plebs seceded to the plebeian hill, the
Aventine, on the second as on the first occasion (2. 32. 3). So Diodorus
12. 24 and Sallust, Jug. 31. 17; cf. 54. 9 n. But the whole position of
the tribunate was safeguarded by leges sacratae, whose origin it was
natural to connect with the Mons Sacer (Appian, B.C. 1. 1.2). Hence
second-century historians whom Polybius followed made both seces
sions take place on the two hills (cf. Cicero, de Rep. 2. 63). This was
a clumsy manoeuvre which later writers improved by allotting the
First Secession to the Mons Sacer, the Second to the Aventine
(7. 40. 11 (a Licinian passage); Pomponius, Dig. 1. 2. 2. 20, 24;
Festus 422 L.). The improved account became the standard version.
It is to be noted that whereas L. adopts it in the digression 54. 5-15
(54. 9 n.), in the main narrative he prefers the older and clumsier
story that they moved from the Aventine to the Mons Sacer (52. 1).
L.'s treatment is characterized by the frequency of debates, dis
cussions, and harangues. Besides three more extended speeches (50.
4-9 Verginius; 52. 6-9 Valerius and Horatius; 53. 6-1 o the emissaries),
there are numerous short remarks in direct and indirect speech
(5- r4> i5> l6 > 5 1 - 3~5> n> r 2 , 13* 5 2 - 4 53- 3~5> 54- i, 7) whose
overall effect is to convey the impression of bewilderment and con
cern. Rome is divided and perplexed, subjected to a confusion of con
tradictory advice. The issues are presented in the openthe conflict
of liberty and order, libido and pudicitia, minority rights and concordia,
justice and equity. They wait for Quinctius to gather up and resolve
them in his great speech (65-66).
See further Taubler 4 9 - 5 3 ; Burck 4 2 - 4 3 ; U. von Lubtow, Das
Romische Volk, 96-99.
50. 1. Vecilio: not otherwise mentioned. If sound (Algido Doujat),
it must be the name of one of the peaks or spurs of the Algidus range.
As a proper name Vecilius is tolerably common. It may be Etruscan in
origin, perhaps from Falerii (Schulze 561; Gundel, R.E., 'Vecilius').
If so, its application to Algidus looks like later elaboration.
50. 3. strictum . . . telum: two things, the knife and the bloodstained
figure, attract the attention of the camp. But there is nothing remark
able about a drawn knife as there would be about a drawn sword,
489

3- 50- 3

450 B.C.

because knives do not normally live in sheaths and Verginius had

in any case snatched it from the butcher's counter. There is much to
be said for Cobet's cruentum etiam telum, which makes a nice balance
with respersus ipse cruore. The corruption is simple. L. may, however,
have allowed the melodramatic to run away with him, as he conjures
up the picture of the bloodstained father with the weapon still in his
hand after a hard ride of at least 20 miles.
50. 4. silentium: 47. 6 n.
The Speech of Verginius
An emotional performance full of pathetic cliches, agreeing sub
stantially with the speech in D.H. 11. 40 and so being traditional.
Analogues to many of the commonplace phrases are forthcoming:
e.g. for comwilitones cf. 2. 55. 6 n.; for vitam . . . cariorem cf. Cicero, ad
Fam. 11. 20. 2; liberae . . . vivere cf. Cicero, Phil. 11. 24 liberine vivamus
an mortem obeamus thus confirming Rhenanus's interpretation of the
manuscript libere; for adstuprum rapi (26. 13. 15) cf. Sallust, Hist. 3. 98;
for effrenatiorem cf. Cicero, pro Cluentio 15.
50. 5. parricidam . . . aversarentur: echoed by Tacitus, Hist. 3. 25.
50. 7. nee se superstitem: se is only omitted by IT.
illis quoque enim: enimy also omitted by 77, is needed to make explicit
why Verginius thought that his fellow-soldiers would sympathize
(Gronovius). See C.Q.q (1959), 271.
50. 10. I would read et immixti. . . [cum] eadem . . . insecutique qui. . .
dicerent. 'Civilians mingled with the crowd, and by making the same
complaints and telling them how much more shameful the situation
would have seemed if they had seen it rather than merely heard it at
second hand, and at the same time by proclaiming that it was by now
virtually all over at Rome (they began to stir the army) and, others
following on who said that Appius had almost lost his life and had
gone into exile, they induced the troops to raise the cry "to arms".'
cum has nothing to govern unless it be dicerent which would require the
deletion of insecutosque [sic N ] , nor can cum . . . simul = simul. . . simul.
It seems easier to understand how cum could be inserted by dittography
(militum togati cum) than how it could be a corruption of simul (Zingerle). (There is, moreover, a superficial resemblance to 39. 5 (n.).)
It is also possible that insecutique was changed to insecutosque after cum
had been interpolated in order to allow, however speciously, cum to
govern dicerent and insecutos to be linked with prqfligatam, both being
taken as dependent on nuntiando. The prominent position of immixti
at the beginning of the sentence leads the reader to expect a further
participle and makes insecutique a more probable correction than insecutis (Alschefski).
videripotuerint for the potential visafuissent has caused difficulty but is
49

450 B.C.

3. 50. 10

affected by L. (cf., e.g., 36. 6,5. 4.2). Here it also serves to obviate the
ambiguous repetition of visa . . . visa fuisset, thus ensuring the first
visa (visu Freudenberg; cf. 6. 37. 1, 21. 32. 7) as well as potuerint
(debuerint Doring; oportuerit Madvig) against emendation.
50. 12. et leniter: et {-que) has an adversative force as also at 60. 3,
6.22.7,7.5.2.
50. 15. cepissent: 'occupied' not 'captured'; cf. Cicero, de Rep. 2. 26
50. 16. invidiae se qfferre: cf. Cicero, in Catil. 3. 28.
5 1 . 2. summae rei: awkwardly repeated at 51. 10, 11. See 1. 14. 4 n.
tribunos militum: 4. 7. 1 n.
appellari: appellate N. T h e switch from passive to active after placet
can be paralleled (cf., e.g., 28. 25. 9, 29. 4. 2, 44. 2. 2) but in all these
passages the subject of the action verb can easily be supplied (the
consul, the general, & c ) , whereas here it is difficult to see who is
to call them tribuni militum. T h e Senate ? T h e whole people ? There is
a clear case for the passive. Cf. 13. 8 n.
5 1 . 8. praerogativam: 5. 18. 1 n.
5 1 . 10. Before agmine there are preserved in Ver. the letters . . . enti.
Novak's suggestion that they are no more than an anticipation of
Aventi- which the scribe has failed to delete is impaired by the fact
that at least four and possibly five letters were written before enti.
Mommsen's ingenti agmine cannot be right, since the order is invariably
a.i.; cf. 6. 15. 2, 34. 10. 1; Augustine, Civ. Dei 5. 2 3 ; for the bare
agmine see Fugner, Lexicon, 779. See 5. 41. 5 n. T h e most probable
restoration is frequenti; cf. 27. 15. 18, 32. 12. 9, 44. 43. 1.
M. Oppium: 35. 11 n. Not otherwise known.
Sex. Manilzum: MdXtov according to D.H. 11. 44. 2, i.e. Manlium:
but the Manlii were patricians. No Manilius is known before the
second century (M'. Manilius cos. 149) and the praenomen Sextus is
not used either by the Manilii or the Manlii. H e is, therefore,
imaginary.
5 1 . 1 1 . terunt: 1. 57. 5 n.
51. 12. quo anno iam ante: 55. 1 n.
5 1 . 13. in ordinem: 'to be reduced to the ranks, to be degraded'. Only
here and at 35. 6 in L., an unconscious repetition (1. 14. 4 n.). T h e
metaphor is taken from military language; cf. Pliny, Epist. 1. 23. 1.
se aiebant: se, omitted by Ver., is not strictly needed but the omission
is one to which that manuscript is peculiarly liable; cf. 44. 6, 62. 1,
5. 32. 4, 40. 10, 6. 6. 10.
52. 2. sciturosque . . . nequeant: as the text stands there is no conjunction
to introduce and govern nequeant and a harsh change of subject has
to be presumed between admoniturum and scituros. T h e first difficulty
491

3- 52. 2

450 B.C.

is insurmountable, making it certain that the text is corrupt. T h e

easiest correction is to follow Rhenanus and read sciturosque (quam) or,
as improved by Gronovius, who put a colon after plebis, scituros quam
(Frigell). Cf. 28. 44. 1. This may be right and is certainly preferable
to quod (Drakenborch, Perizonius) or qua (Bezzenberger, Madvig), to
say nothing of the fantastic proposals of Gitlbauer and Harant. Doubt,
however, also attaches to scituros. If the word is right one would expect
it to be followed by an ace. and inf. Hence nequire (Alschefski). But
is it the right word ? T h e patricians are going to learn, not to know,
that tribunicia potestas is a necessary condition for resolving the present
deadlock, scio seems inapposite for conveying that idea. O n both
counts, therefore, I regard scituros as suspect, as the emendation of a
nonsensical plebis scitum Ro(manae). (The ordinary contraction of plebis
scitum was pi. sc.; see Capelli.) If so, the most likely restoration of the
text would be plebis Romanoe cum . . . nequeant where the cwm-clause gives
the reason for Duilius' faith in the efficacy of reminding the patricians
of the Mons Sacer. For the whole sentence cf. 61. 5.
52. 3 . Ficulensi: 1. 38. 4 n.
patrum: 2. 32. 4.
52. 5. solitudo: 38. 9 n.
plures[que] : Pettersson would retain the -que, taking the whole clause
as governed by the initial cum and comparing 29. 37. 8 for the switch
from subj. to ind. (see also Steele, Temporal Clauses in Livy, 40 ff.). T h e
resulting anacoluthon is ungainly and L. always introduces long
speeches by a main verb of speaking, -que is so often erroneously added
or omitted that its deletion here is easy (24. 5 n.). It certainly gives
only nominal support to such writing as Rossbach's (indignabantur
senatores} pluresque. See Zingerle, Kleine Phil. Abhandlungen (1882), 47 n.
The Speech in the Senate
T h e speech is properly not to be attributed to Valerius and Horatius
but represents the combined feelings of several senators (plures).
Although the narrative of D.H. breaks off at this point it is safe to
assume that L. has condensed a full-scale debate in which Valerius
and Horatius took part into a single speech containing the gist of
their views. D . H . does report a speech of L. Cornelius (11. 44. 4) and
the lacuna begins after ACVKLOS 8e OvaXepios, indicating that Valerius
made a separate speech. L.'s abbreviation of the debate accounts for
the ambiguous plures quam Horatius ac Valerius vociferabantur.
T h e speech itself is passionate. T h e string of eight questions is a
highly emotional device and the effect is enhanced by the language
which surpasses L.'s ordinary rhetorical vocabulary in colour and
liveliness. There are many stock phrases of oratory e.g. for quid exspectabitis? cf. Cicero, Verr. 2. 191; for ruere ac defiagrare cf. Farad. 28; for
492

4 5 0 B.C.

3. 52. 5

amplexi tenetis cf. pro Sulla 59; for ferant desiderium (only here in L.)
cf. Phil. 2. 45, 10. 21. There are many familiar stylistic tricks such as
the repeated quid si. . . quid si, the sharp chiasmus plebs . . . habenda
aut habendiplebis and the antithesis nos . . . patriciis . . . illiplebeiis. There
are many rhetorical commonplaces. The swamping of civilians by
soldiers recalls the opening of the pro Milone. The exaggerated occasune
urbis voltis finire imperium? is matched by similar cliches from Cicero
(e.g. de Domo 96). Above all, tectis iura dicturi recalls dvSpes yap 7T6XL$
(52. 6 n.).
52. 6. tectis: a Greek TOKOS, as befits a people who could take to their
ships when the enemy invaded, going back at least to Alcaeus E 1. 10
(Lobel and Page). Cf. also Herodotus 8. 6 1 ; Thucydides 7. 77. 7;
Sophocles, O.T. 56; Euripides, fr. 828 Nauck. Although used by
historians of Rome (e.g. Appian, B.C. 2. 50; Dio 56. 5. 3) it enjoyed
little vogue in Latin since to a Latin the concepts of urbs and populus
were indistinguishable.
52. 7. aliorumque: who else would there be besides togati to be out
numbered by the lictors ? According to Alschefski and Harant, women,
children, and slaves. But since the main contrast is between civilians
and soldiers, the women and children would be classed as togati, as they
are, for example, in Cicero, pro Rab. Post. 27, or in the tag cedant arma
togae. T o limit togati exclusively to men who wore togas is to miss
the point of the contrast between soldiers and others, viz. civilians =
togatorum aliorum (ed. Frob. 1531). For the intrusion oi-que see 24. 5 n.,
and for the idiomatic aliorum 5. 35. 1 n.
52. 9. novam: 'it was a new and unproved power when they extorted
it from our fathers: now that they have once been captivated by its
charm they will endure still less to be deprived of it, especially since
we for our part do not moderate our orders so that they stand in no
need of help' (after B. O. Foster). Three points call for comment.
dulcedine capti does not survive in prose before this passage (cf. 5. 6. 15
(speech of Ap. Claudius); 5. 33. 2), except in a letter written by
Matius to Cicero (ad Fam. 11. 28. 2). It is used by Cicero in a poetical
fragment (I b 1. 4) and by other poets (e.g. Ovid, Met. 1. 709; Lucan
9. 393), and it must, therefore, have seemed a vigorous phrase to a
Roman, ne nunc for nedum nunc is equally striking (Kiihner-Stegmann
2. 68 Anm. 14). The use is only attested in a letter from Cicero to
Paetus written in 46 B.C. ne iuvenem quidem movit umquam, ne nunc senem.
See Cicero, de Domo 139 with Nisbet's note, nee nos = et(iam) nos non
is affected by L. (6. 15. 7, 23. 18. 4, 38. 23. 3, 34. 32. 9, 37. 20. 8). See
Riemann, Grammaire, 277 ff.
52. 10. videatur: L. misunderstands the impeccably constitutional lan
guage in which his source couched the Decemvirs' reply, si eis videtur
was the request made by the Senate to the magistrates (2. 56. 12 n.).
493

3- 52- i o

450 B.C.

in auctoritate patrum esse signified the compliance of the magistrates

for which L. wantonly substitutes potestate (2. 56. 16, 3. 21. 3, 9. 10. 1)
a most inappropiate word for the Senate. Gf. Cicero, de Legibus 3.28
cum potestas inpopulo, auctoritas in senatu sit.
53. 5. vivos . . . concrematuros: it is possible that this threat to punish
the Decemvirs by burning them alive was also fabricated to illustrate
the provisions of the Twelve Tables. T h e penalty was certainly pre
scribed in the Tables for certain offences (8. 10 = Gaius, Dig. 47. 9. 9)
and is said by Diodorus (12. 25. 3) to have been the sanction of the
Lex Trebonia (64-65 n.). Gf. also Val. Max. 6. 3. 2.
The Speech of the Envoys
T h e suave and conciliatory advice is put forward in a series of easy
sentences. It is enough to call attention to the high degree of antithesis
employed, e.g. libertati . . . licentiae, ignoscendum . . . indulgendum, liberi
. . . dominari, patrum inplebem . . . piebis inpatres, scuto . . . gladio, inferendo
. . . patiendo, tunc . . . nunc.
53. 9. satis superque humili est: 'an ordinary man who lives at liberty
has enough and to spare', humilis N would destroy the point by imply
ing that such a man was excessively ordinary.
53. 10. legibus: the leges sacrae which have been in abeyance.
54. 3-4. Appius' remarks are in keeping with his character and
situationbrusque and contemptuous. Notice the bald sentences
without inter-connexion. T h e language is equally arresting. For imminetfortuna cf. Seneca, Troades 275. It is natural to take sanguis invidiae
(gen.) together (cf. Cicero, ad Att. 1. 16. 11): 'the blood demanded by
unpopularity must be paid'. Alternatively take invidiae as dat. (cf
Seneca, Dial. 6. 13. 3 ) : 'blood must be paid to satisfy unpopularity'.
Gf. 4. 58. 13, 7. 24. 5. nihil moror quominus is perhaps an extension of the
plain nihil moror (1. 53. 10 n.) and as such is an outspoken remark,
but it appropriately recalls the technical formula for dismissing the
Senatenihil amplius vos moramur (Gapitolinus, M. Aur. 10. 8).
54. 5. Q.Furius: the consul of 441. Cicero, pro Cornelio 25 supplies the
reason : decern tr. pi. per pontificem quod magistratus nullus erat creaverunt;
and Asconius adds that the pontifex was M . Papirius, Furius' colleague
in the consulship of 441. T w o inferences may be made from these
details. Until the Decemvirate the tribunate was not a recognized
part of the constitution. It only achieved recognition in the framework
of magistracies by the Valerio-Horatian laws, whatever their exact
content may have been (55. 3 n.). It is therefore inconceivable that the
elections should have been presided over by the pontifex before these
laws were passed; the pontifex may actually have performed some
494

450 B.C.

3- 54- 5

ceremony of auspication (2. 33. 1), or at least have been popu

larly supposed to have done so, to mark the recognition of the
tribunate after the passing of the laws. Secondly the Annales of the year
441 must have recorded some event which indicated that one of the
consuls was pontifex maximus without specifying which. Such an event
might well have been the games which L. significantly says were
vowed ab decemviris per secessionem plebis a patribus ex s. c. (4. 12. 2 n.).
For Furius' praenomen see 4. 12. 1 n. See further Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 36. n. 2 ; Botsford, Roman Assemblies, 285-6; Siber, Pleb.
Mag. 18; de Martino, Storia delta Costituzione, 1. 313.
54. 6-15, The Election of the Tribunes.
Various indications suggest that at some point L. abandons Valerius
Antias in favour of another source. The whole passage from 54. 6-55
reads more like a series of tendentious discussions than a coherent
historical narrative, which L. has felt obliged to include not so much
because of their interest to him or to his age as because they formed
part of the developed tradition of Roman historical writing which had
employed facts and legends as the basis for contemporary argument.
Moreover, whereas in both 45. 4 and 57. 4 P. Numitorius is said to be
the avus of Verginia, in 54. 11 he is described as avunculus, avus normally
means 'grandfather' and the meaning 'great-uncle', although attested
(cf. Tacitus, Annals 2. 43), can be excluded on the ground that L.
could not have used both words in the same sense. Also in 54. 11
Verginius has the praenomen A., in 44. 2 and 58. 5 L. Mere scribal
error might be presumed but for the fact that Cicero (de Rep. 2. 63)
calls him Decimus, which suggests that the praenomen was not a fixed
element. The inference that the passage has a different origin from
the main narrative is also confirmed by the repetitious M. Duilium qui
tribunatum insignem gesserat (54. 12) after 52. 1 and the doublet resolu
tions ne cui fraudi (54. 5; 54. 14). It was noted above that the com
plicated manoeuvres of the plebs from the Aventine to the Mons
Sacer and back again may be due to the combination of two separate
accounts, one of which located the final scenes on the Mons Sacer,
the other on the Aventine. If that is right the new source might be
Licinius but the identification cannot be certain and is, in any case,
immaterial. The list of tribunes is no more than a doublet of the list
of 471 with such additions as family loyalties or personal ambition
cared to make, even if it be an historical fact that ten tribunes were
elected, perhaps for the first time (30. 7 n.). The suggestion that M.
Duilius was responsible for the motion to elect consuls is equally
anachronistic.
54. 8. quod bonum: 1. 17. 10 n.
54. 9. ubi: does L. mean where they began their secession a few days
495

450 B.C.
3- 54- 9
before or does he refer to the version known to Piso which sited the
First Secession, the beginning of the plebeian fight for recognition and
independence, on the Aventine (2. 32. 3) ? T h e pompous language
might suggest the latter (for initia incohastis cf. 39. 23, 5) but the sen
tence is probably to be regarded as an amplification of ita undeprofecti estis
and the mention of the Mons Sacer as the site of the First Secession a few
lines below (54. 12) shows that L. did mean to refer to that event here.
54. 1 1 . pontifice: 54. 5 n.
L. Icilium: 31. 1 n. T h e college of 471 included Sp. Icilius (2.
58. 2 n.).
P. Numitorium: cf. L. Numitorius in 471 (2. 58. 2 n.).
54. 12. C. Sicinium: according to the differing political attitude of
historians 471 also included a C. Sicinius or a Cn. Siccius (2. 58. 2 n.).
In saying primum tribunum plebis creatum L.'s source appears to conflict
with 2. 33. 2 where Sicinius is only co-opted to the college and is not
the founder-member (but for rival versions see note on 2. 32-33). This
C. Sicinius is not mentioned elsewhere.
in saero monte: 2. 33. 3 n.
M. Duilium: for his tribunate and his name see 2. 58. 2 n.
54. 13. spe . . . mentis: the phrase awakens suspicions, since the hopes
were not fulfilled. Nothing else is known of them but a great deal is
heard of their descendants.
M. Titinius: cf. Sext. Titinius tr. pi. in 439 (4. 16. 5 n.), P. Titinius
consular tribune in 400 a n d L, Titinius in 396 (5. 18. 2 n.). T h e
formation of the name from Titus suggests an Etruscan origin for the
family (Schulze 242) and, despite the identification of P. Titinius as
a patrician (5. 12. 10 n.), the family was doubtless plebeian. M .
Titinius was tr. pi. in 193 and praetor in 178, whose career may have
facilitated his ancestor's emergence. See Munzer, R.E., 'Titinius ( i o ) \
M. Pomponius: the Pomponii were an old plebeian family, claiming
descent from N u m a Pompilius (Plutarch, Numa 21. 2 ; Nepos, Atticus
1. 1), but M . Pomponius owes his name more to the consular tribune
of 399 (5. 13. 3 n.) than to history. See Gundel, R.E., 'Pomponius (7)'.
C. Apronius: significantly the only other Apronius known before
the late Republic is the notorious Cn. Apronius, who was aedile
some time before 266 (Val. Max. 6. 6. 5).
Ap. Villius: the Villii only become prominent in the third a n d
second centuries and reach their peak with the author of the Lex
Villia Annalis (180) and P. Villius Tappulus, consul of 199. T h e
praenomen Appius so far from being suspect (P. Sigonius) may be
significant. Appius is not, in any case, exclusively confined to the
Claudii (Doer, Die Rom. Namengebung, 26) but Scullard's demonstra
tion that Tappulus was closely connected with the Claudian faction
in the Second Punic W a r {Roman Politics, 96) may be used to support
496

450 B.C.

3-54- *3

the conjecture that the name Appius Villius was intended to be a

compliment or the surmise that Tappulus and Claudius were related
by marriage. See Gundel, R.E., 'Villius ( i ) \
C. Oppius: 35. 11 n.
54. 14. ne cuifraudi: the plebiscitum is a doublet of the S.C. of 54. 5.
rogationem: the language suggests that Duilius, a tr. pi, introduced
the motion before the comitia centuriata, which is unthinkable. Even to
introduce it before the comitia tributa would be quite ineffective before
the Valerio-Horatian laws had been passed which accorded some
measure or recognition of validity to plebiscita (55. 3 n.). Since cum
provocatione is equally tendentious and false (55. 5 n.) the whole notice
must be regarded as an invention by an annalist anxious to give a
democratic cast to the restoration of the consulate.
pratis Flaminiis: ^ 3 . 5 n., called the campus Flaminius by Varro [de
Ling. Lat. 5. 154). They lay in the south part of the Campus Martius,
where in 220 the censor C. Flaminius built the Circus Flaminius (see
Platner-Ashby s . w . ; the exact site of the Circus Flaminius, for long
uncertain, has been established by recent examination of the frag
ments of the Marble Plan of R o m e : see plan, and Bloch, J.R.S. 51
(1961), 152; it stretched between the Theatre of Marcellus and the
modern Piazza Cenci). It is doubtful whether the name like the
Prata Quinctia (26. 8 n.) is older than the construction of the Circus
and denoted land belonging to the gens Flaminia or whether the ground
on which it was built acquired the name Flaminius simply from the
builder. T h e choice of the fields as the location of these transactions
is doubtless an Aetion connected with the ludi plebeii which were held
in the Circus (Val. Max. 1. 7. 4).
55. The Valerio-Horatian Legislation
T h e three main Valerio-Horatian laws, on plebiscita, provocation and
sacrosanctitaSy have been the subject of acute controversy ranging from
total rejection (Beloch) to total acceptance (Stuart-Jones). T h e case
for each law is set out separately below but on the whole question of the
legislation of 449 it is worth commenting that, although surprisingly
we have no evidence for it earlier than the accounts in L. and D.H.,
who only mentions the first law but whose text is defective, and a
garbled passage of Diodorus (12. 25) who attributes to the consuls
the institution of ten tribunes, the division of the consulate between
patres andplebs, and a measure to ensure thecontinuity of the tribunate
(55. 14 n.), yet we can see that L.'s third law, on sacrosanctitas, was
already a bone of dispute in the early second century (55. 8 n.). A
fourth law, on the storing of archives in the temple of Ceres, gives the
aediles their primitive functions (55. 13 n.). Historically 449 marks
a break. T h e increasing pressure of the plebs, inspired as much by
814432

497

Kk

3- 55

449 B.C.

economic discontent (if the annalistic notices of plagues, famines, and

wars may be connected with the archaeological evidence for an
economic slump in the first half of the century) as by the desire for
political recognition, was inadequately appeased by the Decemvirate.
T h e Second Secession secured the triumph of the plebs. Their victory
can be seen in the final cessation of cultural contact with Etruria.
Such a break must have been marked by various constitutional en
actments. There are, therefore, adequate grounds for believing that
the programme as a whole was not the invention of a late annalist
anxious, like Valerius Antias, to bring credit on his ancestors.
T h e section, apart from the legal digression in 8-12, is homogeneous
and of a piece with the tribunician activities in 54. 6-15. It is im
possible to name L.'s source for certain. It is not Valerius Antias
(55. n n.). See Burck 4 3 - 4 4 ; and for the general history Beloch,
Rom. Geschichte, 349; H . Stuart Jones, C.A.H., 7. 4 8 2 - 4 ; Siber, Pleb.
Magistrat. 15, 32, 65 fT.; Arangio-Ruiz, Storia del Diritto Romano, 2 f.;
Volkmann, R.E., *L. Valerius (304)'; Staveley, Athenaeum 33 (1955),
12-23.
55. 1. per interregem: 8. 2 n.
extemplo: 6. 1 n.
The Law 'quod tributim plebes iussisset populum teneret\
T h e comitia tributa had been brought into being for the election of
tribunes in 471 (2. 58. 1 n.). T h e great advantages of efficiency
which it enjoyed over the comitia centuriata must have been speedily
recognized and it was inevitable that once such an assembly had been
established it should devote itself to discussion and recommendation
as well as the mere business of election. But when did its recommenda
tions obtain the force of law ? Only in 287 did it acquire the un
conditioned right to pass a measure which could automatically bind
xhepopulus. T h a t was the result of the Lex Hortensia (Gaius 1 . 3 ; Aul.
Gell. 15. 27. 4). But L. also includes a Lex Publilia of 339 utplebi scita
omnes Quirites tenerent (8. 12. 14). W h a t is the relation of that law to the
present law? They look identical in substance. Since there are no
grounds for rejecting the Lex Publilia many scholars have followed
Meyer and rejected the Valerio-Horatian law as an attempt to pro
vide a precedent for later democracy. Not for nothing did the Valerii
have the cognomen Publicola. But the sources preserve unmistakable
traces of tribal legislation before 339, notably the plebiscita of 366 and
342. T h e facts can only be satisfied by a solution such as Staveley's
which holds that from 449 all decisions of the comitia tributa were
binding on the populus as a whole if they were approved by the Senate
(patrum auctoritas), that in 339 consular legislation passed in the
comitia tributa was freed from this restriction while strictly plebeian
498

449 B.C.

3- 55- i

legislation (i.e. plebiscita) still required senatorial sanction before

becoming law and that in 287 this anomaly was removed. A recent
suggestion by Friezer that the Valerio-Horatian law applied speci
fically only to the two measures of L. Icilius and M . Duilius (54. 14, 15)
and was not of general application is disproved by the existence of the
other plebiscita before 339. A bibliography is given by Staveley,
Athenaeum 33 (1955), 13 n. 4 ; see especially E. Meyer, Rh. Mus. 37
(1882), 622; H . Siber, Pleb. Magistrat. 39 ff; A. G. Roos, Mededelingen kon. Nederl. Akad. Wetenschappen, 3 (1940); E. Friezer, Mnemo
syne 12 (1959), 325~ 6 55. 3 . telum acerrimum: cf. 69. 2, 5. 29. 9. Gf. Sallust, Oratio Macri 12
vis tribuniciay telum a maioribus libertati paratum.
The Law {ne quis ullum magistratum sineprovocatione creareV.
It has been argued above that the Lex Valeria de provocatione of 509
is fictitious (2. 8. 1 n.) and that the annalistic allusions to provocatio
(2. 27. 12, 2. 55. 1 n.) in the early period are anachronistic em
bellishments. It is, moreover, uncontroversial that magistrates were
only compelled to allow appeals from their absolute power [coercitio)
by the Lex Valeria of 300 (10. 9. 3-6). Can any room, therefore, be
found for a third Lex Valeria on the same subject in 449? It is true
that in this period the coercitio of the magistrates was challenged. T h e
Lex Aternia Tarpeia, as modified by the Lex Menenia Sestia (452),
laid down a scale of fines which, even if not mandatory, imposed
a de facto restriction on the powers of the magistrates. The Twelve
Tables are also asserted to have contained provisions for provocatio
(Cicero, de Rep. 2. 54) which points to the same conclusions. But the
form of this particular law is influenced by the conception of the
Decemvirate as a magistracy sine provocatione (32. 6, 54. 15) as distinct
from an ad hoc commission to frame laws. 'It is designed to ensure
that a magistracy so autocratic as the Decemvirate should not be
renewed.' To that extent the law must be unhistorical and it may be
a complete fiction. Certain linguistic points corroborate that. It is,
however, possible that in the Valerio-Horatian programme some
thing was said about the duties of the magistrates not to overlook the
optional procedure of provocatio laid down by the Twelve Tables but
it is quite uncertain what the terms of such a law would in detail
have been. It is clearly wrong to interpret the law as concerned with
the protocol of elections (Karlowa, Rom. Rechtsgeschichtey 1. 117) or as
designed to embrace the dictatorship as well as the consulship
(Schwegler, Rom. Geschichte, 2. 121 n. 1). See in addition C. Brecht,
Zeit. Sav.-Stifl. 59 (1939), 269 ff.; A. Heuss, Zeit- Sav.-Stifl. 64 (1944),
93 ff.; H . Siber, Pleb. Magistrat. 63 ff.; de Martino, Storia della
Costituzione, 1. 257-62; Staveley, Historia 3 (1955), 427.
499

3- 55- 5

449 B.C.

55. 5. novam legem: Daube (Forms of Roman Legislation, 27) notes that,
whatever the authenticity of the law, it follows the regular pattern
of legal formulation. In new statutes the prohibition is put first and
has the sanction as, for example, in the Lex Quinctia de aquaedudibus
( = Bruns 113) or Cato, de Re Rust. 144. 3. legulos praebeto. si non praebuerit, quanti conductum erit aut locatum erit, deducetur. In statutes which
merely confirm existing statutes as in the following law on sacrosanctitas, the prohibition is taken for granted and so omitted: only
the sanction is stated.
iusfasque: the meaning is that it would not be an offence against
men or gods for him to be killed. T h e language is suspicious. Although
the Twelve Tables speak of a man being iure caesum, the combination
of ius and fas looks like a late formulation. We should expect
something like parricida ne sit (Festus 424 L.). capitalis noxa is also
modern.
The Law ''qui tribunis . . . nocuisset, eius caput Iovi sacrum esse?
T h e law is a restatement of the oath taken at the time of the First
Secession (2. 3 3 . I ; cf. D . H . 6. 8 9 . 3 e^ayicrros

earw KCLL ra

xPVlJLara

avrov ArjixrjTpos lepd). T h e principle behind it is very old. When a man

committed an iniuria against another man his iniuria surrendered him
into the power of the other man. So when a man committed an
offence against a god either by violating a god's sanctuary or, as
here, by breaking an oath made in a god's name, he became forfeit
to that godsacer. T h e only way in which a god could claim this
man was by death which was not in any sense a sacrifice but the speedy
delivery of the offender to his master. So Macrobius (3. 7. 5 ; cf.
[Servius], ad Aen. 10. 419). Consequently any one who dispatched the
offender was exempt from the ordinary penalties and taboos connected
with causing death. From the primitive religious death-sentence sacer
esto, attested both by archaeological evidence (1. 55. 3 n.) and by the
Twelve Tables (8. 21 patronus si clienti fraudem fecerit, sacer esto), the
Roman capital law evolved. In this respect therefore the third ValerioHoratian looks authentic. The consecratio bonorum in the Temple of
Geres, Liber, and Libera is equally archaic (2. 41. i o n . ) . T h e cult
had strongly plebeian associations. The only doubt which attends the
genuineness of the law is the mention of the obscure iudicibus decemviris
(see below). T h e law was certainly in general currency in the early
second century (55. 8 n.) and seen against the background of the
recognition of plebeian aspirations it seems likely that what from
494 to 449 had rested upon a mutual oath (religio) should now have
been put upon a regular footing.
See L. Lange, De Sacrosanctae Potestatis . . . Origine Commentatio
(1883); Mommsen, Strafrecht, 56 ff.; Warde-Fowler, Roman Essays,
500

449 B.C.

3- 55- 7

15 ff.; Strachan-Davidson, Problems, 1. 1-27; A. Piganiol, Journ.

des Savants, 1919, 245; Hagerstrom, Rom. Obligationsbegriff, 1. 467;
Altheim, Lex Sacrata, 19-29; J . Bayet, tome 3, 145-53; Kaser,
Altro'm. lus, 42-53 with fuller bibliography; H . le Bonniec, Le Culte
de Ceres, 345-7.
55. 7. iudicibus decemviris: identified by Mommsen with the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis (Staatsrecht, 2. 605), a panel who were mainly concerned
with causae liberates. In view of Verginia, the identification was appro
priate enough. But, as Wlassak observed (Prozessgesetze, 1. 139 ff.),
the decemviri were instituted after the praetor peregrinus, i.e. after 242 B.C.
(Pomponius, Dig. 1. 2. 2. 2 9 ; first attested in 139 B.C.) and certainly
comprised both patricians and plebeians. If the identification is right
the law cannot be original. Nor is the text suspect, iudicibus being
guaranteed by 55. 11 and decemviris being an improbable interpolation
(Sigonius, Doring, Bayet). With Jolowicz {Historical Introduction, 204
n. 10), I incline to think that the identification is wrong and that by
iudicibus decemviris are meant one or two plebeian officials of whom
we know nothing. Did the plebs have a special court for taking pro
ceedings against its own members? Is that reflected in the notices
about tribunician prosecutions in the fifth century? D.H. 6. 90, dis
cussing the First Secession, speaks of . . .

. (E. Cocchia in the Rivista Indo-Greca-ltal. 5 (1921), 25-28,

supposes on the analogy of praetores iiviri and similar titles that
aedilibus iudicibus decemviris are all attributes of tribunis, there now being
ten tribunes. His interpretation which incidentally makes excellent
sense of Nonius 317 L. is ingenious but involves the impossible hypo
thesis that the aediles were not a separate body by this period.)
Iovi: it is claimed, e.g. by Warde-Fowler and Bayet, that the naming
of a particular god rather than the unspecified sacer esto is a later
rationalization and that the terms given by D.H. for the oath of the
First Secession ( ) are therefore more correct. But the
analogy of divine and human law which surrendered the offender into
the power of the injured party suggests that a specific god was always
named. T h e evidence corroborates this. Apart from the solitary law
of the Twelve Tables (8. 21 ; see above), where the god may have
been named elsewhere, the deity is always cited or implied, e.g. Lex
Numae (Festus 505 L.) sacros esse sc. Termino; the Forum cippus
s]akros esed Sor[anoi; Paulus Festus 5 L. si quisquam aliutafaxit ipsos Iovi
sacer esto; Festus 422 L. qui quid adversiis eas fecerit sacer alicui deorum
sit; Macrobius 3. 7. 5 sacros esse certis dis iubent.
In 55. 8 below, the manuscripts read 'interpretes negant quemquam sacrosanctum esse sed eum qui deorum cuiquem nocuerit id
sacrum sanciri'. eorum is a certain correction as 55. 9 shows. T h e harm
501

3- 55- 7

449 B.C.

is done directly to the individual who is protected by the sanction.

N had cuiquem. T h a t A chose the simple quern and that PFB reversed
the order quecui or cuiquamcuiindicates that cui and quern were alter
natives. Hence although cuiquam = cuipiam or alicui in a hypothetical
relative clause would be possible ( i . 35. 3, 3. 38. 9 ; Publilius ap.
Seneca, Dial. 9. 11. 8 cuivis potest accidere quod cuiquam potest; Nepos,
Alt. 19. 3) and is affected by L., the simple cui may be right, id is super
fluous, since eum is the subject otsanciri* Recent editors accept Muller's
Iovi which brings the passage into line with the formula of the law.
It is, I think, wrong. T h e contrast is between sacrosanctum and sacrum (so
Rhenanus and Hertz). T h e two adjectives should be placed in stark
opposition, without qualification, id is a dittography after nocuerit.
For a similarly corrupt and senseless id cf. 4. 2. 3 n.
familia: 2. 41. i o n .
Ceteris Liberi Liberaeque: 33. 25. 3, 41. 28. 2 ; Cicero, de Nat. Deorum
2. 62; Tacitus, Annals 2. 4 9 ; Fasti Antiates. Despite the difficulties
raised by le Bonniec (Le Culte de Ceres, 277-311) who points out that
there is no precisely corresponding Greek triad attested, it is difficult
not to believe that the cult was introduced in 493 either from Cam
pania, where the cult of Demeter was certainly established at Cumae
(Plutarch, Moralia 261 E ) , or from Sicily where it was localized
particularly at Henna (Val. Max. 1. 1. 1 ; Cicero, Verr. 4. 108) and
at Syracuse. Her need for corn brought Rome into contact with both
areas at an early date.
55. 8. iuris interpretes: when the old notion of sacer became obsolete
with the increasing secularization and ordering of the legal system,
it underwent a subtle change. Instead of the person who violated
a tribune being held sacer, the tribune himself was held to be inviolate
or 'sacred' in our modern sense. He could not be subjected to legal or
physical restraint. T h e issue then arose whether sacrosanctity in the
new sense also applied to the aediles and, one presumes, the iudices
(and) decemviri. T h e controversy raged in the early part of the second
century. T h e older Cato delivered a speech aediles plebis sacrosanctos
esse (Festus 422 L . ; for the date see H. H. Scullard, Roman Politics,
Appendix 2, 256-7) and before 226 C. Scantinius Capitolinus
attempted to take refuge in his position as aedile against M. Marcellus
(Plutarch 2). It is evident that the debate formed part of the oldest
R o m a n history and that the law itself must be of much greater
antiquity (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 472 n. 2, 486 n. 1). No doubt
it continued. Apart from the suppression and restoration of the
tribunate in the first quarter of the century, Augustus had assumed
the sacrosanctity of a tribune in 36 (Dio 49. 15. 5) and certain other
tribunician powrers in 29 (Dio 52. 42. 3). Such innovations required
justification. C. Trebatius Testa who wrote an essay on the concept
502

449 B.C.

3- 55- ^

sacer was Augustus' legal adviser (Justinian 2. 25). T h e question had

a current topicality. Why else would L. have included it ?
55. 1 1 . fuere qui: the argument runs: the law covers a class of officials
called indices; the consuls are called indices; therefore the consuls are
covered by the law, but the praetors are created under the same
auspices as the consuls; therefore the praetors are covered as well.
Horatia lege: the absence of Valeria excludes Valerius Antias from
being the source here.
indicem: Cicero, de Leg. 3 . 8 ; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 88.
55. 12. praetorem: 1. 60. 4 n.
55. 13. in aedem Cereris: the storing of S. C. seems at first sight anachro
nistic. Such a concern about documents should reflect first-century
consciousness, which Caesar exploited by arranging for the publica
tion of senatorial business in the Acta Diurna. Yet already by 307, as
the career of Cn. Flavius illustrates, there were many people at Rome
anxious to know the secrets of the Fasti and similar documents. T h e
tradition about the S. C. is the more credible because of the mention
of the aediles. As their name suggests (cf. aedituus) they were the over
seers of the plebeian aedes Cereris, with which, as Latte observed (Nachrichten Gesell. Wissen. zu Gottingen, 1 (1934), 73-77)? a market must have
been connected where, for instance, the goods of the consecrati were
sold. T h e aediles would have possessed certain police powers over the
running of the market from which gradually the full magistracy de
veloped. Here they are still confined to their primitive functions (cf.
57. 10, 4. 30. 11) so that the notice must be old and authentic. See de
Sanctis, Riv. FiL 10 (1932), 433-45 5 ^e Bonniec, Le Culte de Ceres, 355-7.
55. 14. sine tribunis: for this plebiscitum, also mentioned by Cicero,
de Leg. 3. 9 and Diodorus 12. 25. 3, who names the penalty as death
by burning, see 64. i o n .
sine provocatione: repeats 54. 15, 55. 5.
56-59. The Trial ofAppius Claudius
T h e emphatic deinde indicates that the digression on the legal con
sequences of the Decemvirate and its aftermath is over. We revert
once more to the main plot, to the fate of the leading personalities in
the struggle. Except for the annalistic notices of 57. 7-10 and perhaps
58. 9-10, there is unlikely to be any historical foundation to what
follows. Appius Claudius may have been tried and may have com
mitted suicide. A tradition about him could have been kept alive in
the family but it has been elaborately worked up. T h e choice of a
tribune as prosecutor must be unhistorical even though the tribunate
was now a recognized branch of the constitution (2. 35. 5 n.) and the
choice of Verginius as the tribune is clearly motivated by a desire to
make the trial of Appius the counterpart of the trial of Verginia. In
503

3- 56 59

449 B.C.

Appius' Provoco there is also a deliberate and ironical recollection of

previous occasions when innocent citizens had appealed against the
unbending decisions of Appii Glaudii (2. 27. 10-12, 55-56). There is
a similar schematization in the actual details of the trial. Whereas
D.H. disposes of the entire business in a couple of chapters, L. lays the
scene carefully. T h e first act takes place in the Forum where a speech
of Appius (56. 9-13) is matched by one from Verginius (57. 1-5).
T h e second act, also in the Forum, witnesses Appius 5 supporters (58.
1-4) opposed by the necessarii Verginiae (58. 5). T h e effect is dramatic.
In addition, L. makes the drama point a moraldementia concordiam
ordinum stabiliri posse (58. 4 n.). Indiscriminate reprisals would only
lead to a worse reaction in time to come. Appius and other ring
leaders must be punished but for the rest it is better to forgive. T h e
different aspects of dementia are revealed in the proceedings and the
whole exemplum serves to lead up to the great speech of Quinctius
which gathers together the various elements on which concordia
ordinum depends.
These considerations suggest that L. has returned to Valerius
Antias as his source. Certainly avum (57. 4) agrees with 45. 4 against
54. 11 (n.), and the atmosphere is in keeping with the other Glaudian
passages which were held to be Valerian in origin. But it cannot be
proved. Klotz would even hold that L.'s source was writing under
the influence of Caesar's account of the death of Orgetorix (B.G.
1. 4 ff.) but on examination the resemblance is seen to be far-fetched.
See Burck 4 3 - 4 5 ; Klotz 2 6 8 - 9 ; Klotz, Rh. Mus. 96 (1953), 66.
56. 1. fundata: so also 60. 1, introducing a new section.
The Arrest of Ap. Claudius
56. 3 . oratio . . . inventa est: a commonplace; cf. the paradoxical
denial of it by Catiline (Sallust 58. 1).
vosmet ipsi: cf. Sallust, Catil. 20. 6.
56. 4. impie nefarieque: cf. Cicero, Verr. 1.6; Phil. 2. 50.
gratiam. /ado: 'I remit, overlook' = ^at/oetv ew. So also 8. 34. 3.
Otherwise the phrase is only found in Plautus (Cas. 373; Miles 576;
Most. 1130, 1168) and Sallust (Catil. 52. 8; cf. Jug. 104. 5). It gives
life and colour to Verginius' challenge.
nisi iudicem dices: said to be the defendant's reply to the prosecutor's
proposal iudicemferre (57. 5) and to mean 'to agree to go before a iudex\
Cf. the interesting discussions by Gronovius and Drakenborch. But
whereas i. f. is commonly attested, neither i. dicere nor anything re
motely analogous occurs. In 57. 5 L. writes ad iudicem non eat. M a n y
conjectures have been made, none altogether satisfatory: iudicem
vindices te Rhenanus; in iudicem dices, te Campanus; iudicem doces^
504

449 B.C.

3- 56. 4

te Niebuhr. Hearne and Drakenborch repunctuated nisi iudicem

dices te . . . dedisse, taking iudicem in apposition to te 'unless you will
admit that in your capacity as judge you . . .', but Appius would have
rightly claimed that it was unreasonable to expect him to make such
an admission without even a trial. A future tense is required, and L.'s
habit of repetition is so constant that I would propose nisi ad iudicem
ibis and assume that the corruption followed the transposition of
iudicem and ad.
in vincla: Appius was asked to give surety that he would appear
to answer the charge; if he refused, he was to be remanded (13. 6 n.).
But L., as elsewhere, has misunderstood the procedure and regards
the prison as punishment or sentence and not as merely detention
before trial. Gf. D.H. 11. 46.
56. 5. auxilio: cf. Val. Max. 4. 1 . 8 ; Pliny, N.H. 21. 8 ff. A tribune
was not obliged to give auxilium when appealed to. He could refuse
if he thought fit (Wirszubski, Libertas, 27).
\at\tamen\ attamen would be unique in L. and though suitable in
sense is likely to have arisen through dittography after habebat.
56. 6. silentium fecit: notice L.'s use of dramatic silence (47. 6).
5 6 . 1 , deos tandem esse: the reactions of the crowd are sketched delight
fully in lines of conventional triviality. For deos tandem esse cf. Homer,
Od. 24. 351 Zev 7Ta,Tp, fj pa cr' icrre Oeol Kara fiaKpov "OXvfjLnov. For

seras, non leves tamenpoenas cf. Homer, Iliad 4. 160 ff.; Solon 13. 25 ff.;
Aeschylus, Agam. 5 8 ; Choeph. 3 8 3 ; Euripides, Bacchae 883 with Dodds's
note; Tibullus 1. 9. 4 ; Horace, Odes 3. 2. 31-32.
56. 8. fidem . . . implorantis: 2. 23. 8 n.
Appius' Plea
See Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 35. A good example of subtle
casuistry, planned according to the best patterns, as recommended for
example by ad Herennium 2. 25. Notice the careful antitheses; maiorum
merita, suum studium, suas leges; turn . . . in praesentia; civitatis civem;
invidiam . . . aequitate; dominatio an libertas; inanibus litteris an vere and
the balanced experturum . . . experiri, quod si . . . quod si and quern enim
. . . ? cui . . . non sit? T h e language is as exemplary. For maiorum
merita in rem publicam cf. Cicero, Verr. 2. 122; for aequandarum legum
see 31. 7 n . ; for invidiam pertimuisse cf. in Catil. 1 . 2 9 ; for aequitate et
misericordia cf. pro Mar cello 12; for dominatio an libertas see 39. 7 n.
56. 9. abisset: in 33. 4 the consuls were only designati but the exaggera
tion is legitimate.
56. 10. bona malaque: 'his case's good and bad points 5 .
56. 12. tollendae appellationis: N wrongly interpolates causa, as Duker
had already seen. T h e genitive is governed by foedus as at Val. Max.
7. 4 ext. 3. In what follows, quod for quam and at for ait (cf. 9. 1.8)
505

3- 56- i2

449 B.C.

are necessary corrections. Where L. uses at in the apodosis of a con

ditional, it is always accompanied by the personal pronoun. For
conspiro in cf. 36. 9 ; Tacitus, Annals 15. 68.
56. 13. hoc indemnato indicta causa: 13. 4. Brecht was right to stress the
sympathy which this plea would have gained in the aftermath of the
Gracchan law ne quis de capite (Perduellio, 166 ff.). But Gracchus only
reiterated what was already law by the time of Cato (Aul. Gell.
13. 25. 12) and what may indeed be assumed to have been a stipula
tion in the Twelve Tables (Salvian, De Gubern. Dei 8. 5. 24; see D.
Daube, J.R.S. 31 (1941), 183). Like so much else in the history of the
Decemvirate, it seems to be intended as an illustration of the Twelve
Tables.
Appius Claudius makes skilful use of the ronos contrasting truth
with empty words which was worked to death by the elegists (cf.
Catullus 70. 3-4; Ovid, Am. 2. 16. 45, et al. = Sophocles fr. 749).
Verginius9 Speech
By contrast Verginius is brutal and inflammatory. He meets
Appius' subtle pleadings with violent language. Among the more
striking expressions, for legum expertem cf. Cicero, Phil. 2. 7 ; for castellum
omnium scelerum cf. in Pisonem 1 1 ; for bonis . . . infestus cf. pro Sestio 39;
for virgas . . . minitans cf. Verr. 3. 143; for carnificibus see 2. 35. 1 n . ;
for ab rapinis . . . verso cf. 1. 60. 2, Sallust, Catil. 5. 2, 51. 9.
57. 4. illi carcerem aedificatum: 1. 33. 8 n. There is no other trace of
a tradition that the Decemvir was responsible for building the prison.
Verginius invents it for the occasion in order to bring in a familiar
and savage jibe which had already been used by Cicero against
Verres (5. 143). It was, of course, much older. Casaubon, commenting
on Theophrastus, Characters 6. 6, refers to Plautus, Pseudolus 1172 and
Demosthenes 22. 63.
57. 6. ut... sic: 'a step which though disapproved by none yet gave
occasion to much serious consideration, the commons themselves con
sidering their own privileges as carried rather too far in the punish
ment inflicted on a person of such consequence' (Baker).
External Affairs
57. 7. coronam auream: 29. 3 n., 2. 22. 6. T h e crown would in fact have
been dedicated from the victory spoils to come (61. 10) and not have
been presented de concordia.
57. 9. Horatio Sabini, Valerio Aequi evenere: Petrarch had already
seen the apparent inconsistency, for in his copy of L. he corrected
Sabini to Vulsci. But D.H. 11. 47-48 clarifies the problem. T h e Sabine
War stood over from the threat mentioned in 51. 7, while the Aequi
and Volsci have joined forcesavvrjXOe yap dfjL<f>6rpa rd eOvrj. L. has
506

449 B.C.

3- 57- 9

compressed to the point of obscurity. In choosing between evenerunt

(Ver.) and evenere (N) we have to note that according to the statistics
compiled by Lease [A,J.P. 24 (1903), 408 ff.) in Book 3 the ratio of
-ere to -erunt terminations is 88:22 but that 'with venio and its com
pounds the -erunt form was preferred'. At the same time Ver. is prone
to devalue L.'s language (6. 6 n., 44. 5 n.) and Lofstedt (Peregrinatio,
p. 37) demonstrated that -ere is the high-flown form of the termination.
This fact tips the balance in favour of evenere here. Cf. also 4. 7. 8 n.,
5. 5. 5 n. Note also 28. 42. 15, 5. 33. 5 (transcendere Ver.).
pars magna: the volunteers came from those who were exempt on
grounds of age and service (emeritis stipendiis) and formed a great part
of the total army. T h e gen. voluntariorum is not partitive but a gen. of
material.
57. 10. urbe egrederentur: the manuscripts here, including Ver., and
at 1. 29. 6, 21. 12. 5, 22. 55. 8, 28. 26. n , 29. 6. 4, read egredior urbem
with varying degrees of unanimity. But egredior with the ace. could
only mean transgredior (2. 61. 4 ; see Frigell, Epilegomena, 43 fF.) which
is absurd with urbem as the object, urbe must be read in all places, as at
Val. Max. 9. 6 ext. 2 ; Frontinus, deAq. 101; Marcian, Dig. 1. 16. 2.
in aes incisas . . . proposuerunt: in 34. 2 the first ten tables had been
propositas and a further two were added in 37. 4. But this publication
may be regarded as only provisional. A strong tradition associated
the consuls with the final ratification of the laws, as was reasonable
since Valerius and Horatius were the logical consequence of the de
mocratic movement set in motion by the Decemvirate. T h e difficulty
lies rather in the nature of the material used for inscribing the laws.
T h e earliest surviving bronze laws are all of one piece (e.g. the Lex de
Repetundis and the law of Bantia) and would have been referred to as
tabula in the singular. T h e name Duodecim Tabulae implies then
that they were written on wood (cf. the Solonian amoves) and that is
the tradition known to Pomponius (Dig. 1. 2. 2. 4 quas in tabulas
"\eboreas [roboreas Edd.) perscriptas pro rostris composuerunt; cf. Horace,
A.P- 396-9 with Porphyrio's and [AcroJ's notes). T h e younger
authorities knew only bronze (Diodorus 12. 26; Cyprian, Epist. ad
Donatum 10). T h e discrepancy cannot be reconciled by supposing
that the provisional promulgation of the laws was made on wood
(Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 371) and that they were finalized in bronze.
T h e solution lies rather in believing that at the beginning of the first
century they were restored and set up in bronze, perhaps when Sulla
reconstructed the Curia. See Mommsen, Melanges Boissier, 1 ff.;
Taubler, Untersuchungeny 69-77.
sunt qui: a variant, to glorify the tribunes at the expense of Valerius.
Licinius Macer ? It is a corollary of the archival functions of the aediles
described in 55. 13.
507

3- 58. i

449 B.C.

58, 1. Regillum: 2. 16. 4 11.

sordidatus: contrast 2. 61. 3 fF.
The Appeal by C. Claudius
C. Claudius speaks in studied terms, movingly stressing the dignity
of his family without excusing the faults of his brother. His appeal
strikes a note of moderation which is taken up by Quinctius. Cf.
6. 20. 3 ff.
58. 2. inustam maculam: cf. Fronto 158. 16 van den Hout. T h e meta
phor is from the branding of a slave; cf. Propertius 3. 11. 40 with
Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana, 171.
honoratissimae imaginis: 36. 40. 9, Veil. Pat. 2. 116. 4.
latrones: cf. Sallust, Catil. 59. 5.
58. 3. preces aspernarentur: cf. Cicero, pro Sestio 30.
58. 4 . generi ac nomini: cf Phil. 3. 29. dare: 'made that concession
to'.
virtute . . . posse: Claudius here sounds some of the keynotes of the
political propaganda of the late Republic which, as so often, can be
illustrated from coins. Libertas, dementia, concordia, all were the slogans
of the political rivals before Actium and after Actium they assumed
a new importance. Octavius had 'recovered liberty'. H e was in a
position to wreak vengeance on his enemies. Only prudential motives
prevented him from so doing. See H. Kloesel, Libertas (Diss. Breslau,
1935); Dahlmann, Neue Jahrb.f. Wiss. 10 (1934), 17; Syme, Roman
Revolution, 155-61.
58. 6. conscivit: 2. 61. 8 n.
Further Reprisals
58. 8. testisproductus: see p. 298. T h e lowest age at which a man could
be called on to serve in classical times was seventeen (Aul. Gell. 1 o. 28).
T h e upper limit is less clear. It was either forty-five or forty-six (1.
43. 1 n.) and this passage should perhaps be used as evidence for the
lower figure. T h e veteran had spent all his active life in the ranks.
Isidore (9. 3. 53) and Servius [ad Aen. 2. 157) reduce the maximum
possible length of service to the round figure of twenty-five years.
58. 9. solum verterunt: 13. 9.
58. 10. ultimam poenam: i.e. the death penalty; cf. Pliny, Epist.
2. n . 8.
58. 11. manes Verginiae: 1. 20. 7, 3. 19. 1 n., 4. 19. 3. Originally the
manes were the spirits collectively. T h e individuation of the manes of a
particular person is relatively late (first in Cicero, in Pisonem 16) but the
concept of their possessing powers of vengeance is old if their name is
rightly derived from manus = 'good' and if they are euphemistically
named, like the Eumenides, 'the kindly ones'. It is a common prayer
508

449 B.C.

3.58- "

on epitaphs that the Manes either collectively or individually may

not disturb the peace; cf., e.g., C.E.L. 467. 8 et manesplacida tibi node
quiescant; and see R. Lattimore, Themes in Greek and Latin Epitaphs,
90-95. Their introduction here is strongly reminiscent of the part
played by the Furies (Eumenides) in the story of Tullia (1. 48. 7 n.,
59. 13). Both serve to underline the tragic nature of the tales.
feliciores (N) is corrected to felicioris (Gulielmus) because it is sense
less to speak of the manes of a person still living. But forfelix used of
the departed spirit cf. Virgil, Aeneid 6. 669 and for the whole phrase
C.I.L. 8. 24787 condita nunc Libyca felix tellure quiesco. It is Virginia's
epitaph.
Conciliatory Moves by M. Duilius
59. 3 . placet [et] cum nova: et looks like a clumsy anticipation of the
following et which picks up neque. It is senseless both in this position
given it by M and before nova (Xrr) since the old sins have not been
purged as well as the new ones. They have merely been forgotten.
59. 4. toti plebis: 36. 7.
60-63. Wars with Aequi, Volsci, and Sabini
T h e extended accounts of the two campaigns undertaken by the
consuls form a fitting pendant to the settlement of affairs at Rome.
Rome was a military power first and foremost. T h e health of her
society was revealed by her success in war. L. therefore devotes con
siderable space to the narrative, elaborating it according to the fixed
principles of Hellenistic battle-technique. In particular the exhorta
tions or TrapcLKtXtvotis were a feature of such narratives. L. employs
them liberally as a means of illustrating the morale of the armies.
D.H., by contrast, is much briefer (11. 47-48) and concerns himself
with the physical not the psychological aspects. There are a few factual
discrepancies between the two writers (63. 5 n.) but sundry an
achronisms datable to the early first century (62. 8 n., 63. 9 n.)
coupled with the prominence of Valerius indicates that L. continues
to follow Valerius Antias. See Soltau 161-2; Burck 45-47; Klotz
270; Plathner, Die Schlachtschilderungen, 11-12, 16, 4 6 ; F. E. Erbig,
Topoi in den Schlachtberichten (Diss., 1931), 11.
60. l.fundato: 56. 1 n.
60. 2. staturum: 'the battle would have cost great loss'.
60. 3 . provocantibus: the same manoeuvres as in 2. 45. 3.
60. 5. terrorem: notice the emphasis on the psychology of warterror,
conscientia, animus, paventes, pleni spei, indignatio.
60. 7. nocti cessere\ cf. 17. 9. T h e phrase imitates the Epic WKTI
-mdeadac Iliad 7. 282, 2 9 3 ; 9. 6 5 ; 8. 502). Cf. also Sil. Ital. 5. 677.
corpora curabant: 2. 10 n.
509

3- 6o. 8

449 B.C.

60. 8. multa iam dies erat: 'much of the day was spent' cf. 5. 26. 6,
27. 2. 9; Caesar, B.G. 1. 22. 4. T h e expression is military.
tegerent: the Aequan sense of shame is expressed in a rov-os often
employed in such situations; cf. Sallust, Cat. 58. 10.
60. 10. qui erant: sc. educti. turbatis mentibus is dat. after addito. The long
sentence with its involved participial clause, extended apposition, and
abl. abs., culminating in the sharp invadit, conveys the impression of
the sudden moment of attack against a disorganized enemy performing
a complicated series of manoeuvres.
60. 11. victisne cessuri: it is not clear whether the leaders mean that
the Romans have been defeated on previous occasions or that they
are (virtually) defeated now. Perhaps the former which was a common
TO7TOS for encouraging the troops (cf. Thucydides 2. 89. 2, 4. 92. 6,
7. 66. 2 ; Polybius, 3. 64. 4 ; Sallust, Jug. 49. 2).
Exhortation by Valerius
Valerius makes use of four main TOTTOL: ( I ) T h e Romans are
fighting as free men for their freedom. This is the most frequent of all
commonplaces in a 7Ta/3a/ceAeuo-t?.Cf., e.g., Herodotus 5. 2. 1; 6. 109.3 ;
Thucydides 7. 69. 2 ; Xenophon, Anab. 1. 7. 3, 3. 2. 10; Cyrop. 3. 3. 35,
6. 4. 13; Lucan 7. 264-9. (2) Previous defeats have been due to the
failure of the generals, not the soldiers. Cf. Polybius 3. 64, 3. 108. 9.
(3) T h e Romans can be assured of divine goodwill. Cf. Thucydides
7. 69. 3 ; Xenophon, Cyrop. 3. 3. 34, 6. 4. 13; Polybius 10. 1 1 ; Lucan
7. 349 ff. (4) They are fighting for the safety of their children and
homes. Cf. especially Thucydides 7. 69. 2 ; Polybius 3. 109. 7. He adds
one argument (turpe esse contra cives) which had a special relevance to
L.'s own day. T h e speech is reported indirectly, but Valerius breaks
out at the end with a passionate appeal in direct speech addressed to
a particular section. See Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 4 1 .
6 1 . 4. pudicitiae: note the alliterative />'s. inclino is intransitive only
here in L. (cf. 6 1 . 14, 2. 47. 3, 6. 9. 8). T h e phrase looks like military
jargon (Caesar, B.C. 1. 52. 2 ; Jtin. Alex. 16).
6 1 . 5. nolle: 'yet he would not utter an omen which neither Jupiter
nor Mars their Father would suffer to come home to a City founded
with such auspices' (Foster). T o suggest the possibility of defeat was
a bad omen.
6 1 . 7. dicta dedit: so 22. 50. 10; Petronius 61 and Virgil (eight times);
dicta dederat 7. 33. 11, 29. 2. 12. T h e constant word-order disproves
Ver.'s dedit dicta. T h e phrase is epic in character, as Petronius shows,
and is thus appropriate to the tense moment of a great battle (cf. 2.
45-47)advolat: 2. 20. 10. T h e focus is on his destination, not the scene he is
leaving (avolat).
510

449

B.C.

3.61.8

6 1 . 8. exigite de: elsewhere in L. exigo is followed by e{x) (6. 37. 10,

39. 55. 4) but de given by both Ver. and M makes adequate sense,
particularly if they were fighting on the high plateau above the pass.
Note 62. 5 deducturum.
cunctantur: for the TOTTOS cf. 21.40.6; Curtius4.14.2,* Tacitus, Agr. 34.
61. 10. vis belli: cf. Cicero,pro S. Roscio 91.
6 1 . 1 1 . laetitia [modo] : the retention oimodo with N would suggest that
whereas the city only received the news with joy, the army were both
delighted and jealous. It has been interpolated from in urbem modo.
6 1 . 12. [sufficiendo]: omitted by Ver. Many attempts have been made
to retain and explain the word (see Doujat's note and Rossbach,
B. Ph. W., 1920, p. 701) and many emendations have been proposed
(adsuefaciendo Frigell; subinde Seyffert; subigendo Madvig; subiciendo
Bayet)all unnecessarily.
profecerant: 'had encouraged the highest hopes of the general out
come' (Foster).
6 1 . 13. priore anno: the definition of time is not exact but the victories
of the Sabines were before Valerius and Horatius took office.
recurrentes: recursantes (Ver.) must be wrong. T h e word is not found
in L. although six other -curso compounds are (R. Jones, Progr. Posen,
1884) and it is also the more vulgar form. It is due to assimilation
with the preceding procursantes\
62. 1. ad id quod: 26. 45. 8.
se> si: for Ver.'s omission of se cf. 5. 32. 4, 40. 10, 6. 6. 10. T h e
commonplace is old; cf. Xenophon, Cyrop. 3. 3. 3 5 ; Caesar, B.G.
5- 44- 3Exhortation by Horatius
consilio . . . virtute: consilio is certain {silio being preserved in Ver.
at the beginning of a line). consulto, the result of a dittography in N ,
should not be adopted, as it was by Gronovius and Burman (on
Suetonius, Augustus 2), for consilium and virtus are conventionally con
trasted as the prerequisites of all the best battles (cf. Caesar, B.G.
7. 29. 2, 52. 4 ; Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v. consilium 452. 83 ff.) and consulto
is only used by L. with opus est and bene. Horatius' language resembles
the phraseology of the official communique announcing the victory.
T h e choice between prolonging a war and bringing it to a speedy
issue is conventional.
62. 3 . mihi feceritis, milites: milites and feceritis were transposed by N,
or an earlier copy, which led to subsequent corruption and correction
{milites geritis /x,, mihi tegeritis A, mihi effeceritis IT). Ver.'s reading is pre
ferable and the repeated milites suits the lively and excited style. Cf.
67. 4, 5. 44. 1-3 {Ardeates . . . Ardeates).
511

3- 62. 4

449 B.C.

62. 4. iam satis: a colloquialism for which cf., e.g., Terence, Phormio
436 and see Fraenkel, Horace, 242-3.
agite dum: 68. 1, 5. 52. 9, 6. 35. 9, 7. 33. 10, 34. 14, 35. 12. Ver.
also omits dum at 67. 6. Both are instances of haplography.
voluntatis: observe the alliteration, as Horatius storms to his con
clusion.
62. 5. gesturum morem: for the history of'moremgerere see G. W. Williams,
J.R.S. 49 (1959), 28-29. It meant originally 'to regulate one's own
individual behaviour in the interest of another' and was initially con
fined to 'wifely and filial obedience'. It later became colloquial and
popular but since it is used here by L. I think some of the original
associations of the phrase are retained. Unlike Appius Claudius
Horatius was a true father to his troops. As with other semi-archaic
phrases L. puts them into the mouths of his characters and does not
use them directly himself.
62. 6. gloriae: if right, the gen. is analogous to Cicero, pro Plancio 89.
Such variations of construction [gloriae . . . elatum) are not uncommon
in L. Ver. is reported to have victoriae, a negligent anticipation of
victoria (51. i o n . ) , but, as far as its illegible state allows one to judge
today, it seems to have read vi gloriae and that would be possible,
perhaps better; Stroth and Ruperti had already proposed gloriae
(memorial. Both victoria elatus (Caesar, E.G. 5. 47. 4 ; Bell. Alex. 76. 3 ;
Nepos, Pans. 1. 3 ; cf. 2. 51. 1, 21. 48. 8) and gloria elatus (Caesar, B.C.
3. 79. 6; Bell. Hisp. 23. 8 ; Bell. Afr. 22. 2 ; cf. 31. 24. 12) appear to be
military cliches. Ver. also has the more satisfactory transposition nova
nuper which enables veteris and nova to balance one another. T h e inter
laced nuper may have seemed too harsh to the editors of the Nicomachean recension.
Notice again the preoccupation with psychology (gloriae, pudore,
verecundiae).
62. 8. degravabant: 4. 33. 11, 7. 24. 9.
sescenti; 1. 43. 9 n. T h e detail is anachronistic from the time when
every legion had a detachment of 300 cavalry attached to it (8. 8. 14;
22. 36. 3). For the significance of their dismounting see 2. 20. 10 n.
ex(s)iliunt (Ver.) is not used of jumping from horseback.
63. 2. et in: in is omitted by Ver. as at 63. 5, 4. 9. 14, but is required
here as there.
63. 3. providere omnia: the mark of a good general (cf. Sallust, Catil.
60. 4), as it is his duty laudare et increpare merentes (Jug. 100. 3).
6 3 . 5. supplicationes: 5. 23. 3 n. A solemn thanksgiving decreed by the
Senate during which the temples were opened and the cult-statues
displayed on couches while the people offered up their prayers. There
is no doubt that in origin supplicationes were decreed in time of pesti512

449 B.C.

3- 6 3 - 5

lence (7. 7-8) and that the thanksgiving for victories was a com
paratively late development. The present case has several suspicious
features: the vaga popularisque supplicatio ( a clumsy annalistic explana
tion), the meeting of the Senate at the Apollinare where later a temple
of Apollo was vowed pro valetudine populi (4. 25. 3-4 n.), and the coin
cidence of the date of L. Valerius' triumph with that of his descendant
M . Valerius in 312 (Id. Sext.). T h e truth may be as Gage conjectures
(Apollon Romain, 2 fF. with bibliography). The Annales preserved a
record of a supplicatio ad Apollinare but no mention of a triumph. T h e
supplicatio was doubtless for health. Family and national patriotism
demanded that the restorers of Roman democracy should be com
memorated by a triumph and it was easy to convert a supplicatio pro
valetudine into the thanksgiving for victory which usually preceded a
triumph while the reference to the Apollinare could be explained as
the site where the Senate met to consider the request for a triumph
(34. 43. 2, 37. 58. 3, et al.). T h e absence of an official notification of
the triumph meant that if one was held it must have been authorized
in some unprecedented mannera tribunician motion. M . Valerius
supplied the date. See also L. Halkin, La Supplication, 16; P. Grenade,
Origines du Principal 230.
frequens iit: 7. 1; Plautus, Persa 447; Val. M a x . 3. 7. 1. T h e technical
expression is omitted by Ver. influenced by the juxtaposition of diem
supplicationes immediately above. After it the supine supplicatum is
wanted, supplicatumque est is a very old mistake.
63. 9. numquam ante: the sententious invention of precedents recalls
35. 8 (n.)also Valerian. D . H . on the other hand cites a regal
precedent. Constitutionally the power to allow a triumph rested with
the magistrates not the Senate (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 1233) but
their power appears to have been modified by Sulla who gave the
Senate discretionary control (Cicero, de Leg, Man. 62. O n e triumph
of historical times violated all the rulesthat of Pompey in 80 B.C.
(E. Badian, Hermes 83 (1955), 107 ff.). L. significantly says of it quod
nulli contigerat (Epit. 89).
63. 1 1 . triumphatum est: in the Fast. Triumph, the entry r u n s :
L. Valerjius P.f. P.n. Poplicola Potit(us) an. ccciv
consul] de Aequeis idibus Sextil.
D.H. credits both Horatius and Valerius with triumphs (11. 49. 2,
50. 1) and knows nothing of the two-day supplicatio. L.'s version
favours Valerius at the expense of Horatius.
64-65. Tribunician Agitation: The Lex Trebonia
For L. the events of the next few years are of interest as exemplifying
the difficulties of preserving concordia within the state notwithstanding
811432

513

L1

3- 64"65

449 B.C.

the wise provisions which Valerius and Horatius have made. Real
concord requires the co-operation of all parties in the states, dementia
from those who are in a position to be vengeful, moderatio from those
who have opportunities of power, modestia from those who havegrievances to air. Above all, the two main divisions of the community,
the patres and the plebs> are depicted as waiting for a chance to jump
at each other's throats. The power of the plebs lay in the tribunate.
If the patres could hamstring that office, they would render the plebs
powerless. Conversely, the plebs realize that to re-elect year after year
a strong college of tribunes would give them a hold over the other
magistracies. Hence the 'Lex' Trebonia, designed to prevent the
infiltration of the tribunate by co-option but calculated to perpetuate
seditio and discordia.
Such at least is L.'s version. It is clear from the sources that tra
ditionally the issue whether co-option of a patrician to the tribunate
was permissible had at one time been discussed. It recurs in the story
of L. Minucius (4. 16. 4) and in 401 (5. 10. 11 n.). If there is any
substance to that tradition it must be connected with the institution
of the consular tribunate and not with such highly organized political
manoeuvres as L, describes, since patrician membership of the plebeian
tribunate is the obverse of plebeian membership of the patrician
tribunate. The whole tradition may just be legalistic invention based
on the known terms of the provisions regulating the election of
plebeian tribunes (i.e. the Lex Trebonia; cf. Diodorus 12, 25)cer
tainly the stories of Tarpeius, Aternius, and Minucius are fictitious
but it may go back to a contemporary discussion on how Rome was
to have a unified government when religious reasons debarred ple
beians from holding the auspices. Any reconstruction is guesswork.
See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 219; E. Meyer, Kl. Schriften, 1. 337;
Cornelius, Untersuchungen, 62; de Martino, Storia della Costituzione,
294-5The Lex Trebonia was invoked as an argument in the contested
matter of re-election to the tribunate in the Gracchan age. Appian
(B.C. 1. 21) refers to an old law (presumably the Lex Trebonia) that
ten tribunes must be elected and it was argued that 'though as a
general rule re-election was improper, if fewer than ten tribunes were
duly returned, the plebs might fill the vacancies from all including
former tribunes' (A. H. M. Jones, P.C.P.S. 186 (i960), 34-35). The
topicality of the law in the Gracchan and Drusan disturbances accounts
for its prominence, but L. could hardly have written this section in
this form after 23 B.C. when Augustus took the full tribunicia potestas
and from time to time co-opted colleagues (Suetonius, Augustus 27;
Res Gestae 6).
64. 1. consulibus . . . continuarent magistratum: continuare m. can mean 'to
5i4

449 B.C.

3. 64. 1

renew one's own magistracy' (35. 6, 21. 2) or with dat., 'to renew
another person's magistracy' (5. 29. 1). Here the latter is clearly in
tended.
64. 2. iura [tribunorurri] plebis: Ver. adds tribunorum but the limitation
of the complaint to the tribunes weakens the force of the argument.
64. 6. auctores populares sententiae haud popularis nactus: Stroth's emenda
tion is necessary. Valerius and Horatius are popular, Duilius' pro
posal is not. The gen. sententiae haud popularis as always with auctor
(5. 22. 2, 8. 21. 2, 31. 7. 15, 33. 6. 15). Ver.'s dat. (s. k. populari) is
inadequately supported by 2. 54. 7 where the dat. follows closely on
deerat. For auctores nactus cf. 4. 6. 3.
64. 8. prae studiis: 'the other candidates not being able to make up
the requisite number of tribes on account of the eagerness with which
the nine tribunes openly pushed for the office'. T h e sense is that the
other nine existing tribunes except Duilius tried to secure re-election
but that the tribes which voted for them were disqualified by Duilius
with the result that other candidates could not secure a majority.
tribus explerent is technical; cf. Lex Malac. 3 . 7 : Cicero, pro Caecina 29.
64. 10. in quo: 'si...':
the vulgate reading on which Ver. and N agree
is adopted by most editors including Mommsen and Bayet but no
convincing parallel has been adduced for the ellipse. If a verb has
fallen out it is more likely to be scriptum est than sic erat (H. J . Miiller,
Luterbacher). T h e text of the clause is fortunately preserved in a
sound state by Ver. with the exception of uti> given also by N . ut ii
gives the right sense and balances hi and Mi but Housman in a
marginal note suggests that the contracted ut i ( = ii) suits the pseudoarchaic nature of the language better and accounts for the archetype.
'If I shall call for your votes for ten tribunes, if for any reason you shall
elect today less than ten tribunes, then let those whom the elected
tribunes co-opt as their colleagues be as validly tribunes as those
whom you shall this day have chosen to that office.' Linguistic details
betray the whole formula as a second-century fabrication. For si. .
turn cf. 1. 24. 8 ; qui is abl. 'for any reason' (not a primitive form).
65. 1. Tarpeium: the alleged co-option of the consuls of 454 (31. 5 n.) is
inspired by their responsibility for one of the first measures to give
the plebs some legal protection (4. 30. 3 n.).
65. 2. Lars Herminius: I replace Herminius' praenomen which Gassiodorus' L. shows once stood in the text of Livy. {Aapivos Diodorus
12. 27. 1; Adpos D.H. 11. 51. 1; cf. Auct. de Praen. 4.) Lars is frequently
corrupted in transmission. Herminius is presumably related to the
consul of 506 (2. 15. 1 n.), perhaps a grandson. For the Herrrinii
see 2. 10. 6 n.
T. Verginius Caelimontanus: regarded by Munzer and others as a son
5T)

3. 65. 2

448 B.C.

of the consul of 456 (31. 1 n.) but the age-gap is too small. Perhaps
the son of A. Verginius, consul in 469 (2. 63.1 ). T h e Verginii at
some early period divided into two families, one residing on the
Esquiline, the other on the Caelian. Hence his cognomen.
65. 3 . Trebonius: there is evidence to suggest that the Trebonii were
an old family of Etruscan origin from Clusium (Munzer, R.E.,
'Trebonius').
65. 4. usque eo: 23. 19. 4 ; adeo is one of Ver.'s trivializations.
65. 5. M. Geganius Macerinus: 4. 8. 1, 17. 7, 27. 10-12. For the
cognomen cf. Macer. N's Macrinus may be influenced by the emperor
of that name. A son of the consul of 492 (2. 34. 1).
65. 6. otioforis quoque: N's word-order is ruled out by the absence of
any Livian examples of prepositive quoque (Baehrens, Philologus,
SuppL 12 (1912), 387 ff.; Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana, 175).
65. 7. cura pacis: for the sentiment cf. 2. 39. 7.
65. 8. inprimis: 'originally'.
65. 9. nominal 5. 18. 2 n.
6 5 . 1 1 . adeo moderatio: one of L.'s most articulate judgements in which
he gives a coherent framework to the events of these years. Notice
the subtle transition from the impersonal quisque / homines to the per
sonal nobis I iniungimus. The balance between personal ambition (dignitas)
and public order (libertas) was one which the late Republic un
successfully struggled with (Wirszubski, Libertas, 16; cf. 4. 6. 11). T h e
thought is older, going back at least to Thucydides 2. 65. 10; cf.
Xenophon, Cyrop. 8. 2. 2 8 ; Lucian, de Calumnia 11-13. Ver. omits the
preposition a(b) also at 42. 7, 4. 25. 11.
66. 1. Agrippa Furius: his filiation, in the absence of the Capitoline
Fasti, is uncertain. Perhaps a son of the consul of 481 (2. 43. 1).
C f . 5 . 3 2 . 1.
66. 3 . Aequi Volscique: the regular combination (cf. 2. 30. 3, 63. 7,
3. 6. 4, 57. 8, 60. 1, 4, 4. 1.4). T h e only case of A. ac V. (N) is 9. 12
ne Aequi quidem ac Volsci where ne . . . quidem makes all the difference.
66. 4. in ipsos verti: cf. Sallust, Or. Lepid. 19.
occaecatos lupos: this refers to a slogan which enjoyed some currency
between n o and 80. T h e Romans, jealous of their descent from
Romulus and Remus, were proud to be known as lupi but the term
could rebound. Cf. Justin 38. 6. 8 (Mithridates); Veil. Pat. 2. 27. 2
(Pontius). It will be a legacy of Sullan historiography.
67-68. The Speech of Quinctius
Quinctius' speech is the first of L.'s full-scale rhetorical compositions
and it is, in its way, a small masterpiece. After some experimentation
in Books 1 and 2 in shaping his material L. hits on the idea of opening
516

446 B.C.

3. 67-68

and closing a book with a long speech. As often as not the first speech
foreshadows what is to come, the last rounds off the narrative or what
has happened. So Book 4 is opened by Canuleius (3-5), Book 5 opened
by Appius Claudius (3-6), and closed by Camillus (51-54). Quinctius
gathers together and reviews the issues which have been at stake in
the turbulent years before and after the Decemvirate and points the
moral that Rome's future depends upon Concordia and that concordia
can only be achieved by every citizen subordinating his own desires
and ambitions to the needs of Rome. It need hardly be said that such
a message was more relevant to the times of Augustus than of Quin
ctius, and Hellmann does well to draw attention to it (Livius-lnterpretationen, 50-52) but it is in no sense Augustan propaganda. A speech
on similar lines was evidently in D.H. whose text is defective at this
point (Klotz 271), which implies that one stood in the history written
by Valerius Antias.
T h e immaturity of the composition is revealed by its formal correct
ness, by detailed discrepancies from the surrounding narrative which
indicate that it was composed separately (67. 1 n.3 68. 1 n., 68. 7 n.,
68. 10 n.) and have even led scholars to suppose that it is taken from
a different source, and by the large number of passages which
imitate Demosthenes and Cicero. As Dobree observed (Adversaria
Critica, 1. 349) 'omnia e Demosthene adumbravit'. Such similarities
might be put down to a common stock of rhetorical commonplaces
if it were not for L.'s known and demonstrable admiration for the two
great orators. For a general treatment of the speech see R. Ullmann,
La Technique des Discours, 5 6 - 5 8 ; also Soltau 113, 169; Burck 48-50.
For R o m a n knowledge of Demosthenes see P. Perrochat, Les Modeles
grecs de Salluste. T h e Philippics and Olynthiacs were the most popular.
Prooemium: principium a nostra persona et a re
67. 1. Quirites: 5. 6. 15 n.
pudore: the argument resembles Demosthenes, Olynth. 1. 27.
in conspectum vestrum: N has a variant in contionem vestram introduced
from ad contionem in 66. 6, which is the standard phrase (4. 6. 1,
44. 22. 1, 44. 45. 8). For in conspectumprocedere cf. Plautus, Most. 1125.
It is an archaic phrase which sets the tone for Quinctius, severissimus
consul.
traditum iri: 1. 7. 10 n. for the impressively weighty future pass. inf.
vix Hernicis: no engagement between the Hernici and the Aequi
and Volsci has been mentioned, but it may be a purely rhetorical
comparison.
67. 2. ita vivitur: further examination of Ver. shows that it has pre
cisely the same text as N , namely vivitu
atus and not as reported
in the O.C.T. is status rerum est might seem redundant with it but the
517

3- 67. 2

446 B.C.

phrase is unexceptionable linguistically (8. 13. 2)) and the two phrases
do convey two distinct ideas, the atmosphere of Q / s life and the
general situation. T h e text should be kept. For the thought Weissenborn well compares Cicero, in CatiL 1. 31.
67. 3 . viri arma: for the juxtaposition cf. 2. 40. 2 n.
Roma me consule: me Roma consule Ver., but there is no parallel for the
separation of me and consule.
satis honorum, satis superque vitae: a conventional disclaimer for which
cf. Aeschylus, Agamemnon 1314 with Fraenkel's note but the im
mediate source was no doubt Caesar's famous satis diu vel naturae vixi
vel gloriae (ap. Cicero, pro Marcello 25).
Tractatio: (a) dignum
67. 4 . nos consules an vos Quirites: the argument that if the fault rests
with the generals they should be replaced but if it rests with the people
they should reform owes much to Demosthenes, Olynth. 2. 28-31, the
language something to Cicero, in CatiL 1.3.
67. 5. ignaviam . . . virtuti: a variation on Demosthenes, Phil. 1. 11.
67. 6. discordia ordinum et: 2. 44. 8, evidently a Republican common
place but the thought can be traced back e.g. to Demosthenes, Phil.
3. 21. Madvig's emendation of est to et, confirmed subsequently by
Ver., eliminates what would otherwise be an irrelevant generalization
where we expect a specific reason for Aequan optimism. T h e resulting
antithesis between Hits (Clericus) and urbis huius underlines the point
and suggests that the emphatic order urbis huius is preferable to the
normalized huius urbis. According to A. Fischer (De Usu Praenominum,
1908) the incidence of postponed hie is 12:451.
(b) aequum
67. 7. pro deumjidem: An archaic exclamation (Ennius, Sat. 18 V . ;
Terence, Andr. 237) used only here and 44. 38. 10 and avoided by
Sallust and Cicero who prefers p. d. hominumque jidem (cf. Orator 155).
It invariably accompanies a question and introduces a new point.
Quinctius passes to consider whether R o m a n behaviour is reasonable.
For the form of the subsequent argument cf. 4. 4. 2 ; Cicero, in
Pisonem 15.
6 7 . 9 . videbamus iniquum: 'although we saw that it (i.e. the election
of consuls with plebeian leanings) was unfair to the patricians'. There
is as yet no suggestion in L. that plebeians were actually elected to the
consulate, only that men with plebeian sympathies were. According
to L. the first plebeian consul was in 367 (6. 42. 9) although in fact
the presence of plebeian names in the early Fasti suggests that the rigid
exclusion of plebeians only began after the Decemvirate when such
distinctions were for the first time formally fixed. There is no need,
518

446 B.C.

3- 67. 9

therefore, to accept A's iniquos against the archetype. In the rest of

the sentenceplebi must be dative (cf. 22. 1. 17, 27. 37. 10). It is hard
to see whom Quinctius has in m i n d ; perhaps Tarpeius and Aternius. T h e repetition of vidimus after videbamus is harsh, particularly
since they must bear different meanings ('saw' and 'witnessed').
Harant's sivimus, conjectured independently by Housman, is a great
improvement.
67. 10. ecquando . . . licebit?: picks up 66. 4. T h e thought is again con
ventional (cf. 4. 4. 10, 5. 5, 2. 44. 9, 24. 1), recurring in D.H. 6. 36. 1,
88. 1, and in [Sallust], Epist. 2. 10. 8. It goes back to Greek political
thinking, in particular Thucydides 3. 82-83 and Demosthenes.
67. 11. Esquilias videmus: N has Esquilias quidem with submovit as main
verb. T h e resulting zeugma is intolerable. O n e can repulse assaulting
Volscians but not a captured suburb. Ver. actually reads Esquiliasqvid. . . . , that is Esquiliasque vid[emus]9 thus confirming Harant's
emendation. For the idiom cf. 2. 59. 2.
(c) utile
68. 1. ubi: Doering alone observed the awkwardness of ubi. It must
mean 'when' not 'where', but the sense requires 'seeing that' which
ubi cannot convey (Kuhner-Stegmann 2. 359 f.). iisdem presumes
a correlative'the same spirit as you showed in besieging the Senate'
and ubi should be altered by a slight change to quibus (the loss of q
may be associated with corruption of videmus to quidem). As often, the
same idiom occurs in close proximity (59. 1). T h e siege of the Senate,
not elsewhere mentioned, is a legitimate exaggeration.
68. 2. incensa passim tecta: p. i. t. Ver. but logic insists that passim
belongs to incensa not fumare.
68. 3 . in quo statu: the presence of in misplaced in U indicates that -n
originally had it but that at an early stage it was eliminated. Taken
with the joint authority of Ver. and TT the evidence is enough to establish
it as the reading of the archetype. It can be accepted; cf. 37. 53. 6,
3 8 . 5 . 6 - 8 . 1.
nuntiabantur: if the farms have been burnt the news will already
have reached the unfortunate owners. W h a t lies in the future is the
question how they are going to restore the damage. T h e imperfect
is more appropriate that N's future.
68. 4. 'Words are no substitute for actions.' T h e argument is familiar
from Demosthenes; cf, e.g., Phil. 2. 3-5. utcontionum in the O.C.T. is
a misprint for et contionum.
refortuna: for text see C.Q. 9 (1959), 282.
68. 6. Notice the combination of a complex, long sentence describing
the fullness of past glories, and bare statement of their present
plight.
519

3.

68.

446 B.C.

(d) necessarium
68. 7. haerete: 21. 35. 12; cf. Seneca, Contr. 7. 7 - 4 ; Val. Max. 2. 1. 9.
sequitur vos necessitas: cf. Demosthenes, Olynth. 1. 15
'
.

grave erat: 'it was irksome' (Fletcher, Latomus 20 (1961), 91 with

parallels).
Capitolium scandet: 4. 2. 14, 45. 39. 2; cf. Horace, Odes 3. 30. 8-9
dam Capitolium
scandet cum tacita virgine pontifex.
The similarity of the language may go back to a common religious
source, perhaps the details of processions whether triumphal or pon
tifical, or, since both passages have in the background a premonition
of the Fall of Rome, a prophecy circulating under the late Republic
that foreboded the end of Rome (Fraenkel, Horace, 303).
68. 8. domi mulierum: cf. Homer, Iliad 20. 251-5, especially 252. The
sedentary quarrelsomeness of women quickly became proverbial (cf.
the passages collected by Headlam on Herodas 1. 37) but the thought
that enjoyment of present peace is shortsighted is always uppermost
in Demosthenes' mind (cf. Olynth. 1. 15).
68.9. his ego gratiora dictu alia esse scio: a frequent apology by orators and
a commonplace already for Aeschylus. Fraenkel gathers some early
examples in his note on Agamemnon 620-2. Add, from Demosthenes,
Olynth. 2. 2 1 ; Phil. 1. 5 1 ; 3. 63.
Conclusio
68. 10. adsentatores: the distinction between the adsentator and the
statesman was a favourite of the schools (cf. Cicero, Topica 83) and is
treated at length by Cicero in the Laelius 95-98. The picture of un
scrupulous individuals making capital out of the perils of the state
was drawn by Demosthenes (cf. Chers. 66-67).
68. 11, malae rei se quam nullius: cf. the arguments of Alcibiades in
Thucydides 6. 89.

68. 12. antiquos mores: Quinctius recalls to the Romans the majestic
claim of Enniusmoribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque.
69-72. War with the Aequi and Volsci: the Scaptius Affair
Moderatio is not enough. The governed as well as the governing classes
have to exercise restraint (modestia). The final section of Book 3 strikes
a new note which is to become the dominant theme of the following
book. The Decemvirate had taught Rome that libertas could not be
520

446 B.C.

3. 69-72

maintained unless the governing class learnt to subordinate their per

sonal ambitions to the general interest of the state, a lesson which
Quinctius expressed in his speech. The people had now to be taught
by experience the same lesson. The acceptance by the governing class
of restraint was rewarded by victory over the Aequi and Volsci but the
undisciplined character of the people was symptomatized in the
Scaptius Affair. So the two incidents which round off Book 3 cohere
togethervictoriam honestam turpe indicium populi deformavit. Historically
there is no substance to the events of the year.
See Burck 50-51; Hellmann, Livius-Interpretationen, 46-58; Klotz
271.

69. 2. telum acerrimum: 55. 3 n.

69. 3 - 5 . dignam . . . dignam . . . dignam: observe the fulsome rhetoric
with which the Senate greets Quinctius' speech. Cf. Verr. 4. 65, 5. 184;
for bellum propulsari cf. Cicero, CatiL 4. 22; Phil. 3. 3.
69. 4. per proditionem: Valerius and Horatius. acerbe tuendo: Ap.
Claudius (2. 27. 1).
69. 5. communem patriam: 66. 4, 67. 10.
69. 6. cum consules in contione pronuntiassent: for the text see C.Q. 9
(i959)>27icausas cognoscendi: 4. 26. 12 n.
69. 8. ex aerario: 4. 22. 1, 7. 23. 3. This could be an archival notice. The
aerarium was situated in the temple of Saturn (2. 21. 2) which already
existed and the name aerarium implies the use of bronze as a currency
medium which was assumed by the Twelve Tables and was perhaps
a reform of Tarpeius and Aternius. The function of the quaestors as
financial officers is also a likely consequence of the Decemvirate
(2. 41. 11 n.). At a later date when armies were stationed largely
abroad the storing of standards in the treasury would obviously have
been impracticable. See Karlowa, Rom. Rechtsgeschichte, 1. 258.
quarta: i.e. about 10 a.m. The hasty mobilization of Rome may be
inspired by the resistance to Marius and Cinna in 87.
69. 9. hostem in conspectum dedit: 9. 27. 4, 30. 12. 8, a military phrase
to build up the atmosphere of battle. Cf. Bell. Hisp. 4. 2, 39. 3 ;
Cicero, Verr. 5. 86; also Ennius, Ann. 48 Vahlen and Terence, Phormio
261.

The Battle with the Aequi and Volsci

The description of the battle is schematized. First the cavalry
engagement is related and then the fortunes of three divisions of the
infantry are followed through in turn. T o achieve the smooth
transition from one scene to another L. twice employs a favourite
technique, the dispatch of a messenger to the locality where the next
operations are to be described; see Witte, Rh. Mus. 65 (1910), 270 ff.;
521

3- 70

446 B.C.

P. G. Walsh, Rh. Mus. 97 (1954), 11214. T h e combats themselves

are divided into stages, the initial repulse, the rally, the final victory,
and the interest centres on psychological rather than technical issues.
T h e whole is leavened with a smattering of military jargon to give it
verisimilitude. See Plathner, Die Schlachtschilderungen, 11-13.
70. 1. quod. . . est: to be taken with summa imperii. . . erat. Unity of
command is essential for the conduct of vital matters. T h e generaliza
tion is traditional; cf. 4. 31. 2 ; Homer, Iliad 2. 204; Thucydides,
6. 72. 4. There may be an allusion to the status of M . Agrippa in
28 B.C.

communicando: 'by sharing his plans and his honours and treating
him as an equal although in fact he was not'.
consilia laudesque make an odd pair (no example quoted by Gudeman
in Thes. Ling. Lat.) and I suspect with H . J . Mliller that another gerund
has dropped out, e.g. participando; cf. 2. 52. 8. See Tacitus, Agr. 8.
70. 2. Sp. Postumio Albo: 4. 25. 5 n.
P. Sulpicium: 10. 5 n.
70. 6. conficerent: 1. 25. 10, a strong word to match Sulpicius' resolu
tion. Cf. Donatus on Terence, Eun. 926 proprie (confeere) convenit gladiatoribus qui gravissimis vulneribus occubuerunt. Used in this sense by the less
sophisticated military writers, e.g. Hirtius, B.G. 8. 23. 5 ; Bell. Alex.
53-3resistere quibus sibi: editors follow the single testimony of A and print
resistere sibi quibus, taking quibus to refer to sibi: 'the Romans who had
forced the massed phalanx of the Aequan infantry to yield'. With
N.'s word-order which allows sibi its natural position (1. 13. 2 n.)
quibus = illos 'the Aequans could not resist whose infantry already
had yielded to them (the Romans)'.
70. 7. haud surdis auribus: 24. 32. 6, 40. 8. 10. 'His words did not fall
on deaf ears.'
impressione una: 2. 30. 13, 4. 28. 6, 8. 9. 3, 25. 37. 13. A military
term; cf. Bell. Afr. 78. 3 ; Hirtius, B.G. 8. 6. 2 ; Vegetius 3. 15.
confodere: another word avoided by Cicero but patronized by
military historians, e.g. Sallust, Catil. 60. 7 ; Nepos, Pel. 5. 4 ; Frontinus
2- 5-3370. 10. Agrippa's exploit is one of those nameless legends so readily
incorporated into history. Frontinus preserves three other instances
of it: Servius Tullius (2. 8. 1), T. Quinctius Capitolinus (2. 8. 2), and
M . Furius Camillus (2. 8. 4). Of the present incident Frontinus
writes: ' signum militare ereptum signifero in hostes Hernicos et
Aequos misit', thus confirming Duker's arrepta.
70. 13. praeda . . . compotem: the abl. (other than animo) only here,
except for Accius 36 R. and a few debased inscriptions which give voto
compos for voti compos. T h e phrase is evidently mock military and as such
522

446 B.C.

3- 70. 13

the text may be sound but the analogy for it must have come from
victoriae compos (9. 43. 14, 29. 10. 8; Veil. Pat. 1. 10. 3, 2. 96. 3 ; Val.
Max. 1. 1. 1). praedaeque ingentis ?
70, 15. The panegyric of Valerius and Horatius sounds excessive and
tendentious. The hand of Valerias Antias may lie behind it.
The Scaptius Affair
The arbitration between Ardea and Aricia cannot be credited
either in general or in detail. A glance at the map shows that the land
in dispute must have comprised part of the later Tribus Scaptia since
the tribe was centred on Velitrae and the town of Scaptia which lay
some 16 miles from Rome (Festus 464 L.). The tribe was not formed
until 332 and no other Scaptius is known before the first century. It
follows that the story that the land really belonged to Rome must
have been propaganda in circulation between 338 when the confisca
tions after the Latin War took place (8. 14. 9) and 332. That it is
mere propaganda is confirmed by Cicero who tells an identical anec
dote about Nola and Neapolis (de Officiis 1. 33). Nor is the treaty with
Ardea in 444 any more secure (4. 7. 10 n.) The only certain detail is
the colonization of Ardea (4. 11. 5 n.). Many reconstructions of how
the history was built up have been advanced as, for example, that the
treaty belongs to a much later date, but was placed in 444 to account
for the troubles and subsequent colonization of Ardea and the Scap
tius Affair inserted to account for the treaty (Sherwin-White). Such
reconstructions do not, however, allow for the fact that the treaty was
a discovery of Licinius Macer's while the Scaptius Affair must be a
much earlier element in the story and is derived, here at least, from
Valerius. The second-century version will have contained Scaptius,
the capture of Ardea by the Volsci, recapture, and colonization. The
only improvement on that was Licinius' addition of the treaty.
That the Scaptius Affair itself is an invention of the late fourth
century is confirmed by a secondary consideration: Scaptius claimed
to have fought at Corioli. If that implies acceptance of the traditional
date for Coriolanus, we know that the Coriolanus saga was taking
shape at very much the same time, the end of the fourth century
(2. 33. 4 nn.). In other words the two anecdotes hang together and
have a roughly contemporary origin.
L.'s treatment balances Scaptius against the consuls. Each side
gives its reasons in answering speeches, presented in or. obi. and ex
pressed in the language of late Republican politics. See also L. R.
Taylor, Voting Districts, 53; Sherwin-White, Roman Citizenship, 25-26;
Munzer, R.E., 'Scaptius'.
71. 2. Aricini: 1. 50. 3 n. Ardeates: 1. 57. 1 n.
523

3-71-3

446 B.C.

71. 3 . concilio populi: not a concilium plebis but an assembly of the

whole people meeting by tribes, and presided over by the consul
(2. 58. 1 n.).
7 1 . 5 . reguntur... regunt: a familiar epigram deriving from Thucydides
2. 65. 8 KCU OVK r\yTO \1aXk0v VTT* avrov (sc. the people) rj avros fye',
cf. Sallust, Jug. 1. 5. See the Introduction p. 17.
71. 6. infit: 1. 23. 7 n.
annum: Corioli fell in 493 (2. 33. 5). It is now 448. If Scaptius had
begun to serve at the minimum age of seventeen, he would have been
thirty-seven, i.e. have served twenty years.
71. 8. exiguum vitae tempus superesse: for the pathetic touch cf. Fronto
83. 12 van den Hout.
72. 1. flagitium: with/acinus below, cf. Cicero, in CatiL 1. 13, 1. 18, and
other examples in Tkes. Ling. Lat. s.v. /acinus, 82. 10 ff.
72. 2. tribus: it would not have been much use to address themselves
solely to the tribunes (N) and Perizonius's correction restores a cliche
(8. 37. 9 ; Suetonius, Augustus 56).
72. 3 . famae . . .fidei: cf. Sallust Jug. 16. 3 ; Cicero, adAtticum 11. 2. 1;
ad Fam. 13. 10. 2.
72. 4. contionali seni: { an old babbler in the assemblies'. The insult is
feeble and not strengthened by Dutoit's reference to Cicero, adAtticum
1. 16. 11 and ad Q.F. 2. 5. 1 (Hommages a L. Herrmann, 335). Should
we not follow a clue disclosed by Sigonius and read comptionali? The
senex co(e)mptionalis was an old slave who was used in sham sales and
hence became proverbial for a worthless and venal slave. So Curius
(ad Fam. 7. 29. 1) 'sum enim xPla1, / ^ t u u s ^crci 8e Attici nostri:
ergo fructus est tuus, mancipium illius; quod quidem si inter senes
comptionales venale proscripserit, egerit non multum'; Plautus,
Bacch. 976; Thes. Gloss. ( = Vat. Lat. 3321; from Festus) contemnalis
senex: emptus, manumissus et tutor, auctor foetus. The sneer of venality is
much more to the point.
clarum hoc fore imagine Scaptium esse: the Roman people are going to
have to wear the mask, i.e. have the character, of double-crossers
(for quadruplator as a political term of abuse cf. Cicero, Verr. 2. 2 2 ;
Plautus, Pers. 70) and profiteers (4. 50. 1). Scaptius' reward is badly
corrupt. The contrast with persona leaves no choice but to take
imagine to mean the death-mask, which noble Roman families pre
served generation after generation (58. 2, 4. 16. 4). If so, all intertations which start from imagine as 'statue* or 'reflection' can be
ruled out. Equally since Scaptius is still alive and the death-mask will
be his, the future {fore) is required and Humanist conjectures founded
on forte . . . esse can then be dismissed. Two alternatives appear
to be open: (1) regarding hoc as an assimilation of hoc to the preceding
524

446 B.C.

3- 72. 4

hoc . . . hoc . . . hoc . . . hoc . . . hoc, delete esse (Gronovius, de Pec. Vet.y
4. 9) or emend to sed (Alschefski) 'Scaptius will be famous by this
memorial'. For clarum . . . imagine cf. 1. 34. 6 nobilem una imagine Numae
esse. (2) If hoc is right the corruption will be deeper. Bayet's lacuna
{(et dignum)) gains nothing and explains nothing, but the text could
be rewritten to give the sense 'this will be a fine death-mask for Scaptius', e.g. claram hoc fore imaginem Scaptio. I have little doubt that the
truth lies with the former. T h e chiastic .Saz/rtzHm X populum should make
both the subject of their sentences, and the antithesis is sharpened by
the simple deletion of esse rather than by its emendation to sed. For the
interpolation of esse cf. 3. 2. 3, 4. 27. 2.
72. 6. Scaptius: to be retained.

525

BOOK 4
BOOK 4 covers nearly fifty years and bridges the period between the
Decemvirate and Rome's first great wars, against Veii and against
the Gauls. Such a long period is unsatisfactory to handle, particularly
since the material at L.'s disposal from the Annales is much fuller
than hitherto. As was his practice, he constructed a series of episodes
which would break across the vertical succession of scrappy and
isolated facts. T h e story of Canuleius is followed by the fate of Sp.
Maelius and the heroism of A. Cornelius Cossus but the latter half
of the book is less coherent and might suggest that L. was overwhelmed
by the wealth of disconnected detail and abandoned the attempt to
unify and co-ordinate it. T h e impression given by chapters 21-61 that
L. has been content simply to retail his sources is confirmed by the
absence of a long speech at the end to round the whole book off, as
Canuleius introduced it. As a substitute he is content to recall various
phrases and passages from Canuleius' speech (56. 11 n.) to achieve
the same purpose. So, too, the theme of modestia which is foreshadowed
in the closing chapters of Book 3 and plays a prominent part in the
first half of Book 4 wanes when the annalistic details begin to crowd
thick and fast. T h e need to compress the history of fifty years into
a single book in order to deal with Veii and the Gauls in the final
book of the first Pentad forced L. to give up more ambitious schemes
of literary presentation. As a result, the book, particularly the second
half of it, although full of historical curiosities, is less exciting than its
predecessor.
T h e refrain is modestiamoderation the necessity for give and take.
T h e agitation over conubium was inspired by the stand-offishness of
the patres; the compromise by which the consular tribunate came into
being but only patricians were elected is a signal example of modestia
(6. 12); the settlement of Ardea was largely the work of Quinctius
whose fairness iura infimis summisque moderando made him a byword
(10. 8) and a splendid contrast to the opportunist and ambitious Sp.
Maelius (13. 4). But moderatio applied in the military sphere as well.
T h e jealousies of generals spell defeat (26. 7), the single-minded
devotion of M a m . Aemilius to the call of his country brings victory
(31. 5). But if generals must exercise self-control to be victorious, it is
equally necessary that the soldiers should be loyal. T h e story of T a m panius is an (exemplum) non virtutis magis quam moderationis (41. 7) while
the fate of C. Sempronius was a stern lesson (44. 9) and that of M .
Postumius deserved and salutary. Co-operation is the only hope.
526

445 B.C.

4. 1-6

T h e plebs entrust the quaestio Postumiana to the consuls: the consuls in

turn exercise moderatio in their handling of it (51. 3). Finally, in the
political struggles that close the book, struggles over ager publicus
fought out in the elections and the levies, the true example is preached
by Servilius Ahala (57. 3, 'quern enim bonum civem secernere sua a
publicis consilia') and practised when the patres voluntarily concede
pay to the troops, thereby earning favorem unica moderatione par turn
(57. 12).
1-6. Canuleius
T w o issues dominate the first section of the book, the demand that
plebeians should be eligible for election to the consulate and the
proposal that there should be a recognized right of conubium between
patricians and plebeians. Both are associated with the name of the
tribune C. Canuleius. T h e first is demonstrably political invention
by Licinius Macer to supply background for his interpretation of the
institution of consular tribunes (7. 1 n.). T h e second is likely to be
historical and together with the name of Canuleius to have been
preserved in the Annales as the only authentic notice for 445.
T h e right of conubium is not the possession by an individual of certain
legal requirements necessary for contracting marriage. It is rather
a common relationship which unites and constitutes a community.
As such, conubium is parallel not subordinate to civitas. They are
separate and distinct rights both of which determine homogeneous
communities. T o be a R o m a n citizen does not entail the right of inter
marriage with other Roman citizens and to enjoy the right of inter
marriage does not entail citizenship. In practice the two became
identified, but in law (Gaius 1. 56) and in origin they were widely
distinct. T h e early history of Latium shows that there existed among
the upper classes of Latin cities a tradition of intermarriage. Tarquinius
Superbus married his daughter to Octavius Mamilius of Tusculum
( i . 49. 9), as in later times Rome attempted to secure the adherence
of Capua by marriage ties with leading Capuans ( 3 1 . 3 1 . 11). Unlike
citizenship intermarriage naturally did not extend to the lower classes.
There was no legal bar as such but sentiment and religionRoman
gentes were as proud as Scottish septsformed an adequate obstacle.
At Rome the patrician community which recognized marriage among
its own members and certain privileged Latin aristocrats became
during the first fifty years of the Republic increasingly exclusive until
it was possible for the Decemvirs in codifying the unwritten laws
to regard intermarriage as a matter of right and not merely of con
vention. So it was defined in the Twelve Tables: ut ne plebei cum
patribus (conubia) essent, inhumanissima lege sanxerunt (Cicero, de Rep.
2. 63). As soon as the restriction was codified, the underprivileged,
527

4. i-6

445 B.C.

the plebeians, were bound to protest. T h e Lex Canuleia, a negative

measure designed not to promote intermarriage but to prevent the
prohibition of it, was inevitable. But at no time were the citizen-rights
of the plebeians ever impugned.
L.'s version of the struggle obscures the issue. Canuleius' speech
tends to identify civitas and conubium and in blurring the two betrays
the same radical tendency which fathered the proposal to make
plebeians eligible for the consulship on Canuleius. T h e immediate
source is Licinius Macer, for L. abandoned Valerius at the end of
Book 3, as is clear from several inconsistencies. Hos secuti (4. 1. 1)
refers to the consuls of 446 who have not been mentioned by name
since 3. 66. 1 nor referred to since 3. 72. 1. In 4. 1. 4 the Ardeates are
said to descisse. no treaty is referred to in 3. 71. 2. 4. 6. 7 talks of
a foedus ictum between plebs and patres of which there is no mention
in the previous book. And there are others (3. 12, 7. 1 n.). But L. has
worked over the material. In particular the careful opposition be
tween the arguments of the patricians and of Canuleius is charac
teristically Livian (see Hellmann, Livius-Interpretationen, 61-63). On
the problems of conubium see Bayet, tome 4, 126-32 ; Volterra, Studi. . .
Albertario, 2. 349 ff.; De Visscher, R.I.D A. 1 (1952), 401-22 ; Studi. .
Paoli, 246-7; on the sources see F. Liibbert, De Fontibus Libri 4 Obser
vations; Soltau 164-72; Klotz 271-2; J.R.S. 48 (1958), 4 0 - 4 1 ; on
L.'s presentation Burck 89-92.
T h e source used by D.H. is closely related but evidently later since
he names the dissentient tribune, who is anonymous in L., as C.
Furnius ( n . 53. 1), under the influence of the career and oratorical
repute of the tribune of 50 B.C. Remarkably D.H. omits the proposals
of Canuleius on conubium, perhaps because they were too technical
to be made intelligible for a Greek audience, but his divergent treat
ment of foreign affairs (54 ff.) and of the consular tribunate (60)
indicates that the differences are not to be accounted for simply by
the differing aims of the two historians.
1 . 1 . hos secuti: the pronoun hie is used on ten occasions to make the
connexion between books (cf., e.g., 7. 1. 1,9. 1. 1) but nowhere except
here does 'a form of hie referring to definite words reach back more
than a few lines' (Nye, Sentence Construction, 135). hos = M . Geganius
and C. Julius (3. 66. 1).
M. Genucius: if the text and tradition are sound he will be a brother
of the consul and Decemvir of 451 (3. 33. 3 n.). T h e Genucii were
plebeian and there is little evidence of them before the end of the
century, so that Mommsen {Rom. Forschungen, 1. i n ) doubted the
authenticity of the entry in the Fastiperhaps rightly.
C. Curiatius: the praenomen is given as P. by L. here but C. at 7. 3,
rdios by Zonaras (7. 19, from L.), and D.H. 11. 53. 1. P. is probably
528

445 B.C.

4. 1. 1

the usual corruption for p(roprium nomen; 2. 15. 1 n.). AyplinTas in

Diodorus 12. 23. 1 is repeated from Agr. Furius of the previous year.
The nomen is less secure. Curtius is transmitted by Diodorus, Varro {de
Ling. LaL 5. 150), and Fast Hyd. (Koivrios in D.H.) but both here
(Curatius) and at 7. 3 (Curiatius N Curatius Ver.) the longer form is
found and that it comprised the vulgate reading of L. at an early date
is corroborated by Cassiodorus' Curiacius. No help is afforded by the
cognomen Philo (or Chilo), which is not adopted by another member
either of the Curtii or the Curiatii (Guratii do not figure). Curiatius
is probably right, in so far as being the name given by Licinius, and
should be identified as a brother of the Decemvir P. Curiatius (3. 33. 3)
as M. Genucius was of T. Genucius. Both may be falsifications, if the
Curiatii are also plebeian (cf. 5. 11. 4; see above p. 76).
nam anni principio : anni nam p. M. The order is invariably principio
anni (Fiigner, Lexicon, 1154. 15) and nam p. a. should be read here
(Schmidt).
C. Canuleius: the name is Etruscan (Schulze 152 n. 4) and there
were Canuleii at Volsinii (C.I.L. 11. 2748-50). Besides a M. Canuleius
(? a son) mentioned in 44. 6, the family occur in minor offices through
out most of the Republic. C. Canuleius is known only by his law. The
Vestal Canuleia (Plutarch, Numa 10) is tendentious fabrication.
1. 2. promulgarent: cf. D.H. 11. 53. 1. The bill anticipates the LicinioSextian rogations.
1 , 4 . ob iniuriam: cf. Caesar, B.C. 3. 10. 2 with Meusel's note.
descisse: 7. 10 n., 9. 1 n. A previous treaty, unrecorded in Valerius'
narrative, is implied.
fremere: only wars, not rumours of wars, had their place in the
Annales and the menace from Rome's three traditional enemies is
certainly inserted into the history to provide a suitable atmosphere
for the debate. Veii had made a truce for forty years in 474 (2. 54. 1).
Apart from the present ambiguous activity, no hostilities by the
Veientes are reported until 438 (17. 1), when the treaty had nearly or,
if the regular chronology is defective, actually expired. Any provoca
tive raids in the intervening period are, therefore, exceedingly im
probable. The fortification of Verrugo may have been recorded. The
name (from verruca 'a wart'; cf. Cato ap. Aul. Gell. 3. 7. 6 locum
editum asperumque) suggests a commanding citadel of rock. It lay on
the edge of the land of the Volsci and the Aequi and was within a
night's travel of Tusculum and in sight of cthe plain', presumably the
plain bounded by Praeneste to the east and the Mte. Lepini (55. 8,
58. 3, 5. 28. 7). It must therefore have been one of the summits of the
Alban Hills guarding the passage of the Via Latina through Algidus.
Only one of the whole circuit of peaks resembles a wart (cf. the Scottish
Bynac)Maschia d'Ariano which is capped by a precipitous outcrop
814432

5^9

Mm

4- i . 4

445 B.C.

of rock. A little way down the eastern slope an important seventhsixth-century cemetery has been found (Nordini, Notiz. Scavi, 1934,
169-75). T h e remains on the Acropolis itself are medieval or later,
but the small church of S. Silvestro is likely to have taken the place of
the temple of Diana mentioned by Horace (Odes 1. 21. 6 ; 3. 23. 9 ;
Livy 21. 62. 8) and some Republican sherds have been washed down
the slopes. See also T. Ashby, P.B.S.R. 5 (1910), 424; Tomasetti,
Campagna Romana, 564 ff.; Radke, R.E., ' V e r r u g o \
1.5. conticescerent: recalling the remark first made by Marius (Plutarch
28) and immortalized by Cicero (pro Milone 11 ; cf. Lucan 1. 277)
silent leges inter arma.
1. 6. scivisset [et] : Pettersson retains et and takes vociferatus as an indica
tive not as participle, comparing for the ellipse 3. 14. 6, 9. 10. 2,
10. 12. 9.

The Debate in the Senate

T h e consuls' speech, analysed by Lambert (Die Indirekte Rede, 23-4),
is an elaborate exercise in indirect speech which corresponds effec
tively with the passionate and direct oration of Canuleius. Sophistry
is balanced against emotion and the contrast is underlined by the
variation between 0.0. and o.r. It has no counterpart in D.H. and may
be presumed to be an original composition. Notice the repetitions
(iam , . . iam; sic . . . sic; ne quid. . . ne quid; dimidius . . . dimidius; creet
. . . creaturos; concessum . . . concessum; concitent. . . concitaverint; hostes
. . . hostes), the antitheses (domi. . ./oris; plebis . . .patrum . . . tribunorum . . . consulum; pace . . . bello; primo . . . nunc; hunc ordinem aut
ilium magistratum; non plebi R. sed Volscis) and the chiasmi (ut. . .
temptasse . . . rogari ut; concedendo . . . postulando; proditurum . . . passurum;
scelus civium . . . hostium arma). T h e language and contents are as
sophisticated as the clausulae (cf., e.g., 2. 5 nee suos noverit).
2. 1. furores tribunicios: a favourite phrase of Cicero's; cf., e.g., deDomo
1 0 3 ; Phil. 1. 2 2 .

2 . 3 . ideff : the strict parallelism between cuius rei praemium . . . , earn

. . . semper and Romaepraemium seditionum . . . semper shows that the sub
ject of honori fuisse must be not the reward but the activity which
produced the reward, id et (H. J . Muller) or id (Madvig) is therefore
impossible while ideo (Weissenborn) breaks the symmetry and is
without authority, being attested by F alone. The conjecture seditiones
(Mr. D. M . Last) is palmary.
2. 4. reminiscerentur: the general sense of the passage is that political
agitation brings the greatest rewards at Rome and will continue to
thrive so long as it does so. The plebs have everything to gain by
organizing strikes since the reward of sedition is enhanced prestige
530

445 B.C.

4. 2. 4

and position. W h a t then are senators being asked to remember? Not

surely the twin bastions of the R o m a n spirit, the enduring greatness
of the patricians, and the increasing splendour of the plebeians. That,
as Conway says, would be 'imposing but irrelevant': it could not be
resumed by ergo. It would also be untrue. The rise of the plebs was
at the expense of the patricians. The Senate must be being reminded
that their greatness was being eroded by the plebeians and that there
would be no end to the process so long as the plebeians had something
to show for their agitation. There are also grammatical difficulties.
T h e subject of auctiorem . . . esse is not expressed. It cannot be maiestatem senatus since, by definition, the plebs would find nothing to be
proud of in the growing greatness of the Senate and their whole
behaviour is designed to reduce it. T h e subject must be se (the plebs)
and since it cannot be understood, it must be replaced in the text
(Sigonius). Further, as the text stands either ut or quemadmodum is
redundant, ut is deleted by Porson and Madvig, as well as by earlier
editors, or emended to et (Faber), turn (Rhenanus), an (Crevier), or vel
(Bayet): quemadmodum is deleted by Lehner. But the corruption is
probably deeper. The point is that the Senate should be ashamed at
the diminished prestige which they are going to hand on to their
children. This is an old commonplace (cf Thucydides 2. 62. 3 ;
Sallust, Jug. 31. 17; Catil. 51. 42) but we expect it to be made ex
plicitly; for ut quemadmodum we might read deminutam dum (cf. 8. 34.
5 ; 63. 10). T h e metathesis is almost exact. T h e more radical
remedies of transposition (Klockius, Conway) depend on a mis
understanding of the sense of the sentence. Tr. 'Let them recall the
majesty of the Senate that they had received from their fathers and
would pass on diminished to their children, while the common
people could boast that they were becoming greater and more im
portant'.
finem ergo non fieri: 2. 11 n.
2. 5. perturbationem: 6. 4 1 . 4-12. Before the Lex Ogulnia of 300 only
patricians could be augurs and even thereafter only patricians could
hold the auspices. Hence when an interregnum occurred auspicia ad
patres redeunt (Cicero, ad Brut. 1. 5. 4). Since in early Rome no trans
action of any kind took place without consulting the auspices, the
distinction between publica and privata is anachronistic and belongs to
the period after the Lex Ogulnia when plebeians by their member
ship of the religious colleges acquired a share in the control of those
auspices which affected public transactions. But the patricians main
tained an exclusive monopoly of the auspices for their own private
affairs, in particular for the celebration of marriages (Plautus, Casina
8 6 ; Cicero, de Divin. 1. 28 with Pease's note). T h e consuls argue that
since the auspices can only be held by patricians mixed marriages
531

4. 2.5

445 B.C.

whose offspring could not validly be called patrician would in the

end deprive Rome of anyone to hold the auspices. The argument is
fallacious, for in law origo sequitur patrem (4. 12 n.).
incontaminati: the word is rare being found only in Varro, de Ling,
Lat. 9. 21 before the Christian period. It is used here to pick up con
taminate sanguinem in 1. 1. As often such striking words are only at
home in speeches where they provide a touch of verisimilitude. The
meaning is 'non depravati miscendo' (G. Jachmann, Plautin. u. Attisches,
152).

2. 6. ferarum prope ritu: cf. 3. 47. 7 n.

quorum sacrorum: 5. 52. 4 ; the gentes had special cults of their own
(cf. Varroap. Non. 820 L.; Festus 284 L.: see Wissowa, Religion, 398 ff.).
sit: parallel to ignoret, after ut.
2. 7. parum . . . iam: for this device cf. Cicero, pro Sestio 32.
accingi: 1. 47. 3, 28. 41. 8. In the sense 'to gird oneself against' the
word is rare and impressive. Avoided by Cicero, Caesar, and Sallust,
it is used by L. only in reported speech which suggests that it sounded
too strong or too poetic for narrative (cf. Terence, Phormio 318; Eun.
1060).

erect \ et creaturos: the change of subject is remarkable(populus)

creet: (turbatores) creaturosand unconstitutional since at all times it is
the people who are responsible for creating consuls. The difficulty was
seen and solved by Dobreecreet: [et] creaturus.
2. 8. ne . . . sineret: a pious prayer, cf. 28. 28. 11. regiae maiestatis imperium is the equivalent ofregia potestas (8. 32. 3)the annalistic myth
that the consulate was evolved from the authority of the kings.
eo reddere: cf. Cicero, Phil. 7-^7miliens morituros: a favourite disclaimer of Cicero's; cf. ad Att.
7. 11. 1, 14. 9. 2, 14. 22. 2 ; Phil. 2. 112.

2. 9. alia ex aliis iniquiora: with a comparative L. often uses the plain

alia aliis, where the abl. is one of comparison (4. 26. 7, 29. 15. 11,
35- 17- 3) > M. Muller deleted ex. But here ex aliis goes closely with the
gerund postulando as at 7. 39. 3 alias ex aliis fingendo moras. The rOTTOS
that a policy of concession does not endear one to an electorate had
been enunciated already by Plato in the Republic and by Demosthenes.
2. 11. finem nonfieriposse si in: Conway's restoration is admirable and
easy. The consuls have said earlier that there was no prospect of an
end to the disturbances. They now conclude by denying the possibility of
any end so long as the two opposed forces continue in the same state.
audaciae temeritatique: see 2. 55. 10 n.
2 . 1 2 . illine ut: -ne ut (or utne) introduces a 'repudiating question' in
the subjunctive. Fraenkel {Horace, 100) writes on Sat. 1. 1. 108: 'This
mode of expression is in keeping with the climate of a somewhat
heated conversation; consequently the bulk of our evidence comes
532

445 B.C.

4. 2. 12

from Plautus and Terence. But it is by no means alien to the language

of Cicero and can even be found in speeches in Livy' (cf. 5. 24. 10).
'Horace, as is to be expected, uses it in the Epodes and Sermones . , .
but not in the Odes.'
2 . 1 3 . proloqui: 'speak out'; 23.5. 12,39.15.4, both speeches. T h e word,
which occurs sixteen times in Plautus and five in Terence (cf. Afranius
fr. 213), is avoided by the classical prose-writers, being found only in
Sisenna (fr. 108 P.) and the Bell, Afr. (35. 3,44.4) before L. and Tacitus.
See Kroll on Cicero, Orator 147. Its character is clear from its use.
2. 14. scandere: 3. 68. 7 n., the first of several echoes of Quinctius'
speech which suggests that there was no great interval between the
composition of Book 3 and Book 4.
si patribus . . . eripuerint: si has often been challenged (nisi Luterbacher; ni Madvig) or the punctuation been adjusted, because of the
apparent absurdity of saying that consuls are ready to be leaders if
the patres are demoralized. W h o m then, it is asked, are the consuls to
lead ? But the emphatic position of patribus and consules shows that the
text is sound. T h e patres ought to set an example of leadership, the
consuls argue, but, if they are demoralized, the consuls at least will
not fail in their duty, ni or nisi, with its implication that the consuls
have not the courage to set an example unless they are backed up,
weakens if anything the effect of the challenge.
The Speech of Canuleius
Canuleius' speech strikes a more emotional and impassioned note.
Its frequent echoes of Quinctius' oration as well as its highly finished
structure show that it is a free composition by L. himself. Licinius
probably also gave Canuleius a speech, but, as in D.H., a short one
before the Senate in answer to the consuls or to C. Claudius, and not,
as here, before the people. There is indeed a considerable similarity
to the speech attributed to Licinius Macer by Sallust, but much of the
tone, the plea for moderatio (cf. Horace, Odes 3.4.65), the dream of empire,
and the judgement on discordia are thoroughly Augustan (4. 4 n.).
It belongs to the genus duplex (Quintilian; for which see Ullmann, La
Technique, 58-60), because it is concerned with two separate issues
which are treated separately and in parallel. T h e language is flecked
with characterizing touches proper to a tribune of the fifth century.
T h e fame of the speech in antiquity was deservedly great. In par
ticular its Claudian content commended it to the emperor Claudius
who was indebted to it both for argument and for style. T h e extent of
this debt has been analysed, e.g. by A. Zingerle, AY. Phil. Abhandlungen,
1887, 51-52; F. Leo, Nachrichten von der K.G. der Wissenschaften zu
Gottingen, 1896, 193 n. 2 ; R. Syrne, Tacitus, app. 40, 4 1 ; D. M.
Last, Latomus 17 (1958), 476-87.
533

4.

3- i

445 B.C.

3 - 1 . adversus consules: but not in their presence.

Prooemium: (a) principium ab adversariis
3 . 3 . saepe . . . nunc: an old introductory formula commonly found in
Attic speeches and illustrated by Fraenkel (Glotta 39 (1961), 1-5);
cf., e.g., T h u c y d i d e s 3. 37. I (Cleon)
. . . ' vv . . . .

cives nos eorum: 'we are their fellow citizens'.

(b) principium ab re
3 . 4. finitimis externisque: 1. 49. 9 n., but externis is anachronistic since
there is no earlier example than the Campanians in 23. 4. 7.
hostibus etiam victis: Claudius took the reference to be to the en
franchisement of the Sabines by Romulus (Tacitus, Annals 11. 24. 6).
Gf. 1. 13. 4. But it would also apply to the Albans enfranchised by
Tullus (1. 30. 1) and the Latins by Ancus (1. 33. 5).
Tractatio I: (a) dignum
3 . 6. caelum ac terras misceant: 'turn the world upside down', a collo
quial proverb found also in Juvenal (2. 25, 6. 283) and Lucian
(Prometheus 9). See Otto, Sprichworter, s.v.
3 . 7. dignus: under the late Republic the right of standing for office
was not denied: candidature was a question of dignitas (Wirszubski,
Libertas, 53).
apiscendi: 44. 25. 2 (reflections of Eumenes). apiscor is a rare word
found in early Latin at Sisenna fr. 94 and in Cicero's letters before
being taken up by self-conscious writers like Pliny and Tacitus. It has
an archaic flavour which suits Canuleius' style. See C.Q,- 9 (1959),
277 against Gries, Constancy, 82.
libertinum: cf. Tacitus, Annals 11. 24. 7; Suetonius, Claud, 24 on the
adlection by Ap. Claudius Gaecus of libertinorum Jilii to the Senate
(9. 46. 10; see A. Garzetti, Athenaeum 25 (1947), 1906.). T h e allu
sion is again anachronistic. If its origin antedates L., it is probably a
confused reference to Caecus' activities or a Licinian jibe at Sulla's
supporters (cf. H. Hill, C.Q. 26 (1932), 170 fF.). But there may also
be a contemporary sneer against freedmen whose power in 32 B.C.
was feared and unpopular (Syme, Roman Revolution, 284; cf. Dio
50. 10.4).
3 . 8. lucis . . . indignantur: an old 1-077-09, used, for example, by Cicero,
pro Sex. Rose. 72 (cf. Quintilian 12. 6. 4 ) ; DecL min. 299.
(b) iustum
3 . 9. si dis placet: the exclamation is discussed most recently by
Fraenkel, Studi Italiani di Fil. Class. 27 (1956), 123-4 w n o concludes
534

445 B.C.

4- 3-9
that it is 'nicht immer ein Ausruf propter indignitatem alicuius rei' sondern
auch, wie P l a u t , Capt. 454, ein allgemeiner Ausdruck starken Erstaunens'. Here the note of indignation prevails. T h e exclamation is
confined to Plautus and Terence and Cicero's early pro Sex. Roscio
(102) and the sparing use of it by L. (6. 40. 7, 38. 47. 3, 41. 23. 7,
44. 22. 8) suggests that he keeps it for special effect.
non adfastos, non ad commentarios: the allusion again anticipates the
reform of Ap. Claudius Caecus whose secretary Cn. Flavius (9. 46)
was responsible in 304 B.C. for the publication of the Fasti and of the
formulae of legis actiones. (Detailed discussion of these controversial
measures may be found in Schulze, Roman Legal Science, 9 ff; Jolowicz,
Historical Introduction, 8 8 ; see also H. S.Jones, C.A.H. 7. 533-4.) Since
commentarii were procedural handbooks (1. 60. 4 n.) and since the
pontifices were intimately concerned with private law in so far that
questions of legitimacy and inheritance affected the maintenance of
sacra privata, the formulae of legis actiones would have been contained
in the commentarii. For Licinius 5 interest in Flavius see fr. 18 P.
3 . 10. enunquam: 9. 10. 5, 10. 8. 10, 24. 14. 3, 30. 21. 8. An inter
rogative ( = ecquando Paul. Fest. 66 L.), which should be printed as
one word. Its usage (Plautus, e.g. Cist. 8 6 ; Rudens 987, 1117 ; Terence,
Phormio 329; Virgil, Eel. 1. 67, 8. 7) suggests that it was a colloquialism
(Hofmann, Lat. Umgangsprache, 35).
Numam: 1. 18-21 n . ; cf. 1. 17 n.
3. 11. L. deinde Tarquinium: 1. 34. 1-2 n. TT has modo Romanae for R. m.
which induced Conway to delete modo and L. Herrmann to read non
modo (jion) R. (Latomus 6 (1947), 262) but the authority of MA
shows 7r\ order to be eccentric and the examples of non modo for
non modo non, collected by Drakenborch at 25. 26. 11, suffice. Cf.
* 39- 53 . 12. Ser. Tullium: 1. 39. 5 n.
patre nullo: 'whose father was a nobody'.
de T. Tatio: 1. 13.6-8 n. quidenim .. . dicamp is a typically Ciceronian
praeteritio (cf, e.g., pro Milone 75).
3 . 13. eniteret virtus: cf. Cicero, pro Mur. 32; Sallust, Catil. 54. 4.
3 . 14. Claudiam: 2. 16. 4-5 nn.
3 . 16. virfortis ac strenuus: 1. 34. 6, 3. 47. 2 n. the Roman equivalent
of with a significant concentration on military qualities
rather than gifts of person. Cf. Plancus ap. Cicero, ad Fam. 10. 8. 5,
Sallust, Catil. 51. 16; Nepos, Bat. 7. 1. It is possible that in origin it
was a more definite term of Roman public lawthe Foretes and
Sanates of Festus (426, 474 L.).
3 . 17. ad gubernacula . . . accedere: a Ciceronian metaphor (de Inv. 1.4;
de Rep. 1. 11). The whole passage with its emphasis on the virtues of
the novus homo might easily have been penned by Cicero.
535

4-4-

445 B.C.

(c) legitimum
4. 1. at enim: 5. 9. 3 n.
nullane res nova institui debet: the argument that there must always
be a first time for everything is a commonplace and is even employed
by Critognatus in recommending cannibalism (Caesar, B.G. 7. 77. 13).
4. 2. pontijices: 1. 20. 5 n.
augures: 1. 18. 6 n. Canuleius neglects the tradition that the
augurate was as old as Romulus.
census: 1. 43 n.
4. 3 , consules: 1. 60. 4 n.
dictatoris: 2. 18. 4 n.
tribuni plebi, aediles, quaestores: 2, 32. 1 n., 3. 55. 13 n., 2. 41. 11 n.,
3. 69. 8 n.
4. 4. in aeternum urbe condita: cf. 28. 28. 11 (Scipio). Canuleius ends
the first half of his speech with a glorious assertion of Rome's immor
tality. The history of the idea is of interest: latent at the very end of
the Republic (cf. Cicero, pro Marc. 22) it first appears in Tibullus
(2. 5. 23) and Virgil (Aeneid 1. 276-9) and taken in conjunction with
the present passage (cf. 6. 23. 7) must have formed part of Octavian's
early propaganda after Actium. The early evidence is assembled by
M. P. Charlesworth, Harv. TheoL Review 29 (1936), 122-31; see also
Syme, Tacitus, 208 and n. 1; Koch, Religio, 168 and n. 48. The order
is condita in aeternum, crescente in immensum. Does nova imperia allude to
the startling innovations brought about by Augustus' constitutional
settlement in 28-27 B.C. ? (Syme, Harvard Studies in Class, Phil. 64
(1959), 47; against, Walsh, Proc. Afr. Class. Ass., 1961, 26-35).
Tractatio II: (a) dignum
4. 5. pessimo exemplo publico: 3. 72. 2, 4. 13. 1. pessimo exemplo n\.
Klockius conjectured pessimo publico, a familiar phrase (Valde blanditur': Gronovius) but one which is repetitious with summa iniuria plebis
and untrue since the harm was confined to the plebeians. It is as
a precedent for a policy of segregation that it is dangerous to the state
as a whole (cf. Cicero, de Leg. 3. 32 plus exemplo quampeccato nocent).
insignitior: elsewhere contumelia insignis (e.g. Terence, Eun. 771 ;
Cicero, de Leg. Agr. 2. 54; Suetonius, Julius 79).
4. 6. immisceamur: cf. Tacitus, Annals 4. 40. 11. Like intermiscere it
conveys a suggestion of debasement.
4. 7. cooptationem implies that patricians could co-opt families at will
into their body but that is certainly erroneous (Mommsen, Staatsrecht,
3. 30 n. 1). The decision would have rested with the comitia curiata.
The choice of the term may, therefore, reflect legalistic controversies
of the last centuries of the Republic. Or it may simply be mis
understanding by L. himself, to which he is prone. If so, it was seized
536

445 B.C.

4-4- 7

on by the Emperor Claudius and retailed in his Gallic speech, from

where it found its way to Suetonius (Tib. i gens Claudia in patricias
cooptata). The two cases are given in i. 30. 2 and 2. 16. 5 where see
notes.
sinceram: picking up 2. 5.
enubere: N had ecnubere; for the form see Burckhardt in Thes. Ling.
Lat. s.v.
4. 8. nemo: Canuleius alludes to the story of Ap. Claudius and Verginia.
(b) iustum
4. 9. verum enim vero: 24. 5. 2, 29. 8. 7, 31. 30. 4, 36. 40. 4, 37. 52. 8.
The very strong particle, used by Sallust (Catil. 2. 9, 20. 10), and
Cicero (Verr. 3. 194), serves to introduce the new section.
4. 10. sub . . . vincula conicitis: only metaphorical here and only with
sub here. The usual in v. c. (3. 13. 6) required variation to carry the
metaphor.
duas: 3. 67. 10 n.
4. 11, cur non sancitis: for the same appeal to absurdities cf. Cicero,
de Leg. 1. 44.
ne . . . nee: the structure is (i) ne . . ., (ii) nee eodem . . . idem . . .
eodem, and therefore nee is correct, linking the second main clause,
which is itself subdivided into three, to ne vicinus sit. For ne . . . nee =
ne. . . neve cf. 3. 21. 6, 5. 3. 8, 26. 42. 2, 40. 46. 4 ; see E. B. Lease,
Class. Phil. 3 (1908), 313. The examples which Canuleius gives are
hackneyed, and seem to be as old as the Old Oligarch.
immutatur: preferable to the plain mutator, because it is the legal
terminology; cf, e.g., Ulpian, Dig. 45. 1. 52, 46. 5. 1. 10 et al.
4 , 12, nempe: the drift of Canuleius' argument is that to recognize
conubium would not involve any consequential changes in the law since
the children of such marriages would automatically take the status
of their fathers. If the father was patrician, the son would be also and
vice versa. Mr. W. A. J. Watson points out to me that this begs the
whole question. It is only children born in iustae nuptiae (i.e. marriages
sanctioned by conubium) that take the status of the father. The children
of other marriages take the status of the mother (Gaius 1. 76-96).
(c) legitimum
5. 2. velit, iubere: 1. 46. 1 n.
vocare: in the c. tributa the tribes were called successively to vote
(U. Hall, Historia 13 (1964), 276).
5. 3 . quid si non: the idiom has been overlooked; even Porson and
Madvig emended it to quasi non (cf. Aul. Gell. 9. 9. 14). As Mr. G. W.
Williams discussing Propertius 1. 9. 15-34 in J.R.S. 47 (1957), 242-3
537

4-5-3

445 B.C.

formulates it, 'quid si in such a context adds an argument by means

of an appeal to a circumstance which either is the case (so with the
indicative) or might easily have been (and perhaps yet can be) the
case, though it was not (or is not) at the moment (so with the sub
junctive)'. T h e sense is: 'Just think what it would be like if you had
not learnt how ineffectual your threats against the plebs were. Then
you might risk open conflict with us. As it is, you will only try to bluff
us and I call your bluff. Give us conubium and we will fight.'
nobis: a necessary correction for N's vobis. T h e two are constantly
confused and Bayet's vos nobis is unnecessary as well as being overemphatic.
Conclusio: amplificatio
Canuleius ends his speech with an emotional peroration marked
by the repeated anaphora of si and nemo.
5. 5, unam hanc civitatem: 3. 67. 10 n.
si spes, si aditus: 'the hope and opportunity of office'. Cf. 25. 10.
in vicem annuis magistratibus: the concept of proper democracy cf.
3. 39. 8 n. T h e similarity between the two passages led Porson to read
aequandae for aequae here, rightly, for although aequa libertas is found
(34. 54. 5,45. 32. 5) the gerundive is required with quod est (cf. 38. 50. 8 ;
Florus 2. 1. 4).
5. 6. ferte sermonibus: cf. Caesar, B.C. 2. 17. 2.
pro superbis dominis: 28. 44. 4, 42. 52. 16; Virgil, Aen. 12. 236; Pliny,
Paneg. 63. 6.
6. 2. respondit: it is impossible to understand alter consul from consules
in 6. 1 and with the exception of Bayet who retains the manuscript
reading, editors agree that either respondit should be altered to an
impersonal passive (respondetur R u p e r t i ; responsum Bitschofsky) or that
the subject has dropped out. H a r a n t would supply alter but the
palaeographical inducements {alter roganti for interroganti or utiliter alter
(Conway)) do not outweigh the inanity of not specifying which consul
spoke, quite apart from the incredible separation of utiliter from in
praesens c. which Conway's text involves. Now the parallel account in
D.H. shows that in Licinius' version the opposition to the proposal
for electing plebeian consuls came not from the consuls themselves,
that is not from Genucius who is pictured as a tactful negotiator
(11. 58. 1) and not from Curiatius who is not mentioned throughout,
but from C. Claudius (11. 60. 1). In his usual fashion L. has simplified
the story by eliminating all superfluous characters and reducing the
dispute to one between Canuleius and the consuls. In so doing he has
deprived himself of anyone to answer Canuleius and so leaves the
awkward and anonymous respondit. If any name was to be supplied
538

445 B.C.

4. 6. 2

I would follow Walters but write certamen (Curiatius) respondit. See also
6

-76. 6. intercedentibus: the first reputed instance of the tribunician veto

(43. 6, 50. 6 ; see Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 294 n. 1). It is doubtful
whether the veto did exist at this date. T h e first certainly attested
case is 310 (9. 36. 14) and, if it was not the result of a gradual evolution,
it will have been instituted together with the other Licinio-Sextian
measures. See Lengle, R.E., 'tribunus plebis'.
consilia: so consiliis and consilia below, consilium habere and consilio
interesse are both well attested (2. 54. 7, 9. 15. 1, 36. 11. 7; Sallust,
Jug. 62. 4). Change is unnecessary but should at least be consis
tent.
apparebat: Livian simplification. In D.H. 11. 60 (and so in Licinius)
the misgiving formed part of a speech by T. Genucius, the consul's
brother.
6. 7. C. Claudi sententia: 6. 2 n. His proposal was firjSefilav airohihovai.
rjj ftovAfj Sidyvajcriv vnkp TOV vofiov ( D . H . 11. 6 0 ) .

Quinctiorum: D.H. mentions only Capitolinus. T h e pairing recalls

3- 35- 9foedere icto : not mentioned in 3. 55. 10 but cf. Sallust, Oratio Macri 17.
6. 8. tribunos militum: 7-11 n.
6. 10. adipiscendi: for the text see C.Q. 9 (1959), 277.
6. 11. contentione libertatis dignitatisque: 3. 65. 11 n.
secundum: 'after the contest is ended and when the judgment is
unbiassed' (Baker).
7-11. Ardea: the Institution of the Consular Tribunate and the Censorship
In 445 the Senate decided to suspend the election of consuls and to
appoint in their stead three tribuni militum. Except for a few inter
missions when consuls were elected, the appointment of tribuni militum
lasted until 367 while the number grew more or less steadily from three
to six. T h e annalistic tradition was unanimous on these points (D.H.
11. 5 3 - 6 1 ; Diodorus; L.) but differed in their explanation of them.
One source saw the consular tribunate as a political compromise de
signed to meet the demand that plebeians should be eligible for the
consulship. Another, introduced by L. as a variant (sunt qui . . . dicant),
explained it as a device for dealing with increased military commit
ments which required more than two commanders. Modern specula
tion has ranged widely over the significance and origin of the office
without arriving at any agreed interpretation.
It is well to notice that L. owes the political explanation directly
to Licinius Macer and furthermore that the first plebeian alleged to
have been elected to the office was P. Licinius (5. 12. 9). T h a t is in
539

4-7-"

444 B.C.

fact false. L. Atilius in 444 and Q . Antonius Merenda in 422 were also
plebeians (7. 1 n.).
T h e political explanation has therefore no respectable antecedents.
It bears every sign of having been fabricated by Licinius himself to
reflect glory on his family and to promote a favourable history of the
plebs. If so, the military explanation is the older. T h a t does not mean
that it need be the more reliable. Licinius may even have divined the
truth with the worst of motives. But the objections against the poli
tical interpretation are decisive. Unless a bar on plebeian access to the
consulate had been instituted by the Decemvirate, the consulate was
already open to plebeians and there are numerous genuinely plebeian
names in the early Fasti. And even if the consulate was barred and
the consular tribunate was intentionally created for plebeians, why
did so remarkably few hold it ?
T h e name tribuni militum indicates that their function was primarily
military and the name must be the starting-point in any consideration
of their significance. And the name survives. When the R o m a n govern
ment was reorganized again in 367/6, the six consular tribunes dis
appear from the Fasti but a difficult note in L. (7. 5. 9) shows that they
remained as elective military commanders, although no longer as
supreme commanders; cum eo anno (362) primum placuisset tribunos militum
ad legiones suffragio fieri. . . secundum in sex locis tenuit. The succession is
clear. By the mid-fifth century Rome was threatened on several fronts,
from Etruria, from the Aequi and the Volsci, from the Sabines, and
at the same time was trying to secure her position by extending her
control over the strategic keys to Latiumthe Tiber, Algidus, and
the coast. Such a policy meant simultaneous operations on several
fronts. In itself it would justify the reorganization and redisposal of
her military resources and it is noteworthy that the first occurrence
of six consular tribunes coincides with the attack on Veii. Corrobora
tory evidence for a reform of the R o m a n army in this period may be
afforded by the substitution of the scutum for the clipeus (see nn. on
1-43)There are only two serious objections to the military interpretation.
If the consular tribunes were appointed for military reasons, why
were dictators created in times of serious war (4. 23. 5, 31. 5, 46. 10,
57. 6, 5. 19. 2, 46. 10) ? Sudden emergencies will always call for the
appointment of a strong man to co-ordinate the defences of the state.
Secondly, it is urged that once the new system had been inaugurated
the periodic reversion to consuls (443-439; 431-427; 413-409, & c ) ,
is inexplicable, especially when many of the years in which consular
tribunes held office were years of peace. Short of believing the Fasti
to be hopelessly unreliable or that there were always two consuls
with one or more assistants if circumstances required, we may rather
540

444 B.C.

4. 7-11

believe that the election of consular tribunes was viewed originally

as an occasional military necessity. They were the alternative govern
ment when it looked as if the international situation would call for
extended military effort. It would never be easy to predict with cer
tainty what the year would hold in store and the military emergency
which was foreseen when the consular tribunes were elected might
have evaporated by the time they held office. The converse would be
equally true and it was perhaps to avoid this element of uncertainty
that consular tribunes were almost invariably elected for 405-367
(5. 31. 2 n.). But this monopoly of the government by military men
involved the neglect of civil affairs which were becoming increasingly
important and intricate. The reforms of 366 by instituting the praetorship by the side of the consulate enabled a proper balance to be struck
in the conduct of Rome's affairs. There would be at any time sufficient
men competent to run home affairs and military expeditions.
Of the older discussions still worth consulting are Mommsen, Staatsrechty 2. 1766.; Soltau, Philologus 73 (1916), 524-9; Ed. Meyer,
AY. Schriften, 2. 280 ff.; H. S. Jones, CAM., 7. 519 ff. See also M. P.
Nilsson, J.R.S. 19 (1929), 1-11; F. Cornelius, Untersuchungen, 59 ff;
Lengle, R.E., 'tribunus'; Bayet, tome 4. 135-48; K. von Fritz, His
toric 1 (1950), 37 ff; Bernardi, Athenaeum 30 (1952), 35 ff; E. S.
Staveley, J.R.S. 43 (1953), 30-36; F - E. Adcock, J.R.S. 47 (1957),
9-14; R. Sealey, Latomus 18 (1959), 521-30; A. Boddington, Historic
8 (x959)3 356-64. For the censorship see Suolahti, Roman Censors, 20 ff
7. 1. anno trecentesimo decimo: 3. 33. 1 n.
primum: Varro (de Ling. Lat. 5. 81) writes: 'tribuni militum quod
terni tribus tribubus Ramnium, Lucerum, Titium olim ad exercitum
mittebantur'; and continues by saying that the office was older than
the plebeian tribunate. His total of nine tribunes is mistaken, but if
the military establishment of 6,000 goes back to regal times (1. 43 n.),
it is possible that each 1,000 had been commanded by a tribune since
at least the beginning of the Republic and that there were, therefore,
six tribunes already at this date, primum does not, therefore, necessarily
imply that 444 marked the first creation of the office oftribuni militum.
444 was the year when for the first time the tribunes took the place of
the consuls as supreme magistrates.
pro consulibus: to be taken with ineunt and not as part of their title,
which is variously given as t. m. consulari imperio or consulari potestate.
They had imperium but evidently not the auspices, since no consular
tribune celebrates a triumph (Zonaras 7. 19). The variation in their
title might suggest that only the words tribuni militum were recorded
in the Fasti and that the other words were added by historians
anxious to create 'an impression of orderly and legal development'.
ineunt: L. names only three tribunes. D.H. surprisingly says dvrl TWV
541

4- 7- i

444 B.C.

vTrdrajv ^tAtap^ot? . . . rpecs (j,cv K TWV rrarpiKLcov rpcts S' K TCJV 8T)(J,O-

TiKtov (i i. 6o) and six was the later maximum (5. 1.2 n.). If it is true
that there were already in existence six tribuni militum, the supreme
authority would be delegated to three or four or all six of them as
circumstances dictated. If, say, four were designated, the other two
would continue as commanders of their detachments but subordinate
to the supreme authority vested in the four.
A. Sempronius Atratinus: A.f, the son of the consul of 497 (2. 21. 1).
Gf. 4. 35. 1 n. For his 'brother' see 7. i o n .
L. Atilius: the gens is plebeian (Klebs, R.E., 'Atilius'). His son was
cons. trib. in 399 (5. 13. 3 n.).
T. Cloelius: N read Caecilius here, but Cluilius is certain at 11. 5
where the cognomen Siculus is added and D.H. 11. 61. 3 calls the cons,
trib. T. KXVXLOS EIKEXOS. T h e omission of the cognomen here leaves it
doubtful whether L. (or Licinius Macer or the libri lintei) intended the
cons. trib. and the iiivir to be identified. If they did, then Cluilius (not
Cloelius) should be restored for Caecilius. T h e Gaecilii were plebeian,
the Gluilii patrician. See Miinzer, R.E., 'Cloelius (12)'. T h e cognomen
Siculus, almost confined to the gens (but cf. I.L.S. 4874 n.), may have
been adopted by a branch of the family who traded with Sicily in
the third century. It is first certainly attested for the Rex Sacrorum
o f 180 B.C.

7. 2. sunt qui: meaning doubtless Valerius Antias.

usi sunt: so Ver. M has usos as rr\. For the corruption cf. 3. 7. 7.
A strong stop is required after plebe and the use of consular imperium
and insignia is no longer an item in the variant tradition but is a
fact accepted throughout the whole tradition. So also in D.H.
7. 3 . profirmato : a correction by Petrarch of the vulgate formato which,
like Vcr.'sfamato, is nonsense and results from an old corruption. For
the use offirmo cf. 3. 56. 13; Tacitus, Annals 3. 60.
perinde ac: makes a comparison (2. 58. 1, 4. 7. 11 n., 5. 42. 2,
28. 38. 10) rather than states a reason, 'just as' or sometimes 'just as
if. If it was uncontroversial that the election was invalid, perinde ac
vitio creati is a singular way of expressing it, and may conceal a mani
pulation of the facts. The notices C. Curiatius vitio tabernaculum cepit and
T. Quinctius interrex (comitia habuit) look like genuine annalistic material.
They have been used by Licinius to set the scene for the insertion of
his pair of consuls (7. 10) whereas it is easier to imagine that the
decision to appoint tribunes instead of consuls did indeed meet with
opposition (7-9), particularly from diehard patricians who held con
trol of the priestly colleges and thwarted the elections by declaring
them vitiated. Their obstruction would lead to an interregnum during
which T. Quinctius could manage to secure the election of Sempronius
and his colleagues.
542

444 B.C.

4. 7. 3

tabernaculum cepisset: 1. 6. 4 n., 3. 20. 6 n. T h e expression is sacral.

7. 4. foedere: 1. 4 n., 7. 10 n.
7. 5. concordiae etiam ordinum: Sallust attributes similar arguments to
Licinius Macer (Or. Macri 6-13). See Strasburger, Concordia Ordinum,
377. 8. vicere: 3. 57. 9 n.
7. 10. T. Quinctius Barbatus: i.e. Capitolinus. T h a t his name stood
in the Annales may be supported by Diodorus listing Tiros Koivrios
as one of the consular tribunes of the year (12. 32. 1).
his consulibus: those who pin their faith on Licinius Macer's powers
of historical research need read no farther. T h e omission of the names
from the annales prisci is the one conclusive proof that Papirius and
Sempronius were not consuls for 444, since ultimately there was only
one common source of magistracy-holdersthe annalesfrom which
the libri magistratuum, the libri lintei, and other lists were derived. T h e
suspicion is confirmed by the obvious 'adjustment' of the augurs'
report and the interregnum (7. 3 n.), by the attempt to foist the same
two men into history as censors (8. 7 n.), and by the observation that
the treaty which Licinius saw was a renewal. Since there is neither
evidence nor occasion for any treaty with Ardea before the coloniza
tion in 443 (treaties and colonies are not incompatible), the inference
is insistent that Licinius' treaty, if it is genuine, is later than 443.
M a n y reconstructions are possible, all hazardous. T h e most satisfying
are those made by Mommsen (Staatsrecht, 2. 335 n. 1), Beloch (Rom.
Geschichte, 249-50), or Hanell (Das altromische eponyme Amt, 202 ; see also
Ann Boddington, Historia 8 (1959), 359). T h e difficulties in the list
of 4. 52. 4 (n.) might suggest that in 411 there were not as reported
two consuls but three consular tribunes, M . Papirius, (Sempronius),
and C. Nautius, but that the mutilation of the original tabulae led the
compilers of magisterial lists to give two names only. In that case
Licinius Macer, reading Papirius and Sempronius on his inscription,
was unable to find them in the libri magistratuum and so inserted them
as consuls in 444 because of the plethora of Ardeatine happenings in
the period 445-3. In fact, the renewal of the treaty will belong to
411 (or 416). For a similar example of an inscription recording the
names of two of a college of three consular tribunes, cf. Varro ap.
Macrob. 1. 13. 21 antiquissimam legem . . . incisam in columna aerea a L.
Pinario et Furio consulibus ( = 432; 4. 25. 5). See Hermes 89 (1961),
379 ff:
libris magistratuum: compilations of magistrates made, e.g., by C.
Tuditanus (Macrobius 1. 13. 21), Atticus, and Varro.
7. 11. T h e text of the passage stood in the archetype of Ver. and N
as: 'credo quod tribuni militum initio anni fuerunt eo perinde ac
[si N] totum annum in imperio fuerint suffectis iis consulibus praeter543

4.7.11"

444 B.C.

missa nomina consulum horum Licinius Macer auctor est et [iam

Ver.] in foedere Ardeatino et in linteis libris ad Monetae [-tea Ver.]
inventa [-tae N]. et [om. Ver.] foris . . .'. The problem is to divide the
sentence in such a way that suffectis Us consulibus and consulum horum
are separated and that inventa has a subject. L.'s use of the demon
stratives is and hie guarantees that consulum horum will come near the
beginning of a sentence and not, as, following Crevier, Walters
punctuates, at the end. nomina consulum horum . . . auctor est. . . inventa.
'Licinius Macer is the authority that the names of these consuls were
found both in the Ardeatine treaty and in the libri lintei at the temple
of Moneta.' The sense is unimpeachable and the syntax clear but it
leaves in the preceding sentence praetermissa unattached. The shape
of that sentence recalls 2. 8. 5 'credo, quia nulla gesta res insignem
fecerit consulatum, memoriam intercidisse.' In other words praeter
missa should be part of an ace. and inf. after credo. Peter made the
attractive supplement (nomina). 'I believe that, because there were
military tribunes at the beginning of the year, therefore just as if they
had held power for the whole of the year, when Sempronius and
Papirius were elected suffect consuls, their (i.e. Sempronius' and
Papirius') names were left out.' For similar haplographies cf. 4. 26. n ,
5. 5. 7. The more radical restorations made by Mommsen, Madvig,
and Bayet among recent editors do not meet the needs of sense and
syntax. See before all Leuze, Romischen Censur, 107-33.
7. 12. Licinius Macer: see Introduction.
libris linteis: 20. 8, 23. 2. The name signifies that they were books
written on linen (cf. the linen corslet of A. Cornelius Cossus in 4. 20. 7)
and they were evidently a list of magistrates. The date of the com
pilation and its extent is not known. The temple of Moneta (see
next note) was not founded until 344 while the libri lintei purport to
go back earlier. Without believing with Klotz (Rh. Mus. 86 (1937),
217) that they are therefore a forgery by Licinius, we may either
suppose that they had been stored in another temple and were trans
ferred to Moneta in 344 or, since it is as unlikely that such a relic
would have survived from the earliest times as that such scholarly
compilations, as distinct from the regular tabulae dealbatae, would
have been made before the second century (they appear to have in
cluded cognomina), we may hold that they were not compiled before
c. 150. As to their extent L. actually quotes them only for the period
of the consular tribunate and the close proximity of the foundation
of the temple of Moneta to the end of the consular tribunate (367/344)
has suggested to some scholars that the libri lintei were a list exclusively
of consular tribunes dedicated as a memorial of that office shortly
after it had come to an end. But apart from the objections outlined
above sundry vagaries in the list of eponymous magistrates used by
544

444 B.C.

4- 7- is

Licinius can be detected elsewhere (e.g. 2. 15. 1 n.). It was probably

a complete compilation from 509 downwards. See J.R.S. 48 (1958),
40-46.
ad Monetae: the temple ofJuno Moneta, vowed in 345 and dedicated
the following year during a crucial war with the Aurunci (7. 28. 4-6).
Plutarch speaks of an earlier temple in connexion with the sacred
geese in 390 (Camillus 27) but that is merely to provide an aetiological
myth for the title (Moneta from moneo (cf. obsoletus: soleo; Voleta, Peta) =
the Remembrancer used as a translation of Mvrjfioavvri by Livius
Andronicus). The title arises from the invocation of the goddess to
remember her previous favourshence her connexion with the re
cords as the repository of the libri lintei and after 269 as the site of the
mint. (For a different explanation which connects the title with
Phoenician see Assmann, Klio 6 (1906), 477 ff.; the fact that the asso
ciation of the temple with coinage must be eighty years later than its
foundation militates against it.) The temple was on the arx, replacing
the house of M. Manlius Capitolinus destroyed in 384 (6. 20. 13). See
Platner-Ashby s.v.; Marbach, R.E., 'Moneta'; R. Thomsen, Early
Roman Coinage, 3. 85 ff.
8 . 2 . censurae initium: when military tribunes were elected who were
both preoccupied with military operations and, if plebeian, dis
qualified from performing the religious ceremonies of the census
(lustrum condere; see 1. 44. 1-2 n.), it was necessary to elect ad hoc two
politicians to kindle the ritual fire (censor from *cendere) and hold the
census. It was from this makeshift that the censorate began. The fact,
but not the names, would have been mentioned in the Annales. See
Leuze, Romischen Censur, 94-144; Suolahti, The Roman Censors, with
full bibliography. This passage is not inconsistent with 4. 22. 7 (n.).
sub dicione eius magistratus publicorum ius privatorumque locorum, vectigalia populi Romani sub nutu atque arbitrio essent: for the text see C.Q. 9
(1959), 275. Notice the balanced regimen . . discrimen, followed by the
chiastic sub dicione . . sub nutu atque arbitrio.
The ius locorum was the right to adjudicate in boundary disputes
between private and public property (40. 5. 7; C.I.L. 6. 919).
8. 4. mentio inlata ad senatum: ab senatu TTX. N O exact parallel for m. i.
ad senatum is found but it is modelled on the common res delata ad j .
(14. 3) and the alternative ab senatu is ruled out by the fact that mentionem inferre is only used of individual speakers in the Senate ( 1 . 2 ,
47. 6).
custodiaeque [et] tabularum cura: the censors are in charge of the scribes
and of the keepers of the tablets (custodiae for custodum). Without
Crevier's deletion of et, custodiae must be nom. plural linked to mini'
sterium (the scribae both as scribes and as keepers are under the control
814432

545

4-8.4

443 B.C.

of the censors). But in that case tabularum cura would be redundant.

T h e tabulae censoriae which listed and valued all property (Cicero,
de Har. Resp. 30; Aul. Gell. 2. 10; Pliny, N.H. 18. n ) , in addition
to registering persons, were available to public inspection in the
atrium Hbertatis (43. 16. 13, 45. 15. 5) and (perhaps a later change
of site) in the aedes Nympharum (Cicero, pro Milone 73).
formulae censendi: the censors had a procedural code, like the prae
tors 1 edict, which was handed down with additions and accretions
from college to college, known as the formula census {Lex Iulia Municip.
147; 29. 15. 9) or the lex censui censendo dicta (43. 14. 5) in which they
outlined the principles which they would follow in the administration
of the census and which would determine any consequent litigation
(Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 372).
8. 5. ius maiestatemque: Cornelissen substituted decus for ius but cf. Bell.
Alex, 34. 2. T h e whole picture of the patrician reaction derives from
Licinius' political interpretation of the censorate.
8 . 7 . dubitabatur: there is no need to change to the present tense, 'about
which doubt was expressed a few pages back'. Cicero (adFam. 9 . 2 1 . 2 :
46 B.C.) accepts the account: 'fuerant enim patricii minorum gentium
quorum princeps L. Papirius Mugillanus qui censor cum L. Sempronio Atratino fuit cum ante consul cum eodem fuisset, annis post
R o m a m conditam c c c x n \ Unger conjectured that Cicero derived the
information from L. Scribonius Libo whose 'Annals' were published
in 46 {Jahrb.f Class, Phil. 143 (1891), 646) and to whom Cicero else
where refers. In any case Cicero does not provide independent testi
mony since directly or indirectly his information will only go back to
Licinius' researches. If their consulate is false, a fortiori their censor
ship is too. An anonymous notice has been rilled out by Licinius to
anchor Papirius and Sempronius to the years 444/3. See also Klotz,
Rh. Mus. 88 (1939), 47 ff.; Suolahti, Roman Censors, 168 ff.
T h e story of Ardea grew out of three basic facts, the capture by the
Volsci, the defeat of the Volsci by the Romans, and the colonization,
all of which would have figured in the records, being coupled with
the familiar legend of T h e Maid (virgo plebeii generis), the twin, if not
the parent, of the legend of Verginia (Pais, Ancient Legends, 187-90).
L. does not develop the potentialities of the material but is content with
a straightforward narrative which illustrates the fides of the Romans
and exemplifies the evils of the disease (9. 3, 9. 10) of certamina
factionum.
9. 1. renovatoque: 7. 10.
9. 3 . fuerunt eruntque: the theme and the language recalls Thucydides'
j u d g e m e n t on oTao-i? (3. 8 2 - 8 3 ; especially 82. 3).
magis: for the pleonasm with pluribus cf. Kuhnast, Liv. Syntax, 273.
546

443 B.C.

4- 9 - 4

9. 4. petiere iuvenes; alter. . . alter: for the omission of the numeral

with iuvenes cf. 32. 5. 11 inter montes quorum alterum Meropum, alterum
Asnaum incolae vocant; 6. 35. 4, 32. 38. 9 (Pettersson). Kiehl's (duo}
was anticipated by Doring.
9. 5. nohilis superior iudicio matris: the conflict between considerations of
true love and of material advantages, when the marriage of a daughter
is contemplated, was appreciated and moralized upon by the Greeks;
cf. Herondas 2. 1-2 with Headlam's note.
9. 6. ventum in ius est: the case illustrates an important principle of
Roman law, the assumption being that Ardeate law can for all prac
tical purposes be regarded as Roman law. The question at issue was
what control her tutor has over the marriage arrangement of a girl
sui iuris. We are not told whether the tutor was legitimus or testamentarius
but that detail is not relevant. Had the girl been a filiafamilias (i.e.
if her father had still been alive) she could only have contracted a
valid marriage if, in addition to satisfying certain formal requirements
(e.g. being of age, conubium), she herself had the necessary will (con
sensus facit nuptias) and had obtained the consent of her paterfamilias
(Ulpian 5. 2 ; Paul. Dig. 23. 2. 2; Paul. Sent. 2. 19. 2 ; Justinian, Inst.
1. 10 pr.). The consent ofthe paterfamilias (which could be tacit, and
could later even be extorted on appeal to the magistrates; C. 5. 4. 16)
was necessary whether or not the marriage was accompanied by con-*
ventio in manum, that is, whether or not the girl passed out of the manus
of her father into the manus of her husband. In early times it was
customary for marriage to be attended by this change in the legal
status of the woman, but juridically the two processes were quite
distinct. Thus in a case where a. filiafamilias married and, as well,
passed into the manus of her husband, the consent of the paterfamilias
was twofold; in a case where, as in classical times, the filiafamilias
married but did not pass out of the manus of her father, the paterfamilias
gave a single consent to the marriage.
The Ardeate girl was sui iuris and the duty of the tutor was primarily
to safeguard the interests of the agnati by ensuring that none of the
heritable property passed out of the family. Thus while it is clear that
a tutor's auctoritas would be necessary if a girl sui iuris contemplated
marriage accompanied by conventio in manum (XII Tab. 5. 2 = Gaius,
Inst. 2. 47; Cicero, pro Flacco 84)for such a marriage would affect
inheritancethere is no a priori reason why the marriage of a girl sui
iuris which did not change her legal status should require the tutor's
consent and this is the opinion of the Jurists also (Paul. Dig. 23. 2. 20;
C. 5. 4. 8; cf. Gaius, Inst. 1. 192 : C. 5. 4. 1 is concerned with a wholly
different problem, the selection of a husband for a fatherless girl when
she herself had expressed no preference).
The case, therefore, seems to have been thought up, like so many
547

4.

g. 6

443 B.C.

other incidents of early Roman history (cf. 3. 33. 10 n., 44-49 n . ;

2. 23-24 n.) to illustrate the workings of the Twelve Tables, and in
particular the provisions (1) that marriage need not necessarily be
attended by manus (Tab. 6. 5 ; cf. Ennius ap. adHerenn. 2. 3 8 ; Cato ap.
Aul. Gell. 17. 6. 1); (2) that women sui iuris could not be debarred
from entering on marriage without manus by the obstruction of their
tutor (Tab. 5 ) ; (3) that plebeians were legally eligible to marry
patricians. See Latomus 21 (1962), 477-83.
9. 8. ex urbe profecta: cf. the Second Secession.
9 . 9 . urbem quoque omnis etiam expertem ante certaminis: the city, qua bricks
and mortar, has not been jeopardized up till now, although the out
skirts have been pillaged. Now opifices are being massed to attack the
city itself expers . . . certaminis is guaranteed by 40. 8. 4 (Walker) and
conjectures based on Morstadt's omm, because the city has been sub
ject to riots and disorder if not physical attack, destroy the neat abl.
abs. multitudine . . . evocata and produce the un-Livian omnis . . .
multitudo in exchange for the idiomatic expers omnis (gen.) = 'utterly
unaffected by' (Praef. 5, 23. 5. 11.)
9. 12. Aequo Cluilio: the name Gluilius is credible. It is by no means
exclusively Roman, but thepraenomen Aequus is unique. Since in 3. 25.
5 (n.), which duplicates this campaign, the Aequi are led by a Cluilius,
Aequo either indicates his nationality, or, if it be thought unfeasible for
an Aequan to command the Volsci, conceals a deeper confusion of a
notice which told of a joint force of Aequi and Volsci led by Gluilius.
9. 13. curare corpora: 3. 2. 10 n.
9. 14. alia parte: 3. 38. 5 n.
iniunxerat: 5. 7. 2, 10. 34. 2, 27. 41. 3. iunxerat (Ver.) by haplography

(rf. 3- 6 3- 5)10. 3 . fatentes: as ifiubet eosponere had preceded, but the passive form is
preferred to convey the impression of crisp military orders. T h e closest
analogy is 3. 42. 7also in official language. Walter's esse (jiecesse}
or Walters's parerent both introduce other than purely military tones.
For fatentes victos se esse cf. 30. 35. 1 1 ; Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 3. 14,
5-77hostem infensum: infestum Ver. infestum is much the commoner word
(188 133) and is likely to have replaced infensum by assimilation of
ending after hostem. For h. infensum Virgil, Aeneid 11. 899; Tacitus,
Annals 2. 15. 1.
10. 4 - 5 . Notice the elaborate subordination.
10. 7. consul triumphans: cf. the Fasti Triumph.:
[M. Gegajnius M . [f.-n.] Macerinus ann. cccx
[cos. II] de V[olsceis n]onis Sep.
dearmatum: only here and Apuleius, Met. 5. 30.
548

443 B.C.

4. 10. 8

10. 8. togatus: cf. Cicero, in Catil. 2. 28, 3. 2 3 ; pro Sulla 85. It was
Cicero's preferred way of referring to his consulship (Nicolet, R.fi.L.
38(1960), 236 ff.).
domesticae: Gronovius's correction of domesticam seems inevitable in
view of 6. 30. 9 domestica quies.
10. 9. faciebat: cf. 30. 33. n , 33. 18. 12, 37. 9. 3, 40. n . 1 (Jung).
1 1 . 1 . consules creantur M. Fabius Vibulanus, Postumus Aebutius Cornicen:
Ver. T h e passive is greatly to be preferred to N's consules creant with
accusatives for nominatives, since the subject of creant would have to
be the consuls of the previous year, Quinctius and Geganius. In re
ferring to the election of consuls L. uses the form consul creavit where
one specified consul was the presiding officer (10. 47. 5, 32. 27. 5,
40. 35. 1, 42. 9. 8). T h e plural only occurs in the problematical
45. 44. 1. See Staveley, Historia 3 (1954), 199. Fabius, Q.f. M.n., the
son of the consul of 467 (3. 1. 1); cf. 4. 17. 10, 19. 8, 25. 2, 27. 9, 28. 1.
Aebutius' filiation was probably L.f. T . n., the son of the consul of
463 (3, 6. 1; see Klebs, R.E., 'Aebutius (14)'; for his cognomen see
21. io, 3. 35. n n.).
11. 4. Rutulorum: i.e. inhabitants of the country surrounding Ardea.
11. 5. triumviri: we are not compelled to disbelieve either the notice
or the names. Such special commissions were recorded (the doubts
about the commission of 218 raise a separate problem) and the
archival origin of this commission is established by relatum in tabulas.
Moreover, apart from conventionally consisting of three members
(3. 1.6 n., 5. 24. 4, 8. 16. 13), it was the custom in early times except
when major colonial enterprises were being planned for the board to
contain one consular and two non-consulars. Such was the case in
218 (21. 25. 3 - 5 ; Asconius 3 C , in 200 (31. 49. 6), and in 197 (32.
29. 3-4). Here T . Cluilius Siculus had been consular tribune (7. 1 n.),
M . Aebutius, otherwise unknown, was an elder brother of the current
consul, perhaps, as his name suggests, with Ardeatine connexions, and
Agrippa Menenius was to become consul (13. 6 n.).
11. 6. praeter: confirmed by Ver. where . . . ,/ter survives and by
the idiom (cf. 3. 70. 15); they were unpopular not only with the plebs
(which might have been expected) but with the patres as well, cum
plebem offendissent is almost parenthetical, explaining and repeating
minime populare ministerium.
11. 7. [coloni adscripti]: would imply that they became members of
the colony rather than waited for the storm to die down, but Menenius
is consul in 13. 6. Ver.'s omission of the words proves them to be a
marginal summary (cf. 3. 49. 5 Appiusfugit), although the language is
technically exact (6. 30. 9 et al). If they had joined the colony they
would have avoided a summons (vocationes Cornelissen; cf. Aul. Gell.
549

4- " . 7

442 B.C.

13. 13), not the fuss and bother (vexationes). T h e threat of prosecu
tion is unhistorical.
12-16. Sp. Maelius
T h e story of Sp. Maelius, like the story of Cincinnatus, is an instance
of a timeless legend which grew up at first independently of the
Annales and was then fitted into the framework of dates and facts
at a time when it had already acquired a wealth of circumstantial
detail of its own.
T h e core of the story is the killing of a homo sacer Sp. Maelius by G.
Servilius Ahala. It was the reason for the name Ahala (13. 14 n.) and
the memory of it was kept alive by the Servilii. Equally, as an aetiological myth for the waste land Aequimaelium, it stayed in the
memory of the Roman people. Nor need we doubt the association of
Sp. Maelius' offence with a corn shortage. Such shortages are part of
fifth-century history (2. 9. 6 n.) and were easy to remember. Whether
G, Minucius was always an integral part of the tale is less certain.
T h e name Minucius was associated with a portions in the south-east
corner of the city, which served as a grain market. Outside the porta
Trigemina there was a column in honour of L. Minucius. If it were not
established that the portions Minucia cannot be older than the third
century, the association of Minucii and Rome's corn supply might
be thought to extend right back to the days of Sp. Maelius. As it is,
there are some grounds for believing that he is the earliest addition
to the story, supplying the information that led Ahala to execute
summary justice. It is significant that in the earliest versions none of the
principals has any official standing (Gincius fr. 6 ; Piso fr. 24). Minucius
merely lays evidence (fnjvvrrjs) that Sp. Maelius seeks to become king.
T h e date of the story remained essentially fluid but it had to be
tied down when consecutive history was written, and respectable
positions had to be discovered (or invented) for the chief characters.
T h e date was determined by the life-history of Servilius Ahala, as
given in the Fasti; precision was supplied by annalistic reference to
annona. L. Minucius had provided one site for Cincinnatus' dictator
ship. He could provide another (Cicero, Cato 56 even places the
ploughing scene here) and at the same time give Ahala an official
capacity as mag. equitum. Gincinnatus cannot have been dictator in
this year: the duration and terms of his appointment conflict with
everything that is known about the early dictatorship. Only Maelius
and Minucius were unplaced. For Maelius the obvious position was
tribune and traces of a tradition that made him tribune survive both
in 15. 6 (tribunatus plebis magis optandus quam sperandus) and in 21. 3
where his double, Sp. Maelius, holds that office for the year 436.
Since the latter passage is not Licinian a rival chronology and inter550

441 B.C.

4. 1216

pretation may lie behind this curious duplication. Unlike the Maelii,
the Minucii were not always plebeian (3. 33. 3 n.). If in later times
they were plebeian, a transitio adplebem must have taken place. As the
family history of the Octavii illustrates (Suetonius, Aug. 2 ; cf. Cicero,
Brutus 62) it was not difficult to invent such an explanation. Minucius
is co-opted as a tr. pi. The sheer incredibility of that invention led to
alternative solutions. The compilers of the libri lintei list him as a
plain praefectus. Whether they meant praefectus urbi or not, Licinius
Macer firmly interprets his office in terms of the contemporary cura
annonae, and with this pleasing fiction he can afford to leave Sp.
Maelius as a privatus.
While the fabrication of details of status and chronology went on,
on the other side the narrative was embellished. The resemblance to
the fate of Sp. Gassius could be exploited to advantage (13. 4 de regno
agitare = 2. 41. 5; 12. 7 neglegentiam consulum = 2. 41. 2). But above
all, recent events at Rome, the programmes and the fortunes of the
Gracchi, offered a model which the annalists were quick to perceive
and utilize (cf., e.g., Ampelius 27. 2). Gracchan touches may be
detected especially in Gincinnatus' speech (15. 1 n.).
One remark has no equivalent in the attentuated account of D.H.
or in any of the sources (Cicero, pro Mil. 72; Lael. 36; in Catil. 1 . 3 ;
de Rep. 2. 4 9 ; Phil. 2. 114; Val. Max. 5. 3. 2 ; Quintilian 5. 9. 13,
13. 24; de Viris Illustr. 17. 5; Plutarch, Brutus 1 . 2 ) : macte virtute. . .
esto liberata re publica (14. 7). The highest realization of the individual
is the preservation of the state. That was L.'s message. He tells the
story dramatically to illustrate that message, contrasting the evil
emotions in Maelius' breast (13. 3-4) with the nobility of the dictator
and his Master of Horse. It leads up to the speech of Gincinnatus
who with a fine mixture of rhetoric and blunt speaking provides the
deed with its historical significance and moral justification.
See Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 199-222; Soltau, Phil. Woch.9
1908, 586 f.; Pais, Ancient Legends, 194-223; Munzer, R.E., 'Sp.
Maelius'; ibid. *L. Minucius Esquilinus Augurinus'; Burck 9 3 - 9 5 ;
Momigliano (16. 2 n.); Meiggs, Roman Ostia, 481.
12. 1. C. Furio: 22. 7, 31. 1. In fact he should be called Q. (Koivros
in Diod. 12. 35. 1) since he was the same as the pontifex maximus of
3. 54. 5 (where see note). The cognomen Pacilus is read by the Capitoline
Fasti for the consul of 251 (cf. C.I.L. 9. 3823 Paciledius) and should
probably be read here too (22. 7, 52. 1) as a by-form of Pacullus
(39. 13. 9 ; I.G.S. 1. 894) formed from an Oscan god-name; cf.
Pacuvius (Schulze 477).
M. Papirio Crasso: Mavios in Diod. 12. 35. 1 (cf. D.H. 5. 14.) but
certainty is unobtainable. The leading member of the Grassus branch
of the Papirii was L.P.G., dictator in 340.
551

4. 12. 2

441 B.C.

J 2 . 2. /tt^z: the vowing of these games was not mentioned in the

Valerian narrative of the Decemvirate. T h e turbulent conclusion of
that institution was centred on the prata Flaminia (3. 54. 15 n.) where
the ludi plebeii were later celebrated. But the ludi plebeii were not
established before 214. T h e most economic solution is to suppose that
the entry ludifacti occurred in the Annales but the further detail of
their vowing was added to provide a venerable pedigree for the ludi
plebeii. If they had been vowed in 450, why did nearly ten years
elapse before their celebration ? See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 519-20;
Habel, R.E., Suppl. 5, 'ludi publici'; Piganiol, Recherches, 78, who
accepts the antiquity of ludi plebeii.
12. 3 . Poetilio: 3. 35. 11 n. T h e tradition of a single tr. pi. being re
corded each year appears to subsist, although his activities are fic
tional.
12. 6. Proculo Geganio Macerino: evidently a brother of M . G . M .
(3- 65. 5) as his praenomen might suggest; cf. Paulus Festus 251 L.
Proculus must be nearly ten years younger than his brother.
L. Menenio Lanato : T. according to Diodorus 12. 36. 1 and the Fasti
(cf. Ghr. 354 Lanato / / ) , i.e. the consul of 452 (3. 32. 5). But Cassiodorus confirms L. It must be another of the vagaries attributable to
the libri lintei, which regarded him as the son of the consul of 452
an impossibly short gap. For Lanatus cf. 13. 6 n,
fame mala: recorded in the Annales. T h e alternative explanations
reflect the pro- and anti-plebeian standpoints of L.'s two chief
authorities.
12. 8. praefectus annonae: L. explicitly states that the libri lintei only
gave the bare title praefectus, i.e. praefectus urbi. In Republican times
the corn supply was regularly under the supervision of the aediles or
the Ostian quaestor but in emergencies special appointments were
made. M . Aemilius Scaurus, who was appointed in 104 to replace
Saturninus, then quaestor, is the first case known (Cicero, de Har.
Resp. 43) before Pompey's famous cura annonae. See Mommsen,
Staatsrechty 2. 670-2.
12. 9. ex Etruria: 2. 34. 2 n.
12. 10. et vendere: Mommsen emended Ver.'s ut venderet to ut venderent
but the order of words shows that prqfiteri and vendere make a closely
parallel pair.
12. 1 1 . capitibus obvolutis: an unexpected glimpse, probably a literary
adaptation of an old ceremony, employed in time of famine, of throw
ing pensioners into the Tiber as a sacrifice (Festus 450 L. sexagenarios
de ponte; cf. the procession of the Argei). T h e employment of such a
ceremony would certainly have figured in the Annales. See Klotz,
R.E., 'Sexagenarii 5 ; J . Gage, Huit Recherches, 41. T h e habit of com
pletely enveloping the head before death, particularly before suicide,
552

440 B.C.

4. 12. 11

is often mentioned in antiquity (1. 26. 6 n . ; Euripides, I.T. 1207 with

Platnauer's note.; Festus 174 L . ; Plutarch, Demosth. 2 9 ; Horace,
Sat. 2. 3. 37 ; Seneca, N.Q. 4 praef. 17;see R. Waltz, R..L. 17 (1939),
292-308).
13. 1. praedives: according to D.H. 12. 1 he earned the cognomen
EvSalfxwv 7T1 rrjs iroXXrjs V7T0pLas, that is, Felix (or perhaps Faustus),
but no allusion to Sulla should be seen here since the Greek version
of his name was 'Ena^pohiTos (Balsdon, J.R.S. 41 (1951), 5). praedives
is not found before L.
13. 3 . elatusque: inflatusque Ver. T h e two words are constantly con
fused (cf. 37. 12. 4 ; Suetonius, Nero 37. 3) and Ver. has a weakness
for inflate (54. 8 n.) which was a favourite if devalued word in late
antiquity. In keeping with its tendency to replace the more vulgar
variant (3. 6. 6 n., 44. 5 n., 61. 13 n.) Ver. has wrongly substituted it
here for elatus which is the mot juste in the phrase (cf. Seneca, de
Bene/. 6. 3. 2 ; Tacitus, Annals 2. 34; Quintilian 12. 10. 39).
fplebeiofavoreacsipedespondente} : Ver.; (ei T>hA)favore acspedespondentem N (DLA's ei is of no account since it did not stand in the arche
type) The intrusion of plebeio is inexplicable and the word must form
part of any restoration of the passage, plebeius favor is not cited in the
Thes. Ling. Lat. but the equivalent popularis favor is used at 22. 26. 4 ;
despondere in the sense 'to guarantee in advance' only at 26. 37. 5
velut despondente fortuna . . . imperium (abl. abs.). If the abl. is preferred
here also, it is necessary to put a strong stop after trahere and a comma
after despondente; ipse will then resume the main subject after an
abl. abs. as in 2. 11. 1 praesidio . . . locato ipse . . . posuit (1. 10. 5). But
can plebeio favore ac spe be the subject of despondente ? The pair of
nouns governing a singular verb raises no difficulty but the meaning
is not self-evident, plebeius favor will be the popular manifestations of
support which welcomed Maelius. This could be said to guarantee a
sure consulate, spe might be his own hopes which gave him un
questioning confidence in his chances of nomination, or the hopes
which the plebs entertained in expectation of the benefits of Maelius 5
administration and whose public expression encouraged him. Pre
sumably the latter. I would, therefore, accept Ver.'s text. T h e cor
ruption sipe might be due to haplography of spe sibe (i.e. sibi in L.'s
spelling; see Introduction, p. 5 ) : if so, sibi should be restored.
Mommsen's text is not eased by the switch from ei to ipse.
13. 4. ut est humanus: a familiar commonplace going back to Hero
dotus 7. 49. 4 (cf. Apostolius, Cent. 8. 61).
exsudandum: in a metaphorical sense with an object 'to sweat over',
exsudare is colloquial, used, outside L. here and in Claudius' speech
(5- 5- 6), only by Horace in the Satires (1. 10. 28).
553

4- 13- 5

4 4 0 B.C.

13, 5. necdum compositis eum: unless a special emphasis is intended,

L. prefers to tuck the demonstrative pronoun is away from the pro
minent positions in the sentence. Here N's quae res eum . . . throws a
quite irrelevant weight on eum. For the position of eum inside an abl.
abs. cf. i. 34. 2, 25. 3. 18 (Jung). The disarrangement of word-order
may cover a deeper error. In Ver. all that is preserved is
sula
dum compositis eum
If the first line is supplemented con-\sula[ria instabant; quae res nec\ a
total of 26 letters against the normal 18 results, suggesting that either
instabant or quae res (cf. the frequent omission of Quirites) was missing.
13. 6. Agr. Menenius: his name is given both by Diodorus (12. 37. 1)
and by the augural inscription (I.L.S. 9338. 2). The old variant
Manilius (Ver. M ; see C.Q,. 7 (1957), 76) will be a correction of the
haplography Menius. The cognomen Lanatus, like Cincinnatus, will
describe the characteristic hair of the family, 'downy'.
13. 8. rem compertam: a few easy strokes, the crisp announcements of
gun-running and secret confabulations which were the two regular
symptoms of conspiracies under the late Republic, enable L. to paint
a scene of tension and panic, where D.H. (12. 1. 4-12) requires a
previous meeting of the Senate, several illegal assemblies, and the
gradual enlightenment of the consuls. For tela in domum conferri cf.
1. 51. 2 n.; for contiones domi habere cf. Catiline's address to his followers
(Sallust 20); for partita . . . ministeria cf. Sallust, Catil. 43. 2. Quinctius'
protestation about the responsibilities and limitations of the consulship
seems designed as a copy and a defence of Cicero's predicament in 63.
13. 9. [et] tribunos: the breathless haste of Minucius' news is much
strengthened if, with Ver., we omit et. For tribunos . . . emptos cf.
Cicero, in Pis. 35; pro Sestio 87.
13. 10. cum undique: et undique N, Ver. If increparent is right, it must be
governed by a conjunction other than postquam which is followed by
the ind. et undique looks like the emended remains ofcundique, a haplo
graphy of cum undique.
13. 11. provocatione: 2. 18. 8 n.
exsoluto: 22. 22. 6. A highly rhetorical metaphor, elsewhere only in
Seneca, Suas. 6. 6; [Quintilian], decl. min. 377; cf. Lucretius 1. 932.
13. 12. ibi: traces of the word survive in Ver. also. For the meaning
'in him' cf. 3. 15. 9, 27. 48. 6; Tacitus, Annals 13. 46.
Quinctius primo: Ver.'s order, putting Cincinnatus at the head of
the sentence, is more effective than the normal primo Q. . . . dein of N.
13. 14. damno dedecorive: as the alliteration might suggest, the colloca
tion is old. Cf. Plautus, Bacch. 67 pro disco damnum capiam, pro cur sura
dedecus; Horace, Sat. 1.2. 52-53.
dictator: the casual method of appointment, coupled with its im554

439 B.C.

4. 13. 14

probable timing (e.g. fortuitous consular elections), renders the whole

episode suspect.
C. Servilium Ahalam: the cognomen is interesting. The old form of the
word was Axilla (Cicero, Orator 153) 'an armpit5 ( = aid) and as a
cognomen it belongs to that class of names like Sura and Vatia which
denote parts of the body. One would assume that it was originally
given as a nickname to one member of the family, just as Cincinnatus
is obviously a nickname given to a man of crinkly hair. In fact, how
ever, Sura and Vatia have Etruscan progenitors and there is apraenomen Ahal in Umbrian (Schulze 420). Whatever the origin of the name,
its meaning was exploited to provide an aetiological myth. Servilius
carries the dagger under his armpit (see Dodds on Plato, Gorgias 469 d 1)
or, according to another version, cut off Maelius' arm at the shoulder,
thereby acquiring the cognomen. L. has the good taste to omit it.
14. 2. rectorem: Cicero's word for the benevolent statesman whose
auctoritas should guide the destinies of Rome (cf. especially de Rep.
2. 51 5-5)14. 3 . vocat te . . . dictator: to answer the charge laid by Minucius L.
employs the language of normal legal procedure (15. 2) but the
dictator's powers were summary and untrammelled. Cf. 3. 29. 6.
crimen . . . diluendum: the legal t.t. for refuting a charge (ad Herenn.
4- 47)14. 6. obtruncati: to be retained; cf. 2. 25. 6 and see Drakenborch on
1. 3. 9; Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana, 182. Ver. is guilty of similar
omissions (cf. 5. 24. 5) where words stood above each other in the
original.
stipatus: 1. 47. 7 n. L. has kept back any mention of Ahala's escort
to heighten the contrast between the solitary hero and the massed
bodyguard of the villainous Maelius. In D.H., who is strongly in
fluenced in his description by the events of the Ides of March, the
escort was there from the very beginning and takes an active part in
the assassination.
14. 7. macte virtute: 2. 12. 14 n.
The Speech of Cincinnatus
15. 1. iure caesum: it was before a rowdy contio in 131 that Scipio
Aemilianus in reply to a question from a tribune, C. Papirius Carbo,
about his views on the death of Ti. Gracchus said si is occupandae rei
publicae animum habuisset iure caesum (videri) (Veil. Pat. 2 . 4 . 4 ; see for the
content and context of the saying A. E. Astin, C.Q. 10 (i960), 135-7).
Sp. Maelius had won support by his policy of cheap corn. The de
tractors of the Gracchi were quick to allege the same (Plutarch,
555

4- i5-

439 B.C.

C. Gracchus 5 ; Cicero, pro Sestio 103). There can therefore be little

doubt that Cincinnatus' speech has overtones of Scipio's. T h e clause
etiamsi . . .fuerit gives strong support to Astin's view that the si. . .
habuisset clause preserved by Velleius is part of the original saying.
1 5 . 2 . similem causaefortunam: 'he would have fared as his case merited'.
15. 3 . sororis filios: 1. 56. 7. liberos consulis: 2. 3-6.
15. 4. Collatinum: 2. 2. 10. Sp. Cassio: 2. 41.
15. 6. bilibris farris \ \x had the double bilibre libris, TTX bilibre. T h e abl.
is required after emo and the noun bilibra, found also in late Latin
(Chiron 447), is properly formed. T h e sentiment recurs in Licinius
Macer's speech, given by Sallust (19): quinis modiis libertatem omnium
aestumavere. In what follows there may be an adaptation of another
saying of Scipio Aemilianus made on the same occasion in 131 :
hostium armatorum to Hens clamore non territus, qui possum vestro moveri
quorum noverca est Italia (Veil. Pat. 2. 4. 4).
15. 7. concoquere: metaphorically only here. Cf. 3. 36. 2 n. coquebant;
cf. Plautus, Miles 208. Possibly from contemporary political slang
(E. Dutoit, Hommages a L. Herrmann, 334).
15. 8. bona: cf. Sp. Cassius (2. 41. 10).
16. 1. Aequimaelium: or Aequimelium, an open space in the Vicus
Jugarius at the south-east corner of the Capitoline, near the porticus
Minucia. Cicero (de Domo 101; where see Nisbet's note) connected
the name with aequum 'just' and not, as Varro (de Ling. Lat. 5. 157),
with aequare 'to level 5 .
16. 2. bove aurato: this is what L. wrote (cf. Perioch. 4 L. Minucius
index bove aurata donatus est) but what he understood by it is more than
questionable. All other authorities referred to a statue-column: D.H.
12. 4. 6 arduiv avhpiavros

eip7](j>Laaro 77 povXij; Pliny, N.H.

18. 15 (from

Piso) 'L. Minucius Augurinus qui Sp. Maelium coarguerat, farris

pretium in trinis nundinis ad assem redegit undecimus plebei tribunus
qua de causa statua ei extra Portam Trigeminam a populo stipe
conlata statuta est' (cf. 34. 21). Such a column with a statue is de
picted on the coins of two moneyers C. Minucius Augurinus (150-125)
and Ti. Minucius Augurinus (124-103) (see Sydenham nos. 492, 4 6 3 ;
L. Cesano, Stud. Num. 1 (1942), 147). Momigliano has demonstrated
that such a column and statue cannot be earlier than the third century
(S.D.H.L 2 (1936), 374; G. Beccati (La Colonna Coclida 34-36) is too
credulous) and was set up to commemorate the legendary great among
the Minucii near the Porta Trigemina (or Minucia) since that was
the site of their ancestral rites. 1 It follows that the statue-column is
1
H. Lyngby (Eranos 59 (1961), 148 ff.) has argued from the emblems associated
with the statue on coins that it represented Triptolemos, the family deity of the
Minucii. His argument is elaborated in Eranos 61 (1963), 55-62.

556

439 B.C.

4. 16. 2

not an authentic historical testimony. "What of the bos auratus? We

know of no gilt statues before 181 (40. 34. 5) but there is no need to
assume that it was a statue. In 343 the consul, A. Cornelius, praeter
militaria alia dona aurea corona (Decium) et centum bubus eximioque uno
albo opimo auratis cornibus donat. Animals with gilded horns (boves aurati)
are commonly mentioned as sacrificial victims (25. 12. 13; Act. Frat.
Aw. (A.D. 86) 1, 12, 16, 17, 47 et passim) and Minucius was presumably
expected to sacrifice his gift. A mention of the bos auratus, not neces
sarily in connexion with Minucius (it might even have been a further
precaution against the famine; 12. 11 n.), would have stood in the
Annales.
16. 3 . undecimum . . . tribunum: so also Pliny, loc. cit. It will have been
the view of Valerius Antias.
16. 4. falsum imaginis titulum: 3. 72. 4 n. Was there an imago said to
be of L. Minucius with an honorific inscription in the vaults of the
Minucii? T h e subject of refellit is cautum 'the proviso disproves the
inscription'.
16. 5. Q. Caecilius Q,- Junius Sex. Titinius: nothing else is known of
them (3. 54. 13 n.) and one can neither affirm nor deny their existence.
A M. Titinius was mag. equitum to C. Junius in 302 and the families
were among the most prominent plebeian names. T h e mention of
sex locis (16. 6 n.) suggests that they may have figured in the libri
lintei as tribuni militum and been wrongly identified as plebeian tribunes.
T h e parts assigned to them are pure invention.
Servilium: 21. 4 n.
16. 6. sex locis: 7. 1 n. There were always six tribuni militum but they
were not all necessarily invested with supreme authority.
16. 8. Mam. Aemilius: M.f., according to the filiation of his son M \
Aemilius (4. 53. 1) but the father is not otherwise heard of; vir summae
dignitatis indicates that he was the nephew of L. Aemilius, consul in
484 (2. 42. 2). Mamercus is an old praenomen in the Aemilii (Festus
1 1 6 L . ; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 73), from the Oscan; cognate with
Mavors. I t is also in common use as a cognomen in the Aemilian gens.
See Klebs, R.E., 'Aemilius (97)'.
L. Julium : rdtos in Diodorus 12.38. 1. L. is right, he was later consul
in 430 (4. 30. 1). His filiation would be Vop.f. C.n. (2. 54. 3).
17-20. 4. A. Cornelius Cossus and the 'Spolia Opimd*
T h e story of A. Cornelius Cossus forms a separate episode which L.
skilfully constructs to throw into relief the unprincipled wickedness of
the Etruscans and the iustitia of the Romans. T h e story opens with the
crimes of the enemy and the Roman preparations for war. T h e Etrus
can state of mind, the distrust and foolhardiness which come from
an evil conscience, is then sketched (18. 1-3), while the Romans rest
557

43 8 B.C.
in the confidence of religious assurance (18. 6). In this spirit the
forces meet and it is not till then that L. introduces with his favourite
formula (erat turn . . .) the hero, A. Cornelius Cossus (19. 1). His ex
ploits, inspired by loathing for a ruptorfoederis humani violatorque gentium
iuris (19. 3), are narrated to their conclusion, while simultaneous
events on other parts of the field of battle are postponed to an appendix
(19-7-8)Of the truth of it there can be no doubt. The spolia opima and,
doubtless, the corona aurea had existed for generations to see. The
statues of the murdered ambassadors still stood and the Annales re
corded a triumph over the Fidenates (20. 1 n.). The Tolumnii are a
real family at Veii (17. 1 n.); the Cornelii would not lightly have
allowed the memory of such a deed to lapse. Whether Cossus killed
Tolumnius in 437 or in 426 or even as consul in 428 is more dis
putable (see on 20. 5-11). L. took his material from the same source
that provided the second war with Fidenae in 32 ff. and, since 32. 3
where Mam. Aemilius is said to have led the fighting at Nomentum
is inconsistent with 22. 2 where that honour is given to Q,. Servilius,
that source is likely to be Valerius Antias (see also 20. 8 n . ) . A change
of source at this point is indicated by the formal introduction in
horum magistratu and by the citation of a variant (i.e. Valerius Antias)
at 16. 3.
See Delaruelle, Rev. Phil. 37 (1913), 145-61; Burck 96-97; J.R.S.
48 (1958), 41. For references to discussions of the date and authenticity
of the episode see 20. 5 n.
17. 1. Fidenae, colonia Romana: 2. 19. 2 n.
Lartem Tolumnium: a sixth-century dedication at Veii is inscribed
VeWur Tulumne Tresnu ^M^6 Mene Mul[. . . (Nogara, Not. Scavi,
1930, 327 f.) and an Etruscan Tolumnius is met in Virgil, Aeneid
11. 429 (L. A. Holland, A.J.P. 56 (1935), 211). (The claim made by
Santangelo (Latomus 8 (1949), 37) and Ernout (Rev. Phil. 75 (1949),
157) that the third-century dedication also from Veii, L. Tolonio Bed
Menerva, was set up by the same family, is shown by Weinstock to be
untenable in default of other parallels for the change of Etr. -wmw- to
Lat. -on- (Glotta 33 (1954), 306-8).) See also 5. 1.311.
\ac Veientes]: Ver. omits the words, rightly. Although not too much
weight should be put on the fact that Priscian does not quote them
(p. 149 K. Livius in IIII a.u.c. Larte Tolumnio rege Veientium), it is reason
able to ask whom else the Fidenates could have joined if they threw
in their lot with Tolumnius. It is a typical gloss.
17. 2. legatos: 17. 6. A famous statue-group was said to have been
set up to commemorate them, which still survived in Cicero's day
(Phil. 9. 4-5 statuae steterunt usque ad meant memoriam in rostris . . . atqui
et huic (Cn. Octavio) et Tullo Cluvio et L. Roscio et Sp. Antio et C. Fulcinio
4- 17-20. 4

558

438 B.C.

4- i7- 2

qui a Veientium rege caesi sunt . . . mors honorifuit; cf. Pliny, N.H. 34. 23).
It may be inferred that the statues were removed in the rebuilding of
the rostra undertaken by Sulla. The earliest statues of particular men
as opposed to gods seem to have been commemorative, one of the first
being the group of Messenian boys by Callon of Elis (c. 450). A com
memorative group of the murdered ambassadors thus accords both with
the date and with the purpose of such sculpture (E. H . Richardson,
Mem. Am. Acad. Rome 21 (1953), 108) and the names of the ambassa
dors are credible. Four oratores were sent res repetitum before the
fetiales. This fits our four legati. Fulcinius is a widely and early attested
Etruscan name (Schulze 169). It is of no consequence that the Fulcinii
seem to be plebeian. Cloelius Tullus, or better, as Cicero and Pliny
write, Tullus Cloelius (Cluilius), could belong to the family of Cluilii
prominent in this period (7. 1 ; he might even be the same as T.
Cloelius (Siculus); for the praenomen Tullus cf. 2. 35. 7). T h e third
person is in doubt; Pliny calls him Sp. Nautius but the texts of Cicero
print Sp* Antio. Nautius is certainly right. T h e Nautii are active and
distinguished in the fifth century, whereas the Antii do not emerge
until the first (cf. C. Antius, tr. pL 68 B.C.). Ver. had Spuantium against
N.'s Sp. Antium. Mommsen assumed a progressive error resulting from
a simple metathesis (cf. 4. 54. 3 C. Appius for P. Papius). T h e real
puzzle is L. Roscius. T h e Roscii are unknown before the first century
but they stemmed from Lanuvium and Ameria, both very ancient
cities, so that, although surprising, the solitary manifestation of a
Roscius in the fifth century is not impossible.
17. 3. levant quidam: cf. 2. 41. n invenio apud quosdam idquepropius est
fidem (Hellmann, Livius-Inierpretationen, 18). propius est fidem (17. 5)
shows that a variant explanation has been cited and therefore that the
subject of levant cannot be the Fidenates trying to explain away their
guilt (so Mommsen who followed Ver. in omitting quidam) but must be
the rival historians, quidam and similar words are frequently dropped
(cf. 4. 24. 6).
tesserarum: cf. Val. Max. 9. 9. 3 'cum in tesserarum prospero iactu
per iocum conlusori dixisset "occide'' et forte Romanorum legati
intervenissent, satellites eius errore vocis impulsi interficiendo legatos
lusum ad imperium transtulerunt.' W h a t game was Tolumnius play
ing? Not ordinary dice (Becq de Fouquieres), because there is no
trace of any such cry as occide ('amort') in all the ancient references to
dicing (Lamer, R.E., 'lusoria tabula'). But the principle of the Roman
game ludus latrunculi was, like chess, to corner your opponent's piece
and eliminate it. T h e elimination was called 'death', where in English
we would speak of 'capturing' a piece. Cf. Ovid, Ars Amat. 3. 358. The
cry occide would be appropriate for 'capturing' the opponent's piece.
Unfortunately the Roman ludus latrunculi does not seem to have been
559

4- ! 7 . 3

438 B.C.

played with dice. As in chess, each player moved alternately. T h e

Greek equivalent (TTOXIS), however, involved dice. R. G. Austin
(Antiquity 14 (1940), 257) maintains a rigid distinction between
'games of the battle-type played without dice' (ireTrela), among which
he classes the Indus latrunculi, and 'games of dice' (fcujfcwx). Since -TTOXLS
was a battle-type game he argues that it too was played without dice
and virtually identifies it with ludus latrunculi. T h e distinction is not
a priori sound. Battle-types are found played both with and without
dice. 'Campaign' and 'L'Attaque' are both fought out by contending
armies but in the former the moves are governed by the throw of the
dice, in the latter moves are made strictly alternately. Moreover, games
which involved a combination of dice and moves were well known in
antiquity (see Fraenkel on Aeschylus, Agamemnon 33) and such games
could be classed indiscriminately under the general category of-rreTTela
or Kv^eta (see L.S.J, s.w.). TTOALS is, in fact, explicitly classed with the
dice-games, Pollux links it with TTZVT ypdfjLfxai which used dice, and
Eustathius (Iliad 1397. 45) calls it CL86S TL Kvfizlas. In other words
TTOXIS and ludus latrunculi are not identical but differ on the fundamental
question of whether the moves are dictated by the throw of a die or not.
Lars Tolumnius, an Etruscan, was, as might be expected, playing a Greek
not a Roman game. A large quantity of dice have survived at Veii.
J . Gage (R.E.L. 35 (1957), 224 ff.) attempts to 'rationalize' the
story as having grown up from a misinterpretation of tesserae, militarysigns (7. 35. 1, 9. 32. 4), or tesserae hospitales, the tokens from a proR o m a n party in Fidenae (Plautus, Poen. 1047 ff.; Cist. 503). But the
game is Greek and the story is likely to have been taken over from an
episode of Greek history, like Tarquin's poppies.
1 7 . 4 . in errorem versumfacinus: 'or that, if it had happened in this way,
the deed would not have been regarded as a mistake'. For deinde
standing for a suppressed protasis cf, e.g., 33. 32. 3.
17. 7. tribunisque eius: L. normally writes either plebs tribunique or
p. tribuniqueplebis (4. 7. 8, \\. \et al.; see Drakenborch on 2. 56. 1).
Freudenberg's eius (anni), nihil is attractive.
L. Sergius Fidenas: 3. 35. 11 n . ; C.f. C.n., according to the Fasti for
418. Perhaps the first member of the family to reach consular rank
since the suffect in 478 is more likely to be a Verginius (see Broughton)
and the Decemvir of 450 to be fictitious. T h e cognomen must indicate
his home of origin and not his victory, since the first such honorific
title was Aemilius Privernas in 329. T h e old rural tribe Sergia lay
between the Via Salaria and the Via Nomentana and reached as
far as Fidenae. It is significant that the commission sent to investigate
Fidenae contained a Sergius and a Servilius who also had the cogno
men Fidenas. See 30. 5 ; Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 294; L. R.
Taylor, Voting Districts, 40.
560

437 B.C.

4. 17. 8

17. 8. fusis hostibus: understand ex. See Burman's note on Suetonius,

Caligula 46.
17. 1 1 . Faliscorum auxilio: Ver.'s word-order is certainly right; for
the slip auxiliorum cf. 56. 3. For Falerii see 5. 26-27 n 17. 12. qua sequi: Aemilius had crossed the Anio and taken up a
position with his flanks resting on the Tiber and the Anio and his
rear guarded by the confluence of the rivers. It was only necessary
to place a r a m p a r t to protect his front. T h e text as it stands is mean
ingless. It can certainly not be translated 'throwing up a r a m p a r t
between himself and the enemy wherever he found it possible to go
on with the work' (Stephenson): the enemy were not likely to molest
h i m ; nor, on the other hand 'son retranchement longeait les rives
entre les deux cours d'eau la ou elles pouvaient etre fortifiees5 (Baillet)
a futile proceeding since the rivers were ample fortification. Novak
was surely right to recall 39. 2. 3 per rupes fugerunt qua sequi hostis non
posset; the vallum would be dug in front of Aemilius 5 lines, where the
Fidenates could carry through an assault, munimento looks like a gloss
on vallo (cf. 1. 55. 9 n.). In consequence the conjectures of Drechsler,
Madvig, and Karsten, as reported in the O.C.T., are unsatisfactory.
Nor does Novak's own munimento (nisi) qua sequi (hostis} poterat nullo
interposito convince against the agreement of Ver. and TTX on vallo.
I would simply restore hostis for munimento.
18. 2. Notice the emphasis on the psychological reactions of the
enemy.
18. 6. silentium: as always to signalize a key moment (3. 47. 6 n.).
arcem: it is not possible to see the Capitol from the plain of Fidenae.
ex\ auguribus: ex is wrong. T h e plain ab is required with tolli (4. 37.9).
T h e question remains whether ex is a simple mistake for ab by antici
pation of ex composito or whether there is a lacuna such as ex (ea ab)
postulated by Alschefski. ex would be the right preposition for de
scribing where the signal was raised (cf. 4. 34. 1 signum ex muro tollunt)
and the superfluous -sae in N's admissae essent, where admisissent is con
firmed as the right reading by passages such as 1. 55. 3 or Plautus,
Asin. 259, could well be the consequence of a transposition. On the
whole Alschefski's reading best meets the demands of palaeography
and of meaning, admitto in this sense is sacral.
1 8 . 7 . simul ubi: the expression may be compared with simul ut (Cicero,
Tusc. Disp. 4. 5) and should be retained (Rossbach).
19. 1. erat turn: 2. 33. 5 n.
amplissimum: 2. 4 n.
19. 2. videret: a necessary correction of videt. For the combination of
imperfect and pluperfect tenses cf. 1. 5. 6, 3. 5. 8 n.
814432

561

0 0

4- 19- 3

437 B.C.

1 9 - 3 . Hicine: Brakman (Mnemosyne 56 (1928), 63) drew attention to

the similarity of 22. 6. 3 - 4 : the Insubrian Ducarius sees the consul
Flaminius rallying the most closely contested part of the field and
exclaims s en hie est qui legiones nostras cecidit manibus peremptorum
foede civium dabo'. T h e vow, which underlines the high purpose of
Cossus' bravery, is the reverse of a Devotio where the general vowed
himself and his own troops to the manes (cf. 10. 28. 13 f ) . As such it
is a traditional feature of stirring battle-accounts. Should en hie est
be read here?
mactatam: 'I will sacrifice and offer this victim to the manes\ Cf.
3 . 5 8 . 11 (n.).
19. 4 - 6 . T h e actual encounter is described in simple, short sentences
which graphically bring out the excitement; notice, e.g., terrore caesi
regis hostes fundit with its plain, almost monotonous, dissyllables. T h e
language, as in other heroic battles, is 'epic' to match. For resupino (not
in Cicero, Caesar, or Tacitus) cf. Statius, Theb. 9. 312; Virgil, Aeneid
1. 476; 3. 624. cuspis as a whole spear (not in Sallust, Cicero, or Nepos)
is frequent in Ovid, Virgil, and Propertius.
19. 6. locorum notitia: military, cf. Caesar, B.C. 1. 3 1 . 2.
19. 7. ut ante dictum est: 18. 4. All news of their operations is held back
so that the main incident can be presented as a unity.
20. 1. triumphans: so also Lydus, de Mag. 1. 38.
T h e fragmentary Fasti Triumph, preserve the entry
mus an. CCCXVI
us idib. Sexlt.]
T h e early editors read the first letter as n and restored
Mam. Aemilius M.f. -n. Mamercx\nus an CCCXVI
diet, de Veientibus et Fidenatib]us idib. Sext.
but Degrassi asserts that n is impossible and that m is the only serious
candidate, which would certainly make the cognomen Maximus. O n e
of the late chronographers gives the entry for this year as Fidenato et
Maximo, whence Degrassi restores a suffect consul P. Valerius Lactuca
Maximus and attributes the triumph to him. T h e reasoning is con
sistent but not compelling. Aemilius' defeat of the Fidenates was
a celebrated event, quite apart from its connexion with Cossus'
exploits, and it is hard to see where Lydus would have got his informa
tion if the triumphal Fasti attributed the triumph of this year to an
otherwise utterly unknown figure. Further the Chronographer's
Maximo is a simple corruption of Macerino. T h e two are constantly
confused. If the -mus is correct, then the restoration:
Mam. Aemilius M.f. -n. Mamercus Maxi]mus
at least raises fewer objections.
562

437 B.C.

4. 20. 2

20. 2. spolia opima: 1. 10. 1 ff n.

carmina incondita: 3. 29. 5 n.
20. 3. celebritatis . . ./rueturn: 27. 45. 5.
coronam auream: 3. 29. 3 n.
20. 5-11. Digression on A. Cornelius Cossus
The three problems posed by this notorious digression can be kept
distinct and treated separately.
In writing that omnes ante me auctores agreed that Cossus won the
spolia opima as military tribune (in 437) L. exaggerates. At least two
other traditions are known. One refers the exploit to 426 when he was
magister equitum (VaL Max. 3. 2. 4 ; cf. Servius ad Aen. 6. 842; 32. 4),
the other also places it in 426 but designates him consular tribune
(Diodorus 12. 80). The date was evidently fluid because there was
nothing in the Annales to tie it down. Legend associated Cossus
with Mam. Aemilius and Aemilius was listed twice in the records,
as dictator in 437 and 426, and was credited with wars against
Fidenae on both occasions, wars which need not necessarily be
doublets. If the date was fluid so also was Cossus' rank. Perhaps the
consular tribunate in Diodorus represents the oldest stage in the
tradition, but we cannot be sure. Augustus' claim that he had inscriptional evidence that Cossus was consul when he won the spolia did not,
therefore, contradict a uniform tradition. Nevertheless, his evidence
is worthless and must be rejected. A linen corslet, even apart from the
deleterious effects of sweat and blood, could not have survived intact
for four hundred years in a temple which in its latter years was roof
less and exposed to the elements. Even if it could have, its authenticity
is betrayed by the addition of 'Cos.' (in whatever form or with what
ever meaning). On an original document of so early date the title
praetor rather than consul would have been used and equally the
suggestion made by Rutgers and Hirschfeld, that Cos or Coso was the
cognomen Cossus misinterpreted by Augustus as consul, is invalidated
by the absence oicognomina from early inscriptions. The inscription on
the corslet is not original and cannot be used as evidence for early
history. The most plausible hypothesis is that it was 'restored', perhaps
at the time when M. Marcellus dedicated his spolia opima, and the
inscription was brought into line with Marcellus' (but cf. Plutarch,
Q..R. 37).
Secondly, it may be asked what Augustus' motive was in bringing
a highly dubious piece of evidence to L.'s notice. An attractive sugges
tion of Dessau's connected it with a claim for the spolia opima made in
29 B.C. by M. Licinius Crassus, proconsul of Macedonia, who had
defeated the Bastarnae in battle and killed their chieftain, Deldo.
The claim was disallowed by Octavian, on the grounds that Crassus
563

4. 20. 5-i i

437 B.C.

was not the holder of full imperium (Dio 51. 24. 4), but the reason was
his fear of being overshadowed by Crassus. T h e spolia opima of Cossus
would have provided Grassus with a clear precedent, unless it could
be shown that Gossus was consul and not a mere military tribune.
There were thus vital political motives to influence Augustus' reading
of the inscription and when the temple was rebuilt no doubt the in
scription was visible for all to see.
Thirdly, the passage raises a question about the date and com
position of Book 4. If the arguments given above are right, L. was
given the information by Augustus not earlier than 29 B.C. and a
somewhat later date is indicated by the use of the title Augustus Caesar
which Octavian assumed on 16 J a n u a r y 27 B.C. A date of 27-26 B.C.
might, therefore, be proposed for the composition of the digression,
but the digression was inserted subsequently. This follows not simply
from the fact that L. relates the story of Gossus without any initial
qualms and only poses the difficulties afterwards: the habit of adding
qualifications and doubts after a story is a fixed technique (cf. 10.5. 13,
17. 11, 26. 6 f.). But 32. 4 qui priore bello . . . intulerit is written without
any knowledge of the digression and, similarly, 20. 9 imbelle triennium
presupposes that the narrative of 30 has already been written. If, then,
the digression was written in 27-26 and was inserted into a narrative
that had already been composed, we might be tempted to believe,
with Syme, that the Books 1-5, and Book 4 in particular, had been
written several years earlier. T h e temptation should be resisted. There
are certainly no traces of any other such insertions and no evidence
for Bayet's hypothesis of two 'editions' of the Books 1-5.
Finally, it casts some interesting light on L.'s relations with Augus
tus. L. says that it would be sacrilege not to accept the evidence which
Augustus produced and yet takes no steps to alter his own narrative.
There is no rewriting, no deletion: the sensational discovery is put
in a footnote. L.'s ties with the imperial house were close and personal
(Introduction, p p . 2 ff.) but he remained politically uncommitted. He
could afford to neglect the historical niceties which meant so much to
Augustus and so little to himself.
See Rutgers, Variarum Lectionum Libri Sex (1618), 346; Perizonius,
Anim. Hist, ch. 7; Soltau, Hermes, 29 (1894), 611 ff.; Dessau, Hermes 41
(1906), 142 ff.; Hirschfeld, Kl. Schriften, 398 ff.; Beloch, Rom. Geschichte,
298 ff; Last, C.A.H 7. 507; G. Hirst, A.J.P. 47 (1926), 347 ft".;
Gichorius, Rom. Studien, 263 f.; Klotz, R.E., 'Livius', col. 836; J . D.
Bishop, Latomus 7 (1948), 187 ff.; Syme, Harvard Studies in Class. Phil.
6

4 (1959) , 4 3 - 4 6 .
20. 6. dux: 3. 1. 4 n. Festus 204 L. quotes a reputed law of N u m a :
l
cuius auspicio classe procincta opima spolia capiuntur Iovi Feretrio
darier oporteat'.
564

437 B.C.

4. 20. 6

Cossum: 'wormy'; the cognomen is descriptive of personal appearance;

cf. Paulus Festus 36 L. It has nothing to do with the Cossii, Cossidii,
or Gossuttii (but see Schulze 519). Rutgers argued that the inscription
read A. CORNELIO M.F. COS. It is likely that the cognomen would have
been inscribed if the inscription was 'restored' c. 200.
20. 7. conditorem cue (aut nX) restitutorem: Augustus founded some and
restored others. So Ovid, Fasti 2. 63 templorum positor, templorum
sancte repostor.
ingressum: Augustus presumably visited the temple in company with
Atticus at whose suggestion the work of restoration was undertaken
(Nepos, Atticus 20. 3). Atticus died on 31 March 32 B.C., so that an
interval of at least five years must have elapsed between the first visit
and the communication of the evidence to L. It is not known when the
restoration was carried out or completed. It may have been a lengthy
operation. T h e temple was roofless, according to Nepos, and Augustus
classes the work as new construction, not rebuilding (Res Gestae 19;
cf. ipsius templi auctorem below).
Cosso: Cossum N, by assimilation to sum.
20. 8. quis ea in re sit error: existimatio communis means 'it is up to every
one to make up his own mind' and is invariably used with an ind.
question (23. 47. 8; cf, 4. 41. 2, 34. 2. 5). T h e manuscripts' qui si. . .
error cannot, therefore, be defended as Conway proposes (C.Q. 5
(1911), 8 : 'but if the cause of doubt about this should lie merely in
the fact that the annals mention Gossus only as consul seven years
later, that is a problem which I do not profess to explain but which
everyone must settle according to his liking'). T h e sense must b e : 'the
reader can decide for himself how the mistake came about that the
authorities date Cossus' consulship seven years later', i.e. quis . . .
error (Gronovius).
libri quos linteos: editors, comparing 7. 10, have wished to include a
reference to the other libri magistratuum besides the libri lintei (libri
librique quos Mommsen) but such precision is misguided. T h e libri
lintei were libri magistratuum.
septimo\ post demum anno: the year is 437 B.C. (A.U.C. 317). Gossus'
consulship is given by L. (30. 4) as falling in 428 (A.U.C. 326), that is
decimo . . . anno, but the chronology of these years is inextricably con
fused. Two other oddities need to be considered. Licinius Macer re
peated the consuls of 435 in 434 (23. 1), where Valerius Antias listed
"M. Manlius and Q . Sulpicius as consuls. T h e discrepancy could be
explained by supposing that Licinius had fused the lists of two earlier
years (e.g. the consular tribunes and consuls in 444, if they had really
belonged to 444 and 443 respectively) and as a result was left with a
spare year at 434 which he filled by repeating the college of 435. T h a t
explanation, however, does not account for the difficulties of 444
565

437 B.C.

4- 20. 8

(7. 10 n.) and no reason is advanced why Licinius should not have felt
the missing year until 435. It is, therefore, necessary to consider also
the fact that 31. 1 (T. Quinctius Poenus ex consulate) implies that Quinctius was consul in the year immediately preceding his consular tri
bunate, but, in L., Quinctius is consul with Cossus in 428 (30. 4)
and another consulate, that of C. Servilius and L. Papirius (30. 12),
intervenes before his consular tribunate. There are no grounds for
disputing the text. Any explanation must rather start from the fact
that L. is using different sources which gave different magistrate lists.
If the source of 31. 1 (Licinius Macer) omitted the consular of C.
Servilius and L. Papirius, Quinctius' consular tribunate would follow
directly on his consulate but in consequence Licinius would have
lost a complete year from his chronology unless he had reduplicated
a year earlier which is precisely what we find. The list may be conjecturally set out as follows:
Licinius Macer
435

L.
434 C.
L.

ulius

Valerius Antias
C. Julius II
L. Verginius
M. Manlius
Q . Sulpicius

J
Verginius
Julius III
Verginius II

429 L. Papirius
Hostus Lucretius
L. Julius
L. Sergius II
428 Hostus Lucretius
A. Cornelius Cossus
L. Sergius II
T. Quinctius Poenus II
427 A. Cornelius Cossus
C. Servilius
T. Quinctius Poenus II
L. Papirius
426 T. Quinctius Poenus
T. Quinctius Poenus
C. Furius
C. Furius
M. Postumius
M. Postumius
A. Cornelius Cossus
A. Cornelius Cossus
The confusion must have arisen from disorder or disarray among
the tabulae dealbatae, which could have been inferred from the uncer
tainty whether there were consuls or consular tribunes in 434 (23. 2 n.)
and from Diodorus' insertion of a college of consuls (L. Quinctius and
A. Sempronius), probably misplaced from 425, between 428 and 427
(Diodorus 12. 77. 1). See also J.R.S. 48 (1958), 45-46.
What light does that solution, if accepted, throw on the corrupt
septimo? If the digression was inserted after the text of 20-30 had been
composed, L. is unlikely to have looked farther afield than his own
history to establish when Cossus' consulship was and since on L.'s
own showing that consulship was in 428, we should read decimo here.
Poeno: 26. 2 n.
20. 9. imbelle triennium: 29. 7-30. 16.
566

437 B.C.

4. 20. 10

20. 10. fortius: 31. 1 ft

20. 11. The O.C.T. punctuation and interpretation must be supposed
to mean: 'you may conjecture what you like; but in my view whatever
opinion you form is pointless (lit. you may revolve pointless things to
all opinions) since Cossus would not have courted sacrilege by calling
himself consul unless he was consul'. But vana versare licet cannot =
vanum est versare etsi licet. The passage should be compared with 29. 6
nee libet credere et licet in variis opinionibus: the object of versare must be
understood as the date of Cossus' exploit. Repunctuate: ea libera
coniectura est sed, ut ego arbitror, vana 'that is legitimate speculation, but,
in my view, pointless. You may subject the matter to every opinion
(for versare in omnes cf. 1. 58. 3) although Cossus himself at the risk of
sacrilege called himself consul5. The sense demands that cum =
'although5 not 'since'. My interpretation is founded on the excellent
note by J. Walker, Supplementary Annotations.
21-30. Annalistic Narrative, 436-427 B.C.
The First Battle of Fidenae
The narrative continues on 20. 4 but in the succeeding chapters
there is little unity of story and no attempt to combine the scattered
notices in an over-all picture or by a common thread. The Annales
were rich in details for the decade but in the absence of some great
personality or some stirring legend the material could not easily be
worked up into history. The contradiction between 22. 2 and 32. 3
indicates that he reverts to Licinius but variants are cited at 21. 10,
23- 2, 24. 9, 26. 6, 29. 5. See Burck 97.
21. 1. M. Cornelio: M.f. L.n., a brother of Cossus. His praenomen is
given as AtiXos by Diodorus 12. 46. 1.
L. Papirio: a brother of the consul of 441 (12. 1).
21. 3 . Sp. Maelio: probably a doublet of his famous namesake
(13. 1 n.). The accusations are presented in characteristically Re
publican terms. For falsis criminibus circumventum cf. Sallust, Catil. 34. 2 ;
for caedem civis indemnati see 3. 11. 5 n.
favore nominis: cf. Tacitus, Hist. 2. 72. 1; Justin 15. 2. 3 (Fletcher).
de publicandis bonis: one tradition, given by Cicero, de Domo 86, and
Val. Max. 5. 3. 2, held that Servilius Ahala was condemned by the
comitia centuriata and went into exile (Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen,
2. 212 n. 127). It was a Gracchan gloss on the law that no one should
be put to death without a trial, however self-evident the merits of the
case.
21. 5. vis morbi: 3. 2. 1 n.
prodigia: 3. 5. 14 n.
duumviris praeeuntibus: 5. 13. 5 n. Understand carmen with praeeuntibus. The priests led the way in the chanting or recitation of the
567

4- 2i. 5

435 B.C.

solemn prayer. T h e type of prayer is illustrated by Festus 230 L . ;

Cato, de Re Rust. 141. 3 ; Plautus Merc. 679; and the style can be
detected in the archaic collocation salvus and sanus (Plautus, Amph.
730; Merc. 889), characteristic of such prayers.
21. 6. C. Iulio iterum: 3. 65. 5.
L. Verginio : Opet.f., a son of the consul of 473 (2. 54. 3), but Diodorus
gives the rarerpraenomen Proculus (12. 49. 1) which would make him
a son or grandson of the consul of 486 (2. 4 1 . 1). See Gundel, R.E.,
'Verginius (14)'.
tantum metum vastitatis: there is no need to alter the text. (t. metus et
vastitatis Conway; tantum metum, vastatis urbe agrisque Seyffert). The gen.
of the thing feared is common (cf., e.g., Cicero, Verr. 5. 160) and for
metum facere cf. 9. 4 1 . 11.
2 1 . 9. in aede Quirini: the temple of Quirinus on the Quirinal hill to
which it gave its name was not vowed till 325, by L. Papirius Cursor,
and not dedicated till 293 (10. 46. 7; Pliny, N.H. 7. 213) but there
may have been an older temple on the same site, for Pliny [N.H.
15. 120) regards the shrine as among the oldest in Rome and Festus
303 L. speaks of an archaic sacellum Quirini (see Platner-Ashby s.v.).
Meetings of the Senate could be held in any augurated building and
in later times the choice was sometimes dictated by superstition and
consideration of the business to be transacted (e.g. the critical dis
cussion on the riots of 103 was held in the temple of Fides Publica
(Appian, B.C. 1. 16) : declarations of war were often proposed in the
temple of Mars Ultor) and sometimes by proximity to the consul's
house (e.g. in 63 at the temple of Juppiter Stator near Cicero's (in
Catil. 1. 11) and in 44 at the temple of Tellus near Antony's house
(Appian, B.C. 2. 126)). Either factor might have been operative here.
Quirinus was a suitable deity to preside over the election of a dictator
in a time of military crisis and his temple was the nearest to the Porta
Collina. No other session is recorded in the temple.
2 1 . 10. Q. Servilium: he must be the same as Q . Servilius P.f. Sp.n.
Priscus Fidenas, dictator also in 418, whose name and filiation are given
in full by the Capitoline Fasti under that year and who was elected
augur in 439 (I.L.S. 9338. 2 Q.Ser]viliusP.f. . .). He was a leading figure
in his generation (26. 7,30. 5,45.5,46. 4-11,48. 10), but never reached
the consulship although his father held that office in 463 (3. 6. 1 n.).
T h e manuscripts, both Ver. and N, conspire on the praenomen A. but
that can hardly be even what Licinius Macer or the libri lintei wrote.
Aulus only figures once as a praenomen among the Servilii (C.I.L. 1.
1384 (first c. B.C.)) and Q . and A. are easily confused in uncials. T h e
doubt about the cognomen is more instructive. Different branches of
families were from early times distinguished by nicknames but the
practice only became regular after the third century and was not
568

435 B.C.

4. 21. 10

systematized until the first. T h e cognomina of fifth-century persons were,

therefore, largely whimsical. T h e Servilii were distinguished from one
another by several names. T h e first Servilius Priscus, like Tarquinius
Priscus, was so called because he was the oldest of the family, and
other members of the family were named Ahala (13. 14 n.) or, as here,
Structus (the exact meaning of the name is uncertain; ? from struo =
'well-built', 'large', a physical description). In editing the Fasti and
listing each person with tria nomina, scholars had no sure evidence to
work on and the attribution of names for the early period was in
evitably arbitrary. P. Servilius, the consul of 495, is named in the
Fasti Priscus Structus. His son, Sp. Servilius, the consul of 476, is
plain Structus in the Fasti, but his grandsons P. and Q . , consuls in
463 and 468, are called Priscus in the Fasti and Structus in Diodorus
(11. 79. 1, 71. 1). T h e present dictator is listed as Priscus Fidenas
in the Fasti, but appears as Priscus in 26. 7 and 46. 10. We may note
the variant traditions but can build nothing from them.
permittente . . . node: dictators were always appointed at night
(57- 5) 8. 23. 15, 9. 38. 14, 10. 40. 2 ; Dio fr. 36. 26), a survival from a
time when the consuls could only leave the front after dark.
Helvam: 11. 1 n. T h e name is formed from helvus 'light brown', re
ferring to the colour of his hair (cf. Rufus). Helvium read by Ver. and
7rA is a nomen not a cognomen. T h e Nicomachean editors had already
made the right correction {helvam helvium M ; cf. 11. 5).
22. 1. ex aerario: 3. 69. 8 n.
22. 2. subiit: Ver. rightly: an intrusive historic indicative would be
out of place.
Nomento: 1. 38. 4 n.
Fidenas: the method by which Fidenae is alleged to have been
captured is a doublet of the more celebrated surprise of Veii and the
capture is remarkably ineffective since Fidenae, although deletae (25. 8),
shortly afterwards is in a position to rebel (30. 5, 31. 7 ff). Such
considerations have led many scholars to infer that the campaigns have
been reduplicated (Secmiiller, Die Doubletten in der Ersten Decade;
Last, C.A.H. 7. 507-9) and even that Servilius' dictatorship is unhistorical. Scepticism is unwarranted. It is only too likely that military
details were used more than once to fill out a bare notice and that the
taking of an Etruscan city by means of a cuniculus was a story remem
bered more for the strategem than the locality. But in the long struggle
with Veii which culminated at the end of the century the Etruscan
enclave at Fidenae was always the strategical key (Richter, Hermes 17
(1882), 433 ff). T h e ground would have been contested several times
and no one engagement proved decisive. T h e annals of these years,
then, must have contained numerous references to battles with the
569

4- 2 2 . 2

435 B.C.

Fidenates, and it was good psychology to choose a Servilius whose

family, like their cousins the Sergii, originated from Fidenae, to
manage Rome's affairs at that juncture.
22. 4. ab aversa parte: adversa (codd.) pars is only used in L. of political
parties. A general would select a spot where the enemy's concentration
was not directed. Ver. reads
per[9 that is, urbis permaxime:
permaxime is a late and vulgar interpretation of maxime.
cuniculum: 5. ig. 911. There are no visible traces oicuniculi as there
are at Veii.
22. 6. a castris: deleted by Conway and Bayet on the strength of its omis
sion by the manuscript L. The deletion makes nonsense of the principles
of manuscript tradition and since the words, to be taken with e recta ...est
(cf. 9. 24. 7), cannot be faulted on grounds of latinity, they should be
retained. A similar interlacing occurs in the next sentence (a periculo
with intentis), where the purpose is to contrast vanas and certo.
22. 7. Furius: 12. 1 n. M. Geganius: 3. 65. 5.
villam publicam: since the census was no longer the responsibility
of the consuls but was entrusted to a special magistracy, it was
necessary to build headquarters for the censors when they were en
gaged on their functions (Varro, de Re Rust. 3. 2; Apuleius, Apol. 17).
The campus Martius was the obvious site and a building was erected
near the Saepta (Cicero, ad Att. 4. 16. 8) and the Circus Flaminius
(Plutarch, Sulla 30). Enlarged in 194 (34. 44. 5) and again in 34 by
Fonteius Capito, the villa publica is depicted on a coin of Fonteius
(Sydenham no. 901). See Platner-Ashby s.v.; Makin, J.R.S., 1921, 26.
2 3 . 1 . Macrum Licinium: Ver. inverts the order. The data are assembled
and discussed by Lahmeyer, Philologus 22 (1865), 469-94 and J.
Curschmann, %ur Inversion (Progr. Budingen, 1900), 55-61 ; cf. Axtell,
Class. Phil. 10 (1915), 392 ff. It emerges that the use of nomen and
cognomen (without praenomen) by themselves and, particularly, inverted
is a form of reference confined by Cicero to intimate friends or de
spised enemies. The observation holds good for L. also who used the
plain nomen and cognomen inverted either to refer to his sources (so
more nearly contemporary than the historical characters they deal
with), e.g. Antias Valerius (3. 5. 12), Macer Licinius (20. 8, 7. 9. 4,
9. 38. 16, 46. 3, 10. 9. 10), or to throw a special emphasis on the
cognomen in order, for example, to distinguish one member of a gens
from another (46. 10-12 Q. Servilius Priscus . . . alii Ahalam Servilium
scribunt; cf. 1. 39. 5, 46. 4, 47. 2, 57. 6, 2. 2. 3, 4. 18. 5, 41. 12, 6. 18. 4,
9. 15. i i , 38. 9). L. only uses the order Licinius Macer once (7. 12),
where he introduces the name for the first time. On both scores,
therefore, of familiarity and to produce the chiastic M.L. . . . Valerius
Antias, N's order is to be preferred. See Weissenborn on 26. 22. 13.
570

434 B.C.

4. 23. 1

Valerius Antias et Q. Tubero: for Q,. Aelius Tubero, see Introduction,

p. 16.
(I see nothing to be said for the conjecture atque for et Q., intended
to make Tubero apply to the father: so Soltau, Hermes29 (1894), 6 3 1 ;
Klotz 209; Bayet; A. Piganiol, Scritti. . . B. Nogara, 1937, 378 n. 3 ;
Gelzer, Gnomon 18 (1942), 229. L. does not use atque before t (Fugner,
Lexicon, 180. 10) and a praenomen is demanded by the formal balance
of the sentence. Ver. clearly read Antias et Q.)
M. Manlium: his filiation cannot be determined; see the stemmata
proposed by Miinzer, R.E., 'Manlius', cols. 1158, 1166.
Q. Sulpicium: 27. 9; Ser.f., a son of the consul of 461 (3. 10. 5), if
Ser. Sulpicius Q.f. Ser.n. Camerinus (cos. 393; 5. 29. 2) is rightly
identified as his son.
consules: Licinius is wrong. The confusion is to be connected with
the entry of three consular tribunes (Manlius, Sulpicius, and Ser.
Cornelius Cossus) in Diodorus (12. 53. 1) and, possibly, the Capitoline
Fasti, which was also known to both Valerius and Licinius. The re
cords were evidently damaged or obscure.
23. 3 . placet [et] : Muretus; placuit Ver. placuit would give L.'s own
opinion ('Licinius was doubtless content to follow the libri lintei9;
so Jung) but hand aubie must be taken with sequi, and consequently
placet is required to express Licinius' resolve to follow the libri lintei
without hesitation. The corruption in Ver. may be due to the pre
ceding -uil-. N's dittography is characteristic.
incertus veri: not, as Klotz supposes, doubtful of the authenticity of
the libri lintei but doubtful which of the suggested colleges was his
torically right.
cooperta: Mommsen's correction of N's incomperta by the clue of
Ver.'s conperta is not indisputable, incompertus 'uncertain' is common
enough (9. 26. 15, 10. 40. 10, 28. 3. 12; Aetna 547-8) although the abl.
is not found with it, whereas coopertus with vetustate would be unique
here (but cf. Sallust, Catil. 23.1 ; Jugurtha 14.11).
23. 5. duodecim populos: 5. 33. 9 n.
ad Voltumnae fanum: 25. 7, 61. 2, 5. 17. 6, 6. 2. 2. The location and
the nature of the goddess are nowhere else discussed. Since the League
of Twelve in imperial times met aput Vulsinios (C.I.L. 11. 5265), it has
been generally held that the shrine of Voltumna was in the territory
of Volsinii and the site has been looked for in the vicinity of Mte.
Fiascono or Orvieto. The evidence is scarcely compulsive but may
get some support if the local god of Volsinii, Vertumnus (cf. Propertius
4. 2. 2-4), be regarded as a male counterpart of Voltumna. Such dual
deities are frequent. See L. R. Taylor, Local Cults in Etruria, 230-1;
J. Heurgon, Historia 6 (1957}, 88; Eisenhut, R.E., 'Vertumnus'.
23. 6. A. Postumius Tubertus: Tubero N, wrongly from Tubero in 23. 3.
571

4- 23- 6

434 B.C.

Tubertus (?from tuber 'warty'; cf. Verrucosus) was a cognomen of the

Postumii (Cicero, de Leg. 2. 58), in particular of P. Postumius, the
consul of 503 (2. 16. 7), presumably grandfather of A. Aemilius'dicta
torship and, in consequence, Postumius' office as mag. equitum have
been called into question (17. 1) as duplication of a single event.
It is argued that Postumius is listed so as to provide him with a pre
liminary office before the dictatorship, after the manner of later pro
motions. T h a t is possible but cannot be demonstrated. Since there are
some authentic facts from these years and since his dictatorship (see
below on 26.11-29) established that Postumius was an historical figure,
I would accept the account as also emanating from archival sources.
proximo'. 35. 21. 5.
24. 2. mercatoribus: trade with Etruria seems to have closed down in
the late half of the fifth century. Imported Attic pottery and Etruscan
terracotta cease after 450. There remains, it is true, the corn trade
but that only flourished in time of crisis. T h e detail, therefore, sounds
anachronistic, as is borne out by the tendentious account of Aemilius'
dictatorship. T h e limitation of the censorship to eighteen months
came about ipso facto. The censors had a definite j o b to do. When
it was completed, their raison d'etre ended.
negare: cf. 5. 1.6.
communicati: despite Novak's attempt to justify a deponent use (cf.
Veil. Pat. 2. 117. 4 ; Bell. Afr. 94. 1 ; Val. Max. 4. 1. 7), an active,
transitive communico only is found (see Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v., NeueWagener 3. 32). Emendation is required. J a c . Gronovius's communicare
non sirint is palaeographically neat, but Mtiller's communicare noluerint
gives better sense.
24. 4. magna imperia diuturna: few Romans reading this could fail to
be reminded of their recent history. T h e lengthy commands of Marius
and Sulla, of Pompey and Caesar, and, more, lately, of the Triumvirs
had brought Rome to the verge of collapse.
24. 5. quinquennalem: 'continuing for five years' not 'renewed every
fifth year, i.e. continuing for four years'. T h e word is used with both
meanings; see C. dall'Olio, Studi di Filologia Class. 6 (Bologna, 1959),
49-52. T h e original censors were probably elected on an ad hoc basis,
the five-year period gradually becoming established by convention.
grave esse: gra
e Ver. confirms Gronovius's correction.
magna parte: taken by Conway to mean 'in a large part, in many
spheres, of their life', but the whole emphasis of the passage is on dura
tion. Madvig's magnam partem is certain. Cf. Tacitus, Agr. 3 per quindecim annos, grande mortalis aevi spatium.
24. 6. consensu ingenti populi: consensu populi ingenti Ver. The divergent
word-order results from the misplacing of ingenti. Read ingenti consensu
572

434 B.C.

4. 24. 6

populi as always in Latin (1. 35.6, 3.63. 8, 9. 40. 21, 10. g. 1 ; Suetonius,
Domitian 13 et al.).
Quirites, quam . . . placeant: [quam] . . . placere Ver., a reading known
also to the Nicomachean editors, for M has placeant re. Nobody doubted
Aemilius' distaste for long commands: what might be at issue was the
degree to which he was prepared to carry that distaste i.e. quam . . .
placeant. Ver.'s error arose from an attempt to construe the sentence
after the omission by haplography of quam.
24. 7. tribu moverunt.. . aerarium fecerunt: the censors had two sanctions
to impose on offenders. They could exclude a man from his tribe
and enrol him in the tabulae Caeritum (27 Cicero, Verr. p . 103, Orelli)
thereby depriving him of the right to vote, or after 304, in one of the
four urban tribes, where his vote would be swamped and would count
for nothing (45. 15. 3-4). A man so punished would still be liable for
tributum and military service. Alternatively, the censors could allow
him to retain his tribe but would list him as in a special category of
aerarii, who were evidently compelled to pay extra high taxation, apart
from or in addition to tributum. T h a t the two sanctions were distinct
and not, as Mommsen argued (Staatsrecht, 2. 402-3) on the assumption
that all who did not belong to tribes were aerarii, the same, is shown
by their separate mention (aerarium facere in Varro ap. Non. Marc.
280. 35 L . ; Aul. Gell. 4. 12. 1 ; 4. 20. 11 ; tribu moveri Aul. Gell.
16. 13. 7; 27 Horace, Epist. 1. 6. 62). But most offences merited the
double penalty. Most scholars reject Aemilius' punishment as ana
chronistic, based perhaps on the buffoonery of the year 204 (2g. 37).
But if the censors are genuine it is at least as likely that a record of
their actions would have survived also. See the full discussion by
P. Fraccaro, Athenaeum 11 (ig33), 150-72.
25. 1. contentionibus: N's telescoped contionibus would require the
tribunes to have held continual meetings of the tribal assemblies in
order to stymie the patricians and prevent, the holding of the comitia
centuriata. For although there was no constitutional bar against both
assemblies being held concurrently (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 28g
n. 4), no one would attend the centuriata. Cf. 3. 52. 1, 65. 5, 4. 6. 3.
25. 2. nullum fuit: Bayet adopts nullius (Drakenborch) but Petrarch's
nullum will have come from a /u-source and M itself had the same
reading.
M. Fabius: 11. 1.
M. Folius: the pontifex maximus of 3go (5. 41. 3) whose grandson
was consul in 318 and three times magister equitum. The family is other
wise unknown. T h e name suggests a Sabine rather than an Etruscan
origin (Foslius in the Fasti).
L. Sergius: 17. 7.
573

4- 25- 3

433 B.C.

25. 3 . pestilential 3. 2. 1 n.
aedis Apollini: dedicated in 431 (29. 7), damaged by the Gauls
(cf. Dio fr. 49. 1) and rebuilt in 353 (7. 20. 9). It was situated between
the Circus Flaminius and the Forum Holitorium, outside thepomerium,
because the cult was foreign, and so often served as an extra-pomerial
meeting-place of the Senate. The site has been excavated but no traces
of the earliest construction can be recognized (Golini, Bull. Comn.
Arch 68 (1940), 9-40). The origin of the cult itself is obscure. There
may have been an earlier shrine on the spot (3. 63. 5 n.), but the name,
Apollo Medicus (40. 51. 6), indicates a direct connexion with the
series of plagues which had devastated Latium and the Mediterranean
during the late 430's. It was certainly prescribed by the libri Sibyllini
(25. 3) and the Gumaean provenance of the Sibylline books taken in
conjunction with the expedition to Cumae this year in search of corn,
might suggest that the cult, like that of Demeter, came from Cumae.
A Cumaean Apollo is mentioned several times (Jul. Obsequens 28:
cf. Augustine, Civ. Dei 3. 11; Jul. Obsequens 54; Cicero, de Divin. 1.98)
but seems to have been more prophetic than healing. Etruria and
Sicily have also been canvassed as possible sources. See J. Gage,
VApollon Romain, 19-113; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 221 ff.
25. 4. Etruriam . . . Siciliam: 2. 34. 2 n.
25. 5. L. Pinarius Mamercus: a son of the consul of 472 (2. 56. 1).
The Fasti gave his cognomen as Mamercinus but, as with the Aemilii,
both forms are found. Varro ap. Macrobius 1. 13. 21 cites an antiquissimam legem incisam in columna aerea a L. Pinario et Furio consulibus
which may date from their office.
L. Furius Medullinus: 44. 1 n., 51. 1 n,
Sp. Postumius Albus: 27. 8, 28. 6, 8, a son of the consul of 466 (3. 2. 1).
25. 8. prolatae in annum: a transparent device to get round the awk
wardness that nothing was in fact recorded in the annals for this year.
The Etruscan assembly at the fanum Voltumnae was hardly an item to
be entered in Roman archives.
cautum: 5. 1. 3 n.
The Lex de Ambitu
The Fasti continue to be used as raw material for inventing political
struggles. The paucity of actual facts forced annalists to build an
elaborate superstructure on the apparent oscillation between consuls
and consular tribunes and fit into it any other scraps they could
assemble. The law against whitening clothes must be a misinterpreta
tion of some notice in the annals. The wearing of white clothes by
candidates (hence their name; see Casaubon's note on Theophrastus,
Characters 10. 14) continued uninterrupted and L. himselfparva nunc res
574

432 B.C.

4- 25. n

admits that the law does not sound very credible. Steps to combat the
abuses of ambitus were only taken seriously in the second century (40.
19. 11; Epit. 47) and the first move is precisely dated to 358 (7. 15. 12).
It is more likely that an entrye.g. album proscriptumwhich referred
to the censors' compilation (cf. the later album iudicum, album senatorium) has been distorted to provide historical precedents for action
against canvassing. If that is right it tends to confirm the historicity
of the notice about Mam. Aemilius. For similar distortions cf. 12. 11 n.
L. sets the scene for it by describing secret meetings of positively
Catilinarian sinisterness. For coetus indicere cf. Cicero, in CatiL 1. 6;
for secreta consilia Cicero, ad M. Brutum 2. 3. 5; for ad honorem aditus see
5. 5 n.; for purgare plebem cf., e.g., Cicero, pro Sulla 14, 36, 39; for culpam
. . . vertere cf. Verr. 2. 4 9 ; for obsaeptum . . . iter cf. pro Murena 48; for
respirare cf. pro Milone 47.
25. 11. sordere: { to be slighted'. It is a good touch for plebeians to use
coarse and plebeian language. In this sense sordeo is only found here in
L. and only sparingly in other authors. Thus Plautus (Poen. 1179) and
Horace in an Epistle (1. n . 4). Virgil, significantly, employs it once
in the Eclogues, to achieve a very similar effect (2. 44 sordent tibi
munera nostra).
25. 13. petitionis causa liceret: p. liceret causa N. causa is only separated
from the noun it governs by pronouns (cf. Plautus, Poen. 551).
25. 14. inritatis animis: for Ver.'s haplography cf. 54. 8 n.
26. 1. causa fuit: there was only one cause.
26. 2. T. Quinctius: 30. 4, 31. 1, 44. 1 n., son of the great dictator. His
cognomen Poenus is bizarre. Both Ver. and N agree on it here (cf.
20. 8, 30. 4, 31. 1) so that it is hard to doubt that this was what L.
wrote. Poenus could only be Carthaginian' which would be too
anachronistic even to be ascribed to him retrospectively. Pennus, on
the other hand, a cognomen also of the Julii, would be in line with other
namespennum antiqui acutum dicebant. L. or his source probably con
verted Pennus into the more familiar and trivial Poenus.
et C. Iulius Mento: praenomen is given as rdios by Diodorus 12. 65. 1.
Cnaeus was not employed by the gens lulia. The source of the corrup
tion in N (genus M gneus TTX) can be seen in Ver.'s interpolated genucius
en. The cognomen Mento = 'long-chin' (Arnobius 3. 108). He may be
a cousin of the mag. equitum L. Iulius (26. 11).
26. 3 . lege sacrata: 7. 41. 4, 9. 39. 5 (Etruscan), 10. 38. 3 (Samnite),
36. 38. 1 (Ligurian): cf. 22. 38. 2. L. alludes to what was manifestly
an Italic practice whereby all able men who failed to report for
military service were declared sacer. Fighting was a religious duty.
See F. Altheim, Lex Sacrata, 11-29.
eos: sc. Volsci and Aequi.
575

4. 26. 4

431 B.C.

26. 4. ante: antea Ver., rightly for qaam unqitam antea is invariable
(5- 2 3 - 4> 3- 33- 4> 36. 15. 4) except where alias follows (1. 28. 4,
32.5-8).
26. 6. pravitas: T h e divergence of opinion whether the dictator was
elected for political or military reasons reflects the same dichotomy
that was seen over the consular tribunate (7. 2). Valerius will again
have contained the variant.
26. 7. nee in auctoritate senatus: the process by which Postumius was
chosen reflects the constitutional wrangles of the second century. T h e
dictator was nominated by a consul on assumption of a state of
emergency. W h o decided whether a state of emergency existed was
a matter of dispute. By the third century the Senate had arrogated
to itself the right to determine this (O'Brien Moore, R.E., Suppl.
6. 755) but refractory consuls endeavoured to defy the Senate (8. 12.
g fT.; Per. 19; Suetonius, Tib. 2) and historical 'precedents' such as
the present case were no doubt invented and invoked (cf. 56. 8-57. 6).
See also A. H. MacDonald, J.R.S. 34 (1944), 16. For the general
question of the consuls' relations with the Senate see 1. 17. i - n n.
T h e tribunes had, of course, at no time any right to imprison the
consuls.
The Dictatorship of A. Postumius: the Battle of Algidus
Numerous objections have been marshalled against Postumius'
famous dictatorship. His office of mag. equitum having come under fire
(23. 6 n.), critics have pointed out that while L. and Aulus Gellius
(17. 21. 17) date the dictatorship to 431, Diodorus (12. 64. 1) places
it in the previous year, 432, which suggests that there was no firm
tradition on the date. There is indeed something over-schematic about
it. A run of consular tribunes (434-432) including a Postumius gives
way to a run of consuls (431-27) including a Julius. W h a t more easy
than to devise a bridge which would consist of a dictatorship of a
Postumius with a Julius? Moreover, the key incident about Postumius
is the killing of his son (29. 5-6) which is duplicated with better
authority in the family of the Manlii. But the objections are not even
cumulatively sufficient to disprove the tradition. T h e persistence of
the legend among the Postumii, particularly since the Postumii
Tuberti die out after the fifth century, gives it a strong claim on our
beliefs. Moreover, Nilsson has made an attractive suggestion that the
importance attached to a soldier's not leaving his rank (although L says
praesidio not acie decedit) mirrors the conditions of hoplite warfare where
steady discipline was essential (J.R.S. 18 (1928), 4 fT.; cf. Ed. Meyer,
Kl. Schriften, 2. 272 n. 1). Such tactics, although adopted by Rome as
early as 600 B,G. (see note on 1. 44), underwent revision and modi
fication in the last half of the fifth century. If falsification and inter576

431 B.C.

4. 26. 11

polation have occurred, it must have happened at a very early date,

for the documents from which the Triumphal Fasti were compiled
contained a record of the triumph. Ovid describes it and even quotes
the day (Fasti 6. 723 fF.; 13 Kal. Quinct). The whole sceptical view
is based on a misconception of how the falsification of history was
worked. There may be some chronological imprecision, although
Diodorus' Fasti for these years are just as wayward as L.'s and are
less reliably transmitted, but there are also hard-core facts (e.g. 26. 12
iustitium; 27. 1 ludi magni, and the plain allusion to A. Cornelius as
pontifex) which it was in no one's interest to fabricate.
Given the plain details of the dictatorship, the legendary encounter
with Vettius Messius, and the killing of the son, the historian was not
hard pressed to embroider them. The army is expanded into several
divisions and the names culled from the neighbouring Fasti to com
mand them (27. 8-9). The preliminary engagements are given to
specific areas without undue regard to geographical probability
(27. 3 n.). The whole campaign is then decked out with circumstantial
details (e.g. 26. 12, 27. 12, 29. 3, 29. 4). There was little left for L. to
add. What he did was to make the engagement one of his Homeric
Battles, like Regillus or the Battle with the Etruscans (2. 45-47). The
comparison with Regillus is illuminating, for in both battles the lead
is taken by a Postumius. The technique is the same throughout
a blend of epic and military language, coupled with loans from
Homeric situations (28. 4 n., 28. 5 n., 28. 7 n.).
See Burck 99; H. Plathner, Die Schlachtschilderungen, 48.
26. 11. L. Iulius: 16. 8 n.
dictus. dilectus: dilectus omitted through haplography by N ; cf.
5. 5. 7 n. For iustitium see 3. 3. 6 n.
26. 12. cognitio vacantium: 3. 69. 7. It is doubtful whether the suspen
sion of leave figured in the Annales; if it did not, it will be a piece of
later colouring (cf. Cicero, Phil. 5. 31) but, even if it did, L. has slightly
muddled the facts. In normal times, when a levy was announced the
magistrates considered cases for exemption. In a state of emergency
(tumultus) no cases were considered and no exemptions granted (vacationibus sublatis; cf. 8. 20. 3). Any person who failed to present himself
for service was liable to be arraigned after the emergency to answer
for his absence (excusationes; Aul. Gell. 16. 4). In the present crisis the
second system is meant. It was not that the cognitio was postponed but
rather that the Senate decreed ne vacationes valerent: and those who did
absent themselves would be charged subsequently. See Mommsen,
Staatsrechty 3. 242 n. 1.
27. 1. A. Cornelio: can only be A. C. Cossus.
ludos magnos: 2. 36. 1 n.
814432

577

pp

4- 27- 3

431 B.C.

27. 3 . viderant: Ver.'s videret is due to correction after the loss of na

common failing (3. 12. 6, 30. 3, 4. 10. 10, 4. 14. 5, 4. 55. 4, 56. 5, 5. 33.
4 45- 7>5- 7,53- 0 Tusculo . . . Lanuvio: Lanuvium is separated by the Alban Hills
from Tusculum and is nowhere near the site of the battle. Weissenborn
conjectured Labico (3. 25. 6) but the names may simply have stood
without amplification in the record.
27. 4. planitiem . . .patentem: the language of military reconnaissance,
cf. Caesar, B.G. 7. 69. 3, 70. 1, 79. 2. In the description which follows
notice the frequent passives characteristic of military communiques
(cessatum est, animadvertitur, missum, praeficitur, exploratum fuerat).
27. 7. ope res egebant: the situation was complex, hence the plural.
corona vallum cingunt: 19.8,47. 5 ; military jargon again (cf. Aul. Gell.
6. 4. 4) as in Caesar, B.G. 7. 72. 2 ; Bell. Afr. 17. 1, 70. 3 ; Bell. Hisp.
I3

' 7'
27. 9. fnoderatu difficilem: moderor of troops 'to manage, control' is only
used elsewhere by Caesar (B.G. 7. 75. 1).
27. 12. fumo: cf. Caesar, B.C. 3. 65. 3 'significatione per castella fumo
facta ut erat superioris temporis consuetude'.
28. 1. lucescebat: 8. 38. 5, the word is revealing. Widely current in
early Latin (Plautus, Amph. 533; Terence, Heaut. 410), it passes from
ordinary use. Cicero has it in only one passage, a letter inscribed
M. Cicero Imp. S.D. M. Catoni giving a formal and not altogether de
preciatory account of his governorship in Cilicia and requesting Cato
to arrange for a supplicatio. We read (ad Fam. 15. 4. 8 ) ; 'a.d. I I I I Id.
Oct., cum advesperasceret, expedito exercitu ita noctu iter feci, ut
a.d. I l l Id. Oct. cum lucesceret in A m a n u m ascenderem'. Weissen
born observes, too, that sub oculis esse is favoured by Caesar, B.G.
5. 16. 1; B.C. 1. 57. 4.
eruptionem . . .fecerat: 3. 5. 9; cf. Caesar, B.G. 2. 33. 2; Bell. Hisp.
28. 3 . Vettius Messius: into the blunt narrative of a military engage
ment is suddenly hurled a heroic figure. His name is authentic enough.
Messius is Oscan, a by-form of Mettius as in Mettius Fufetius ( 1 . 2 3 . 4 ) ,
and Mettius Curtius (1. 12. 2). Vettius is a name in origin native
to Picenum but which is widely distributed over Etruria and the
Sabine country (cf. the Vettii Sabini of the late Republic; see Gundel,
R.E., 'Vettius'). From now on the narrative assumes epic dimensions.
Every phrase which Vettius speaks can be paralleled from Homer.
28. 4. indefensi inulti: the striking parataxis, the repeated in-, the
sense, all recall Homer's aWdAc/xov /cat dWA/aSa (Iliad 9. 35, 41 et al).
in otio . . . segnes: cf. the famous taunt to the Greeks (Iliad 5. 787);
atSc6?, ApyetoL, /ca/c'A6y^a, ctSo? ayrjroL.
578

431 B.C.

4. 28. 4

quid hie stantibus: cf. Iliad 4. 243.

an deum aliquem: Bayet properly calls attention to the allusion to
Aphrodite's rescue of Aeneas in Iliad 5. 311 ff. Cf. 20. 319 ff.
ferro via facienda est: a similar phrase is used by Catiline (Sallust
58. 7) ferro iter aperiundum est from which Skard inferred that it was a
cliche employed by historians in writing such exhortatory speeches.
Cf. also 7. 33. 10, 22. 5. 2, 50. 9, all similar contexts in direct or in
direct speech. A comparison of Virgil, Aeneid 10. 372, 514, would
rather point to a common origin in Epic.
28. 5. qua . . . agite: the usual Homeric request (e.g. Iliad 12. 412).
domos . . . liberos: cf. Iliad 5. 688, 17. 27-28.
non murus nee vallum: recalling the wall and trench guarding the
Greek ships. The argument resembles Polydamas' advice to Hector
(/tow/12. 61 ff.).
virtute . . . necessitate: cf. the situation and prospects of the Trojans
outlined in Iliad 8. 56-57. The cry that necessity is the ultimate
incentive early became proverbial: cf. Simonides fr. 542 Page;
Sophocles fr. 235 N . ; Plato, Laws 741 a.
28. 7. innititur: 6. 1.4, 9. 16. 19.
multa . . . multa: cf. Iliad 15. 314-17.
multa . . . caedes: 5. 21. 13, 8. 19. 8, a poetic expression (e.g. Lucan
4. 2, 6. 580; Seneca, Troades 446; Thy. 733).
ne duces quidem: three wounded leaders who refused to quit the fight.
So Agamemnon, like T. Quinctius wounded in the arm {Iliad 11. 252),
Diomede shot like Fabius through the leg (11. 378), and Ulysses with
a damaged side and shoulder (11. 437), when the threat to the ships
was at its height, came from their tents and rallied the Greeks (14.
113 ff.). Only the Trojan Hector concussed by a boulder retired from
the field (14. 409-32). The resemblance is too striking and close to be
coincidental. It affords a good example of how details were supplied
for legendary battles.
28. 8. unus Sp. Postumius: Harant's supplement Sp. is needed to avoid
an intolerable ambiguity. So also Madvig.
ictus saxo: 50. 2, 42. 15. 9; ictu saxi (Tan. Faber) is unattested in L.
2 9 . 3 . signum.. .ferunt: the same stratagem is told of Agrippa Menenius
(3. 70. i o n . ) . Significantly his colleague was also a T. Quinctius
(Capitolinus) so that the stories are no doubt doublets told about a
T. Quinctius. variously identified.
proruto: 9. 14. 9, 37. 9.
29. 5. tristem memoriam faciunt: related also by Diodorus 12. 64 and
Aul. Gell. 17. 21. 17. XinoTagia was punished with almost comparable
rigour in Greece; cf. Plato, Laws 943 d. Since Postumius is called severissimi imperii virum (26. 11) which anticipates the story, L. is not here
579

4.29.5

431 B.C.

quoting a variant but expressing reluctance to agree with what he

finds in his sources.
decesserit: decedo is technical for deserting one's post (Cicero, Cato 7 3 ;
5. 6. 14; 24. 37. 9). dec. and disc, are constantly confused in manuscripts
(see Graeger, Thes. Ling. Lat. 'discedo', col. 1275. 56-64).
29. 6. libet. . . licet: 20. 11 n. Cf. also 5. 46. 11, 8. 18. 2.
argumento est: namely that the episode told about Postumius is un
true. Aul. Gell. 1. 13 does indeed cite Postumiana imperia et Manliana
but by what may be no more than a garbled recollection of the present
passage. T . Manlius Imperiosus Torquatus, cos. 347, executed his son
for disobedience on the battlefield (8. 7. 8-22). For a judicious
summary of the survival of the Manlian legend see R. G. M . Nisbet,
C'QL- 9 (x959)> 73> w n o strengthens the argument for seeing an allusion
to it in Horace, Epist. 1.5. 4-6.
cum qui: Pettersson would retain quern qui, quern . . . insignem titulum
referring to the idea implicit in quod imperia Manliana appellata sunt and
the suby fuerit with quern being causal (cf. Kuhnast, Liv. Syntax, 237)
'seeing that the earlier would be bound to secure that notorious name'.
Although defensible quern qui seems unreasonably harsh and obscure.
29. 8. Carthaginienses: the passage must be considered with the notes
on the foundation of Capua (37. 1-2) and the capture of Cumae
(44. 12). All threethe only notes of their kind in the first five books
come from Licinian parts and it is no coincidence that other frag
ments of Licinius (e.g. fr. 12 P.) deal with south Italian and Sicilian
affairs. Prima facie a Carthaginian expedition to Sicily in 431 is not
incredible. T r u e there is no reference to it in Thucydides or Diodorus
but the situation in Sicily was conducive to Carthaginian interference.
T h e seditiones Siculorum in 431 would square well with the Spartan
request for ships in the same year to ol raKeivwv iXofxevoi i 'TraAta?
/cat ZiKeXlas (Thuc. 2. 7. 2 with Gomme's note). Equally a threat of
Carthaginian intervention would provide a local background for the
renewal of the Athenian alliances with Rhegium and Leontini in
433/2 (Tod 57, 58). If it is true, the expedition came to nothing; the
Sicilians closed their ranks and opted for neutrality at the Conference
of Gela. T h e passage does not stand alone. T h e two Campanian
passages are paralleled in Diodorus: in 445 (12. 31. 1) TO eOvos TWV
KafJLTTCLVCOV OVVOT7) /CCU TaVTTjg

TL>X TTJS TTpOOTjyoplaS

GLTTO T7j apTTJS

TOV

TrX-qvlov Keifjidvov 7re8iov. That in L. is placed in 423 (37. 1 a campestri

agro). In 428 (12. 76. 4) Diodorus notes the capture of Cumae by the
Campanians. Again, L. has the same note at a different date (44. 12;
420 B . C ) . It seems impossible to determine which of the two sets of
dates is right. Capua was founded by the end of the sixth century. An
Etruscan settlement is established archaeologically for that time and
Cato (fr. 69 P.) put the foundation c. 480a figure perhaps forty
580

431 B.C.

4. 29. 8

years too low. But Etruscan control of Campania was weakened by

the defeat at Cumae and did not last more than a century (5. 33. 7 n.).
There are no external sources to fix exactly when it fell to the Samnites.
Nor is there any simple mechanical explanation of the divergence
between L. and Diodorus. Diodorus' overall synchronism of Greek
and R o m a n dates is admittedly eight years out and so his date of 428
could be reconciled with L.'s of 420 on the assumption that the
event has been wrongly transferred from a Greek Olympiad source
into a R o m a n eponymous framework but we can hardly eliminate
the other discrepancy by supposing that the notices refer to separate
events. It still remains true that the gaps are not uniform. T h e
archons of 445 and 423 or 428 and 420 bear no resemblance to one
another. O n the other hand T . Quinctius Cincinnatus was consul in
428 and consular tribune in 420 (44. i n . ) , where Licinius substituted
T.'s brother L. Quinctius; a Sempronius was consular tribune in
444 and another consul in 4 2 3 ; finally, a L. Furius was consul in 432
and his son in 409. But the corresponsion is not quite neat enough to
be convincing. T h e decisive factor may be Thucydides' silence. T h e
first serious intervention in Sicily since 480 occurred in 409 and
continued for twenty years. T h a t is the event which we would expect
to be recorded by the words tumprimum auxilium traiecere. If so, however
the divergences be explained, L. and Licinius will be found guilty
on the first count and the same verdict must follow for the other two
Campanian notices. Originally they will have come either from a work
like Cato's Origines or from a Greek historian from the west. It was not
easy for R o m a n authors writing annalistically to incorporate isolated
details where they belonged.
See Klotz 277-8; G. Perl, Krit. Untersuchungen, 125-6; J . Heurgon,
Histoire . . . de Capoue preromaine, 86 ff.
30. Annalistic Notices
T h e material is all derived ultimately from the Annales. For the
immediate sources and the chronological perplexities see 23. 1 n. and
J.R.S. 48 (1958), 46 where it is argued that 30. 1-11 are from Valerius
Antias, 30. 12-16 from Licinius Macer.
30. 1. L. Papirius: 21. 1 n.
L. Iulius: 16. 8 n. Cicero gives the consuls the praenomina F. and C.
respectively.
deditio ostentaretur: 1. 38. 1-2 n. T h e meaning of ostento here is un
clear. Were the Romans offering, as a counter-claim, that they
would receive the Aequi into deditio? Hence the only compromise
could be a truce. Andresen's postularetur eases the difficulty.
indutias: an eight-year truce should have expired in 422 (or 421,
if the present passage, being Valerian, corresponds to 429 on the
581

4- 30.

430 B.C.

Licinian lists; cf. 20. 8 n.). But in 35. 2 another truce is made with the
Aequi for three years which equally would have permitted hostilities
in 421. T h e two truces must therefore be doublets, since there is no
mention of the former having lapsed or having been broken in the
interim. T h a t may account for the uncertainty in 42. 10 when war
was renewed with the Aequi.
30. 3 . legem de multarum aestimatione: the earlier Lex Aternia Tarpeia
of 454 B.C., establishing a conversion-rate for fines of 1 ox = 10 sheep
= 100 pounds of bronze (asses), was completely overlooked by L.
although attested by Cicero (de Rep. 2. 60), Aul. Gellius ( n . 1. 2),
and Festus (268 L.,) and although L. himself estimated fines in bronze,
not cattle (but see 2. 52. 5 n., 3. 31. 5 n.). Despite the mysterious
names of the legislators the law is to be accepted. We know from the
explicit testimony of Gaius (Inst. 3. 223) and from a direct quotation
from the laws themselves that the Twelve Tables assessed fines in
bronze (Aul. Gell. 20. 1. 12; Festus 508 L.). W h a t modification did
the Lex Papiria Julia introduce ? Cicero says 'quod censores multis
dicendis vim armentorum a privatis in publicum averterant, levis
aestumatio pecudum . . . constituta est' which suggests that the rate
of conversion was made more favourable for people who wished to
pay fines in money. No specific rates are, however, quoted by any
authorities and it may be preferable to suppose that the law put an
end to the optional payment and laid down that all fines should be
paid for the future in money. See Mommsen, Strafrecht, 51. n. 1;
Hellebrand, R.E., Suppl. 6, 'multa'.
30. 4 . L. Sergius: 17. 7 n.
Hostus Lucretius: the praenomen is given as 'OirLrepos in Diodorus
12. 73. 1, but Hostus (the proper form) is guaranteed by the author
of the work de Praenom. 4.
nihil dignum: Conway's transposition should not be accepted for the
reasons given above on 20. 8.
T. Quinctius: 26. 2.
30. 5. Veientes: the following notes seem to derive from an annalistic
record and may be taken as evidence that the Annales were fuller
and more detailed than many scholars would allow. L. has, of course,
supplied motive and colour but the facts are not such as would be
invented. In particular the passing reference to Ostia is of interest,
since there is no connexion with the corn supply which might have
led to its introduction at a later date (Meiggs, Ostia, 566). If they
are authentic they refute the theory that the capture of Fidenae in
435 is a mere duplication of the war of 426. It was a tense decade
during which Rome was trying to consolidate her grip on Fidenae,
the strategic position controlling both the Tiber and the Anio and
covering the main routes from Etruria.
582

428 B.C.

4- 30- 6

30. 6. qfuissent: they could not give an adequate reason why they had
been absent from Fidenae at the time of the raid and it was presumed
that they had gone to assist the Veientes.
colonorum additus numerus: L. does not make it clear where the colony
was; presumably at Fidenae. Rome put a body of men into the town
in order to secure it. There had traditionally been a regal colonization
which is now supplemented, ager Us bello interemptorum adsignatus would
mean that the land belonging to Fidenates who had been killed when
the city was captured in 435, seven years ago, was assigned to the
new colonists. The interval of time is puzzling because new owners
would have succeeded to the land meanwhile, but the general picture
is clear and convincing. Were the iiiviri, Sergius, Servilius, and
Aemilius, not investigators as L. believes but iiiviri coloniae deducendae ?
They included one consular in L. Sergius (11. 5 n.). It would be a
typical misinterpretation of the Annales.
3 0 . 7 . ingenito: only here in L. (ingenuo Tan. Faber (cf. Lucretius 1.230)),
but it may be intended to suggest the language of pontifical records.
30. 8. volgatique contactu in: 3. 2. 1 n.
30. 11. datum inde negotium aedilibus: if the plebeian aediles are meant,
it might seem at first surprising that they should be given a task of such
widespread importance. The religious excesses and the remedies pre
scribed to meet them are, moreover, closely similar to the famous out
break of religio, that feeling of anxiety which took practical shape in
the performance of (foreign) rites' (Warde Fowler, Roman Essays, 9),
which disturbed the year 213 (25. 1. 6-12). Pais assumed that the one
was a throw-back of the other, but the terms of the instruction look
authentic. The times were critical. Rome's resources were crippled by
a succession of disastrous epidemics. Such conditions are ripe for re
ligious hysteria and the new cult of Apollo provided the means. The
aediles had been entrusted with similar duties of national importance
(3- 55- r 3 n-) If they were responsible for the publication of the
Twelve Tables and for the preservation of senatorial records, they
would be ideally equipped for overseeing the due observance of
religious proprieties. They were, after all, primarily religious officers.
Their mission was not to suppress the newly instituted ritus Graecus,
the cult of Apollo, but to ensure that the worship did not lead to
extravagance and abuse. See Bayet, Histoire . . . de la Religion Romaine,
144 ff.; J. Gage, VApollon Romain, 130-2.
30. 12. C. Servilium: 44. 13 n., 45. 5 n., 47. 7. Whereas the Gapitoline
Fasti know of only one person G. Servilius Structus Ahala, Licinius
Macer or the libri lintei appear to distinguish a G. Servilius Ahala
from a G. Servilius Structus {Prisci Jilius), the son of the dictator who
captured Fidenae. See Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 209 f.; Munzer,
R.E., 'Servilius (37)'.
583

4. 30- !2

427 B.C.

L. Papirium: if the consulate of 444 is bogus (7. 10-12), Miinzer,

Degrassi, and Broughton must be wrong in giving him the filiation
C.f. and regarding him as the son of the consul.
30. 13. fetiales: a notice from the Annales; cf. 1. 32. 5 n.
30. 14. indutiae: the conclusion of the truce was not reported in 21-22.
iurati: 1. 32. 8 n .
30. 15. populi iussu: the dispute is anachronistic, invented to give
historical backing to the people's claims to decide a matter of war
and peace which were impugned by the Senate at the end of the second
century. Cf. 1. 49. 7 n.
Quinctius consul: as at 31. 1 ex consulatu, L. appears to ignore the
consulship of Servilius and Papirius. An explanation of this oddity is
advanced in 20. 8 n. Diodorus (12. 77. 1) inserts a college (L. Quin
ctius and A. Sempronius) between 428 and 427.
31. 1. C. Furius: 12. 1 n.
M. Postumius: his family relationship is uncertain. It is implied
that he did not long outlast his trial in 423 (40. 4 ff.) so that he is
unlikely to be the same as the consular tribune of 403 (5. 1.2 n.).
31. 2. Cossus: his praefectura may be no more than a conjecture that
since he was elected mag. equitum he cannot have been involved in the
defeat at Veii.
inutile: 3. 70. 1 n.
aperuerant ad occasionem locum: 'ils donnerent a I'ennemi le moyen
de trouver une bonne occasion' (Bailiet-Bayet); 'they gave the
enemy room to take them at a disadvantage* (Foster). Such elegant
renderings convey what must be the sense but can hardly be justified
as translations. It would be necessary to supply capiendam or the like
with ad occasionem and to understand aperire locum in a sense for which
there appears to be no parallel (cf. 33. 5. 12). Despite the spirited
defences by Novak and Brakman the text must be abandoned. What
L. does say is aperire occasionem (53. 9, 9. 27. 2), and the mere trans
position of occasionem and ad, proposed by Fiigner, would restore
grammar, ad locum might seem too bald by itself 'to the site where
they were camped'. If so, we should presume that something has
dropped out (L. Herrmann); perhaps invadendum.
31. 4. religio: the consular tribunes cannot have had the auspices
and hence lacked the power to name a dictator or to celebrate a
triumph.
31. 5. censoria animadversio: 24. 7 n.
31. 6-34. The Second Battle of Fidenae
The year 426 was decisive for the history of Rome's expansion north
and east and of her mastery of the Tiber. After an unsuccessful
584

426 B.C.

4-31- 6-34

attempt to exercise control over Fidenae by a colony and an equally

unsuccessful, if bold and original, attempt to strike at the heart of
the enemy by a direct attack on Veii herself, Roman strategy turned
now to a blunt offensive against Fidenae with the intention of de
stroying it for ever. Half-measures were not enough. Its dominating
position sealed its fate. Only Romans could be trusted to guard the
gateway to central Italy.
T h e picture is clear, and an actual quotation from the Annales
recording the Battle of Fidenae may be excavated from the text of
L. (34. 6 n.). But beyond the fact of the battle, nothing else could be
known. L. or his source, Valerius Antias again (32. 3 n.), has incor
porated three legendary strategems to provide body to their account
of a battle which they realized full well to be important: the ignibus
armata multitudo (33. 2), the effreni equi (33. 7 n.), and the herding of the
Fidenates into the water (33. 10 n.). It is doubtful whether the con
nexion of any of these episodes with this actual battle was kept alive
by tradition or religious ritual. They are, rather, part of the inherited
stock of folk-tales.
L.'s treatment shows a fine disregard for topographical or military
considerations but is fast-moving and full of interest. He has made it,
like the first, a heroic combat and introduces a few epic reminiscences
to create that impression (33. 4 n., 33. 7 n., 33. 8 n . ) ; he focuses atten
tion on the psychology of the combatants. T h e scene opens with
Aemilius boosting the morale of the Romans and attributing the
previous defeat, as always, not to ignavia Romani exercitus but to discordia imperatorum. When battle is joined the R o m a n force is odio
accensus and vents its indignation on the impious, treacherous, and
unwarlike enemy (32. 12). But they are disconcerted by the apparition
of the torch-bearing women. Their nerve fails (33. 2). By a timely
exhortation from Aemilius they are shamed into resistance, only to
waver again at an unexpected shout (33. 9). T h e Etruscans are, how
ever, the more terrified so that the Romans duly win. Many minor
points escape L. in his concentration on the psychology of the battle.
How could the Etruscans, encircled by the Roman pincer-movement,
flee over the plain to the river (33. 11)? What is Quinctius doing,
pursuing a fleeing column to the city of Fidenae when he is himself
situated near the citadel (32. 10, 33. 12 ; see Bayet, tome 4, 57 n. 1.) ?
L. evidently cared for none of these things. See Burck 99-100; Bayet
Rev. Phil. 12 (1938), 97-119. T h e episode impressed Tacitus who quotes
at least twice from it (33. 6 n., 33. 9 n.).
3 1 . 7. ante, ita: 2. 52. 7, 7. 2. 7, 22. 44. 1, 58. 2, 31. 28. 3 ; antea (TT,
Weissenborn) only at 39. 36. 10.
3 1 . 9. accito: M, Vorm., and P preserve in various positions the
remains of a Nicomachean marginal note hostibus positis ad Fidenas,
585

426 B.C.
4- 3 1 - 9
shown to be a late addition by the use of hostes ponere for castra ponere.
For these notes see G. Billanovich, Italia Med. e Uman. 2 (1959),
110-12.

iustitium: 3. 3. 6 n. Freudenberg was probably right to add indictum

since the ellipse is unparalleled and the word could easily have dropped
out by haplography.
32. 2. ignavia . . . discordia: cf. 46. 1-9; Bruckmann, Rom. Niederlagen,
45sexiens: 32. 5 septimam\ 5. 4. 13 septiens. T h e numeral must then be
meant exactly and no notice should be taken of Petrarch's totiens or
Klockius's sexcenties. Bayet suggests the defeat by Romulus (1. 15),
Tullus Hostilius (1. 27), in 509 (2. 6-7), 477 (2. 51), 475 (2. 53), and
437 (4- r 7 _ I 9 ) D u t other defeats are mentioned in 1. 30. 9, 42. 3,
2. 4 5 - 3 32. 3 . ad Nomentum: in 22. 2. Q,. Servilius won the victory at Nomentum. Two different sources are responsible.
32. 4. priore bello: 19. 1 ff.
32. 11. equestri auxilio: vexillo Tan. Faber, but cf. Bell. Afr. 78. 6.
32. 12. odio accensus: the conventional abuse; cf. 1. 12. 8.
33. 1. cum repente: the TrepnreTeia.
33. 2. ignibus armata: the sudden emergence of a body of women
armed with torches is told also about Anglesey (Tacitus, Annals
14. 30. 1) : in modumfuriarum vestuferali crinibus deiectis faces praeferebant.
T h e weapon is effective but it may be right to suspect a primitive
magical rite at the bottom of the story. So the Bacchanalian matrons
cum ardentibusfacibus decurrere ad Tiberim (39. 13. 12). A similar sally is
also attributed to the Veientes (5. 7. 2). As with the cuniculus (22. 2 n.)
there seems to be a duplication of a story told both about Fidenae and
about Veii.
fanatico: with cursu. L.'s idiom prefers the plain cursu ruit (9. 13. 2,
33. 8. 7) which led Cornelissen to propose fanatico (furore}. But cf.
39. 13. 12 fanatica iactatione.
33. 3 . incendio similius quam proelio: the left flank was more like the
scene of a conflagration than a battle-field.
3 3 . 4. examen apum: the comparison with bees is unexpected and
arresting. A sudden swarm was regarded as a prodigy particularly
before a battle (21. 46. 2, 24. 10. n , 27. 23. 2) and was indeed one of
the famous prodigies that heralded Pompey's defeat at Pharsalia.
More to the point is the simile in Virgil, Aeneid 12. 586-90. L.,
whether or not he is drawing on the same poetic source, uses the
simile to capture the epic atmosphere. Cf. Ap. Rhod. 2. 130 ff.
exstinguitis . . . inferetis: the sentences are not strictly parallel, the
586

426 B.C.

4- 33- 4

sense being: 'If you will not use swords, then at least use torches'.
A future tense is demanded in the second half (Catterall, T.A.P.A.
69 (1938), 3io).
33. 6. mota ad imperium: echoed by Tacitus, Hist. 2. n . 1.
33. 7. frenos . . . detrahant: L.'s words et ipse novat imply that he took
this strategem to be an innovation (cf. Florus 1. 5. 3), but Frontinus
credits Tarquinius Priscus with a similar brain-wave (2. 8. 10) and it
is also told of L. Cominius in 325 (8. 30. 6). As any cavalryman could
testify, it would be a singularly futile move. A horse will charge with
the greater verve if he has to pull against a firm rein.1 Another myth
may be suspected, a myth that arose possibly to account for some very
ancient equestrian ceremony such as the Equirria2 or for some training
exercise as in the Ludus Troiae. The novice is regularly taught in
equestrian schools to ride bareback without reins and to direct the
horse by knee-pressure. The lesson imparts poise and control. Young
Romans may have been encouraged to undergo the same ordeal on
the assurance that it had won great battles in the past. Riding through
fire is another recommended discipline.
effreno: cf. Statius, Theb. 4. 657, 716. If the text is right the
word must be intended to sound poetic, but L. also uses effrenatus
(37. 41. 10, 40. 40. 5) and, in the absence of the independent testimony
of Ver., effrenato should be considered here too.
33. 8. pulvis: truly Homer's dust (cf., e.g., Iliad n . 151). For lucem
aufert cf. Ennius, Trag. 182 V.
33. 9. clamor. . . accidit: echoed by Tacitus, Hist. 4. 29. 2.
33. 10. liberi frenis: 'freed from their reins', but the abl. after liber is
hard. In Petronius 124 abruptis ceu liber habenis the abl. is not dependent
on liber but abruptis habenis is abl. abs. The received reading liberis
frenis 'with slack rein' should be restored to the text, despite the
apparent contradiction with 33, 7 where the reins are said to have
been removed, liberis frenis is a cliche that would slip unthinkingly
off the tongue. Cf., however, Tacitus, Hist. 5. 3 velut frenis exsoluti.
Tiberim effusi petunt: Gage (Huit recherches sur les origines, 170-6) has
called attention to the curious frequency with which the story of the
conquered plunging into the Tiber near Fidenae and being swept
down to Rome repeats itself in Roman history (1. 27. n ; 1. 37. 2 ;
5. 38. 8). His more elaborate instances are far-fetched and some of his
inferences e.g. the hypothesis of a ritual descensio Tiberina (cf. Ovid,
Fasti 6. 771-84) intended to perpetuate the memory and prevent
the recurrence of the Allia disastergo beyond the evidence. It is,
1

But Mandarin won the 1962 French Grand Steeplechase without a bridle.
But not the Transvectio Equorum, depictions of which always show the horse
with rein and bit (P. Veyne, R..A. 62 (i960), 100-12; cf. R. Egger, Jahr. Oest.
Arch. Inst. 18 (1915), 116).
2

587

426 B.C.

4. 33- io

however, permissible to see how one horrific catastrophe (the Allia)

left so deep a mark on the Roman memory that it is reproduced more
than once in the tradition of her history.
petunt: 2. 40. i o n . ; notice the sequence of short sentences with
which L. rounds off a stirring narrative.
33. 12. eadem: 'a brisk and unremitted pursuit instantly brought up
the Romans by the same route, particularly Quinctius and those who
had just now come down with him from the mountains, these being
the freshest for action as having come up towards the end of the en
gagement' (after Baker).
34. 4 . ab equite: collectively as at 1. 36. 2, 2. 20. 12, 10. 41. 11 ;centurio,
however, is never so used and Ver.'s centurionis is a pointer that the
text was already corrupt in the pre-Nicomachean archetype. Read
centurionibus (Weissenborn); cf. 40. 43. 7. Prisoners of war were
generally sold into slavery and the proceeds disbursed (6. 13. 6, 7. 27.8,
10. 31. 3) but a similar distribution is recorded by Caesar, E.G. 7. 89.
Such fanciful details are characteristic of Valerius Antias. T h e ordinary
soldier was presumed to have secured a fair share for himself by his
own efforts so that no provision is made for him (cf. 34. 52. 11). See
5. 22. 1 n.

triumphans: the Fasti Triumphales are missing for this year and there
is no independent testimony, unless the intriguing entry in the Praenestine Fasti can be invoked {C.I.L. i 2 p. 231). Verrius Flaccus' alter
native explanation for the phenomenon of a second celebration of the
Garmentalia on 15 J a n u a r y runs
HIG DIES DIGITUR INSTITUTU[s AB
SI FIDENAS EO DIE GEPISSET

T h e name is irrecoverable and there is no certainty that it was M a m .

Aemilius. T h e ancients were wholly perplexed by the problems of the
etymology and festivals of Garmenta and the explanation is no more
than a guess based not on pontifical records but it would seem on the
associations of the Porta Garmentalis (2. 49. 8 n.) through which the
Fabii marched to the Gremera. T h e supplement remains elusive. See
Warde Fowler, Roman Festivals, 290; Pettazzoni, Studi e Materially 17
(1941),

n.

34. 5. sexto decimo: so also Gincinnatus (3. 29. 7). An arbitrary figure,
two-thirds of a trinundinum, chosen to suggest the expeditious discharge
of his duties. Ver.'s abdicavit is better that abdicat; L. closes a description
given in the historic pres. with a perfect (3. 48. 7-49. 8 ; 2. 45. 13-16;
7. 8. 1-4; 10. 33. 1-5).
34. 6. classi: a misunderstanding of the term used to denote those
eligible by property qualifications to serve in the army and hence,
588

426 B.C.

4. 34. 6

by a transference, the army itself Gellius (6. 13. 1) and Paulus Festus
(100 L.) refer to the distinction between the classici and the infra
classem and Gellius also alludes to the classem procinctam . . . id est exercitum armatum (10. 15. 4). T h e entry classi pugnatum in the Annales
would simply mean that the full citizen army fought at Fidenae.
There is no necessity to infer further that at this date the five-class Ser
vian Constitution was not yet instituted but only a division between
two properties. T h e exact significance of the terms classici and infra
classem was obscure to Cato (fi\ 160 M.) and classis and classici could
equally well stand collectively for the five classes, while infra classem
would be all those who did not have the minimum property qualifica
tion. See Beloch, Rom. Geschichte, 291; Momigliano, Stud. Doc. Hist.
Iuris 4 (1938), 5 1 1 ; A. Bernardi, Athenaeum 30 (1952), 22; Staveley,
Historia 5 (1956), 79.
34. 7. in maius, utfit, celebrantes: the historian's cynicism; cf. Thucydides 1. 10. 3 ; Sallust, Jug. 73. 5.
35-36. Annalistic Notices: Tribunician Agitation
35. 1. A. Sempronium: 44. 1, 47. 8. L. Quinctium: 16. 7.
L. Furium: 44. 1 n.
L. Horatium: MS. M.n., son of the great democrat (3. 39. 3 n.).
35. 2. Veientibus: the truce expires in 58. 1 (tempus exierat) after only
eighteen years have elapsed. It is likely that the expiry-date was
pushed back to allow the necessary preliminaries before the Siege
of Veii which convention demanded should last ten years as the Roman
Siege of Troy, whereas tradition knew of only eight at the most
(Bayet, tome 4, 114 and n. 3 ; J.R.S. 48 (1958), 42). This section must
have come from a different source from 58. 1. Equally the truce
with the Aequi is a doublet of 30. 1 (n.). L. must therefore have
reverted to Licinius Macer, as often, after consulting him for a second
opinion (34. 6).
35. 3 . ludi: 2. 36. 1 n.
35. 4. Ap. Claudius: 36. 5, a son of the Decemvir.
Sp. Naevius Rutulus: this was probably what L. wrote, although
the Naevii are plebeian (35. 6), and the cognomen is never used by
them. T h e passage is Licinian and must therefore be treated on the
assumption that it derives ultimately from the corrupt libri lintei.
Sp. Nautius is presumably intended, a grandson of the consul of 475
(2. 52. 6).
T. Sergius: his realpraenomen was L. (17. 7) as in Diodorus 12. 82. 1.
Sex. lulius: a younger brother of L. Iulius (16. 8).
35. 4. publice consenserant: it is clear from the context that the Romans
have decided, as a matter of public policy, to put on an act of socia589

4. 35- 4

424 B.C.

bility, and therefore the subject of the relative clause must be the
Romans and not the visitors to the Games. But to agree on a common
policy is not, in Latin, venire ad but consentire ad (cf. Cicero, ad Att.
15. 18. 2) and on this point the archetype of the Nicomachean and
non-Nicomachean manuscripts was already corrupta corruption
which arose from the succeeding advenis and gave birth to the muddled
advenis ad. . . of Ver. and advenis . . . adfuit of N. No reconstruction
based on venerant will work.
M . 's dittography must represent a conjectural gloss ofits own because
it does not correspond to anything in Ver. (see C.Q. 7 (1957), 76) and
so does not possess any independent validity as an external tradition. It
made the correction rightly but this should not have led editors, from
Rhenanus to Mommsen and Bayet, to woo its other contributions
(consilio publico).
35. 5. contiones seditiosae: L. conjures up the atmosphere of a stormy
contio of the 60's or 5o's. It is particularly notable for its blunt speak
ing and some of the tone and phraseology may derive from Licinius
Macer. For adspirare, unique here in L., cf., e.g., Cicero, ad Att. 2 . 2 4 . 3 ;
Div. in Caec. 20: the solitary use of a characteristically Ciceronian
word is significant; forpericulum . . . emolumentum cf. 5. 4. 4, 44. 20. 2 ;
for bello inexpiabili cf. Cicero, de Har. Resp. 4 ; PhiL 13. 2, 14. 8; for
expugnatum esse ut cf. Verr. 2. 130. T h e thoughts come equally from the
main stream of the rhetorical schools. T h e idea that the prize must
be commensurate with the effort was enunciated both by Pericles
and by Alcibiades (Thucydides 2. 64, 6. 16), while Dobree {Adv.
Critica, 354) observed that the whole passage from mat caecus . . .
honoribus fieri is inspired by Demosthenes, Olynth. 3. 13. T h e speech
ends on a brutally colloquial note (35. 10 n.).
35. 6. in partem: cf. 7. 22. g. in partem will mean here as elsewhere
v fiepL Tor one's share' and the order of words demands that it
should be taken with revocandam, but, since it is nonsense to claim a
share of a hope, revocandi (Madvig) must be read. W h a t the tribunes
wanted was the hope that they might share the consulate. T h e corrup
tion was caused by assimilation with in partem.
35. 8. ut: after postulandum esse.
3 5 . 9. neminem: 'plebeians will no longer despise themselves when
they are no longer despised by the world at large'. We expect rather
the sense: 'when plebeians cease belittling themselves they will be
taken seriously by others'; that is, with T a n . Faber, neminem [se] . . .
contemptum iri ubi (se*) contemnere desissent, but the fut. pass. inf. would
be intolerable.
35. 10. suggillatos: a vulgar word, lit. 'beat black and blue'. Only
here in L. (cf. 43. 14. 5) but its tone can be heard in passages like
Petronius 128. 2 or Seneca, Epist. 13. 2.
590

4 2 4 B.C.

4- 35- i

praebere . . . os: another colloquialism 'to expose myself to5. Cf.

Terence, Adelphi 215; Cicero, ad Att. 1. 18. 5. Tacitus creates much
the same effect with it {Hist. 3. 31).
36. 2. The tribunes' proposals are no more than an imitation of
Gracchan schemes, e.g. the agrarian law of Ti. Gracchus, the laws
establishing Carthage and other colonies, and the laws for raising
new vectigalia and portoria (C. Gracchus ap. Aul. Gell. n . 10; Veil.
Pat. 2. 6. 3). Cicero says that the two Gracchi de plebis Romanae
commodis plurimum cogitaverunt {de Leg. Agr. 2. 81). See 2. 41. 3 n.
36. 5. decemviri filium: the official order is given by Ver. and should
be compared with 3. 40. 8, 4. 16. 7, 43. 1. It should be preferred to
N.'s trivialized filium decemviri (cf. 40. 42. 13).
37. 1. C. Sempronius: a brother of A. (35. 1).
Q. Fabius: 47. 8 n., 49. 7 n., Q.f. M.n., a son of the survivor of
Cremcra, consul in 467 (3. 1. 1 n.).
Volturnum: 29. 8 n. Volturnus with its congeners is a good Etruscan
word, deriving from the root of the Etruscan god-name Vel (J.
Heurgon, R..L. 14 (1936), 109 ff.; Histoire . . . de Capoue preromaine
153 n. 1). The name survived in the Capuan Porta Volturnensis and
in the river Volturnus that flowed close at hand. There is no need
to reject the tradition but see also next note.
Capuam: the etymology provided a happy hunting-ground for
ancient scholars: see the full discussion by J. Heurgon, op. cit. 136 ff.
There were three main lines of approach.
(1) a capite (Polybius ap. Strabo 5. 242) : because it was the head of
an Etruscan confederacy.
(2) a campo (Varro, de Ling. Lat. 10. 16; Pliny, N.H. 3. 63). Heurgon
believes that the etymology originated with Varro but L. shows no
other knowledge of Varro's researches so that it is older. It presents
such morphological difficulties that the reverse derivation of Campani
from Capua is, if anything, easier, although the two are clearly dis
tinct. The campani are the plain-dwellers, and only by popular
etymology became identified with the Capuani, the inhabitants of
Capua.
(3) a Capye. Of the various claimants, the Alban king (Diodorus
7. 5. 10; D.H. 1. 71; cf. 1. 3. 8) can be ruled out. A Trojan origin is
not wholly inconceivable (Anchises' father according to Hegesianax
ap. D.H. 1. 73. 3 or Aeneas' cousin according to Coelius Antipater ap.
Serv. Dan. ad Aen. 10. 145) but Capys is also an Etruscan name and
Heurgon made the enticing suggestion, based on late-sixth-century
inscriptions found both at Vulci and at Capua naming a Capys
Mucati f. (kape muka0e<ra; Weege, Vase. Camp. Inscr. Ital. 22 ff.),
591

4- 37-

423 B.C.

that the city took its name from the Etruscan gens Capia who played
a leading part in its foundation. If so, L. is wrong both in calling
Capys the Samnite leader and in saying that Capua succeeded Volturnum as a name. Like many other Etruscan cities it will have
enjoyed a double name from the beginning.
37. 2. incolas veteres: a parallel situation prevailed at Naples where
the original inhabitants existed as a separate community under the
name Palaeopolitani. For the similar fate which may have befallen
Pompeii see A. Boethius, The Golden House oj'Nero, 44 n. 38.
37-^2. C. Sempronius and Sex. Tampanius
T h e bare facts of C. Sempronius* defeat at Verrugo, of the prosecution
of M. Postumius and T . Quinctius and, perhaps, of the prosecution
of Sempronius could be grounded in fact and witnessed by the Annales,
but the whole story of the battle and of the parts played in it by Sem
pronius and Tampanius belongs, like the story of Cremera, to family
legend. It need not be distrusted on that account. Incidental details
are borrowed from that other clades Semproniana, the defeat of Ti.
Sempronius at the Trebia in 218 B.C. T h e consul's negligence and
foolhardiness, the fatal division of the forces into two groups, the
providential escape of the surrounded detachment, all are fore
shadowed in the later battle (21. 52-54). Furthermore, the dismount
ing of the cavalry to fight on foot is taken from Cannae (22. 49. 3) and
Tampanius' resistance on a small hill is also traditional. Tampanius
and his colleagues in the Tribunate were honoured by a memorial
independently of the annalistic tradition (42. 1).
L. exploits the possibilities of the story. T h e action is confined to
two days, the day of the battle and the day of the return, and the
contrasts between Sempronius and Tampanius and between the de
moralized and the confident Volsci are carefully worked out (37. 6,
37. 11). T h e moral is loyalty to one's superiors (41. 7). See Burck
101-2.

37. 3 . his rebus actis: reads awkwardly after Campanian affairs and
betrays the change of source. It is a mannerism of L. to begin a new
section with hie (1. 1 n.).
idibus Decembribus: 3. 6. 1 n.
37. 7'. fortuna ut saepe alias: L. commonly begins a new episode with
a moralization (2. 2. 2 n . ) : for the thought here cf. Euripides fr.
432 N . ; Electra 80-81 with Denniston's note, et al.
37. 8. incaute inconsulteque: 7. 15. 9, 25. 18. 2, 44. 41. 9, a Livian
pleonasm built on a characteristically military understatement, in
caute 'with gross negligence'; cf. Bell. Alex. 27. 5 ; Caesar, B.G. 7.
27- iapte locato: military phraseology, cf. Frontinus 2. 3. 21.
592

423 B.C.

4- 37- 9

37. 9. segnius saepe iteratus: (clamor) iteratus incerto clamore prodidit cannot
be right (pace Pettersson who would compare 2. 40. 8) but it is less
easy to localize the corruption, incerto clamore is Livian and apposite
(cf. 10. 36. 3 segnis pugna clamore incerto coepit; 21. 31. 12, 37. 29. 4) so
that emendations of clamore (clangore Lipsius; etiam orejac. Gronovius;
clarore Seyffert; tenore Sigonius; languore J . F. Gronovius; pavore Gebhard) or deletion of both words (Gruter) start from the wrong premiss.
Madvig and Housman felt the corruption to lie in segnius saepe iteratus
and asked how a shout could be repeated often more sluggishly.
Housman suggested semper or usque for saepe (for the corruption cf.
Housman, Juvenal, li ff.; Shackleton Bailey, Propertiana, 216) but t h a t
does not face the original problem of clamor clamore prodidit. clamor
iteratus is equally sound (cf. 8. 38. 10). H a r a n t with his flair a n d Stroth
with his innate good sense both saw that the damage could be repaired
at one stroke by assuming that a word or words h a d fallen out.
Neither ut nor quo maiorem quite meet the requirements. Perhaps ita
exercitus, punctuating after iteratus. For the repetition clamor .. . clamore
see Drakenborch on 1.3.9; Weissenborn on 4 . 6 1 . 8 ; Meyer on 2. 18. 2 ;
Poutsma, Mnemosyne 41 (1913), 4 2 0 - 5 ; Pettersson.
37. 10. micare: only here of people, not weapons, by assimilation to
urgere; cf. 44. 34. 8. micant gladii is Epic (cf. Lucan 1. 320).
nutant. . . galeae: a reminiscence of the nodding plumes in the Iliad
(cf, e.g., 3. 337, 11. 42, 15.481, 16. 138). Drakenborch refers to Silius
Italicus' imitation of the same feature in 17. 392 ff.
applicant: 30. 33. 3. In this sense the word is restricted to high-flown
poetry (e.g. Ennius, Trag. 88 V. quo accedam? quo applicem?; Pacuvius,
fr. 370 R . ) . L. uses it to evoke such poetry.
videre: if the Volsci were not causing the slaughter, how could they
be spectators of it? videre is most unexpected, edere was proposed by
Jacobs. Cf. 5. 13. 1 1 , 2 1 . 13, 45. 8, 10. 45. 14 (Gries, Constancy, 30).
38. 2. Sex. Tampanius: all historians, dictionaries, and works of
reference know him as Sex. Tempanius and yet the name is unique
(Mtinzer, R.E., 'Tempanius'). In no literary or epigraphic source
from any classical period or region does anyone else figure with an
even analogous name. T h a t would be surprising in itself, if one
did not stop to ask what authority the form Tempanius rests on. Val.
Max., who twice cites his example (3. 2. 8, 6. 5. 2), does not refer to
him by name and he is not mentioned by any other author. His name
occurs eight times in L. (38. 2, 39. 4, 39. 8, 40. 6 (bis), 4 1 . 1, 9, 42. 1)
but Ver. is nowhere extant. Of the Nicomachean manuscripts M has
T a m p - three times, H four times, and O throughout. Tampanius
should be the original reading of the archetype. As such, it commands
belief. There is a large class of T a m p - names of Etruscan (cf. Ta<j>ane in
814432

593

Qq

4- 38. 2

423 B.C.

CLE. 2817) or possibly Volscian (cf. Tafanies; Conway, Italic Dialects,

252) origin. T h e Tampii are known chiefly from Praeneste (CLL. 14.
3264 ff.), which lay on the borders of the two worlds. Now L. does not
tell us where the battle was fought (41. 8 n.) but we know from Val.
M a x . that it was at Verrugo (1. 4 n.), not far from Praeneste. Cato
collected such local legends.
decurio: the commander of a squadron of ten troopers.
labante: Praef. 9 n.
salvam . . . esse: 22. 53. 7.
38. 3. ex equis desilirent: 2. 20. 10 n.
cuspidem: 19. 4-6 n. T h e exhortation recalls 28. 5.
38. 4. vadit: 1. 7. 7 n.
vi viam faciuni: 22. 5. 2, 50. 9 ; cf. 28. 4 n. T h e unfailing frequency
with which readers from Petrarch to Macaulay have been led to
remember Virgil's 7** via vi (Aeneid 2. 494; from Ennius) cannot be
accidental.
39. 3 . equites nee . . . et consul: for the arrangement of words cf. Praef. 4.
tegumen: 1. 20. 4 n.
40. 2. ab dubiis: 'on the part of those who were uncertain'.
40. 3 . conclamaverant: conclamare properly refers to the Roman custom
of calling the dead person's name repeatedly to establish the fact of
death. It is perhaps so used here, but it can also, as at 1. 58. 12, more
freely denote lamentation in general. See Nisbet on Cicero, de Domo
vix prae gaudio compotes: the Humanist correction of the manuscript
compote must be right since it is the individual who is compos mentis
and not the mind itself which is compos. T h e repeated prae gaudio is
inelegant, but both seem necessary (1. 14. 4 n . ) : for oblitus prae cf.
1. 29. 3 n. The scene as a whole is one which earlier generations
of Romans would have been familiar with (22. 7. 1114) and which is
parodied by Plautus (Epidicus 208-16). For Romans of L.'s day the
pomp and spectacle of a returning army might have been greater
but the personal concern was much less.
40. 4. occasio: the delay in the prosecution since 426 may have been
engineered by the interest of the Quinctii. T . Quinctius' brother was
consular tribune in 425. T h e Quinctii and the Postumii are closely
related (26. n ; T . Q . had married a Postumius) and the series of
setbacks suffered by the Postumii in these years (44. 11 n.) mirrors a
real struggle for power among Rome's leading families.
40. 6. C. Iunius: the family being invariably patrician, a Julius can
hardly have been a tribune at this date. Mommsen's Iunius can be
accepted, although nothing else is known of him.
594

42 3 B.C.

4. 40.6-41. 7

40. 6-41. 7. The Speeches of C Junius and Sex. Tampanius

Sex. Tampani: . . . quaero de te: Casaubon acutely observed that
this was the technical formula by which an official investigation or
quaestio was opened. Gf., e.g., Cicero, in Vatin. 10. A substantially
similar investigation is framed at 8. 32. 3-8. T h e observation goes far
towards explaining the remarkable character ofJunius' cross-examina
tion with its succession of eight indirect questions. T h e whole is
designed to give the impression of unremitting legal pressure. By con
trast Tampanius' speech is reported as having been an oratio incompta.
We might expect something in colloquial, popular language but
that would be improper. L. circumvents this by putting Tampanius'
remarks into reported speech. The reader is given the gist by way of a
paraphrase which obviated the need for any direct quotation (cf.
2. 32. 8 n . ; Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 44). Some contrast of style is,
however, achieved by the simplicity of Tampanius' sentences, short
and blunt, with the minimum of subordination (cf, e.g., 4 1 . 5 postea
. . . iamen instead of postquam) where Junius is involved and intricate.
T h e word-order also is effective, e.g. 4 1 . 4 vidisse; 4 1 . 5 exercitus ubi
esset se nescire; arbitrari.
4 1 . 2. comitiis: cf. 26. 2. 9.
4 1 . 3 . pensitanda quoque: only men of ability are capable of command
ing armies and initiating operations and only men of ability also
should be called to judge the results, pensitanda (sc. consilia) is in opposi
tion to ineunda understood, quoque cannot be taken with magnis (56.
13 n.) and there is no need to transpose magnis quoque (Reiz, H a u p t ) .
4 1 . 7. dimissum: sc. esse but an ace. and inf. can hardly stand by itself
after dicitur in 41. 1 when the speech has just been completed. T h e
syntax would demand that precantem . . . dimissum should be on the
same footing as implesse and be part of the reported speech. As Petrarch
saw, who added accipio, some other main verb governing dimissum
must have fallen out. There is nothing to choose between ferunt and
tradunt both conjectured by Doujat. T h e active dimittunt (Harant)
is too unceremonious.
4 1 . 8. fanum Quietis: the site has not been found. A deified abstract
at so early a date is unlikely and Latte (Religionsgeschichte, 130, 239
n. 4) is perhaps right to identify the cult with Volcanus Quietus (C.I.L.
6. 8 0 1 ; cf. Mulciber)the power of the god. Augustine {Civ. Dei 4. 16)
refers to a temple of Quies extra portam Collinam but this is probably
distinct. Neither is elsewhere mentioned.
alia: 5. 35. 1 n.
4 1 . 10. decern milibus: 2. 52. 5 n. T h e figure is apocryphal, and trial
before the tribal assembly may be as well (2. 35. 5 n., 52. 3 n.) but
Postumius was convicted.
595

4. 41- "

42

3 B.C.

4 1 . 1 1 . totam culpam . . . temporis: 'the collective guilt'; cf. Cicero,

in Catil. 2. 3 ; Cato 7 ; Pliny, Epist. 8. 11. 2.
4 1 . 12. Capitolinus: coupled with his brother Cincinnatus as at
3- 35- 9- Since he was consul for the first time in 471, a sporting esti
mate would put his age at eighty. His intervention is mere Quinctian
propaganda, as dicitur betrays. See also next note.
tristem nuntium: the deceased as messengers from the living to the
dead is an idea wholly repugnant to Roman eschatology. It is, how
ever, at home in Greek thought and Weissenborn aptly compared
Homer, Iliad 13. 414-16. T h e Hellenic nature of Capitolinus' plea
shows that it goes no farther back than the third century at the most
and is part and parcel of the Quinctian improvement of history.
42. 1. M. Asellium, Ti. Antistium, Ti. Spurillium: Mommsen's correc
tion of the unbalanced Sex. Tampanium, Asellium et Antistium et Spuril
lium is a start: the name, Ti. Antistium, is given by the inscription
quoted below. In themselves the names do not occasion doubt. Asellius
or Asilius, a diminutive of Asinius (Schulze 129), is frequent among
the Marrucini but, being Oscan or Sabine in origin, is not confined
to them. A branch of the family could easily have come to Rome with
the Claudii or before, although otherwise they are not known before
the first century B.C. Spurillius, a diminutive of the Etruscan Spurinna
(Schulze 95) is well attested in Tarquinii and Ameria (C.I.L. 11. 3487,
4527 ff.) but is not known at R o m e before the Empire unless the
moneyer A. SPVRI (c. 130 B.C.; Sydenham no. 448) held the name.
If, however, he is the double of Sex."f Pollius in 44. 2 (n.), the correction
et Sp. Pullium is easier than Mommsen's as printed in modern texts
(for et closing an enumeration of more than two members see Kuhnast,
Liv. Syntax, 286). Antistius, also Etruscan, cognate with Atinius
(Schulze 124 n. 2), is better documented (cf. the Antistius Petron at
Gabii in regal times). There is a L. Antistius, consular tribune in 379
(6. 30. 2), who could be a lineal descendant and another L. Antestius,
with the cognomen Gragulus, a moneyer in the period 135-126 (Syden
ham no. 451), was the first of several of his name. Yet, even if the
names are genuine, how were they remembered? They did not do
anything to effect an entry in the Annales nor is there any presump
tion that the names of tribunes figured annually in the lists of magis
trates. T h e lapidary character of the final judgement on them (42. 9
nee pietas . . .fuit) recalls the perpetuation of the four ambassadors to
Fidenae (17. 2 n.). A commemorative statue-group which survived
long enough to familiarize generations with their names might account
for the oddity. T h e Fidenae parallel would suggest that pietas would
not be sufficient to earn a statue but that the true reason was replaced
by an aetiological myth when the statues themselves no longer sur596

422 B.C.

4. 42. 1

vived to witness to the truth. T h e queer tradition that the equites had
m a d e them acting centurions (42. 1) must go back to some substantial
fact.
42. 2. L. Manlius Capitolinus: cf. 5. 31. 2 M. Manlio cut Capitolino
postea fait cognomen. H e was a brother of the consul of 434 (23. 1 n.).
Q.Antonius: 3. 35. 11 n. L. Papirius: 30. 12 n,
42. 3 . L. Hortensius: no other Hortensii are known before the dictator
of 287. Moreover, the name is Italian, not Etruscan, in origin (Schulze
177); cf. the town of Urvinum Hortense in Umbria or the cult of
Juppiter Hortensis in Campania. A later, fourth century arrival of the
Hortensii in Rome must be postulated and L. Hortensius be dismissed
as a pleasing myth to give background to the union of the Sempronii
and Hortensii, comsummated by the marriage of Sempronia, d. of the
consul of 129, with L. Hortensius the father of Cicero's rival (Pais,
Storia, 1. 614). This accounts for the highly rhetorical and contrived
nature of the interchanges between him and his colleagues, which
have the stamp of late Republican oratory (42. 5 n., 42. 6 n.).
42. 5. fidens innocentiae: cf. ad Herennium 2. 8; Cicero, pro Sex. Roscio
73delituisse: cf. Cicero,/?. Red. in Sen. 3.
42. 6. erepturi. . .eversuri: cf. Cicero, pro Quinctio 87; Verr. 1. 114:
Sallust, Or. Lep. 23.
42. 7. parentis . . . loco: 2. 60. 3 n.
42. 8. C. Sempronium nihil motor: the technical formula for abandoning
a prosecution (8. 35. 8, 10. 18. 13, 43. 16. 16). Cf. 3. 54. 3-4 n.
42. 10. Aequis: the Aequi did not engage at all in the war and the
Volsci, so far from winning an ambiguous victory, had considerably
the worse of the fight. T h e clumsiness betrays change to a source
which had a different account of the events, including the participation
of the Aequi (41. 8 n.), and which knew of a different expiry-time of
the Aequan truce (30. 1 n., 35. 2 n.). L. now reverts to Licinius Macer
whom he follows up to 57. 6.
43-47. Annalistic Notices: Military Operations 421-416 B.C.
L. makes only a token attempt to unite a series of essentially disparate
scraps into a coherent whole by repeating at intervals the theme that
the interest of one is the interest of all (43. 11, 44. 5, 44. 9), a theme
summed up by Servilius Ahala at the end of the book (57. 3 ) : quern
enim bonum civem secernere sua a publicis consiliis? L. emphasizes through
out the need for moderatio. See Burck 102-4; Hellmann, LiviusInterpretationen, 74-77.
4 3 . 1. Cn. Fabio Vibulano: the praenomen is given by the Capitoline
Fasti as Num(erius), but N both here a n d at 49. 1, 57. 12, 58. 6, gives
597

421 B.C.
4- 43- i
either en. or its corruption m. and in the last place, where alone it
survives, Ver. also agrees. T h e weight of evidence, therefore, points
to Cn. as having been the praenomen in L. and it should be restored.
It is not accidental that it is also historically more credible. T h e
antiquarians (Auct. de Praen. 6 ; Festus 174 L.) explained the name
Numerius, which was employed by the Fabii Pictores and Buteones
only, as having been accepted by the survivor of Cremera as a condi
tion of marriage with the daughter of a Samnite, Num. Otacilius of
Maleventum. Contact with the Samnites only began in the fourth
century so that the whole explanation is a pious fraud, probably no
older than the researches of Varro, while L. as so often reaches back
to an older tradition. See Munzer, Rom. Adelsparteien, 7 1 ; Doer, Die
JVamenbegung, 32.
dignum memoratu: 25. 1. 5, a variation on the regular dignum memoria
(cf., e.g., Cicero, pro Sestio 14; see Wolfflin, Archiv Lat. Lex. 13 (1904),
191). Strictly a solecism, it is formed by influence of the common
dictu, factu facile, and the like.
4 3 . 2. ovans: 2. 16. 1 n.
4 3 . 3 . duplicando quaestorum numero: 2. 41. 11 n., 3. 24. 3 n., 69. 8 n.
Tacitus (Annals 11. 22) writes that the dual quaestorship was first
made a regular elective magistracy in 446, and continues: dein gliscentibus negotiis duo additi qui Romae curarent. His evidence does not
conflict with L. T h e quaestor was in origin an ad hoc assistant to the
king or consul, in particular for the investigation of parricidium. In the
Twelve Tables the office was recognized and defined as quaestores
parricidii, the addition of parricidii at once limiting their scope and
showing that they were not permanent magistrates but special com
missioners, appointed as need arose. T h e need for assistants to the
consuls in other fields still remained, if anything the greater as Rome's
commitments increased, and a logical consequence of the overhaul of
the Roman constitution by Valerius and Horatius in 449 was the
establishment in 446 of a parallel but separate pair of quaestores%
regular magistrates charged above all with the control of military
expenditure. Twenty-five years is ample time for the tasks of govern
ment to have proliferated to such an extent that a further pair are
required. T h e growth of the quaestorship should be compared with
the gradual rise in the number of consular tribunes from three to six.
Both mirror Rome's expanding horizon. In addition to bibliography
cited on 2. 41. 11 see here de Martino, Storia della Costituzione, 1.231 ff.;
U. Coli, Studi Paoli, 191. T h e agitation for plebeian entry to the
quaestorship, on the other hand, is pure fabrication, in keeping with
the 'political' explanation of the consular tribunate.
4 3 . 4. quaestores duo qui: it is clear that the archetype in this section
was severely damaged or maltreated. An even more intractable corrup598

421 B.C.

4. 43. 4

tion disfigures the text below (43. 5 n.) and the mistaken repetition of
a consulibus after adprobassent hints at deep trouble. T h e present
passage, as it stands, could only be interpreted on the very strained
assumption that qui is the equivalent of ut (so Pettersson), 'Now this
proposal, namely two quaestors in addition to the two urban quaestors
to be assistants to the consuls in war'. T h e apposition and the un
paralleled word-order force the conclusion that some words have
dropped out which expressly stated the nature of the proposal. W h a t
the words were can only be conjectured but conjectures should be
governed by two considerations, the length of line in the archetype
of N (probably 16-18 letters; cf. 4. 25. 4, 5. 46. 4, 53. 1) and the
probability that the words were consecutive. Such considerations
would rule out the supplements of Weissenborn and Conway. Perhaps
the easiest restoration would be praeter duos urbanos (ut alii crearentur)
quaestores duo, ut crearentur is too short.
4 3 . 5. summa ope [ad]nisi sunt: political journalese; Sallust, CatiL 1. 1,
38. 2 ; Jug. 9. 2, 25. 2, 31. 17. For the text see next note.
usi sunt adaeque: T h e sense is clear. T h e people are to be allowed
the same freedom of choice in electing quaestors that they enjoy in
electing consular tribunes. But the text is impossible, adaeque is only
Plautine before L.; usi sunt sc. arbitrio, while linguistically suitable
(cf., e.g., Pomponius, Dig. 43. 16. 12), is the wrong tense. Various
remedies have been prescribed: [usi sunt] adaeque Gruter, Lallemand,
Crevier, Bayet; sissent adaequari Seyffert; ius sissent adaequari H. J.
Miiller; ius esset adaequatum ita Zingerle; ius adaequassent ita Novak; [usi
sunt adaeque] Madvig (Emendationes, 104 'quamquam malis: ita'). It is
not, however, noticed, I think, that in the preceding sentence adnisi
sunt is unexpected for nisi sunt and the singularity is the more out
of keeping when L. is trying to capture the atmosphere of the R e
public where summa ope niti was a cliche (see above). I would suggest
that usi sunt ad is the remains of a marginal or interlinear correc
tion of ad-nisi sunt and that the right reading in the sentence before is
nisi sunt and here ut quemadmodum in tribunis . . . creandis, aeque in quaestoribus liberum esset arbitrium.
43. 6. agrariae legis: 2. 41. 3 n.
4 3 . 7. coire . . . prohibebant: 3. 8. 2 n. T h e tribunes did not have the
right to prevent the patricians assembling to appoint an interrex.
It is a tendentious anticipation of the tribunician vetoing of senatus
consulta de patriciis convocandis. The memory of mere intimidation
would not survive and the picture of a long succession of interregna
is exaggerated (3. 6. 1 n.). We cannot recover the true reason for the
interregnum.
4 3 . 9. Papirius: 30. 12 n. His indignant plea is couched in terms which
any senator might have used during the crisis of 52 B.C. For deorum . . .
599

4- 43- 9

4 2 1 B.C.

curaque cf, e.g., Cicero, pro Milone 8 5 ; for increpet 'arise 5 cf. in Pis.
994 3 . 11. mediis copularent concordiam: 'dans un juste milieu conclure un
accord' (Baillet) but there are misgivings. L. elsewhere employs only
the neuter singular of medius as a substantive (26. 2 1 . 4 medium visum
ut ovans urbem iniret; 31. 13. 6) and the phrase copulate concordiam is
scarcely paralleled by Cicero's conglutinatam concordiam [ad Att.
1. 17. 10). Fronto says amicos amore copulare (54. 2 van den Hout) and
Apuleius iugales ad concordiam copulat (Mund. 30), both, that is, making
the object of copulare people and not the concord in which people are
bound. But the sense is right, and, if the plural mediis can be justified
by the preceding quisque, Fronto's amicitiae copulandae (170. 3) may
justify the rest. Cf. also Cicero, ad Fam. 3. 4. 2.
44. 1. L. Quinctius Cincinnatus tertium: 16. 7 (438), 35. 1 (425). The
Capitoline Fasti, for whatever motive, had a different version from
the libri lintei. T h e entry ]Cincinnatus II points to his brother, T .
Quinctius, who was consular tribune in 426 (31. 1).
Sex. Furius Medullinus iterum: the Capitonine Fasti have [Me]dullinus
III. L. Furius M. had been consular tribune in 432 (25. 5) and 425,
but the combination of a different praenomen and a different number
in L. suggests that the text is right and that the libri lintei knew of two
Furii, Lucius and Sextus.
M. Manlius: either a grandson of the consul of 474 (2. 54. 1 n.) or,
if the latter be identical with the Decemvir, a son. T h e late chronographers give his cognomen as Vulso. See Munzer, R.E., 'Manlius (96)'.
A. Sempronius: 35. 1. For the whole college see Broughton; Degrassi
96.
44. 2. Antisti: T h e conviction of C. Sempronius, if not the amount of
the fine, may well be historical, for the prosecution of Postumia cer
tainly is and the Postumii and the Sempronii, closely linked by
marriage as they were, came under heavy fire during this decade.
T h e attacks may have been motivated by personal jealousies and
family rivalries or may reflect a deeper split in policy between the
aggressive Postumii, who saw that Rome's security lay in the conquest
of Fidenae and the expansion of the frontiers, and the more timorous
Furii and Manlii. However that may be, it is remarkable that an
Antistius should crop up as a prosecutor of C. Sempronius so soon after
another Antistius had resolutely thwarted any prosecution. T h e two
can hardly be unconnected. O n this occasion Antistius' ally is a
brother of another tribune whose name is given in the manuscripts
as Sex. Pollius (see below). He may be related to the equally corrupt
Spurillius of 42. 1 (n.). His other ally, M. Canuleius, is a wraith of a
more distinguished namesake. There is, therefore, some suspicion that
600

420 B.C.

4.44. 2

the three colleagues of Sex. Tampanius in 422 are a duplication of

the three tribunes of 420. W h a t part the interpolation of L. Hortensius as prosecutor or a desire to bring the prosecution of Sempronius into closer connexion with his defeat played in the distortion
of the facts is impossible to determine, but 420 has the balance of
probability in its favour as the true date of Sempronius 5 conviction.
And it gains support from a tantalizing inscription on a curved base
(C./.L. i>, p . 5 5 ) :
X I I I EST A T I . A N T I S T I O T I . F. C[
M e J N E N I O A G R I P P A L V C R E T I O T[ricipitino
Nautio Rutilo
Servilio Axilla trib.] M I L C O N S V L A R I P O T E S T A [ t e
Anno post R o m a m conJDIT C C C X X X I I I I P O S T [reges exactos
lxxxxi
T h e lettering, the mistaken writing of Agrippa as a cognomen and the
absence of praenomina all point to an early imperial date. T h e inscrip
tion was found, according to Visconti, near the third milestone on the
Via Appia but the provenance is not wholly certain. It must be the
renewal of an inscription recording the construction or restoration of
a monument. In any event it shows that other sources placed Antistius'
activities in 420-19. T o sum up, it seems probable that A. (Luterbacher's addition: a praenomen is needed to balance Sex.) Antistius,
Sex. Pollius, and M. Canuleius are Ti. Antistius, Spurius Pullius, and
M. Asellius in disguise. T h e latter were commemorated, perhaps by a
monument, with Sex. Tampanius and their prosecution of C. Sem
pronius was recorded in the Annales. It became necessary to duplicate
them when the edifying story of Tampanius' loyalty to Sempronius
made it incredible that Tampanius' colleagues could have been re
sponsible for the consul's conviction. Hence L. Hortensius; and hence
the appearance of three new tribunes (Antistius, Pollius, Canuleius)
to conduct the case when it actually occurred in 420.
Sex."\ Polli: Pompili (TT) has no authority as a reading. T h e nearest,
since Pollius is patrician, would be Pulliusthe two are constantly
confused in literary and epigraphic textsa name which occurs fre
quently at Praeneste (C.I.L. i 2 . 251-5) and was the name of a cele
brated tr. pi. who prosecuted P. Claudius Pulcher for perduellio in
248. Spurillius, although not in itself impossible, would be an easy
telescoping of Spurius Pullius (42. i n . ) . Pompilius which is univer
sally and unreflectingly accepted by editors would be odd. No Pom
pilius is known between N u m a and Catiline's friend ( Q . Cicero, Comm.
Pet. 10); see 2. 42. 10 n.
nobilitate praeferrent: anachronistic because it implies the later cursus
honorum, the first stage of which was the quaestorship.
601

4- 44- 4

420 B.C.

44. 4. quidnam id rex esset\ quod: there are two difficulties: the subjunc
tive esset and the intrusive quod, id. . . quod cannot mean 'the fact
that (not even a single quaestor had been elected)', as at 5. 21. 7, since
that would require a nominative (tribunus . . . quaestor) and a subjunc
tive in or. obi. (foetus esset). T o delete it would be simple and parallels
are forthcoming (2. 32. 10), but esset has still to be treated. As Gronovius observed, in or. obi. quidnam . . . esse is required, and furere only
governs an ace. and inf. or a quod-c\a.use. We should either read
quidnam . . . esse [quod] or, better, quidnam . . . esset quaerere; cf. 3. 4. 5
quaererent quid rei esset; 3. 50. 4.
non: 'their own services, their father's wrongs, even the love of
exercising a (new) right did not avail to secure the election of even
a single plebeian', ius must be inserted before usurpandi (Karsten),
which otherwise is left undefined. For the expression cf. 3. 5, 3. 71. 7,
5. 12. 9, 27. 8. 9 ; Tacitus, Hist. 4. 2 5 : see Nisbet on Cicero, de Domo
44. 7. de agris dividendis: 2. 41. 3 n.
C. Sempronius: meets the situation with the fortitude and the phraseo
logy of a Cicero defending his part in the Catiline crisis. For invidiae
obici maluit cf, e.g., pro Murena 87; for subiturum . . . tempestatem cf. in
Catil. 2. 15; for in parcendo . . .fiat cf. Verr. 3. 208.
44. 9. nee turn: nee nunc in direct speech, the equivalent of nee iam
(Ruperti). Their latest agrarian proposal showed that they were not
now interested in the welfare of the plebs but only in the downfall of
Sempronius.
44. 10. quindecim: 2. 52. 5 n.
44. 1 1 . Postumia: 2. 42. 11 n. T h e record is pontifical and reliable.
Postumia, the sister of that Postumia who married T. Quinctius
(26. 11), was the victim of the same hostility which assailed C. Sem
pronius and her brother M . Postumius. Plutarch, who also reports
the case (ex Inim. Util. 6), adds that the pontifex maximus was Sp.
Minucius. T h e detail is suspicious, suggesting, as it does, that the bare
record has been worked up in the light of the case of 337 B.C. (8. 15.
7 flf.). T h e reference to ampliatio, the procedure whereby a case was
automatically adjourned for a fresh hearing if more than a certain
proportion of the jury voted Non Liquet, is anachronistic. It was
peculiar to the jurisdiction of the quaestiones, which were only instituted
in 147, and Balsdon has the weight of evidence on his side in
claiming it as an innovation made during C. Gracchus' tribunate
(P.B.S.R 1 (1938), 108-14; but see Tibilletti, Athenaeum 31 (1953),
20 flf.).
For the working of the procedure see Greenidge, Legal Procedure,
499 flf. For the truth of the notice see Munzer, Philologus 92 (1937),
56-67; Koch, Religio, 2-5.
602

420 B.C.

4. 44. 11

crimine innoxia, ab suspicione . . . abhorrens: Gronovius' correction is

uncontroversial (ob suspicionem N ; criminis obnoxia suspicioni L. Valla,
Ruhnken). Postumia was innocent (Plutarch KaBapd rrjs curias).
44. 12. colt sancte: colere s. normally means 'to cherish devotedly' (Propertius 2. 26. 26; Cicero, adFam. 10. 1 . 3 ; Seneca, Epist. 94. 26). Here
rather 'to dress soberly'.
Cumae: 29. 8 n., 37. 1 n.
44. 13. Menenius: 13. 6.
Lucretius: 47. 7, Hosti f, son of the consul of 429 (30. 4).
Sp. Nautium: 47. 8, 52. 4 n., 61. 4 n., Sp.f. Sp.n., a son of the
consular tribune of 424 (35. 4 but see note). As at 47. 8 (n.), one name
is missing. T h e Capitoline Fasti add C. Servilius (Q,.f. C.n. Axilla).
T h e omission might be due to inadvertence or corruption, but it is
probable that L.'s source was defective, the more so since that source
was ultimately the libri lintei (J.R.S. 48 (1958), 45).
45. 1. annus . . . insignis: as Fugner demonstrates, the apposition is
intolerable. Insert fuit between annus and felicitate, putting a strong
stop after Rutilum.
coniurarunt: with ut (27. 3. 4, 39. 14. 8), a construction avoided by
Cicero and Caesar, but used by Bell. Hisp. 26. 2, 36. 4. T h e allusion
to Juppiter preventing the sacrilege is not a personal confession of
belief in divine intervention by L. himself (Kajanto, God and Fate in
Livy, 26) but represents an adaptation of an entry in the Annales
referring to the preservation of the temple of Juppiter Capitolinus.
For a similar notice concerning the Capitol cf. 3. 18. 10. T h e rewards
seem over-schematic (2. 52. 5 n.) and would not at this date have been
paid from the aerarium.
45. 4. anniversariis 13. 10. 8. T h e Aequi had only recently resumed the
practice (42. 10).
45. 5. Sergium: 17. 7.
Papirium: 47. 8, 52. 4, a son of the consul of 427 (30. 12 n.).
C. Servilium Prisci filium: 30. 12 n. The libri lintei distinguished him
from C. Servilius Ahala, giving him the cognomen Structus and allotting
Ahala a consulate in 427, and Structus two consecutive consular
tribunates (47. 7 C. Servilio Structo iterum). Since they omitted the
Servilius of 419 (44. 13 n.), it is impossible to know whether they
would have made him Structus or Ahala or what the real truth was.
For the long-lived father, Q . Servilius Priscus, see 21. 10 n.
45. 6. Algido: 3. 2. 6 n.
45. 8. Q. Servilius: his interventions were legendary, multiplying from
a single timeless anecdote. T h e situation in 418 is akin to that in 431
when he had also stepped in to solve the deadlock brought about by the
disagreement of the consuls (26. 7; cf. 46. 4). Here the disagreement
603

4- 45- 8

418 B.C.

is a tendentious fabrication to provide an explanation for the system

of rotating command alternis diebus (46. 3).
46. 1. decern tribus \ as there were twenty-one tribes (2. 21. 7 n.), the
unit often tribes bears the same relationship to the whole tribal body
as, under the later Republic, the assembly of seventeen tribes did to the
comitia tributa of the thirty-five. In classical times enrolment was by
tribes (Polybius 6. 19. 5 with Walbank's note) but if there is any truth
in the Servian constitution it must originally have been based on
centuries and the centuriate organization. When the change occurred
is disputed. Gabba {Athenaeum 29 (1951), 251-5) has argued that it
was introduced to meet the crisis of a tumultus and became normal
under the pressure of the First Punic War. He would regard the
present occasion as just such a tumultus, perhaps the first on which
tribal enrolment was employed. One other early case is known275
(Val. Max. 6. 3. 4)but that differs significantly in that although it
seems to have been a tumultus {subito edicere coactus), enrolment is not
said to have been from a minority of the tribes. Now it is hard to
believe that the crisis of 418 was so severe as to necessitate such drastic
innovations. An explanation may be sought in the peculiarity of the
quasi-comitia of ten tribes. Cicero leaves no doubt (de Lege Agr.
2. 16-22) that the minority assembly was only used for the election of
the pontifex maximus. When it was instituted we are not told but it was
already in operation in 212 (25. 5. 2 - 4 ; see L. R. Taylor, Class, Phil,
37 (1942), 421). I would believe this to be a garbled account of an
earlier pontifical election which has been misunderstood or deliberately
misconstrued to supply the stuff of history. T h e last pontifex maximus
was A. Cornelius Cossus (27. 1), for Plutarch's Sp. Minucius (44.11 n.)
is interpolated from 337. T h e next known was M . Folius Flaccinator,
consular tribune in 433, who was put to death by the Gauls in 390
(5. 41. 3). Cossus' death is unknown but nothing is heard of him after
426 (33. 7-8, 34. 4-5). An election in 418 would be appropriate.
46. 2. contemnere . . . contemni: an unusual way of expressing re
ciprocity, for alter alterum contemnere (cf. Catullus 45. 20 amant, amantur;
see Wackernagel, Vorlesungen, 2. 97). T h e effect of it coming after
the preceding pairs {nihil sentire, pro sententia pugnare; sua consilia, sua
imperia) is to throw into sharp relief the gulf dividing the two men.
46. 5. simulato: cf. Romulus' ruse (1. 14. 9).
46. 9. minores magistratus: i.e. the aediles and quaestors. T h e aediles
were similarly charged according to tradition in 463 (3. 6. 9 n.). T h e
present measures are probably equally anachronistic.
Q. Servilius Priscus: N had Sulpicius for Servilius, who would only
be Q . Sulpicius Camerinus, cos. 434 (4. 23. 1), but the cognomen
Priscus, and the mention of his foresight, and the allusion to his son
604

418 B.C.

4. 46. 9

who was evidently a Servilius to judge by the emphatic word-order

Ahalam Servilium (23. 1 n.), show that the correction to Servilius is safe.
46. 1 1 . Jilio suo: 45. 5 n., i.e. G. Servilius Structus, who was consular
tribune and praefectus urbi at the time.
47. 2. signiferum: a traditional strategem, praised by Frontinus
2. 8. 8 who attributes it also to Gamillus (2. 8. 4). Gf. 3. 70. i o n .
47. 3 . brevior tempore: 'shorter in point of time and less fiercely con
tested', breviore tempore (N) cannot be construed and brevior et tempore
(for et brevior tempore) produces a possible (cf. Praef. 4 ; 44. 26. 1) but
unnecessarily affected 'inconcinnitas'. T h e mistake arose from assimila
tion of endings (3. 1.4 n.).
47. 4. victos: it would be a futile message to report that all the
Labicani were defeated (victos sc. esse) since the dictator knew that and
the implication from the fact that all the defeated Labicani had fled
to Labici must either be the trivial observation that some were dead
or the startling counterfactual that some were still fighting. As earlier
editors saw (Crevier, Doering, Morstadt), the word is a dittography
after La-vicanos. If it is retained, it can only be defended as a careless
ness such as L. is liable to when he is hurrying over uncongenial
material (cf. the perfunctory repetition of captum ac direptum in 47. 4
and 5 ; see 1. 14. 4 n.).
47. 6. die octavo: 3. 29. 7 n., 4. 34. 5 n.
censuit frequens: probably means 'voted in a well-attended meeting'
(cf. Cicero, ad Fam. 8 . 5 . 3 ; Sallust, Catil. 50. 3 ) but since in the later
Republic the term 'frequens senatus' was also used technically for a
meeting of the senate at which a quorum was required and, since a
'frequens senatus 5 in this sense was summoned to consider the voting
of supplicationes as well as provincial arrangements (details in Balsdon,
J.R.S. 47 (1957), 19-20), the expression may be used strictly here.
Servilius' victories at least deserved to be considered for a supplicatio.
coloniam Labicos deducendam: 2. 39. 4 n. T h e capture of Labici and its
colonization are the only genuine events of the whole year, with the
possible exception of the obscure decern tribus (46. 1 n.). For the com
position of the colony see 5. 24. 4 n. and its subsequent fate 6. 21. 9,
7. 11. 3 ; Cicero, pro Plane. 23.
47. 7. bina iugera: the usual figure; cf. 5. 24. 4, 30. 8, 6. 36. 11,
8. 11. 14, 21. 11. It is not sufficient to support afamilia (30 iugera is
specified in the Lex Agraria of 111 B.C. and is the minimum viable
unit today) and must represent the settler's heredium, the land he was
given as his home where his penates could reside rather than the total
amount of land which was his to work (Clerici, Economia e Finanza,
272-81). T h e iugera allocated from Veii may represent grants to
groups otfamiliae.
605

4- 47- 7

417 B.C.
47. 7-49. 6. Annalistic Notices: Ap. Claudius

Into a h u m d r u m sequence of official records, magistrates, floods

(49. 2), and wars (49. 3-6 Bolae) is inserted the story of Ap. Claudius
defeating the proposals of Maecilius and Metilius by an ancestral
device. Great doubt attaches to the story. Claudius, the consular tri
bune of 403 (5. 1. 2 n.), is not otherwise prominent and Metilius
(48. 1 n.) is spurious. See Burck 105.
Menenio: 13. 6. Servilio: 45. 5 n. Lucretio: 44. 13 n.
Sp. Rutilio Crasso : the cognomen Crassus was never used by the Rutilii,
who do not emerge for another 250 years, and furthermore were
plebeian. Diodorus (13. 7. 1) has Eirovpios Overovpios, that is a son
of the Decemvir of 451 (3. 33. 3 n.), and Sigonius would replace
Veturio in the text. But the libri lintei are capable of such mistakes
(35. 4 n.) and the text, although historically misleading, should be
retained as what L. wrote.
47. 8. Sempronio: 35. 1. Papirio: 45. 5. Nautio: 44. 13.
L. omits Q . F a b i u s Q.f. M.n. Vibulanus, a brother of the consul of
421 (43. 1 n.), who is listed by the Capitoline Fasti, but in 414
(49. 7 n.) records him as Qj. Fabio Vibulano iterum, a proof that the libri
lintei were defective but did, like the Fasti, indicate iterations. Cf.
44. 13 n.
48. 1. Sp. Maecilius quartum et <Af>. Metilius tertium: consideration
must start from the nature of their proposals. T h e bill which they pro
posed was framed to ensure viritim division of land captured from the
enemy, i.e. agerpublicus. W h a t land was meant? Not that of Fidenae,
which had long ago lost its land to the tribe Claudia and was no more
than a fortress, nor that of Labici which had been allocated the
previous year (47. 6). We know of no other available land. In other
words Maecilius' proposals had been precisely forestalled by the en
actment of the previous year. But who are the proposers? Sp. Mae
cilius should be genuine since Piso's introduction of a Maecilius into
the college of 471 (2. 58. 1 n.) must have been inspired by the fame
of an early popular leader of that name. Metilius, on the other hand,
looks a pale shadow (5. 11. 4 n.). T h e Metilii were not old inhabitants
of Rome as D.H.'s transparent attempt to gratify his patron, Metilius
Rufus, by unearthing an Alban origin for the family shows (3. 29. 7;
1. 3 0 . 2 n . ; see Munzer, Rom. Adelsparteien, 133 n. 1). T h e name is
Etruscan, perhaps localized at Praeneste. <M.> Metilius and his name
sake, tribune in 401, owe their existence to M . Metilius, who as tribune
in 217 proposed the disputed law to make M . Minucius Rufus codictator with Fabius Maximus. It is significant that in 401 a Minucius is
associated with Metilius. T h e final oddity is the unexpected revelation
that they were holding office for the fourth and third times respectively.
606

4 1 6 B.C.

4. 48. 1

If L. knew of their earlier tenure, he omitted any reference to it. His

motive may have been artistic but since Maecilius and Metilius are
indistinguishable palaeographically, and since there are grounds for
believing that the names of only one tribune were regularly recorded,
the simplest Xvcns (foreshadowed by Mommsen, Rom. Geschichte, 15,
189, 351) of the problem would be to believe that Sp. Maecilius was
tr. pi. II in 418, tr. pi. I l l in 417, tr. pi. IV in 416, that he was in some
way connected with the proposal to send a colony to Labici (bina
iugera viritim), that the colony and his proposals were separated to
provide additional material for a barren couple of years, and that a
Metilius was created to keep him company.
48. 2. ei cum: et cum (N) is to be retained; et is not out of place and ei
is unnecessary; cf. 5. 28. 10.
48, 3 . nee enim: 'for there was hardly any spot of ground, as was
natural in a city founded in another dominion, but what was got by
force of arms, nor any ever assigned or sold but what the people had'
(Steele). This is the only possible translation of the Latin as it stands
but it makes nonsense. Maecilius is complaining that the plebs never
receive any land, while the patricians amass vast estates. He says that
since all Rome's land was captured from enemies, it was ager publicus
and it is well known how all the ager publicus was cornered by the
patricians. How can he or L. go on to say that whenever land did
come on the market only the plebs (nee . . . praeterquam plebs) secured
it ? Why did not the patricians attempt to corner that land as well ?
They were rich enough. And why were the plebs not content with such
a monopoly? He must be saying either that the only land the plebs
managed to secure was land that for some reason came on to the open
market (neepraeterquam quod. . . esset, plebs habebat Harant) or that even
when land did come on the market the plebs never secured it (nee
quod . . . esset unquam plebs habebat).
venisset: anachronistic. The first attested sale of ager publicus is in
205 B.C. (28. 4 6 . 4 ) .

48. 5. nepos: cf. 48. 6 proavum; the filiation of the Capitoline Fasti
(P.f. Ap.n.) proves that he was thought of as nephew not son of the
consular tribune of 424 (35. 4 n.), while his great-grandfather will be
the formidable consul of 471 (2. 56. 5 n.), but the allusion is to the
activities of the great-great-grandfather (2. 44. 2-6 where see notes).
The error arises from the separation of the Decemvir and the consul
of 471 who historically were identical and not father and son (2. 61.
7 n.). L. here is dependent on a source which did not separate them
and so had only three not four generations for the Claudii.
48. 7. temporum . . . maiestatis: advice which Cicero was always quick
to tender.
607

4-48-

416 B.C.

48. 8. pro fortuna: wrongly taken by Hey (Thes. Ling. Lat. 6. 1176. 47)
to mean 'their sympathies are dictated by chance'; it must mean that
such people have an eye for the main chance, that their sympathies
vary with their fortunes.
48. 11. misso senatu: 'after the adjournment 5 .
48. 13. in . . .Jidem . . . confugere: 'to flee for help', as in Cicero, Div. in
Caec. 11.
48. 15. silentio facto: marking the turning-point of the scene (3. 47.
6n.).
4 8 . 16. proditores . . . consularium: familiar Republican abuse; cf, e.g.,
Cicero, pro Sest. 3 3 ; in Pisonem 24. T h e sentiments form the drift of
Licinius Macer's speech in Sallust.
49. 1. at duo bella: aduo M , arduo v, duo A; at is required to point the
contrast between the attainment of internal peace by the checkmating
of tribunician agitation and the threat of external w a r ; cf. 5. 48. 1,
49. 1.
P. Cornelius: A.f. P.n., a son of an unknown father and grandson of
a P. Cornelius who must have been a brother of M . Cornelius Maluginensis, the Decemvir. But see 56. 2 n.
C. Valerius: 53. 1, 57. 12, 61. 4 ; T h e filiation of the Capitoline Fasti
is L.f. Volusi n., which would make him a cousin of the consul of 456
(3. 31. 1) and the son of an otherwise unknown L. Valerius. Miinzer
rightly doubts the Fasti (de Gent. Vol. 36), identifying him as L.f. P.n.,
a son of the famous consul of 449.
Q. Quinctius: 61. 1, a brother to Lucius and Titus.
49. 2. principum: the Etruscan chiefs, whose farms were flooded; but
the flood that was recorded would have been at Rome since the upper
reaches of the Tiber are not liable to flooding and the records that
were kept later were always of inundations in the vicinity of Rome.
T h e importance of the river in the life of the community turned floods
into prodigies (cf. 7. 3. 2 (361 B.C.); 30. 38. 10-12 (202); 35. 9. 1-6
( ! 93) 5 35- 21. 2-6 (192); Dio 39. 61 (54); 53. 20 (27): see le Gall,
Le Culte du Tibre, 62-66) and, as such, they figured in the Annales.
T h e historians have distorted the fact into a motive.
49. 3 . Bolanis: Bola (or Bolae as L. prefers to call it) was an ancient
community of Latium, said to have been an Alban colony (Virgil,
Aeneid6. 775) and a member of the Alban League (Pliny, N.H. 3. 69)
and mentioned by D. H. in connexion with Coriolanus' campaign
(2. 39. 3 n.). Its site cannot be determined. It must have lain in the
upper Sacco Valley, near Labici and Tolerium (Hulsen, R.E., 'Bola';
T . Ashby, P.B.S.R. 5 (1910), 409). T h e best site is Zagorolo. It was
destroyed by Camillus in 389 when the Aequi were crushed (6. 2.14)
and disappears from history, although at the end of the Republic
608

415 B.C.

4-49-3

a branch of the Vettii proclaimed by the cognomen Bolanus their origin

from the town. The earliest known Vettius, a contemporary of
Lucilius (Quintilian i. 5. 56), came from Praeneste which is not far
away (Badian, Foreign Clientelae, 170).
49. 6. L. Decio: his proposal, being abortive, can hardly have stood
in the records, and the early Decii are unhistorical (a messenger to
the seceded plebs in 494 (D.H. 6. 88. 4) and a prosecutor of Coriolanus
in 491 (D.H. 7. 39. 1)), for the family was southern Italian in origin
(cf. Sabell. Dekis) and would not have migrated to Rome before the
fourth century. Their subsequent place in the gallery of Roman heroes
called for a pedigree. (Z. Decio is the only plausible interpretation of
N's /. dexio.)
49. 7-51. Af. Postumius Regillensis
History has been hard on the Postumii. The severe dictator, A.
Postumius, who earned an unenviable reputation by killing his son,
the consular tribune, M. Postumius, who was fined for his incom
petence at Veii, the Vestal Virgin who had a narrow escape from
inhumation, and, finally, the ill-fated M. Postumius who was stoned
by his own troops. Family prejudices have clearly been at work and
have made the most of the unpopularity of the Postumii, but in every
case there was enough truth at bottom to justify the elaborations.
Rome was torn by internal struggles in the period from 440-410, whose
exact causes escape us. The Fasti do not reveal any politically signi
ficant swing of the pendulum. It is only possible to see that there was
a family alliance of Quinctii, Sempronii, and Postumii, which suffered
setbacks under continuous opposition. The fate of M. Postumius was
remembered because of his Wellingtonian remark malum militibus meis
nisi quieverint (49. 11) and his place in the Fasti is assured (49. 7 n.).
The details of the story are, however, throughout borrowed from the
disastrous history of A. Postumius Albinus {cos. 99) who was killed
by his own sailors in 89 when besieging Pompeii during the Social
War (Livy, Epit. 75; Orosius 5. 18. 22 ff.).
Surprisingly L. does not make the episode, which at first sight is full
of potentiality, into an isolated unity like the tale of Servilius Ahala or
Cornelius Gossus. It forms a passing scene in the growing conflict
between plebs and patres. The outlook is sharply democratic without
even any lip-service paid to the claims of senatorial auctoriias betraying
the hand of Licinius Macer, but L. must be responsible for the modifi
cations which transfer much of the blame to psychological factors (see
49. 10 note)Postumius' prava mens (cf. prope vecors, inhumanum) and
the army's ira and indignatio. See Liibbert 16 ff.; Soltau 113; Burck
105-6; Hellmann, Livius-Interpretationen, 41-46; Munzer, R.E., 'Po
stumius (1)'.
014432

609

4- 49- 7

414 B.C.

49. 7. Cn. Cornelio: 56. 2 n., Diodorus gives him the praenomen JTCUO?
(13- 3 8 - 0 L. Valerio: 58. 6, 5. 1. 2, 10. 1, 14. 5, 29. 2 n., 31. 2 ; L.f. P.n., a son
of the consul of 449. Diodorus calls him also rduos but L. is guaranteed
by the Capitoline Fasti.
Q^. Fabio . . . iterum: Q,.f. M.n., a brother of Cn. (43. 1 n.). His
earlier consular tribunate, given by the Fasti, is omitted at 47. 8.
He is called Kalaajv by Diodorus.
M. Postumio Regillensi: A.f. A.n., a son of the consul of 464 (3. 4 . ) ;
for the cognomen see 2. 16. 4 n. There is wide disagreement over his
praenomen. T h e Capitoline Fasti name him P. Diodorus has Tifiepios,
perhaps a corruption from / 7 ( 0 ^ 0 9 ) to 7i. T h e archetype of L. read
m. t. postumio, where ra. could be a dittography after iterum or t. a cor
ruption of the common symbol indicating a proper name (2. 15. 1 n.).
No reliance can be placed on the manuscripts therefore. L. perhaps
wrote M.
49. 10. adducor: L. refers to an alternative version which attributed
the unrest to a short-fall in booty. T h e version is stated more extensively
by Zonaras (7. 20). A plain economic motive is given for the discontent
resembling one view of Camillus' subsequent exile. L.'s version sub
stitutes for it a sharply political account which allows the quaestor
(P. Sextius) to escape with his life (50. 2) and assigns to Postumius
the part of a brutal oppressor, a political bully.
49. 11. M. Sextio : Miinzer is certainly right in believing that he and the
quaestor, P. Sextius, grew out of a single Sextius who was associated
with Postumius in the traditional story (/?."., 'Sextius ( 7 ) ' ; 'Sestius
(5)'). For Sestii and Sextii see 3. 32. 5 n., 33. 10 n. T h e fact that the
quaestorship was not held by a plebeian until 409 (54. 3) should not
tempt editors to abandon the archetype by reading Sestius for Sextius
in 50. 2 and thereby to distinguish the men still further. T h e original
role played by Sextius is not clear, but it is easy to see how the need
for an adversary to counterbalance Postumius would lead historians
to take a rib from the quaestor Sextius' side and create a tribune of
the same name and to clothe him with proposals borrowed from Sp.
Maecilius (the Bola scheme is identical with the Labici scheme out
lined above) and with characteristics from the notorious L. Sextius
( f r . # . 376).
dignum: T a n . Faber's correction is shown to be right by the parallel
of 2. 48. 2 : verum esse habere eos quorum sanguine ac sudore partus sit. Both
passages are Licinian. Cf. Sallust, Or. Macri 18 absit periculum et labos
quibus nulla pars fructus est.
'malum': 'a pox on my soldiers, if they stir', malum as an exclamatory
eurse (cf. Donatus on Terence, Eun. 780), short for malum habebis, is
common enough in authors of all periodsin questions (Shackleton
610

414 B.C.

4. 49. 11

Bailey, Cicero: 'ad Atticum', 46). Here fiet or the like must be under
stood, and the phrase would have sounded to R o m a n ears as an
archaic colloquialism (Hofmann, Latein. Umgangssprache, 32).
49. 12. acer nee infacundus: cf. Cicero's description of L. Bestia, vir et
acer et non indisertus. infacundus is an Augustan synonym for indisertus
first used by L. (7. 4. 6, 10. 19. 6).
49. 13. inquit: Sextius' speech is Ciceronian in style and language,
but it may not be wholly fanciful to detect an unusually high propor
tion of 'loans' from Cicero's speech pro P. Sestio in particular. It would
be in L.'s manner to choose a specific situation to adapt to the require
ments of his narrative.
sedem senectuti vestrae prospiciunt: cf. Sest. 139 aliis otium quaerere; for
quid ut (only here in L . ; to be compared with ut quid = Iva ri, as
Casaubon noted; see Kuhner-Stegmann 1. 786) cf. Sest. 8 4 ; for
adversariis . . . propugnatoribus cf. Sest. 137; for ingemuistis cf. Sest. 146;
for agros . . . stabilire cf. Sest. 143.
49. 14. senectuti: anachronistic. T h e colonies were not veteran colonies
in the Marian or Caesarian sense.
50. 4. sub crate: 1. 51. 9 n.
50. 7. metu quaestionum: 51. 2 n.
5 1 . 1. interrege: the necessity for an interrex often went hand-in-hand
with a switch from consular tribunes to consuls or vice versa (43. 7 n.).
A. Cornelio: Diodorus 13. 43. 1 and Cassiodorus give him the praenomen M. With two branches of the Cornelii Cossi reaching the con
sulate in the same period his filiation is doubtful. H e might be A.f.
P.n., a brother of the consular tribune of 415 P. Cornelius Cossus
(49. 1 n.) or A.f. M.n., a brother of the consul of 409 (54. 1) and of the
consular tribune of 408 P. Cornelius Cossus (56. 2 where see note).
L. Furius: 44. 1 n. It is uncertain whether this consulate marks
the summit of the older (L. or Sext.) Furius' career or is a stage in
the impressive advancement of his son (L.f. Sp.n. according to the
Capitoline Fasti). See Broughton, 412 B.C., n. 1.
5 1 . 2 . quaestione Postumianae caedis: the first special or extraordinary
commission recorded. T h e history and nature of these commissions
is obscure. Strachan-Davidson {Problems, 1. 225 ff.) argued that they
were of distinct kinds:
(1) A commission given by a legislative act of the people to the
consul or chief magistrate to resume the full rights of life and death
inherent in his imperium but curtailed by custom. T h e consul could,
in consequence, act entirely at his discretion without any appeal being
admissible from his jurisdiction, as he did in the cases of L. Hostilius
Tubulus (141 B.C.) and Q . Servilius Caepio (104 B . C ) .
611

4. 5 1 - 2

413 B.C.

(2) After the institution of the quaestiones perpetuae special ad hoc

commissions on the same pattern, with narrowly restricted terms of
reference and powers, were set up from time to time to deal with
particular situations. Such were the Manilian ( n o ) and the Varian
(go) quaestiones and their authority did not derive from the consular
imperium but from the law which established them. T h e quaestio Postumiana would clearly belong to the first category and is, therefore, less
anachronistic than if it had been of the second kind which only dates
from the last quarter of the second century. Strachan-Davidson and
de Martino (Storia della Costituzione, 1. 360 n. 51) are inclined to accept
it. One thing, other than the fact that it antedates the next recorded
case by nearly two hundred years, tends to discredit it. In the second
century the Senate encroached on the quaestiones of the first type by
empowering the consuls to hold investigations without the prior ap
proval or consent of the people. This development put a powerful
political weapon in their hands which they used in the Bacchanalian
scandal of 186 and in the suppression of Ti. Gracchus' adherents in
132. Now the significant point in L.'s account of the quaestio Postumiana is the emphasis on the popular origin of the consul's power to
conduct the investigation (51. 3). This bears every sign of being
tendentiouspropaganda against the Senate's intrusion and control
of quaestiones. I a m inclined to agree with Mommsen (Staatsrecht,
2. n o ) that it is as much a fabrication as the quaestio alleged by
Valerius Antias for the Scipio trials (Scullard, Roman Politics, 220-150
B.c.y 291-303; cf. Jolowicz, Historical Introduction, 327).
a plebe consensu populi: populi was deleted by Crevier (Madvig, H. J .
Miiller) but is an essential element in the tacit identification of plebeian
and popular (as opposed to senatorial) interests. It is not true to say
that populi here = plebis, as it may do in 5. 51. 11, 25. 2. 9, but rather
that it marks a step in a highly casuistical argument typical of
Licinius Macer.
51. 5. aptissimum tempus fuerat: erat nX; the pluperfect is right: 'it
would have been a very suitable occasion to appease their a n g e r . . . ' .
As it was, a sense of injury was aroused, aptissimum tempus followed by
ace. and inf. has raised doubts since the only comparable phrase in L.
is aptius est (without tempus) followed by ace. and inf. (28. 43. 14,
37. 28. 7). Hence aptissimum (ad} (Madvig) or (in) (SeyfTcrt) tempus,
but aptum tempus is a standard phrase (1. 9. 6, 10. 20. 9, 35. 19. 2) and,
if any change is needed, it will be obiciendu
delenimentum: like many political catchwords, e.g. 'Tory', the word
is vulgar in origin. While Cicero and Caesar avoid it, Laberius (fr.
134) and Afranius (378, 382) find it congenial. L. is the first elevated
writer to employ it with the notable exception of Sallust in the speech
which he puts in the mouth of Licinius Macer (21).
612

413 B.C.

4-51- 7

5 1 . 7. Ferentinum: from the Annates. Ferentinum, later to be a municipium of note, here makes its debut. Situated in Latium adiectum (mod.
Ferentino) it lay outside the orbit of the primitive Latin and R o m a n
world. For details see Hiilsen, R.E., 'Ferentinum'.
51. 8. ipsum agerque: Weissenborn's correction of the manuscript ipse
agerque is admirable. T h e town was handed over to the Hernici (56. 6)
doubtless because the Romans were not numerous enough to assume
such a distant obligation themselves, but, at the same time, were
anxious that it should be in dependable hands.
52-55. Annalistic Notices 412-409 B.C.
No stirring episode, no common trend distinguished the years 412-409.
L. makes the best that he can of them by emphasis, finding in every
event some connexion with the ever-menacing political struggle at
Rome and bringing out at every point the moral lesson that a united
city depends on the give-and-take of each individual and class within
it. See Burck 107; G. Niccolini, Studi Liviani, 83-109.
52. 1. L. Icilius: cf. 2. 58. 2, 3. 44. 3, 54. 11, 63. 8, 65. 9, a son pre
sumably of the Decemvir Ap. Claudius' redoubtable opponent.
Q.Fabio: perhaps the consul of 423, despite the absence of iteration
marks (but see Degrassi 97). He could hardly be the son, and the
possession of identical cognomina (Vivullano in Chr. 354) makes it
difficult to make him a cousin. T h e Capitoline Fasti are unfortunately
defective. T h e cognomen Ambustus is not explained, unless it describes
his complexion ('scorched').
C. Furio Factio \ C.f., a son of the consul of 441 (12. 1 n.).
52. 2. pestilential 3. 2. 1 n., from the Annales.
52. 4. inopia frugum: 2. 9. 6 n.
ut plerumquefit: 21. 4. 1, with inopia frugum, not neglecto cultu. Famine
is the regular accompaniment of pestilence rather than of neglected
agriculture.
M. Papirio Atratino : the only instance of a Papirius being given the
cognomen, peculiar to the Sempronii, Atratinus. T h e reading of the
manuscripts is beyond dispute and at so early a date adoption must
be discounted. T h e late chronographers, drawing ultimately on the
Capitoline Fasti, gave Mugillanus = the consular tribune of 418
(45. 5). If 411 originally had a college of three consular tribunes,
Papirius (Mugillanus), Sempronius (Atratinus), and Nautius, it is
easy to see how as a result of damage or mistake the three could be
compressed into a Papirius Atratinus and Nautius. Some support
may be offered by the floating and misplaced 'consuls' of 444 (4. 7.
10 n.), L. Papirius Mugillanus and L. Sempronius Atratinus, whom
Licinius Macer or the editors of the libri lintei knew from an inscription
and inserted in 444 because they could not be found in the regular
613

4- 52. 4

411 B.C.

Fasti. In reality they are likely to be the first two members of the
college of 411. T h e confusion here is the end-product from the libri
lintei. For Papirius' connexion with Garventum see 53. 3 n.
C. Nautio Rutilo: Unopiog in Diodorus 13. 68. i, and the Gapitoline
Fasti for 419 and 404. But there is no certainty that the libri lintei
identified him with the military tribune of 419 and 404 and C
should be retained. Cf. also 3. 25. 1 n.
52. 5. Etruscum . . . Tiberim . . . Cumas: 2. 9. 6 n.
52. 6. Samnitibus: 37. 1 n.
Siculorum tyrannis: there were no tyrants in Sicily in 411 but Dionysius I was to come to power two years later at Syracuse. T h e later
history of Sicily m a d e it natural to think of the cities as ruled by
tyrants. Apart from its intrinsic probability the notice that Sicily sup
plied corn to Rome in 411 may be believed if seen against a wider
background. Although Syracuse's victory over the Athenian expedi
tion was complete and decisive, matters did not rest there. T h e threat
from Carthage was imminent and Athens was soon to negotiate a
treaty with Carthage. Carthage's other ally was Rome by a treaty
a century old. It was much in Syracuse's interest to woo the alliance
or at least the neutrality of Rome.
Etruriae studio: the enthusiasm displayed by the Etruscans is historical.
They were anxious not to lose the Roman market to Sicily and saw an
opportunity of exploiting the hostility between Rome and the Samnites
who had done so much to destroy the Etruscan position in Campania.
53. 1. M. Aemilio: actually M \ Aemilius Mam.f. M.n. Mamercinus
(consular tribune in 405 (61. 1 M. Aemilius Mamercus), 403 (5. 1. 2,
M . AemiliusMamercusiterum),and40i (5.10.1 M . AemilioMamerco
tertium)). Thepraenomen is given as r&iosMavios by Diodorus (13. 76.1)
and M \ by theCapitoline Fasti. T h e change is so slight and the corrup
tion so common that M J . should be restored in the texts of L. through
out (cf. 3. 7. 6 n . ; cf. the similar problem discussed by Syme, J.R.S. 45
(1955), 26-27).
C. Valerio: 49. 1 n.
53. 2. M. Menenius: nothing else is known of him. Munzer (R.E.,
'Menenius (8)') is reminded of the antagonism between another con
sular Valerius and a Maenius in 483 (D.H. 8. 87. 4) and would dismiss
both as fictitious. But the family is old and prominent in the plebeian
interest (a M . Menenius was tr. pi. in 384). H e may well be genuine
even if his abortive proposals are not.
53. 3 . arcem Carventanam: the exact site cannot be fixed. It is not to be
identified with Rocca Massima (see Ashby, P.B.S.R. 5 (1910), 411,
424) but it lay near to Tusculum and the pass of Algidus. Casuetani
figure among the early Alban people in Pliny (N.H. 3. 69). T h e name
614

4 1 0 B.C.

4-5 3. 3

affords no help. Gasuentum is found in Umbria and a river is so called

in south Italy (Pliny, N.H. 3. 97) but the meaning is uncertain (Schulze
535). It should not be connected with Illyrian *karavant 'rocky'. T h e
best site is Mte. Fiore. It disappears from history after 409 (55. 4),
but one further detail about it may be preserved. If the consul of 458
in the Gapitoline Fasti is rightly restored as [Papirius] Carvenftanus
(3. 25. 1 n., 4. 7. 10 n.), it is a fair inference that a branch of the
Papirii came from the vicinity of Carventum. Topographical cognomina such as Mugillanus (also of the Papirii), Fidenas, MedulHnus
refer to the provenance of the gens and Papirii certainly seem to have
originated near Tusculum (Lucilius fr. 1259 M a r x ; S Bob. Cicero,
pro Plancio p. 254 Orelli; 8. 37. 8-12; VaL Max. 9. 10. 1). The
[Papirius] Garventanus, ascribed to 458 by the Gapitoline Fasti
alone, properly belongs to this period when Carventum was important
and is to be identified with M . Papirius (Atratinus) (52. 4 n.). W e
do not know what share he had in the critical negotiations with what
may have been his ancestral home. See further Hermes 89 (i960), 379 ff.
5 3 . 6. iniusti domini: the phrase is legal and technical denoting those
who enjoy possession without legal title or right (Beseler, Beitr. z- Krit.
4 (1920), 73 ff). T h e case of iniusta dominatio is often dealt with by
the Jurists (cf. Ulpian, Dig, 10. 3. 7. 4). Cf. 6. 39. 9.
5 3 . 7. damnum aliamque coercitionem: nominally the consul by virtue
of his imperium had absolute power over life and limb but the exercise
of that power was in practice limited (51.2 n.). Moreover, the tribunes
were protected by their sacrosanctity but that protection was only
operable if at least one other tribune was prepared to take action in
defence of a colleague. T h e action of the nine tribunes was tantamount
to connivance at the violation of sacrosanctity. T h e language of their
resolution is quasi-legal, e.g. inhibere=inferre (cf. Plautus, Bacch. 448;
56. 10, 3. 38. 1, 7, 50. 12). T h e meaning of damnum is not immediately
clear. In strict law damnum signifies any loss or damage which a person
has sustained in his property but Menenius' person rather than his
property was in jeopardy, coercitio, on the other hand, signifies any
coercive punishment inflicted by magistrates but not exactly defined
by the law. T h e tribunes recognize that whatever sanctions are applied
to Menenius will not be prescribed by statute and so they are content
with euphemistic words like 'harm'.
53. 8. collum torsisset: 'put in irons'; (ob)torquere c. was the usual
method of securing and confining a prisoner (Plautus, Rudens 8 5 3 ;
Poen. 790; Cicero, pro Cluentio 59).
53. 9. invisus infestusque: 2. 56. 5, 5. 8. 9.
recipit: recepit has the authority of M and IT and should be preferred.
5 3 . 10. quaestores: 3-31-4, presumably the two military quaestors but
L. may be guilty of a confusion. We would expect the urban quaestors
615

4- 53- io

410 B.C.

to be mentioned, who received the money at the aerarium (5. 19. 8;

26. 8), and not the military quaestors who to our knowledge were not
ndrmally responsible for the sale of the booty. L.'s unfamiliarity with
military and financial affairs may have led him into error. Or should
<W> be inserted before quaestores (J. F. Gronovius) ?
participem praedae: 5. 21. 2, 23. 8-11, 46. 4, the technical phrase.
Cf. Plautus, Most. 312; Caesar, B.C. 3. 82. 1.
53. 11. alternis: sc. vicibus, 57. 2, 2. 2. 9.
inconditi versus: 3. 29. 5 n. The Menenii were remembered by such
anecdotes (2. 32. 8 n.).
54. 1. Cn. Cornelius-. 49. 7. L. Furius: 51. 1 n.
54. 3. K. Fabio: 61. 4 n.
tres plebeii: the fact is possible and the names cannot be ruled out.
The Silii were proud of the antiquity of their family and there were
two tribunes, M. and P. Silius, towards the close of the Second Punic
War. The Aelii reach eminence with a consul in 337 (8. 15. 1). The
third name is variously reported: c. appius in Ver., p. pipius in N.
Palaeographically C. Papius or P. Pupius is feasible but the former,
from a simple metathesis to which Ver. is prone (17. 2 n.), is distinctly
choicer. N's reading combines p. = p(roprium nomen) with a dittography. Historically, the Pupii have the edge, being attested at an
early date in Praeneste (C.I.L. i 2 . 236) and producing a iivir aedi
locandae in 217, while the Papii do not emerge before the second
century. Yet the trio as a whole cannot be viewed with equanimity.
It is suspicious that the Aelii could also claim the first plebeian augur
(10. 9. 2) and that C. Papius, tr. pi. in 65, must have been known to
Licinius Macer.
54. 4. Icilios: 52. 1 n. Did the notice really read something like
Icilius III., recording the third tribunate of Icilius?
ad ea: adeo (Ver., N) is a senseless assimilation to avidissimo populo.
54. 5. si ne: in is added by Ver.; either the plain abl. or the prepo
sitional phrase is possible but quaestoriis comitiis in 54. 2 argues strongly
for the former. For Ver.'s interpolation of in cf. 17. 12, 21. 10.
vellent: vellet (Ver.), the singular indicating the unified will of the
body as a whole as at 51. 2, 6. 39. 9, 32. 7. n , and 36. 39. 3, is more ap
propriate.
54. 7. communicatis . . . amissis: 5. 14. 1. The passage recalls the open
ing controversy of the patricians and Canuleius where the same argu
ments are advanced. See 56. 11 n.
negare \ om. Ver. fremere cannot be used with an implied negative
( = negare) 'complain that so-and-so is not or ought not to be the case'.
negare, therefore, is required and the omission should be explained by
homoeoteleuton.
616

409 B.C.

4- 54- 7

54. 8. inritatis: inflatis Ver. For inritatis animis cf. 1. 17. 4, 8. 32. 16,
23. 44. 5, et aL
55. 1. Hernicumque: 53. 2.
55. 2. tunc enixe: 1. 35. 8 n.
55. 3 . singuli: for the text see C.Q.q (1959), 278,
55. 4. recurrentes in arcem: since the Aequi were palpably in control of
the citadel, the Romans could not have been killed as they forced
their way back in. Ver. rightly reads ad arcem. Some were on their way
back, some were still looting, when they were set upon and killed.
55. 5. adversa civitatis res: adversa res as in Cicero (pro Sulla 57; Tusc.
Disp. 3. 21) is the equivalent of a noun (incommodum) and is followed
by a genitive. A dative only follows when adversa is predicative, i.e. res
est adversa mihi.
55. 8. Verruginem: 1,411. Its loss was not recorded.
56-57. The Dictatorship of P. Cornelius
56. 2. C. Iulius: 61. 1, Sp.f. Vopisci n., according to the Capitoline
Fasti. His father is unknown but must have been a brother of the
consul of 430 (30. 1 n.).
P. Cornelius Cossus: A.f. M.n., to distinguish him from the consular
tribune of 415 (49. i n . ) ; there is no iteration here. A brother of the
consular tribune of 414 (49. 7 n.). His father was the celebrated winner
of the spolia opima and his grandfather the Decemvir, M. Cornelius
Maluginensis. The identity of the dictator P. Cornelius (M.f. L.n.
Rutilus Cossus, according to the Fasti) is perplexing (57. 6, 58. 6).
The filiation suggests that his grandfather was L. Cornelius Malu
ginensis, consul in 459 (3. 22. 1) and brother of the Decemvir. He will,
therefore, be a second cousin both of his namesake the consul of the
present year (408) and of the consul of 415 (49. 1). Such proliferation
is bewildering and only theoretically possible. The filiations given by
the Fasti are largely the work of inspired antiquarianism and rest on
no contemporary documentation. Historically it is likely that there
were in this period three Cornelii Cossi, and three only: (1) P. Cor
nelius Cossus (consular tribune in 415 = 49. 1, 408 = 56. 2, 406 =
58. 6, and 404 = 61. 4 ; dictator in 408 = 57. 6 ) ; (2) Cn. Cornelius
Cossus (consular tribune in 414 = 49. 7, 406 = 58. 6, 404 = 61. 4,
and 401 = 5 . 10. 1); (3) A. (or M.) Cornelius Cossus (consul in
413 = 51. 1). They will have been the three sons of the winner of the
spolia opima. See also 61. 4 n.
C. Servilius Ahala: 57. 12, 5. 8. 1, P.f. Q,.n., a nephew of the consul
of 427 (30. 12) by an unknown father.
56. 3 . intermiscendo: 'contaminating the worthy by mixing in the un
worthy'. For the depreciatory, possibly colloquial, force of the verb
617

4- 56. 3

408 B.C.

cf. Virgil, Eel. io. 4 - 5 ; Horace, Satires 1. 10. 29 f. with Fraenkel,

Horace', 135.
56. 4. Verrugine: 'at Verrugo', locative as 58. 3.
cum impulisset: 'when, whatever the cause was, whether retention of
Carventum or the loss of Verrugo, had driven them to anger or hope'.
T h e archetype reading is feasible, but compello is better than impello
'drive one to an emotion' (see, however, Cicero, CatiL 2. 20; Horace,
A.P. 109) and the construction so involved that Perizonius's simple
compulisset (accepted by J a c . Gronovius and Bekker) is a great im
provement. Cf. 5. 9. 1.
56. 5. caput rerum: 'the Antiates were the centre of the trouble'. There
had been trouble at Antium in 459 (3. 23. 1-7) after which silence
descends on the place, but R o m a n control was never secure. In 406
(59. 1 ff.) successive expeditions had to be sent to counter Volscian
encroachment in the area and in the fourth century fresh disturbances
led ultimately to a citizen colony being established there after a
decisive victory in the Latin W a r (338). With evidence for Volscian
pressure on southern Latium during the last ten years of the fifth
century, the reported revolt of Antium in 408 might seem logical and
timely. But the geography is much awry. T h e fate of Verrugo or
Carventum could be of no interest to the Antiates. Nor is it easy to
see how a victory at Antium could be followed by the storming of
a fort by the Fucine lake (see m a p ) . T h e battle for Verrugo and Car
ventum was a battle for control of the Via Latina and the approaches
to Latium from the east. It was only when the Volscians were balked
in that region that they tried in 406 to outflank Latium by forcing an
entry into the coastal plain near Antium and rolling up the Latins and
Romans from the south. Antium and the Antiates must be a mistake
by L.'s source for Antinum (mod. Civita d'Antino), a small town in
the upper Liris valley, five miles from the Fucine lake, mentioned by
Pliny (N.H. 3. 106) whose Volscian associations are confirmed by a
small inscription in Volscian (c. 150 B.C.) found there (Conway,
Italic Dialects, no. 253; Hiilsen, R.E., 'Antinum'). L. abandons
Licinius Macer hereabouts as is clear from the contradictions between
58. 1 and 35. 2 (n.), and between 48. 3 where the patricians' wealth is
alleged to consist solely in land and 60. 6 where they produce aes grave
on wagons. T h e exact place where the change occurs may be in
dicated by L.'s consultation of different authors in 55. 8. If so, then
the source for the revolt of 'Antinum' will be Valerius Antias. Local
patriotism demanded that Antium should figure largely in his history
but the material was scanty. It is hardly surprising that he should
supplement it by usurping the history of Antium as well, particularly
when the last victor of Antium was also a Cornelius (L. Cornelius
Maluginensis, the consul of 459). T h e connexion of the Cornelii with
618

408 B.C.

4- 56. 5

Antium was long-lived. After the rape of the city by Marius in 87

(Livy, Epit. 80), the colony was nursed back to prosperity by L.
Cornelius Sulla.
56. 6. divisa: divis Ver., who omits final a also at 3. 7. 8 (public),
4. 2. 9 (ali), 5. 31. 6 (qui), and so affords no support for divisui (Gronovius, Mommsen, Madvig). For divisa habere cf. the numerous pas
sages collected in Thes. Ling, Lat. s.v. habere, col. 2426, 28-45.
56. 10. in auctoritate: 26. 7 n.
56. 11. nihil esse in ~\iis auxilii: so N and Ver. (hiis). After auxilii nihil
esse, in with the abl. denotes the helper (26. 16. 53, 40. 40. 4, 31. 5. 6)
while the simple dat. denotes the party who is helped (21. 34. 8 ) : for
both together cf. 37. 1. 10. O n the other hand the dat. with numero
essent must be the person in whose estimation someone is judged (cf.
Cicero, Div. in Caec. 6 2 ; Phil. 2. 71,13.11). As the text stands, therefore,
the tribunes, who have been asked for help by the leading senators,
are made to state that no help can be forthcoming from those who
judge them (the tribunes) to be beneath the level of men and citizens.
But they must be retorting to the patricians that there can be no
h e l p e r those who hold such a low opinion of the tribunes. It is neces
sary therefore either to delete in (Welz), or to emend quibus to qui
(Drakenborch, Alschefski, Bayet) or to insert se = esse in se iis (Orsini,
Madvig, Weissenborn), in se esse iis (Dietsch). T h e first solution is the
simplest, the third provides the better emphasis. For the corruption
cf. 2. 6. 2 n. T h e sentiment non civium, non hominum numero intentionally
echoes 4. 12 (Canuleius' speech), as 54. 7 harks back to 5. 14. L.
adapts a technique of ring-composition, familiar from Greek Tragedy
where an episode, section, or argument is closed by a recollection of
the opening line (cf. Aeschylus, Agamemnon 1-20, 184-205, 1184-96,
1580-1611 with Fraenkel's notes; Theocritus 7. 5 2 - 6 1 ; see Gow, C.R,
56 (1942), i n ) . T h e reader is thus led to expect that the end of the
book is in sight.
56. 12. turn se: se is omitted by Ver., as often elsewhere (3. 51. 13).
56. 13. verecundia: Ver. reads . . i
verecundia per se potestatemquae
tribuniciam. T h e leading senators, in despair that the consular tribunes
have brought about a state of affairs bordering upon anarchy, have
asked the tribunes of the plebs to help restore order. T h e latter are
only prepared to do so on conditionsunacceptable conditions, the
opening of all magistracies and offices to every citizen without dis
crimination of rank or class. In the meantime, until they consented
to those conditions, the patricians would have to wield the tribunicia
potestas by themselves, if they wanted to get any help from the tribunes.
They displayed no respect for the laws; they might as well turn tri
bunes as well. Such must be the gist of the tribunes' impertinence;
the text, however, is very doubtful. Conway's reconstruction in the
619

4 0 8 B.C.

4- 56- i3

O.C.T. reflects his belief that H was the best manuscript and does not
give a good sense. T h e immediate difficulty is the position of quoque.
As it stands in N, it must be taken with per se, whereas it really quali
fies tribunicia potestas. So far from offering help, the tribunes may be
expected to do everything in their power to promote anarchy. If the
patricians are to achieve anything they will have to take the tribunate
as well. There is no certain case in L. of quoque preceding the word it
qualifies (3. 65. 6 n.). However, Ver.'spotestatemquae tribuniciam hints at
potestatem quoque tribuniciam. A fault in the common archetype of Ver.
and N displaced potestatem in N and reduced quoque to -quae in Ver.
A subsidiary problem is the vestigial word before verecundia in Ver.
Re-examination of the palimpsest leaves no doubt that the visible
letters are . . 1
Mommsen discerned via . . . . but the third not
the second letter is i and his vi atque is ruled out by the non-occurrence
of atque before v in L. T h e only word that fits the traces as they are
now visible is pristina. viverent is out of the question.
57. 1. haec contentio: Rome's troubles are due to personal ambition.
Only Servilius Ahala has the wisdom and the forebearance to sub
ordinate his own interests to the interests of the state and thereby to
illustrate the overriding importance of moderatio (57. 3, 57. 5, 57. 12).
57. 4. belli necessitates: from Thucydides 1. 142. 1 rov 8e noXefiov ol
Kcupol ov fieveroL.

57. 5. senatus consulto: 26. 7 n., the S.C. was not legally required, but
Servilius Ahala hoped to secure moral backing by it.
57. 6. P. Cornelio: 56. 2 n.
58-61. The Preliminaries of the War with Veii
58. 1. indutiarum: 35. 2 n. For the chronology of the war with Veii
see 5. 1. 1 n. Historically the truce cannot have expired in this year
(407). T h e date was pushed back by annalists to allow a full ten years
for the siege (406-396) and an extra year for the preliminaries. T h e
abortive delegation of fetials and the magnanimous gesture of allowing
the Veientes to set their house in order before being presented with
an ultimatum were no more recorded in the Annales than the expiry of
the truce, as Dobree demonstrated by comparing 58. 2 ut ex incommodo
alieno sua occasio peteretur with Demosthenes, Olynth. 1. 16. Licinius
Macer, however, who maintained the twenty-year duration of the
truce (35. 2) must have held out against the Trojanizing tendency of
his fellow historians and dated the expiry of the truce to 405.
fetiales: 1. 32. 6 n.
58. 2. discordia intestina: more political colouring, although the rigid
caste-system of the Etruscan aristocracy did lead to internal unrest,
for instance at Arretium (10. 3. 2, 5. 13), and may have contributed
620

4 0 7 B.C.

4. 58. 2

to the decline of the Etruscan hegemony (R. Lambrechts, Essai sur

les Magistratures, 23-25).
58. 4. tribunis qui: it must be the tribunes who failed to consider that
no valour can transcend the limits of human endurance, because it is
the tribunes who are always eager to obstruct the enrolment of ex
peditions, (non), therefore, is needed to put an equal share of the
blame on to the tribunes. N's restate nuntiabantur would be acceptable
(see the parallels quoted by Drakenborch) but is less idiomatic and
less corruptible than Ver.'s restari nuntiaba[n]tur; cf. 34. 15. 6.
nulla virtute: for the proverbial commonplace cf, e.g., Homer, Iliad
13- 78758. 6. P. et Cn. Corneliis Cossis: for P. see 56. 2 n. T h e Capitoline Fasti
indicate that he was the dictator of 408 (57. 6). T h e filiation of Cn.
is P.f. A.n., suggesting a son of the consular tribune of 415 (49. 1),
although the interval between father and son is preternaturally small.
See also 5. 10. 1 n.
Cn. Fabio: 5. 36. n n.; for the praenomen see 43. 1 n. Ambusto
distinguishes him from the noble Cn. Fabius Vibulanus whose final
tenure of office was the preceding year (407 = 57. 12), and the filia
tion of the Capitoline Fasti (M.f. Q.n.) indicates a son of the consul of
4 4 2 (11. 1 n.).

L. Valerio: 49. 7 n.
58. 7. Lars Tolumnius 117. 1-4. It would be a very arrogant and vulgar
reply that omitted the preposition ex after facesso (6. 17. 8). T h e omis
sion could be caused by haplography.
58. 9. occidione occisa: 2. 51. 9, 3. 10. 11.
ei\ cum periculo retineri: unless Verrugo has been recovered L. can
hardly say that the garrison were butchered and the forts only retained
at peril, et must be corrupt, but in emending et account needs to be
taken of what L. has said. The two garrisons which were liquidated
will be Carventum and Verrugo. retineri, however, as in 56. 4, can
only be used of something which the Romans with difficulty manage
to keep, which disqualifies Harant's Aequum periculo retineri, and also,
since we have heard nothing of any other praesidia, eliminates duo
(SeyfTert), alia (Madvig), or cetera (Schenkl), sc. praesidia, cum periculo
retineri. Neither sua et (Brakman) or arces (Luterbacher) could stand
without further explanation. I would suggest castra; cf. 46. 6 castraque
eo die aegre retenta.
5 8 . 1 2 . coloniarumque: libertatis corresponds to suffragii libere ferendi,
coloniarum to agripublici. As the freedom of the colonies does not enter
into the question, there is nothing to be said for deleting -que with
Madvig and Conway.
58. 13. volnera ac cicatrices: 2. 23. 4 n.
quod dari: qui (sc. sanguis) dari N. Either can be defended (cf. 5. 1.4,
621

4- 58. 13

406 B.C.

28. 25. 2, 32. 17. 9, 41. 16. 8) but the rhetorical symmetry quid loci
ad. . . accipienda, quid sanguinis . . . favours Ver. rogitantes should be
retained; cf. 3. 61. 13, 7. 8. 2, 24. 31. 3.
59. 2. Valerius Antium: the collocation is not accidental. T h e mention of
Antium, Ecetrae (2. 25. 6 n.), and Anxur reveals that the focus of the
war has switched. Algidus is at last sealed to the Volscians who can
only force their way into the coastal plain by a long sweep from the
south-east.
59. 3 . Anxur: situated on a small outcrop of rock between the Pomptine plain and the sea and commanding the (later) Via Appia, the
town was of great strategic importance, as was shown in the late
war. Anxurthe meaning of the name is uncertain ( = dvv vpov
according to Servius, ad Aen. 7. 799) was the Volscian name which
survived in the cult of Juppiter A(n)xoranus (C.I.L. 10. 6483;
Sydenham no. 947) but Tarracina, whether Greek ( = rpaxtmrj, from
the roughness of the place) or, more probably, Etruscan (cf. Tarchu,
Tarquinius, & c ) , was the older name which Anxur only temporarily
replaced for the duration of the Volscian occupation. For the site
was inhabited before the Volscians. Its inhabitants were called TappaKtvnai in the Carthaginian treaty of 509 (Polybius 3. 22. 11 with
Walbank's note). T h e Volscians cannot have reached it before the
campaigns of the 490's associated with the name of Coriolanus. L. has
the plural form Tarracinae here, the singular elsewhere, but the plural
is also used by Athenaeus (6. 224 c) and should not be emended
(Wesenberg). Cf. Bolae and Bola (49. 6).
59. 5. circummissae: a textbook stratagem advocated by Frontinus and
employed by Pericles (3. 9. 5) and Antiochus at Ephesus (3. 9. 10).
59. 7. duo milia: cf. 57. 7. T h e taste for numbers is Valerian.
59. 1 1 . additum: so also Diodorus 14. 16. 5. If there is any truth in the
annalistic account of a protracted siege of Veii, it is reasonable to be
lieve that the troops would have had to be compensated for being
prevented from cultivating their land and winning a livelihood. T h e
pay may only have been ad hoc, dictated by the special circumstances
of the Veii expeditionit was not regular in the fourth centurybut
it makes good sense (Watson, Historia 7 (1958) 113). It may have
taken the form of supplies in kind or specific weight of aes rude.
60. 1. patres vere appellatos: a propagandist rationalization of the
senatorial designation patres; cf. Cicero, de Rep. 2. 14 appellati propter
caritatem patres and see Alfoldi, Mus. Helv. 9 (1952), 207.
60. 2. cam: 'while they were delighted with the advantage that their
estate would be secure at least for the duration of their military
service, their happiness was increased by the fact that the offer was
622

406 B.C.

4. 60. 2

spontaneous'. For quasi-concessive cum . . . turn cf. 57. 12, 5. 40. 2,

8. 21. 1, 42. 46. 4 ; Mikkola, Die Konzessivitat, 89.
60. 3 . laetum patribus universis neeprosperum: the manuscript reading is
sound as it stands, universus is only used of the senatorial order except
where it is opposed to singulus (2. 35. 5, 9. 8, 44. 5). patribus universis
must, therefore, go together (patribus del. Madvig, Bayet: universis
transp. Crevier, Conway). T h e point is that the patres think that they
will steal the demagogues' thunder by getting in first with an offer
to pay the troops. But, the tribunes predict, they will not all be so
pleased when they start asking who is to foot the bill. Their own
pockets or new taxes on the people ?
specie . . . quam usu: cf. Sallust, Jug. 16. 5, a demagogue's antithesis.
60. 4 . ex alieno . . . largitos: Dobree would delete aliis, but it is re
sumed by aliorum below.
60. 6. argentum signatum . . . aes grave: H. Mattingly and E. S. G.
Robinson have shown that while Rome dealt only with her Latin and
Etruscan neighbours and had few, if any, direct dealings with the
Greek states of Magna Graecia, she was content with a currency
which consisted at first of rough lumps of bronze without uniform
weight or shape (aes rude). By a slow process, the old, rough lumps
gave way to recognizable unitsblocks, bricks, or barsdistinguish
able by individual marks stamped on them (aes signatum). T h e date of
the introduction of aes signatum cannot be determined but the emblems
employed point to a date in the late fifth century. Rome suffered
a severe jolt with the Gallic Sack which set her economy back by
several decades and it was not until the end of the century that she
was brought into contact with Magna Graecia. T h e first coins as such,
both silver and bronze (aes grave), were minted in the last years of the
century, 338 and 311 being championed as the date for the first issues.
T h e so-called 'Romano-Campanian' coins were minted by Rome to
Greek models and it was not until a hundred years later that the first
denarius was coined. It follows that although Roman memory was
gratifyingly retentive as to the fact that there was no silver coinage in
406, L. is wrong in calling the prevailing coinage aes grave, unless he
uses the word non-technically to denote the heavy ingots of aes rude
or signatum (cf. 4 1 . 10, 45. 2, 5. 12. 1, 29. 7, 32. 9). T h a t the senators
were obliged to use wagons to transport their wealth would suit
ingot-currency and may derive from a genuine tradition. See especially
E. A. Sydenham, Aes Grave, 10-21; H . Mattingly, Num. Chron. 3
( J 943) 3 4 - 8 ; J- G. Milne, J.R.S. 32 (1942), 27-32.
60. 9. legeperlata: the notice looks genuinely annalistic but see 5. 1. 1 n.
6 1 . 1. tribuni: for the significance of the election of six consular
tribunes for the first time see 5. 1. 1 n.
623

.6i. i

405 B.C.

T. Quinctius: 43. 1.
Q. Quinctius: 49. 1 n., omitted by Diodorus 14. 17. 1, who, however,
states that the total was six.
C. lulius: 56. 2 n.
A. Manlius: A.f. Gn.n. Vulso Gapitolinus, according to the Capitoline Fasti, i.e. a grandson or a great-grandson of the consul of 480
(2. 43. n ) . His father is unknown. See 5. 8. 1, 16. 1.
L. Furius: 5 1 . 1 n. M\ Aemilius: 53. 1 n. Both are omitted by
Diodorus.
6 1 . 2 . fanum Voltumnae: 23. 5 n. For the failure of the Etruscan league
to support Veii see 5. 1.311.
61. 4 . C. Valerium: 49. 1 n. M'. Sergium: 5. 8. 1, L.f. L.n., according to
the Capitoline Fasti. His father ought to be the consul of 437 (17. 7)
but his filiation is C.f. C.n. T h e editors or the cutters of the Fasti may
be in error.
P. Cornelium: 56. 2 n. Cn. Cornelium: 56. 2 n., 58. 6.
K. Fabium: this branch of the Fabii is teasing. In 54. 2 N except for
O E (Claudio F.) read C. Fabio; and exactly the same readings are given
here, and at 5. 10. 1 where there is no mark of iteration; at 5. 24. 1
MA have K. (or Caesonem) Fabium and n Caesonem, all branches of the
tradition agreeing on the iteration iterum. T h e Capitoline Fasti, on the
other hand, had the style K. Fabius M.f. Q.n. Ambustus, consular
tribune in 404, II in 401, III in 395. T h e corruption of the praenomen
in L. is understandable and if A", is to be restored, it must be restored
throughout. For the fact that L.'s sources appear to have overlooked
one of his consular tribunates {iterum in 395 where the Fasti have III)
is to be linked to the parallel phenomenon that in 401 (5. 10. 1) Cn.
Cornelius Cossus is listed as iterum by L. but III by the Fasti. L.'s
source for the lists of eponymous magistrates in 401 and, less certainly,
m
395 w a s Licinius Macer, whereas here he is following Valerius
Antias and one can only assume that Licinius Macer either omitted
partially or wholly the college of 404, in which Cn. Cornelius was
consular tribune II and K. Fabius obtained that office for the first
time, or distinguished Cornelius and Fabius from their homonyms
who were consular tribunes in 401. Only in this way can the double
mistake be accounted for.
Sp. Nautium: 44. 13 n. iterum is also mistaken for he had been con
sular tribune in 419 and 416 (47. 8 iterum). It could be corrupt but
where two separate sources are responsible for the lists of magistrates
it is rash to assume corruption.
61. 7. multi mortales: 1. 9. 8 n.
6 1 . 8 . ni servus arcem . . . prodidisset: another textbook method of taking
a city recommended by ancient strategists.
61. 10. Servius Romanus: the legend of his servile origin and the
624

404 B.C.

4. 61. 10

treacherous exploit which won his freedom, fortune, and a name

should be compared with the legend of Servius Tullus' origins (1. 39.
5 n.). Both explain Servius by servus. Such tales do not come from the
Annales but are the stuff of family histories. The family of Servii from
Artena retailed the tradition of their origins, which found its way into
the narrative history of Rome. The unauthenticity of it is revealed
by the cognomen Romanus.
sunt qui Artenam: no town of that name has been discovered in the
vicinity of Ferentinum or Ecetra (2. 25. 6 n.) on the northern slopes
of the Volscian hills. The old identification with the Civita of Mte.
Fortino (Httlsen, R.E., 'Artena') must be abandoned, because L.
implies that the town and the citadel are distinct which is not the
case there (Ashby, SuppL Papers Am. School in Rome 1 (1905), 8 7 - 8 9 ;
see 2. 43. 2 n.). Hence scholars have been led to suppose that L. has
confused Artena and Ortona and Bayet argues that the correction
sunt qui is evidence of a second edition of the book after it had been
pointed out to L. that Artena was an Etruscan city (nothing at all
is known of it, but the name is consonant with an Etruscan foundation),
not a Volscian one (tome 4, 100 n. 1). Book 5, however, begins with
a change of source and that is regularly preceded by the consultation
of a variant. Rather than postulate a second edition we may believe
that whereas Valerius Antias associated a notice in the Annales about
the capture of Artena with the battle at Ferentinum, Licinius related
it to the campaign against Veiia view which L. rejects. The entry
Artena in the Annales may have been an error for Ortona: we cannot
know and conjecture is futile, but that the city which Servius betrayed
was near Ecetra and not Caere is clear from the name Servius. As a nomen
it is scarce. One of the few examples of Republican date is a Servius
of Aquinum (CJ.L. i2. 1550) while the moneyer L. Servius Rufus
(c. 43 B.C.) exhibits a view of his home-town Tusculum on his coins
(Sydenham no. 1081). Aquinum is not more than a few miles from
Ecetra, indicating that the Servii were indigenous to that area.

814432

625

ss

BOOK 5
B O O K 4 pointed political lessonsthe necessity for all parties in the
state, governed as well as government, exercising mutual consideration
(moderatio). Book 5 moves on to a new plane. Rome had a destiny
which had to be safeguarded by proper attention to religion. A
political truce was insufficient without the co-operation of the gods,
and Book 5 illustrates how the fortunes of the city veer as her rulers
observe and neglect their religious duties. The book falls sharply into
two sectionsthe capture of Veii and the capture of Rome (1-32,
35-55). Veii fell because of her own impiety (1. 4-5) and Roman
piety (15. 2, 19. 1 ff., 21. 8). When the Romans, flushed with their
success, allowed themselves to forget their religious obligations and
even expelled Camillus (50. 1), they suffered for it by being defeated
and captured by the Gauls. Their preservation of the sacra patria (40.
7-10 n.), their repentance, and their restoration of Camillus atoned
for their offence. Rome had learnt her lesson. The two halves of the
book are united by their theme. They are also linked by the per
sonality of Camillus, the fatalis dux (19. 2 ; cf. 33. 1 ff.) whose name
betokens a life spent in service of the gods (1. 2 n.) and whose career
mirrors the relationship between worldly success and divine will.
Two further features promote the symmetry of the book. As in Book
3 L. elaborates two long speeches, one at the beginning (3-6) and
one at the end (51-54), which serve to weld the whole together. The
middle is occupied by a digression on the history and geography of
the Etrurian and the Gaul (33-35). L., as Sallust, uses digressions
to prepare the reader for the importance of what follows. Here
the disgression has the extra function of putting in opposite sides
of the scale Rome's two enemies, Veii and Gaul, and contrasting
them.
The Siege of Veiian Historical Introduction
Rome had in early days been a predominantly Etruscan city. Her
constitution and her religion, her culture and her society stemmed
from Etruria. The expulsion of the Tarquins did not mean a break
with her Etruscan inheritance: it was a matter of internal politics.
For a while Rome did have Etruscan enemies to fear, not her neigh
bours or the Tarquins, but the expansionistic cities of the interior
under Porsenna. But it was only a momentary setback. Rome con
solidated herself in Latium (the Latin treaty), and despite occasional
626

HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
catastrophes (Cremera) the growing self-confidence and national con
sciousness of the Roman people, which manifested itself in the demo
cratic Revolution of the Decemvirate, inspired a surge of expansion.
Rome embarked on military adventures that carried her far into the
south and east of Latium. She might indeed have achieved a supre
macy in Italy a hundred and fifty years before she eventually did had
not a combination of obstacles set her progress back. T h e spread of
malaria, aggravated by crippling famine-plagues, into Italy and
Latium in the latter half of the century debilitated her manpower and
compelled the abandonment of many strategic settlements. En
couraged perhaps by this blow the infiltrating tribes of Aequi and
Volsci, joined also by Sabines, renewed their attempts to burst into
the plain of Latium and engaged Rome in a struggle for the control
of the passes. T h e situation was a critical one for Rome. With the
failure of her own crops and the mounting expense of her wars she had
to develop her salt trade and to exploit to the full her advantageous
position as a trading centre by road and river in order to be able to
maintain her existence. It is no surprise to find imports from central
Etruria occurring in larger numbers once again and to have records
(e.g. in 412; see 4. 52. 5) of corn being supplied to Rome by inland
Etruscan cities. Such trade was of course greatly to the Etruscan
interest as well, for Rome was admirably placed as a point of distribu
tion for the whole country. Rome and the inland cities of Etniria,
Clusium, Cosa, Populonia, and Caere, stood to gain mutually by
such an understanding. There was only one city whose independence
and prosperity were threatened, and that city was Rome's near neigh
bourVeii. With her salient across the Tiber in the town of Fidenae,
Veii was able to exercise a stranglehold on the river communications
between Rome and the interior. T h e hostility led to war, first the
capture of Fidenae and then, as a natural sequel, the siege of Veii
herself. T h e course of events is consistent and intelligible. It is only
confused by Livy's failure to distinguish between the inhabitants of
Veii and the rest of Etruria. It was only Veii and her immediate
allies (16. 4, 19. 7-8) who joined issue with Rome. T h e other Etrus
cans, as the Caeretan lodging of the sacra publica demonstrates, were
anxious to retain the goodwill and friendship of Rome. They had
economic motives: they may also already have been alarmed at the
advance of the Gauls. If the Gauls had stopped north of the Apen
nines, Rome must have expanded by leaps and bounds in the fourth
century. As it was, the Gallic invasion put the clock back. T h e Latin
League was broken up and R o m e did not recover control of Latium
till 338. In the face of a pact between the tyrants of Syracuse and the
roving hordes of Gauls, Rome clung to the skirts of Etruria with a
nervously phil-Etruscan government of Fabii and Licinii. T h e concept
627

HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
of a Roman dominion combining the best of the Latin and the
Etruscan was submerged and forgotten in the great slump of the 38o's
and the 37o's.
T h e whole narrative of Rome's war with Veii was already con
solidated in Etruscan historical sources in the fourth century; for the
mythical war between Aeneas and Mezentius seems to have been
inspired by the historical events at Veii, unless the resemblancesthe
Etruscan king hated for his impiety, supported only by the Falisci
and the Gapenates and finally abandoned by J u n o who is matched
against Aeneas, the ' R o m a n ' duxfatalis (Aeneid 8. 511-12)are wholly
illusory. Since that tale, related at length by Virgil but evidently
familiar in some form even to Lycophron three centuries earlier
(Alexandra 1226 ff.), must have been common currency in the fourth
century, it cannot be doubted that the substantial truth has been
transmitted. Besides, the notices of prodigies and battles (Anxur,
Gapenates) could be checked in pontifical records and the interven
tion of Delphi was susceptible of proof from independent sources. T h e
installation ofJ u n o Regina was as much a landmark in Roman history
as the institution of winter campaigning and volunteer cavalry
(7-4)Great victories have, however, a habit of becoming legends. There
is a frightening similarity of details between the capture of Fidenae
and that of Veiithe sally of incendiaries (7. 2 = 4. 33. 2 n.), the
cuniculus, and the defiant gestures of Servilius Ahala (9. 5-7 = 4. 57.
4 ff.). All the same, Veii was more memorable than Fidenae and the
likelihood that these events did not occur on two occasions should not
be allowed to prejudice the possibility of their having occurred once.
But fact and fiction have converted the cuniculus, an arresting feature
of Veian landscape, into a religious myth, while Gamillus' triumph
assumed heroic proportions and the war against a single Etruscan
city became generalized during the second century as a war against
the whole of Etruria. Roman heroism invited comparison with Greek
and a prolonged siege of a redoubtable opponent could not but evoke
the ten-year siege of Troy. T h e traces are clear in L. (4. 11 n . ; cf.
also 2. 6 n., 7. 2 n., 8. 4, 8. 7). Although familiarity with Trojan
history is presumed from the statuettes of Aeneas and Anchises to have
been current in Veii, the assimilation of the siege of Veii with the siege
of Troy is of a piece with other hellenizing adaptations in Roman
historyTarquinius Superbus or the Fabii at Gremeraand belongs
to the first generation of Roman historians who were writing with an
eye to a Greek audience.
T h e historical truth was thus gradually overlaid with legendary
distortion. T h e form of the story which L. retails belongs to the latest
stage of its embellishment as the chronology will show.
628

HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
L. dates the war from 406 (4. 58. 6, 60. 9) to 396 (5. 22. 8) and in
consequence the capture of Rome by the Gauls to 390 (cf. 54. 5 n.).
T h e absolute dates are wrong. Early Greek sources, which synchronize
the capture of Rome with the peace of Antalcidas and the siege of
Rhegium by Dionysius, demonstrate that the city of Rome actually
fell in the summer of 387/6. But the six-year interval between Veii and
Rome is not objectionable. An absolute date of 392-1 for the fall of
Veii makes good sense and may even survive in the doublets pre
served in L. who reduplicates victories over the Tarquinienses in 397
(16. 2 n.) and 388 (6. 4. 8) and campaigns in agro Nepesino in 396
(19. 7-8) and 389 (6. 2. 2 ff.). In either case the latter dates are his
torically preferable. T h e campaigns should be mopping-up opera
tions, like the capture of Falerii, after the main stronghold of Veii had
fallen. T h e four-year discrepancy between the absolute date of 392
and the received date of 396 requires explanation. T h a t R o m a n
chronology should be four years out at this point against the absolute
dates is, of course, disquieting. T h e earlier synchronism with Greek
events (the expulsion of the tyrants, Gremera, the Decemvirate) as
far as they can be checked do seem to be approximately correct and
to provide grounds for supposing that the traditional Roman dates
(509, 471, 450) are right on an absolute reckoning. How did the
Greek and Roman chronologies get out of step? There is ample
evidence of severe dislocation in the Annales for the last half of the
century (cf, e.g., 4. 20. 8 n.) and the loss of several tabulae or confusion
over their arrangement would account for the phenomena. When
Roman scholars came to construct a parallel chronology for Greek and
Roman history, they were aware that the R o m a n chronology was
short by four years. Failing to discern the true cause of the loss, they
redressed it by the insertion of four dictator years, thereby bringing
Roman and Greek dates into line again for the third century. Such
chronological manipulations date from the second century at the
earliest so that L.'s source must at least be as late. But did the siege
really last ten years ? There is an alarming paucity of details. Only
two proper battles are recorded (402, 399). Now the truce with Veii
expired after 20 years in 405 (4. 58. 1 n.), that is in 401 on the true
absolute chronology.
Nothing happens in the first three years of the war in L.'s account
(4. 60. 9, 61. 2-3, 9). T h e first memorable event of any kind takes
place in 403, and it might reasonably be held that 403 (399 on the
absolute chronology') marked the true beginning of the war. Its start
and in turn the expiry of the twenty years' truce were pushed back to
increase the parallelism between Veii and Troy.
L. therefore took the story from a comparatively modern source
which included all the legendary improvements and chronological
629

HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
manipulations. T h a t source is distinguished by making Camillus a
consular tribune ( i . 2 n.) whereas he was in fact censor. T h e mistake
results in a flagrant contradiction between 10. i and 14. 5 where
Camillus is designated trib. cons. I I on both occasions. It follows that
L. follows one authority for the opening chapters and switches to a
second source before chapter 14 (12. 10 n.). T h e tradition that there
were eight consular tribunes in 403 is unique and appears to be due
to Licinius Macer (1. 2 n.). We may conclude that at the conclusion
of Book 4 L. reverted to Licinius Macer (cf. 4. 61. 10).
For the development of the tradition see J. Gage, Huit recherches,
73-96; J. Bayet, tome 5, App. 3 ; J. Hubaux, Rome et Veies (cited as
H u b a u x ) ; M. Sordi, / Rapporti Romano-Ceriti (cited as Sordi): for the
Trojan elements see also Zarncke, Commentationes 0. Ribbeck, 277 and
n. 2 ; G. Thouret, Fleck. Jahrb.f. cl. Phil, Suppl. Band, 1880, 136 ff.;
for L.'s sources see Soltau 2 7 3 - 8 3 ; Klotz 279-80; J.R.S. 48 (1958),
40-46; for L.'s composition see also Burck 108 ff. See also R. Werner,
Der Beginn der rom. Republik, 42 ff.
Veii
T h e city occupied an extensive plateau bounded on all sides except
for a narrow neck of land at the north-west gate by the valleys of the
Fosso della Valchetta (Gremera) and the Fosso dei Due Fossi. T h e
plateau itself divides into two main ridges, the southern of which runs
the whole length of the promontory down to a small outcrop, the
Piazza d'Armi, surrounded on three sides by sheer cliffs and defended
on the plateau side by a rock-cut ditch. There was the ancient citadel
(21. 10 n.). The cemeteries lay outside the city. From Villanovan
times Veii was the hub of a network of roads leading to Capena, Nepi,
Tarquinii, Vulci, Rome, and the Tiber mouth (1. 33. 6 n.). Its
strategic position and natural strength encouraged settlement: the
ager Veientanus was large and with the help of extensive cuniculation
rich. Pottery, terracotta, bronze show an unbroken rise in prosperity
from the eighth (1. 15. 1 n.) to the fifth century. At the end of the
fifth century the natural defences were supplemented. T h e tufa was,
where possible, cut back: elsewhere an earthen rampart with a stone
breast-work was constructed according to the varying conditions of
the terrain. These walls must have been built to withstand Rome.
Veii survived her capture, although the size of the surviving settle
ment has not yet been established archaeologically. Except at the
Piazza d'Armi the votive deposits were continuous and the principal
artery of communication from Rome to the north, the Via Veientana,
still ran through the site.
For a full discussion of the archaeology and topography of Veii see
W r ard-Perkins, P.B.S.R. 39 (1961), 25 ff.
630

403 B.C.

5- i-ft

1-2. 1. The Siege of Veii

T h e opening chapters underline the gravity of the situationut victis
finem adesse appareret.
1 . 1 . pace . . .parta: Pettersson, comparing 2. 26. 4 where 7rA read spe
undiqueparatae pacis 'hoping that peace was everywhere in their grasp',
would follow N and read pace alibi parata here too (see also Krebs,
Antibarbarus s.v.). Peace has, however, been actually made and the
phrase pace parta is a standard introduction to a new episode (3. 19.
i)-

1. 2. octo: 2. 10, 6. 37. 6. T h e number is in itself improbable (4. 7.1 n.)

and further doubt attaches to it since the Capitoline Fasti, Val. Max.
(2. 9. 1), and Plutarch (Camillus 2. 3) all agree that Camillus was
censor with M . Postumius Albinus and not consular tribune. His first
consular tribunate was held two years later in 401. L.'s source for the
section (10. 1) does indeed conspire with the present notice by making
him consular tribune for the second time, but since he is also so listed
under 398 (14. 5), Sigonius and Lachmann were right to comment
that L. has used two sources with different lists of magistrates. T h e
source of 14. 5 would have followed the vulgate tradition and made
Camillus censor in 403 and consular tribune for the first time in 401.
T h e eccentric character of the present notice is strongly reminiscent
of the libri lintei (cf. also M . Postumius below) and, since 6. 37. 6
is also Licinian, L.'s source may be recognized to be Licinius Macer.
T h e emperor Claudius alludes to it in his Lyons speech (I.L.S. 212).
M\ Aemilius: 4. 53. 1 n. L. Valerius: 4, 49. 7 n.
Ap. Claudius Crassus: 4. 48. 5 n.
L. Iulius Iullus: presumably Sp.f. Vopisci n., a brother of the consular
tribune of 408 (4. 56. 2 n.).
M. Postumius: the Capitoline Fasti and other sources list instead M .
Furius Fusus, to be identified as a son of the consul of 446 (3. 66. 1)
or 441 (4. 12. 1). M . Postumius is unknown since he is evidently dis
tinct from his namesake M . Postumius Albinus below. It is likely that
his appearance is a mistake by the compilers of the libri lintei (Miinzer,
R.E., 'Postumius (15)').
Af. Furius Camillus: here mentioned for the first time. An excellent
summary of his life is given by Miinzer (R.E., 'Furius (44)'). We are
told nothing about his parents although his filiation (L.f. Sp.n.) is
the same as that of the consul of 413, L. Furius Medullinus (4.44.1 n.),
which might suggest that they were brothers. T h e cognomen Camillus,
which was the title of an aristocratic boy employed in religious duties
(Macrobius 3. 8. 7; Paulus Festus 38 L.), may be taken as evidence
that Camillus had been so employed in his youth. T h e name un
doubtedly did much to determine the religious character of the
Camillus story.
631

5- ! 2

403 B.C.

M. Postumius Albinus: his filiation in the Capitoline Fasti identifies

him with the consular tribune of 426 (4. 31. 1 n.).
1 . 3 . regem creavere: it is only thirty-five years since Veii had a king
and there has been no talk of a change in the constitution (4. 17. 1 n.).
The omission may be a mere oversight. But the two reasons given for
the neutrality of the rest of Etruriamonarchy and impietyare too
schematic and too Roman. Veii, as the arch-enemy of Rome, had to
Jack those qualities which were most characteristic of Rome (libertas>
pittas) if her extermination was to be recognized as a merited judge
ment. The true reason was that the interests of Veii and the rest of
Etruria were radically different.
1. 4. regis: his name is not disclosed. Besides Lars Tolumnius the only
other king of Veii known to history is Morrius whose name is plausibly
connected with Mamurius (1. 20. 4 n.).
ludorum: 1. 35. 8 n. The games were held to be a religious ceremony.
intermitti: 17. 2 n.
1.5. duodecim: 33. 9 n. The scene of the games may have been Volsinii.
artifices: 'performers*, cf. Cicero, pro Arch. 10; pro Quinctio 78.
Dancers and wrestlers would be intended primarily. The story is
traditional and could be based on fact.
1. 9. ancipitia: The only point at which it was possible to approach
the city along relatively level ground was on the opposite side to Rome
(at the north-west gate) where the roads to Tarquinii and Nepi left
the walls. It was here that the Roman army must have tried to blockade
Veii although their lines of communication with Rome could be cut
and their encampment was vulnerable to attack from the north. It
was, therefore, necessary to construct a double line of defences facing
opposite fronts like the Peloponnesian lines before Plataea (Thucydides 3. 21. 1 with Gomme's note).
aliis: sc. munimentis. auxiliis is dat. after obstruebatur. 'A second line
facing Etruria was to prevent by its fortifications any help coming
from there.'
2. 1. hibernacula: 2. 7 n.
2. 2-14. Tribunician Protests
The protests of the tribunes against the principle of campaigning
throughout the year and of building winter-quarters to house the
troops blockading Veii make a nice contrast to Appius Claudius'
reply. They are formulated in indirect speech, whereas Appius speaks
directly. The excitement and indignation of the tribunes is mirrored
in short sentences, staccato expostulations, and hasty hyperboles.
While the tribunes' language is violent and often coarse (2. 3 nn.,
2 - 4 n . , 2 . 7 n . ) , Appius is dignified, availing himself of the full resources
of rhetorical technique. See Lambert, Die Indirekte Rede, 36, 48, 71.
632

403 B.C.

5-2.-3

2. 3 . hoc illud esse: 'that was the point of instituting military pay'.
A variant of the colloquial hoc illud est = r6Sy (TOUT') /cetj/o, 'I told
you so', 'just as I said'. See Page on Euripides, Medea 98 for examples
in Greek and Latin.
donum inimicorum: Casaubon acutely noted that the proverb re
sembles Sophocles, Ajax 664.-5
aAA' e W aXrjdrjs rj fipor&v napoifJiia
exOpajv dScopa ha>pa KOVK omjcnfia,

Cf. also Menander, Sent. 166; Virgil, Aeneid 7. 350, The use of the
proverb is in keeping with the popular tone of the tribunician harangue.
inlitum fore \ Peerlkamp (on Virgil, Aeneid 7. 350) wished to delete
fore, arguing that the gift had been presented in the past and that there
fore its harmful properties should be referred to in the past tense too
(inlitum sc. esse).
2. 4. venisse: cf. Sallust, Or. Macri 19. A radical slogan.
ac domus ac res: the first ac links cedere and invisere, the second domus
and res (cf. 4. 6 n.). For the former Wex read auty Weissenborn nee
but no change is necessary. Cf. 9. 38. 14.
2. 6. hiemem: the description of the discomforts of the besiegers recalls
the plight of the Greeks before Troy as described, e.g., in Aeschylus,
Agamemnon 559 ff.
urbem tutantes: editors do not draw attention to the difficulty of these
words but Jac. Gronovius, who proposed tutantey rightly remarked
'non cives tutantur sed ipse situs\ You cannot protect a city by its position.
A city can, at a pinch, be said to be protected by its position (so Gron.)
or you can protect yourself by the defences and position of a city.
Cf. 32. 4 moenibus armati se tutabantur. Read situque naturali urbis (se}
tutantes and for the loss of se cf. 3. 62. 1, 5. 32. 4, 40. 10, 6. 6. 10.
2.7. nivibus pruinisque obrutum: there may be a passing allusion in these
words to Cicero's contemptuous reference to Catiline's supporters (in
Catil. 2. 23): quo pacto illi pruinas ac nives perferent? Cf. 6. 4. n.
sub pellibus durare: militarily there was a clear distinction between
a semi-permanent bivouac under canvas, for which the technical
term was sub pellibus habere (Caesar, B.G. 3. 29. 2 ; 23. 18. 15, 37. 39. 2)
and a permanent winter-barracks (hiberna) made of wood and stone.
The former was the regular way of quartering troops away from garri
sons on a summer campaign, while the latter served as the quarters
during the winter. Only in very exceptional circumstances were troops
liable to be called upon to sleep under canvas during the winter. The
normal arrangements are described by L. for 215 (23. 46. 9) and
iqo (37. 39. 2) and the usual type of winter quarters (hiberna) is
illustrated by the excavated camps at Numantia. The Romans at Veii
633

5 2. 6

403 B.C.

proposed the construction of permanent quarters and there is no

reason to doubt the tradition. A blockade of the main approach route
to Veii would have been futile if not sustained throughout the year.
T h e tribunes are made by L. to misrepresent the proposal and
allege that the troops are to be forced to live in temporary bivouacs
suitable only to the conditions of summer. No trace of the R o m a n
encampment has been uncovered. T h e institution of a winter blockade
is dated by Plutarch to the seventh not the fourth year of the siege.
2 . 8 . quod... exercerent: if the words are not interpolated as a gloss, they
must be explicative of hoc servitutis 'this degree of slavery, the tyranny
which the consular tribunes exercise over the Roman people', and the
clause ut. . .facerent be dependent on hoc. Many editors have objected
to the reduplication, Luterbacher wishing to delete ut. . . facerent and
Conway, followed by Bayet, quod. . . exercerent. But the words occur
not only in N but in Ver. and there is still no certain example of a
gloss in the archetype of these two traditions. Madvig reads quod. . .
exercerent as an independent interrogative sentence but we should
rather, with Pettersson, compare 6. 40. 11 where a similar reduplica
tion is found. If that is not favoured, I would follow Allen who took
quod . . . faceret with the succeeding sentence inserting cum: quod (cum)
. . . exercerent) quidnam . . .facturi essent.
2. 9. proconsularem: 3. 4. 10 n.
2 . 1 1 . ne in turba quidem haerere: 'there no longer remains any plebeian
even in the mob . . .'.
collegas: nisi, added by Ver. before c.9 does not construe and must
be a confused repetition si ni-hil above. Cf. 3. 45. 2 n.
2. 14. ante: 4. 48. 6.
3-6. The Speech of Ap. Claudius
Ap. Claudius meets the intemperate demands of the tribunes with
reasoned arguments. Slight discrepancies between his speech and the
surrounding narrative (4. 3 n., 6. 4 n., 6. 9 n., 6. 14 n.) show, as its
position in the book also suggests, that it is a free composition by L.
himself. Carefully constructed on the best oratorical principles, it
contains, as do many of L.'s early speeches, a high percentage of
oratorical commonplaces. T o be noted in particular are the four
traditional similesthe bad doctor (3. 6 n.), the sick man (5. 12 n.),
the birds of summer (6. 2 n.), and the naval battle (6. 4 n.)all of
which have a long pedigree of use. T h e speech is throughout in strict
'classical' style, recalling and perhaps influenced by Cicero at many
points. T h e following list contains the more striking turns of phrase
which find counterparts in the works of Cicero:
For turbare concordiam (3. 5) cf. de Leg. Agr. 1 . 2 ; invitus moror (4. 8)
cf. pro Cluentio 168; necessitate imposita (5. 3) cf. pro Sulla 35; quid. . .
634

403 B.C.

5- 3-6

loquar (5. 6) cf. de Har. Resp. 4 1 ; laxamentum dederis (5. 10) cf. pro
Cluentio 8 9 ; sequantur viam consilii (5. 11) cf. in Catil. 4. 9 ; insanabilem
morbum (5. 12; cf. 13. 5) cf. Tusc. Disp. 5. 3 ; si. . . certe (45. 23. 17)
cf. pro Quinct. 6 5 ; mediusJidius cf. Phil. 2. 67 with Denniston's note;
effeminate . . . molles (6. 4) cf. Tusc. Disp. 4. 6 4 ; erubescant (6. 5) cf.
pro Caelio 8; patrocinium mollitiae (6. 5) cf. <fc Leg. Agr. 2. 9 ; optatum . . .
contingere cf. ad Fam. 5. 21. 1 et ai; scelera latere (6. 15) cf. pro Sex.
Roscio 118; for mollitiae inertiaeque (6. 5) cf. Sallust, Catiline 52. 28. For
other conventional elements see 3. 8 n., 4. 4 n., 4. 7 n. See R. Ullmann,
La Technique des Discours, 61.
Prooemium : insinuatio
Appius impugns the motives of the tr. pi.
3 . 2. JZ unquam: see 4. 3. 3 n. for the introductory formula.
3 . 4 . iniuriis vestris: * wrongs suffered by you' not 'wrongs done by
you'. Appius contrasts the present and the past. In the past the
people may have suffered at the hands of the patres but their hardship
elicited much less activity from the tribunes than their present
affluence. Both Madvig and Housman wished to read nostris for vestris,
spoiling the point of the antithesis. For the subjective use of vester cf.
Delz, Thes. Ling. Lat., 'iniuria', 1676. 77 ff. Contrast 1. 59. 1.
3 . 6. opus quaerunt: so also Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 3. 81 'haec Graeci . . .
in singulos libros dispertiunt: opus enim q u a e r u n t . . . et tamen, ut
medici toto corpore curando minimae etiam parti si condoluit medent u r \ artifices, a general term for anyone practising a trade, is here
shown by the context to refer particularly to the doctors; cf. Propertius 2. 1. 5 8 ; Seneca, Dial. 7. 26. 8 ; et al. qui et, read by N
(Ver. is lacking here), has been variously corrected. After the pro
verbial opus quaerunt a simple connexion is expected introducing a
clause which will amplify and explain the laconic allusion of the
proverb. Neither quippe (Buttner, Luterbacher) nor quis et (Brakman,
Bayet) meets that need. Muretus' [qui] et (Gronovius) is better than
Conway's qui [et] because qui and the like are frequently interpolated
and corrupted in N . Here the preceding quaerunt facilitates what is at
any time a simple mistake (inquieti M . Muller).
3. 7. nisi. . . dicitis: omitted by Ver. as a result of homoeoteleuton
after agitis. T h e words are required to introduce the tribunes' supposed
objection which would be too impossibly abrupt otherwise. They are
also characteristically Ciceronian: cf. pro Sex. Roscio 82. Merguet
quotes more than fifty instances of the same idiom from Cicero's
speeches. For similar omissions in Ver. cf. 4. 8, 7. 1, 27. 7.
3 . 8. servis . . . domini: such mute obedience, so untypical of Greek
practice to judge from Aristophanes and Menander, was recommended
by Greek theory (Plato, Laws 6. 777). At Rome slaves did not enjoy
635

5-3-8

4 0 3 B.C.

quite the same freedom of intercourse (contrast [Xenophon], Ath.

Pol. i. 12; Demosthenes, Philip. 3. 3) but the nearest parallel to the
prohibition adduced by Claudius would seem to be the rules laid
down by P. Piso for the conduct of his slaves (Plutarch, de GarruL
18). See J . Vogt, Sklaverei und Humanitdt (Abhandl. Akad. Wissen.
Mainz, 1953). Cf. also [Xenophon,] Resp. Laced. 6. 3.
comitate . . . oboediens: Appius makes capital out of contemporary
moral platitudes. T h e phrase dicto audiens atque oboediens, 'marked by
pleonasm and assonance, seems clearly an allusion to some formal
and solemn use' (G. W. Williams, Hermes 86 (1958), 97 n. 1). T h e
connexion of dicto audiens or oboediens with imperium, evident also in
Plautus (e.g. Miles 6 1 1 ; Amph. 9 9 1 ; Bacch. 439; Pers. 378), indicates
that it was the technical expression defining the duty of obedience of
a citizen to a magistrate with imperium, although L. also used it more
loosely of subservience to the Senate (4. 26. 9 ; cf. Caelius, ad Fam.
8. 4. 4). In the present passage Mr. Williams detects an echo of the
terms of the soldier's sacramentum (cf. Caesar, B.G. 1. 40. 12). But if
it was the duty of the subject to obey, it was the duty of those in a
position of power to display comitas towards those under them. Hence
the virtues of comitas and obsequium are often as here (3. 9) linked
together. Cf, e.g., Laudatio Turiae 1. 30.
3. 9. humani: Wolfflin (Liv. Kritik, 25) observed that whereas quid,
aliquid, quicquam, &c. are often found with the gen. of 1st and 2nd
decl. adjectives (e.g. nihil magni = nihil magnum) they are never so
found with genitives of the 3rd declension. He, therefore, conjectured
humani animi here (cf. 4. 13. 4, 45. 32. 5). non dico civilis, however,
introduces an afterthought or correction, as if L. had si quicquam
humani esset in mind when he began to write the sentence (cf. 7. 4. 6,
5. 23. 5) and only added civilis later. T h e anomaly can in this way be
understood. Wolfflin's conjecture, which by confining the quality
under discussion to the mind weakens the force of the appeal, is made
improbable by the close analogy of 7. 4. 6.
3. 10. perpetua concordia: the argument that a unified state is capable
of unhampered prosperity formed the staple of Plato's Republic (Bayet
calls particular attention to 4. 420-3) and is often emphasized by
Demosthenes (cf, e.g., Philip. 3. 28-29).
Partitio
4. 1. atque ego: the new section calls for a mild resumptive particle,
not a strong adversative, atque (ego) plays this role at 28. 28. 1, 34. 4. 12
whereas atqui ego (A; Conway) is not found in L. (Fiigner). Cf. Horace,
Sat. 1. 10. 31 (with Fraenkel, Horace, 130 n. 3).
quo: quod (Ver.) is to be preferred, the whole clause explaining hoc
consilium (cf. 3. 49. 7).
636

403 B.C.

5- 4- 3

Tractatio I: Refutatio
(a) aequum
4. 3 . numquam: the alleged reason for the tribunes' opposition to
military pay, that it was unprecedented, disagrees with the narrative
of 4. 60. 3-4 where they are afraid that it will result in new and
oppressive taxes. L. is, however, fond of the Principle of the Dan
gerous Precedent which he uses to effect in Canuleius' speech (4. 4. 1)
and the discrepancy here may be seen as evidence that Claudius'
speech is a freely elaborate composition by L. himself.
4. 4 . opera sine emolumento: an old proverb which in the form 'the
labourer is worthy of his hire 5 is familiar from the New Testa
ment (Luke 10. 7; 1 Tim. 5. 18), but which goes back to classical
times. Mr. A. N . Bryan-Brown reminds me of Aeschines 3. 182-3
TTOXVV TTOVOV V7TO{JLLVaVTS . . . flTTjaCLV 8(tip(LV.

labor voluptasque: the TOTTOS is borrowed (directly or indirectly) from

Plato, Phaedo 60 b.
4. 6. ab domo ac re: 'let him therefore be resigned to remaining away
a little longer from his home and his property, which is now under
no heavy charges' (Foster), ac (Ver.) is confirmed by 2.4 which passage
also disposes of any reasons for deleting ab domo as a gloss.
4 . 7 . ad calculos . . . vocat: the apostrophe by the state is analogous to
the incident in the first speech against Catiline where the fatherland
is represented as reproving Catiline (18). T h a t model ensures that
it is the state which is calling the soldier to book and not vice versa.
ad calculos vocare is used once by Cicero in this sense (Lael. 5 8 ; cf.
Val. Max. 4. 8. 1).
an tu: as at 32. 21. 15 great emphasis is laid by the word-order on tu
'do you, a mere soldier, dare to hold this opinion? 5 , whereas we
expect attention to be called to the outrageous nature of the soldier's
belief that it was fair enough to get something for nothing. Ver. read
anitu which J u n g divined to be the remains of an id tu. T h e emphasis
is now placed where it is expected. Cf. 9. 34. 8, 21. 3. 5.
solidum . . . stipendium: 'a whole year's pay5.
(b) civile
4. 8. mercennario . . . civibus: the emotive distinction between citizens
and mercenaries was much played on by Greek orators. Greek cities,
unlike Rome, had to depend heavily upon the services of soldiers of
fortune whose loyalty was too often available to the highest bidder.
Cf. Nicias 5 arguments to the Athenian assembly (Thucydides6.20-22).
4. 1 1 . decern: the comparison with the Trojan W a r had a special
relevance in the case of Veii but was no original point. It is made
earlier by [Demosthenes] 60. 10.
4. 13. septiens: 4. 32. 2 n. Note the short, simple sentences in which
637

5- 4- 13

4 0 3 B.C.

the crimes of Veii are catalogued. Each is self-contained, hodieque,

therefore, in 4. 14 must = etiam hodie, not et hodie (cf. 42. 34. 2 ; Veil.
Pat. 1. 4. 2) and a semicolon not a comma should be put before it.
(c) utile et necessarium
5 . 4 . nunc consultum: 'to come now to pure military considerations
to what personally touches our troops in the fieldthose troops whom
the gallant tribunes after trying to rob of their pay now suddenly
wish to protect from hardship'.
5 . 5 . ingentis utramque rem operis: so Ver. utrumque rem N. res is required
as in Praef. 4 res est praeterea et immensi operis.
duxerunt: duxere Ver. rightly. T h e proportion of -erunt to -ere for the
3rd pers. plural of the perfect in Book 5 is 45-58. duxere makes for
variety with the folioWmgfecerunt. Cf. 3. 57. 9 11., 4. 7. 8.
spectantes: 1. 9 n.
5. 6. exsudetur: 4. 13. 4 n.
5. 7. minus: the text here is uncertain and Conway's apparatus mis
leading. The problems need to be resolved.
(1) T h e sentence quanto . . . cura is certainly an exclamation, not, as
in the O.C.T., a question. 'How much less trouble to carry on than
to begin from scratch every time!' But can quanto est minus mean 'how
much less trouble'? Weissenborn-Muller quote no parallels nor have
I been able to trace any. T h e regular phrase is minus est operis (cf., e.g.,
Cicero, Verr. 1. 147 utrum existimatis minus operis esse) or minus est operae.
Hence Hell changed opera to operae and Luterbacher proposed (operae)
opera, operum tanto labore factorum (5. 11) shows that Hell's alteration
cannot be right but some emendation is evidently required. Luterbacher's is linguistically less good than (operis^ opera but gains support
from operae . . . iactura below.
(2) How is cura to be understood ? As it stands it could either be an
instrumental abl. with defungi ('to persevere and bring (the siege) to
a conclusion by our persistence'; so J a c h m a n n in Thes. Ling. Lat.; cf.
8. 19. 14, 45. 4 1 . 9) or it could be the object of defungi 'to put an end
to our anxiety' (Foster, Bayet). Neither pleases. T h e naked 'by our
persistence', the equivalent of diligenter, cannot be paralleled and its
place at the end of the sentence is awkward and surprising. T h e plain
noun would certainly need to be qualified by some such epithet as
assidua. Equally, however, cura as the object of defungi is misleadingly
undefined. Elsewhere it is accompanied by a defining genitive such
as bellorum (9. 30. 10, 34. 1. 1; cf. 1. 45. 3). Ver. here is illegible {cura
cannot be read) but there is clear space for a word of nine not four
letters before brevis. certamine is the immediate supplement (cf. 33. 6. 3 ;
10. 13. 4) and must be what L. wrote, certamine was lopped to certa
and emended. 'To press on and persevere and put an end to the
638

403 B.C.

5-5- 7

struggle.' All four verbs are independent and of equal weight. For the
polysyndeton cf. 21. 16. 4 ; see Kuhnast, Liv. Syntax, 287.
5. 8. quid: Ver. omits the following quod and reads with N nunc
oblivisci. With that reading the text could only be punctuated quid
periculi differendo bello adimus? nunc oblivisci nos concilia patiuntur and
could only be understood as 'what risk is there, it may be objected, in
prolonging the w a r ? As things are at present the frequent Etruscan
meetings allow us to forget/ Which is nonsense, quite apart from the
grammatical difficulty of quid periculi = quod periculum. Appius' point
is that the frequent negotiations among the Etruscans indicate that
only a slight change of attitude on the part of Veii would result in
Etruria committing herself wholeheartedly to her support. Time is
short. T h e required sense was seen and restored by Petrarch.
5. 12. non hercule dissimilia: L. employs another Ciceronian TOTTOS (in
Catil. 1. 31).
Tractatio II: Confirmatio
(a) utile
6. 1. parta victoria frui: victoria frui means 'to enjoy the fruits of victory'
not 'to win a victory', parta, which is read by all the manuscripts,
including Ver., except for U, means that the victory has been won
(3. 62. 2), whereas parata ( U ; seeBurman on Petronius 16; cf. Ovid,
Heroid. 8.82) would mean that the victory was ready to be won but not
yet actually won. parta is right. In any case it would be premature to
enjoy the fruits of a victory which is still only parata. Claudius is re
minding the troops that they must win victories as well as enjoy them
afterwards.
6. 2. sicut aestivas aves: for the simile of migrant birds cf. Plato, Laws
952 d-e, where he classifies four types of travellers, including 'summer
business visitors who are like birds of passage taking wing in pursuit
of commerce and flying over the sea to other cities while the season
lasts'.
6. 3 . venandi: the analogy from hunting is old. T h e ancients regularly
advocated hunting as a good form of military training. Cf, e.g.,
Xenophon, Cyneg. 1. 18; Plato, Laws 823 f-824 a ; Aristotle, Politics
i256 b 23~26; Xenophon, Cyrop. 1. 2. 10; Anth. Pal. 14. 17, 6. 188
(Leonidas); Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 2. 161; Columella 1 Praef. 17.
In constrasting the fit huntsmen with the effete citizens Claudius
may also be alluding to Cicero's denunciation of Catiline's supporters
(2. 23), But the educative value of hunting was an element in Augustan
propaganda and is defended by Horace as promoting Romana militia
(Epist. 1. 18. 49 ff.; Sat. 2. 2. 10 ff.). Whether hunting was a pastime
of Romans in the fifth century or not is immaterial. T h e curious will
639

5-6. 3

403 B.C.

find the evidence set out by J. Aymard (Les Chasses Romaines, 25-41)
who shows that it was familiar and popular among the Etruscans
from an early date. What is important is that L. here invokes a literary
cliche, not an historical fact.
6. 4. navale helium: anachronistic, for at this date a Roman fleet was
not even an idle dream (4. 34. 6-7 n.; 5. 28. 1-5 n.; 7. 25-26;
8. 22-23 > s e e Thiel, Roman Seapower before the Second Punic War, 6 ff.).
It is therefore legitimate to suspect another oratorical commonplace,
for which Hesiod (W. D. 684) and Demosthenes (Philip. 1. 31) afford
suggestive, if distant, parallels.
6. 5. iuxta: cf. Tacitus, Agricola 22.
(b) possibile
6. 9. fame sitique: Veii did not so succumb and the inaccuracy may
be taken as a further proof that the whole speech is a free composition
by L. himself, fame sitique is a glib phrase which trips off the tongue
in such contexts (cf. Plautus, Most. 193; Rudens 312; Sallust, Jugurtha
89. 7; Cicero, de Finibus 1. 37, 5. 4 8 ; Tusc. Disp. 5. 98; 7. 35. 8,
28. 15. 4).
Conclusio: amplificatioinsinuatio
6. 14. fustuarium: the comparison between the agitators and the
offenders corresponds to the ninth locus communis of the ad Herennium
(2 49). The punishment was inflicted in the following manner. When
the offender was condemned, the tribune or commanding officer
touched him lightly with his baton (fastis) whereupon the rest of the
soldiers set upon him with sticks and dispatched him. If by any chance
he escaped or survived, he was prohibited from returning home. For
details see Polybius 6. 37. 1 ff. with Walbank's note; Cicero, Phil. 3. 14;
Porphyr. on Horace, Epist. 2. 1. 154; Veil. Pat. 2. 78. 3 ; Tacitus,
Annals 3. 21. 1 ; Mommsen, Strafrecht, 983-4. The antiquity of the
punishment and its etymology are both matters of dispute. Usener
(Rh. Mus. 56 (1901), 16-17) claimed that together with so many
other military institutions its origin was Etruscan but it is perhaps
more likely that it was introduced with the third-century reforms of
the army which laid particular emphasis on steady discipline in the
ranks, fustis, originally the commander's baton, is variously derived
but is perhaps to be connected with gr. dvpaos or Celtic b(h)ustis (see
M. Leumann, Hermes 55 (1920), 107-11; E. Fraenkel, Ind. Forsch. 40
(1922), 97-100; Kurylowicz, Melanges Vendryes, 204; Ernout-Meillet;
Walde-Hofmann).
6. 15. adsuestis, Quirites: Ver. read adsuestis audire, N adsuestis qui
audire. The question is simply whether N's qui is an interpolation
(cf. 10. 6 n.) or whether in the common archetype some other word
640

4 0 3 B.C.

5- 6. 15

lias been progressively corrupted. If the latter, Gulielmus's Quirites is

far superior to any other conjecture (quieti Weissenborn, Wolffiin;
utique Brakman ; aequi Gronovius; benigni Cornelissen); for the corrup
tion cf. 3. 67. 1 and for the emotional adj. with audire cf. 4. 1.4, 25.
38. 23.
6. 16-17. reliquum: Claudius' conclusion corresponds to the tenth
locus communis prescribed by the author of ad Herennium (2. 49).
Claudius' ironical definition of libertas reveals, as Wirszubski (Libertas,
8 ff.) illustrates, that for a Roman liberty was conceived 'in terms of
social relations, as a duty no less than a right'. L.'s specification of
constitutional government and the duties of citizenship (senatus,
magistrates, leges, instituta patrum, disciplina militiae) would have com
mended itself to every Roman of his day. It should be compared with
such passages as 2. 44. 9, 51. 7, 3. 39. 8, 53. 10, 4. 56. 13, and, above
all, Tacitus, Annals 1. 2. 1 mania senatus magistratuum legum in se trahere
(Augustus) as against Augustus, Res Gestae 6.
For the concepts at issue see Syme, Roman Revolution, 152 ; Hofmann,
Antike u. Abendland 4 (1954), i7off. Exception has been taken, e.g.
by Bake and Cobet, to the plural mores: but cf. Plautus, Trin. 295;
Cicero, pro Fonteio 4 6 ; Sallust, Hist. 1. 16 M . Here it is no doubt
infected by the surrounding plurals (magistratus, leges, instituta).
7-11. 3. The Siege of Veii protracted (402-1)
T h e main military events of the years, the defeat of M ' . Sergius by
the Capenates and the Faliscans (8. 4) and the loss of Anxur (8. 2),
are historical and the enlistment of a volunteer corps of cavalry is an
equally authentic notice (7. 5 n.). T h e stuffing of the narrative, how
ever, including the sally against the Roman siege-works (7. 2-3), the
antagonism between Sergius and L. Verginius (8. 9), the intervention
of C. Servilius Ahala (g. 5), and the co-option of C. Lacerius and M .
Acutius (10. 11), can in large measure be condemned. L.'s source is
betrayed by one glaring anachronism (7. 5 n.) to be a late one and
the agreement in error of 10. 1 (M. Furio Camillo iterum) with 1. 2
indicates that the source is still Licinius Macer. T h e events of the
years, viewed together, serve only to illustrate the demoralization of
the R o m a n people and the failure of their attempts against Veii
(cf. 8. 13). T h e reader is being prepared for divine intervention. See
Burck n 1-13.
7. 2. patefacta: a repetition of the scene at Fidenae (4. 33. 2 n.).
7. 3 . mortales: 1. 9. 8 n.
The Volunteer Cavalry
7. 5. census equester: there are two quite separate issues in the present
passage.
814432

64I

Tt

403 B.C.
5- 7- 5
(i) It is implied that the equites had a different census qualification
(the census equester) from the other members of the first class. This is
inconsistent with the provisions of the Servian Constitution set out in
i. 43. 1-2 where equites and pedites of the first class are assessed alike.
A distinct census equester, higher than that of the first class, is first
attested in 76 B.C. (Cicero, pro Q. Roscio 42) and may be presupposed
by the Lex Acilia of C. Gracchus (C.LL. i 2 . 2. 583) but was not in
existence when Polybius wrote 6. 20. 9 (where see Walbank's note).
The mention of the census equester by L. here is therefore a major
anachronism. On the other hand, the anachronism cannot have been
perpetrated by L. himself since under Augustus members of the census
equester were equites equo publico but none of them actually served as
cavalry. T h e title had become purely honorific, while the dis
tinction between equites equo publico and equites suis merentes had been
obliterated by disuse. It may thus be inferred that L.'s source was
writing between 130 and 40 B.C.
(2) The Servian Constitution provided for a cavalry establishment
of 1,800 but did not make any provision for the supplementation of
that number if additional cavalry were required by the military situa
tion. It is certain that in the Punic Wars R o m e depended heavily upon
supernumerary cavalry, members of the first class who were not en
rolled in the eighteen centuries of cavalry but who opted to provide
their own mounts and serve as cavalry in preference to being con
scripted as infantrymen. T h e need for such a voluntary supplementa
tion of the established cavalry must have occurred before the third
century (7. 25, 8; 9. 19. 1 ff.; 29. 1.3 ff.) and there seems no reason
to doubt that it originated during the Siege of Veii. Communications
with the isolated Roman garrisons at Veii would have required con
stant protection by an efficient cavalry escort against the harrassing
attacks of Etruscan skirmishers. T h e memory of such an innovation
would naturally be preserved: it is of a piece with the other military
reforms entailed by a prolonged siege-pay and winter service. The
volunteers, since service was expensive even if paid (7. 12 n.), will
have come from the ranks of the wealthiest members of the first class.
See further Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 258, 499; Gerathewohl, Die
Reiter, 8 ff.; J . B. Mispoulet, Rev. Phil. 8 (1884), 177-86; H . Hill,
Class. PhiL 25 (1930), 244-9; A.J.P. 60 (1939), 357-62 ; Roman Middle
Class, 16-19; E. Gabba, Athenaeum 29 (1951), 255-6; Walbank, loc.
cit.
7 . 7 . se aiunt nunc esse operamque: Ver., N. Ruperti hit on the true inter
pretation *h.e. sicut equites sese obtulerint ad militiam extraordinariam
ut equestrem in bello aciem ordinemque augeant, ita plebeios nunc
quum equitum alacritatem istam viderint, velle pedites esse pedestrique extra ordinem militia fungi q u u m a d h u c Quirites, vacui, otiosi,
642

403 B.C.

5-7-7

nulloque in acie ac bello fuerint loco'. The common populace, too

poor to qualify for ordinary service, are inspired by the example set
by their betters in forming an equester ordo, flock to the Senate-house
clamouring that they have now formed a pedestris ordo and offer their
services voluntarily. There was, of course, properly no pedestris ordo:
the populace claim to have formed one and coin the phrase specially.
Cuper's emendation of the passage (pedestris ordinis aiunt nunc esse
operant: 'it was now the turn of the p. o. to offer their services . . .'),
accepted by most editors including Weissenborn and Conway, misses
the force of nunc and the humour of the phrase/, o. See H. Hill, C.R.
43 (i929)> I 2 7 ! 3 7. 9. ex superiore loco: the scene recalls one of the more tumultuous
demonstrations of the late Republic. L. uses contemporary political
jargon to promote the illusion; for reip. insultarent (7. 4) cf. Cicero,
Verr. 5. 132; for fama . . . pervasisset (7. 6) cf. de Imp. Cn. Pomp. 4 4 ;
for amplissimis verbis gratiae actae (a technical expression) cf. Phil. 1 . 3 ;
for voce manibusque cf. pro Rab. Perd. 32.
7. 10. beatam . . . urbem: 4. 4. 4 n.
7. 11. donee: deinde Ver., rightly, because it would be grotesque to
picture the assembled company weeping tears ofjoy up to the moment
when the Senate was re-convened. Two separate phenomena are
being described : the emotions of the public and the convening of the
Senate.
7. 12. Ver.'s order (equitibuspeditibusque) is rare (1. 44. 1, 21. 4. 8, and
eight other passages) compared with the great frequency of the other
(cf, e.g., 4. 28. 2) and is on that account to be preferred (cf. also 29.
33. 6). N's order gains little support from the argument that since the
pedites displayed the more unexpected altruism they should be named
first. See Conway on 27. 13. 9.
memorem pietatis: a lapidary phrase appropriate to the formal
expression of the Senate's appreciation. I t is frequently found on
inscriptions commemorating the devotion of children to their parents
(e.g. C.I.L. 9. 5167): here, by extension, the devotion is to the state, the
common parent of all Romans.
aera procedere: 4. 59. 11 n. For the amounts of pay in later times see
Walbank on Polybius 6. 39. 12-15 and Watson, Historia 7 (1958),
113 ff. In ratio the pay of the cavalry was always three times that of
the infantry (7. 4 1 . 8). Whereas the equites equo publico now received
pay in addition to the regular allowances of aes equestre and aes hordearium for the upkeep of their mounts (1. 43. 9 n.), the volunteers
apparently only received pay but not the allowances. They were com
pensated by having a shorter period of service. The additional revenue
to meet the extra expense was found by two taxes which are recorded
as having been imposed in this year (403) by the censors on bachelors
643

5- 7- 12

403 B.C.

and orphans (Val. Max. 2. 9. 1 ; Plutarch, Camillus 2. 2). T h e facts

speak for themselves.
7. 13. turn primum equis suis: for the text see J. Walker, Supplementary
Annotations on Livy (1882); C.Q. 9 (1959), 278. hie in the reading of
M (turn hie primum equos si merere) merely symbolizes that the scribe
knew that his version was defective ( = h.d.; cf. E. A. Lowe, Studi e
Testi, 126 (1946), 36-79) and should not be used as a basis for conjec
ture {tunc primum Weissenborn; hinc primum Walters, Bayet) since turn
primum is almost invariable in L. (1. 7. 12, 2. 58. 1, 3. 63. 11,4. 29. 8).
suis is needed to make it clear that the new cavalry were supplying
their own horses (cf. 7. 5 ; so Ver.; the Periocha has equis suis mereri).
8. 1. C Servilium Ahalam: 4. 56. 2 n.
Q. Servilium: Q,.f. P.n. Fidenas, according to the Capitoline Fasti;
cf. 14. 5, 24. 1, 36. 11. H e came from a distinguished family, his father
having been dictator in 435 (4. 21. 10 n.) who acquired fame and a
cognomen by his defeat of Fidenae. Quintus himself held a long series
of high offices and is mentioned as an interrex in 397 (17. 4) but his
character is as elusive as his policv. See Munzer, R.E., 'Servilius
(56)'.
L. Verginium: L.f. Opetr. n. Tricost(us) Esqui[lin(us), son of the
consul of 435 (4. 21. 6 n.). H e is not otherwise known (Gundel, R.E.,
'Verginius (14)'). For the corrupt praenomen pi in the manuscripts
see 2. 15. 1 n.
Q. Sulpicium: Ser.f. Ser.n. Camerinus Cornutus; cf. 14. 5. His
grandfather must be the consul of 461 (3. 10. 5 n.).
A. Manlium: 4. 61. 1 n. M\ Sergium: 4. 61. 4 n.
8. 2. Anxuri: 4. 59. 3 n.
8. 4. Capenatium: Capena (from root kap with Etruscan suffix -ena cf.
Capys 4. 37. 1 n.) has been recently identified with the modern
Civitucola (see map) as the result of several inscriptions set up there
by Capenates foederati. T h e town is situated on a steep hill some 1 \ miles
in circumference to which the only access is through a rocky defile,
easily blockaded. It was therefore a position of great natural strength.
Indeed the Romans never attempted an assault on it but were content
to ravage the surrounding country (12. 5, 13. 12, 14. 7). Of some
antiquity (finds from the necropolis go back to the eighth century),
its ties lay with neighbouring Falerii whose culture it shared and with
Veii whence it was traditionally said to have been colonized (Servius
ad Aen. 7. 697; the text is corrupt). T h e successive capture of Veii and
Falerii by the Romans isolated Capena which was no longer able to
hold out on her own. Her land was incorporated in the tribus Stellatina
instituted in 367 and the city itself was given the status of a municipium
which it continued to enjoy under the Empire. Together with Nepi,
644

402 B.C.

5.8.4

Sutri, and Falerii, Gapena had an interest in the success of Veii's

resistance to Rome, since the defeat of Veii besides removing their
principal centre of trade would open the whole of the Giminian plain
to R o m a n advance. See Hulsen, R.E., * Gapena'; a full-scale study of
Gapena and the Ager Gapenas has been published by G. B. D. Jones,
P.B.S.R. 17 (1962), n 8 f f .
Faliscorum: 26-27 n 8. 6. iam antea: 4. 17. 11.
The Defeat of the Romans at Veii
By a typical 7repi7rcTeia the Romans' hopes which had been raised
to a high pitch by the spontaneous volunteering of infantry and
cavalry are dashed by the personal jealousies of the commanders.
T h e defeat is historical: the cause belongs to a familiar class of motiva
tions which only historians supplied to bring the facts to life. For this
motivation cf. also 4. 31. 2 (Plathner, Schlachtschilderungen, 12 ; Bruckmann, Rom. Niederlagen, 40). A different explanation of the facts is
offered at 9. 1 n.
8. 1 1 . ne quam: for Ver.'s omission of quam cf. 4. 14. 6 n.
8. 13. pauci. . . Mi: a word must have fallen out after rei publicae
signifying the great majority of the Senate who were concerned not
with the interests of the state but with partisan support for one or other
general. All the early editions restore multi but plerique (Kiehl, Andresen) is palaeographically superior and gives better sense. It cannot be
supplied from the context (Bayet). huic atque Mi = vel huic vel Mi; cf.
Propertius 2. 25. 46.
9. 1. Kalendis Octobribus: 3. 6. 1 n. L. offers two explanations for the
supersession of the military tribunes, culpa and irfelicitas. T h e only
cause which could lead to such a drastic step, involving, as it did, the
institution of a new magisterial year and the return of the auspices to
the patres, would be the discovery that they had been vitio creati
(4. 7. 3 n.). Such a detail would have figured in the Annales.
9. 3 . at enimvero: apparently unique here, although P in isolation
reads at enim vero for at enim at 4. 4. 1 ; it was evidently also the reading
of Ver. It should not be tampered with (at enim [vero] Luterbacher).
T h e plain at enim would regularly introduce an objection whereas
a strong adversative is required here. L. has a liking for such pleonas
tic forms: cf. verum enim vero (4. 4. 9).
intercedere: a confusion by L. or his source since the tribuni militum
do not, like the tr. pi., possess the power of veto. Gf. also the tenden
tious in auctoritate senatus (9. 4 ; 4. 26. 7 n.). T h e whole passage has an
air of constitutional quibbling.
9. 4 . hominum: surprising, since the struggle is traditionally between
645

5- 9- 4

4 0 2 B.C.

the orders and it is hard to see the point of hominum. Perhaps ordinum
(Whibley).
9 . 5 . C. Servilius Ahala: his intervention is a duplication of the part which
he plays in 4. 57. 3 and resembles an episode in the life of Q . Servilius
Priscus (4. 26. 9). T h e train of his remarks is not altogether clear.
ad vos is picked up by in vobis animi, minas by in Us iuris, and animi
probably has its usual sense of courage or spirit. T should dearly like
to prove that your threats are as illegal as your behaviour is cowardly
(in that you only dare to speak up when the city is rent by dissensions).'
T h e difficulty lies with the sentence beginning sed nefas est. If it is taken
as rebutting the earlier sentence (i.e. 'but I will not take time now to
prove it because it is wrong to impede senatorial business'), we are
bound to assume that his revelation of the tribunes' malpractices
would be contrary to the Senate's resolutionan assumption which
has no warrant and little probability. It is better to put a strong stop
after esset and take the sentence as a protest put into the mouths of the
tribunes (sed = at enirn). ' "But it's wrong to thwart the Senate" you
say, and imply that you were justified in threatening anyone who tried
to stand in the way of the Senate's resolutions. All right. You stop
trying to exploit the situation and either my colleagues will resign
or I will appoint a dictator.' For the order collegae out. . . aut (ego)
dicam cf Praef. 4.
ne = nae 'to be sure', here as often with a personal pronoun (cf.
Cicero, deFinibus 3. 11: see Kuhner-Stegmann 2. 1. 796). T h e subjunc
tive experirer is conditional: T would gladly make trial of. . .'.
9. 7. terriculis: the word is used once else by L. also in a reported
speech (34. 11. 7). It is a revival of an archaic word employed by
Accius and Afranius, not found in any of the late Republican prose
writers.
10. 1. L. Valerio : 4. 49. 7 n. M . Furio : 1. 2 n. M\ Aemilio : 4. 53. 1 n.
Cn. Cornelio: 4. 58. 6 n., 56. 2 n.
For the iteration of both Cornelius and Fabius see 4. 61. 4 n., where
it is suggested that the discrepancy with the Capitoline Fasti, who list
Cornelius I I I and Fabius II under this year, is to be explained by the
supposition that L. is here following Licinius Macer. Such a supposition
would be in line with the second tribunate ascribed to Camillus (1.2 n.).
K. Fabio: 4. 61. 4 n.
All five were men of an experience and service that contrasted
sharply with the evident youth and incompetence of their predecessors.
If the defeat at Veii is factual, it would be reasonable to suppose that
Rome would call back to office her most distinguished generals.
L. lulius Iullus: 16. 1, L.f. Vopisci n., a son of the consular tribune
of 438 (4. 16. 7 f f . ) .
646

401 B.C.

5- ">. 3

10. 3 . cooptandis: io. u n.

10. 5. tribute: perhaps an allusion to the special taxes referred to
in 7. 12 n.
10. 6. gravia: with the manuscript gravia indignioraque we must under
stand, with Pettersson, an ellipse of erant after gravia since indigniora(que) is clearly governed by faciebant Pettersson does indeed adduce
21. 14. 3 'quod imperium crudele, ceterum prope necessarium cognitum ipso eventu est', where fait is to be understood after crudele. The
passages are hardly analogous, for -que (like re) is a more intimate
connexion than ceterum and in the latter passage the subject of both
clauses remains imperium. Intrusive -que is so frequent in the manu
scripts of L. (cf. 2. 32. i o n . ) that there should be no scruple in deleting
it. For the combination of gravis and indignus cf. 23. 14. 7, 32. 35. 3,
34- 37- 3Note how the concord temporarily established by the volunteering
of the cavalry is gradually broken down so that the need for Camillus
becomes urgent and imperative.
10.7. tertium: i.e. from the start of the all-year siege of Veii. The war it
self was now in its fifth year (quintum Glareanus), but it is a tacit proof
that the start was pushed back two years to secure a ten-year length.
10. 9. labore^ vulneribus, postremo aetate: 'bodies worn out by toil,
wounds and, finally, years'. The picture of the desolated country and
the emasculated veterans is Gracchan colouring. In particular for
inculta cf. Plutarch, T. Gracchus 8 (Gracchus on his way to Spain in
i37B.c.).Itis unreasonable to suppose that agriculture was as depressed
in the 39o'seven allowing for the incidence of malariaas the
tribunes protest. Gracchan, too, is the oppressive burden of taxes:
cf. Ti. Gracchus' proposal to distribute the legacy of Attalus (Plutarch
14; Livy, Epit. 58).
The Proposed Co-option of Patrician Tribunes
10. 11. legis [tribuniciae]: could only mean a law initiated by a
tribune or tribunes, and not a law regulating the conditions of the elec
tion of tribunes (cf. 3. 56. 12, 5. 29. 6), but the reference here is clearly
to the Lex Trebonia (3. 64-65 n.) which was designed to prohibit the
infiltration of the college of tribunes by the co-optation of patricians.
It is true that the law was proposed by a tribune, Trebonius, but it
could not have been referred to as the lex tribunicia after so long an
interval without further definition. It is equally certain that L. did
not write here legis Treboniae (Pighius, Bekker) since the context and
word-order of 11. 1 (Treboniae legis; see Gatterall, TA.P.A. 69 (1938),
314; cf. 7. 21. 1, 3) show that the law had not been referred to by
name earlier (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 2. 277 n. 2). The only acceptable
solution is, with Madvig, to delete tribuniciae.
647

5.

4 0 1 B.C.

io. i i

C. Lacerius et M. Acutius: the names are not wholly imaginary.

Lacerius occurs on an inscription from Rome (C.I.L. 6. 35645) and
Acutius, common after A.D. IOO, is also recorded on inscriptions from
Rome and Praeneste (C.I.L. 14. 3047 fF.; see Schulze 68). None the
less there is much to be said for the view that the names were originally
chosen for their meaning (acuere and lacerare)'the Harriers'and
that the whole incident is a doublet of the equally implausible co-opta
tion of Aternius and Tarpeius in 448. If there was doubt about the
date of the Lex Trebonia, it might well figure twice in history,
especially since a Verginius is a leading figure in the state on both
occasions (T. Verginius, consul in 4 4 8 : L. Verginius). T h e two, pre
sumably anonymous, patricians who attempted to secure co-optation
are also duplicated together with the author of the law. In one case
the patricians are given aetiological names, in the other they are iden
tified, at the cost of historical credibility, with two consulars distin
guished for the introduction of a law that eased the conditions of the
plebs. See E. Meyer, KL Schriften, 1. 137 fF.; Munzer, R.E., 'Lacerius'.
1 1 . 2 . is . . . arguere: 'he complained bitterly that what the patricians
after an initial setback h a d secured by the agency of the consular
tribunes, namely, as he loudly protested, the mockery of the Trebonian law, the co-optation of tribunes not by popular vote but
patrician dictation, the present deplorable position whereby tribunes
must either be patricians or patrician toadies, the annulment of the
sacred laws, the theft of the tribunician prerogativesall was the
result of the dishonesty of the patricians and the treachery of his
colleagues'. A breathless and tortuous sentence, arguere, a historic in
finitive (arguebat Sigonius), is the main verb, governing id. . .factum
(esse), id picks up quodpetissent . . . expugnassent, while the rest of the
sentence is a parenthesis dependent on vociferans containing an explana
tory list of offences to substantiate the general charge of quod. . .
expugnassent. T h e underlying structure, therefore, is: is, quod petissent, id
fraude factum arguere. In the parenthesis the verbs are coupled
et

(1) sublatam et cooptatos (esse)

(2) eo revolvi ut. . .
eripi. . .
extorqueri. . .

i.e. two coupled past passive infinitives linked by et to three present

passive infinitives in asyndeton.
T h e meaning of the quod-c\ause is 'what the patres had wanted but
only secured after an initial setback, viz . . .', the subject of expu
gnassent being the same as repulsi and petissent', cf. 2. 11. 1 Por senna primo
conatu repulsus . . . castra posuit. There is no need to alter tamen which
648

401 B.C.

5- " 2

is the idiom after a quasi-concessive participle (cf., e.g., 2. 64. 3 pulsi

ingentes tamen praedas . . . egere and other examples in E. Mikkola, Die
Konzessivitdt bei Livius, 56, who rightly defends the text here) and is
also required to join petissent and expugnassent. T h e force of quidam,
which H a u p t had doubts about, is that not the whole Senate was
concerned in the dirty business; the ringleaders were the patricians
while a notable member of the opposition would be P. Licinius. There
remains tribunos militum. Haupt, H. J. Miiller, and Bayet excise it.
But it is needed to make the historical succession clear; since it cannot
be the object of expugnassent, it should be the agency employed, i.e.
(per) tribunos militum.
For the text see C.Q. 9 (1959), 272-3.
11. 4-12. 7. The Trial ofSergius and Verginius
At many points L.'s account of the trial ofSergius and Verginius
is open to objection. Even if money fines are no longer at this date
anachronistic (2. 52. 5 n.), prosecutions by tribunes cannot have been
constitutional at least until the Licinio-Sextian laws (2. 35. 5 n.).
Furthermore the names of the prosecutors are suspicious: P. Guriatius
(the form Guratius is not found) should be a patrician (3. 32. 1 n.) as
also, at this date, should M . Minucius be (3. 33. 3 n., 4. 12. 1 n.) and
it is more than doubtful whether the Metilii were yet established in
Rome (4. 48. 1 n.). Guriatius evokes G. Guriatius, the sordidissimus
tribune of 138 B.G. T h e association of M. Metilius and M . Minucius
is highly suggestive recalling, as it does, the activities of the tribunes
of 217 in securing the nomination of M. Minucius Rufus as dictator
and the parallel is heightened by the mutual recriminations on
military matters between Q,. Fabius Gunctator and M . Minucius. T h e
demolition of the circumstantial superstructure need not, however,
invalidate the fact that Sergius and Verginius were tried and con
demned, presumably on a charge of perduellio. T h e case resembles
in its particulars the prosecution of 476 (2. 52. 3 n.).
T h e speech (5-16) is a fine example of pathetic and indignant
oratory: the whole disaster is blamed on the patricians as a deliberate
attempt to weaken the resistance of the plebs, and full retribution must
be exacted from the guilty. It is contemporary in tone, containing
several rhetorical commonplaces (11. 6 n., 11. 16 n.) and conventional
phrases (e.g. for liberis, fratribus, propinquis, adjinibus (11. 5) cf. Cicero,
Part. Or. 35; for consenescat (11. 9) cf. ad Att. 2. 23. 2; for stare respublica
his manentibus cf. Phil. 2. 92. Notice the carefully elaborated structure:
quibus . . . quibus . . . quibus . . . qui... qui (11. 5 ) ; et ab senatii et ab
populo R. et ab ipsorum collegis . . . et senatus consulto . . . et ab collegis . . .
et populum R. . . . (11. 10-13).
1 1 . 6 . omnium . . . malorum . . . causas: the apx*) KOXCDV, a commonplace
649

5- it- 6

401 B.C.

going back at least to Herodotus (5. 97) and perhaps earlier (cf.
Homer, Iliad 5. 6 3 ; Thucydides 2. 12. 3 with Gomme's n.). It became
almost proverbial also in L a t i n : cf. Cicero,pro Caelio 18.
accusatorem: as L. introduces it, the prosecution seems to be the work
of all three tribunes. Hence accusatores (Giers) but, as elsewhere, L.
has taken over an embryonic speech from his source without completely
adjusting it to its new surroundings. In Licinius Macer it may safely
be assumed that only one accusator spoke at a time. T h e singular
should be kept.
fugam . . . Vergini: note the elaborate triple chiasmus.
11. 7. compecto: 'by mutual agreement'.
11. 10. praeiudicium: 3. 40. 11 n.
collegis: collegiis N ; parallelism with 11 demands collegis (Petrarch)
not collegio (Walters).
11. 1 1 . remotos: 'removed from office' not 'exiled'.
11. 12. confossos: apparently legal slang 'worsted'. Only here in L.,
for effect. Cf. Val. Max. 8. 1 absol. 11 causa quamquam gravissimis
criminibus erat confossa, septies ampliata . . . est.
populi iudicium: anachronistic (2. 35. 5 n.).
11. 14. cum fuga ac pavore trepidum, plenum volnerum: Fugner's trans
position of the manuscript text is certain, fuga and pavor are often
linked together (e.g., 38. 2); volnera and pavor never, so that the correc
tion plenum volnerum ac pavoris (Gronovius, Crevier, Ruperti, Drakenborch) can command little support. No other conjecture {a pavore
Seyffert; cum pavore Madvig) so easily satisfies the linguistic and palaeographical requirements.
11. 15. caput. . . detestatusque: 30. 20. 17, 39. 51. 12.
11. 16. minime . . . arment: the TOTTOS is taken over in full from Demo
sthenes, de Falsa Leg. 80.
admovere: 'lay hands on'. Hence often in erotic contexts, e.g. Propertius 1. 3. 16; Ovid, Ars 3. 134.
12. 1. Martem: cf. Cicero,pro Sestio 12 ;pro Milone 5 6 ; 7. 8. 1, 8. 23. 8,
3 1 - 512. 3. legem agrariam: 2. 41. 3 n.
12. 4. ad exitum rei: ad exitum spei, which is read by the majority of
editors, including Gronovius, Conway, and Bayet, would have to mean
'until all their hopes were finished' and, as a phrase, is unparalleled.
In fact, however, it is only the reading of IT and the archetype had
ad exitum rei which gives excellent sense. T h e tribunes sarcastically
comment on the Roman military success which has been so pro
nounced that no war has reached a definite solution. For the expression
cf, 3. 53. 2 ; Quintilian 4. 2. 41, and for the repetition res... rei, a feature
of L.'s earlier writing, cf. 1. 60. 1, 2. 31. 7, 35. 4, 2. 18. 2 (Pettersson).
650

401 B.C.

5- J 2. 4

militia: the plain abl., for militiae or in militia (2. 58. 4) is found
only here in L . (cf. Varro, Men. 223) and is corrupt. Insert <(m).
12. 5. oppida . . .sunt', 'towns were attacked but not besieged'. For
nee = nee tamen cf. 3. 55. 1. T h e Romans made sudden assaults in the
hope of catching the towns off their guard but did not embark on pro
tracted sieges, of which they had already had their fill at Veii. T h e
natural positions of many of the cities made them in any case virtually
impregnable. T h e sole exception was Anxur which was not only attacked
but, when the initial assault failed, invested. Anxur was in a special
category, being an isolated but key fortress which the Romans had
recently lost to the Volscians. We should therefore put a semicolon,
with Bayet, after situm, thereby making Anxur an exception not to a
rule of neither attacking nor besieging towns (i.e. (jiecy oppugnata
Valla, Ruperti, Madvig) but simply to a disinclination to engage in
sieges.
12. 8-17. Religious Sanctions Taken against Veii (400-397)
Purely political and military measures undertaken against Veii have
failed. T h e Romans attribute their failure to divine displeasure and
take such steps as are open to them to remedy the situation : the lecti
stemium (13. 6 n.), the seer of Veii (15. 4 n.), and the Delphic oracle
(16. 9-11 n.). T h e first and last of these are likely enough to be
authentic facts, even if the circumstances have been doctored to the
extent of relating them directly to the issue of the war with Veii
whereas the character both of the lectistemium and of the consultation of
Delphi suggests that they were motivated not by the protraction of
the Veian War but by a series of wasting plagues. T h e story of the
seer of Veii, on the other hand, belongs to the realm of folk-lore rather
than historical fact. In addition the Annales evidently provided a few
military and pontifical (13. 1, 13. 4, 17. 3) details, from which R o m a n
historians developed a continuous narrative. T h e paucity of facts
about the siege itself favours the belief that it was suspended in con
sequence of the enfeebled state of Rome herself. L. could not allow
this because for him the siege had to last ten whole years and because
he was anxious to create a religious climate which needed only a
fatalis dux in the person of Camillus for Rome to be led to victory.
Accordingly he alternates passages of religious and military narrative
(religious: 13. 4-8, 14. 2-5, 15. 1-12, 16. 8-17. 5; military: 13. 9-13,
14. 6-7, 16. 1-7, 17. 6-10).
There are various pointers that L. now abandons Licinius Macer
in favour of Valerius Antias once again as his source. There is a clear
contradiction between 14. 5 and 10. 1 (Camillus iterum) and between
13. 3 (n.) (centuriae) and 18. 2 (tribubus). Also no amount of textual
surgery will bring the magistrate lists of 12. 10 and 13. 3 into line
651

5. 1 2 . 8

400 B.C.

with 18. 2 or make aetate iam gravis (12. n ) the equivalent oi exactae
aetatis (18. i ) . It might at first sight seem paradoxical to suggest that
L.'s source for the consular tribunate of a plebeian, and a Licinius
at that, should not be Licinius Macer but it is evident that ch. 18 is
more partisanly in favour of P. Licinius than ch. 12 where the main
source hints that Licinius was elected not through any merits of his
own but through the popularity of his kinsman Cn. Cornelius. T h e
exact point of transition cannot be recovered, perhaps at 12. 3, since
12. 3-4repeats the argument of 10. 5-6, or at 12. 8.
See Burck 111-15.
12. 9. unus ex plebe: 18. 5 n. Notice that it is not necessarily implied
here that Licinius was the first consular tribune elected from the
plebeians. Licinius' family is uncertain. He is said to be afrater of Cn.
Cornelius Cossus (10. 1 n.), a relationship confirmed by the garbled
KOCKJOS AiKiwios of Plutarch (Camillus 4. 6; cf. 15. 3 n.) but whether
that means that he was a son of P. Cornelius Cossus adopted by the
Licinii (4. 52. 4 n.) or that he was a half-brother or even a cousin of
Cn. Cornelius is obscure. At all events his relationship with the Cornelii
shows him to be no revolutionary and the subsequent radicalism
attributed to him and his family are supposititious, the product of the
normal sympathies of the Licinii. He would have been a most accept
able candidate to the patres. See Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 1. 9 5 ;
Munzer, Rom. Adelsparteien, 10-13; R.E., 'Licinius (43)'.
usurpandi iuris causa: 4. 44. 4 n.
12. 10. ceteri patricii creati: a deep confusion persists about the college
of this and the following year. Licinius Macer (18. 2 n.) evidently
listed only four in addition to LiciniusL. Titinius, P. Maenius, Cn.
Genucius, L. Atilius. His source may be assumed to have been the libri
lintei and cannot be relied on. T h e Capitoline Fasti give
[P. Man]lius M.f. Cn.n. Vulso
[L. Titinijus L.f. M ' . n, Pansa Saccus
P. Maelius Sp.f. C n . Capitolinus
Sp. Fu[r]ius L.f. Sp.n. Medullinus
L. Poblilius L.f. Voler. n. Philo Vulscus.
It might be expected that L.'s list would tally with the Fasti if L. is
following Valerius: for Valerius is less idiosyncratic than Licinius.
But, in the manuscripts at least, there are striking divergences.
Manilius for Manlius and P. Titinius for L. T. (2. 15. 1 n . : note the
surrounding P's) may be mere errors of transcription but Popilius for
Publilius and L. Furius for Sp. Furius look like genuine variants. T h e
numeration of the consular tribunates of the great L. Furius Medul
linus given both by L. (Val. Ant.) and by the Fasti (4.44. 1 n.) rules out
the possibility that it is he who is masquerading in disguise as a
652

400 B.C.

5. 12. 10

candidate for office this year and if L. Furius Medullinus is the right
reading here he must be another otherwise unknown member of the
family (Munzer, R.E., 'Furius (68)'). Historically it is more likely
that he was Sp. rather than L. since the confusion of two identically
named persons was usually avoided but there is nothing to prove that
L. is not what Valerius Antias and/or Livy wrote. Sigonius emended
Popilius to Publilius. At first sight the cognomen Vulscus would support
the change. The Publilii, as the locality of the tribus Publilia shows,
came from Volscian territory and it is likely that they were of Volscian
origin and migrated to Rome, not, as Schur thought, in the fourth
century but in the early fifth since they provided a notorious tribune in
472 (2. 55. 411.). T h e Popilii, on the other hand, are not represented
in the Fasti before M. Popillius Laenas, consul in 359. O n that evidence,
Publilius might seem to be the right reading here: the name was
vulgarly written as Poplilius (C.I.L. i 2 . 1526; cf. Publicola and Popli-.
cola). But the cognomina are misleading. Philo, added by the Fasti,
is a transparent device to provide a link between the early Publilii
and the Publilii Philones, while Vulscus instead of being an indica
tion of origin is probably no more than a misunderstanding of Volusus.
L. could have written Popilius.
T h e real difficulty lies in the statement ceteri patricii. T h e Titinii
are plebeian (3. 54. 13 n . ; a tr. pi. in 192), so also are the Maelii (4. 12.
1 n.) and the Popilii or Publilii. Only Manlius and Furius qualify as
patricians.
12. 1 1 . nullis: the quaestorship had only been open to plebeians since
420 (4. 43. 12).
12. 12. triplex stipendium: 7. 12 n., but Cornelius had not been con
sular tribune in the year when pay for the cavalry was instituted. The
clear discrepancy is a further proof of change of source at this point.
Valerius Antias must have dated the innovation to 404 (4. 61. 4) or
401 (10. 1), not 4 0 2 .

13. 1. insignis . . .fuerit: prodigies from the Annales (3. 5. 14 n.). For
other prodigies concerning the Tiber see 4. 49. 2 n.
annona: 2. 34. 2 n.
13. 3 . M. Veturius: for the form of the name see 3. 8. 2 n. Ti.f. Sp.N.
Crassus Cicurinus according to the Fasti, which would make him a
nephew of the consular tribune of 417 (4. 47. 7 n . ) . For the whole
college of this year see Beloch, Rom. Geschichte, 252.
plebeios: all five are plebeian, unlike the five patricians in the preced
ing year.
omnes . . . centuriae: 18. 2 n.
M. Pomponium: 3. 54. 13 n., probably the first of the Pomponii to
emerge to distinction. L.f. L.n. Rufus according to the Fasti, but the
653

5- 1 3 - 3

399 B.C.

cognomen, held by the famous friend of G. Gracchus who shared his

last hours (Plutarch 17; Val. Max. 4. 7. 2), is no doubt anachronistic
and suggests that the political activities of M . Pomponius and his
brother (5. 29. 6) owe something to the later adventures of their
namesake. See Gundel, R.E., 'Pomponius (7)'.
Cn. Duilium: for the form of the name see 2. 58. 2 n. K.f. K.n.
Longus, according to the Fasti, i.e. a son of the putative decemvir of
450 (3. 35. 11 n.) but the filiation is demonstrably false. See Miinzer,
R.E., 'Duilius (8)'. T h e Fasti and Diodorus 14. 54. 1 call him G.
but the correction ofCn. to C. in the text of Livy can hardly be justified.
Voleronem Publilium: P.f. Voler. n. Philo, a grandson of the tribune
of 472 and, supposedly, a cousin of the consular tribune of 400
(12. i o n . ) . T h e cognomen is a false attempt to connect the early Publilii
with the Publilii Philones. For thepraenomen see 2. 55. 4 n. There is no
reason to question his credentials. See Gundel, R.E., 'Publilius (12)'.
Cn. Genucium: M.f. M.n. Augurinus, i.e. a son of the consul of 445
(4. 1. 1 n . ; see 3. 33. 3 n. for the early history of the family). Like
Pomponius, he may historically be the first of his name to reach
high office. See also 18. 7 n . ; Miinzer, R.E., 'Genucius ( i o ) \
L. Atilium: L.f. L.n. Priscus, a son of the first consular tribune in
444 (4- 7- i n . ) .
13. 4 . pestilens: 3. 2. 1 n. In the following clause causa must mean
the real cause, divine displeasure, rather than the immediate agency,
but cura ( O t t o ; cf. Veil. Pat. 2. 123; Silius Ital. 6. 551), already adum
brated by Tan. Faber ('legendum nee curatio neefinis.Vel, nee remedium
nee finis. Q u a e verba hinc sumpsisse videtur epitomistes in re alia:
cuius remedium et finis per novas religiones quaereretur') is attractive. The
phraseology looks ritual, cf. 10. 47. 6 quinam finis out quod remedium . . .
ab diis daretur, 22. 57. 5.
13. 5. libri Sibyllini: 3. 10. 7, 4. 25. 3, 5. 50. 2, a collection of oracles,
traditionally acquired by the last Tarquin off a Sibyl from the
Euboean colony of Gumae which were consulted not for the purpose
of discovering the future but of learning by what steps the gods were
to be appeased. The name Sibylline is doubtless late (the oracles were
not forecasts and the Sibyl, as opposed to the books, played no part
in R o m a n religion) but the tradition is in essentials trustworthy (D.H.
4. 62 ; Zonaras 7. 11. 1). The fact that the books were kept in the temple
of Capitoline Juppiter shows that they were connected with the
institution of that triad. Such prophetic practices had been long
established in Greece before the sixth century and it is significant
that at Athens similar oracles were kept on the Acropolis (Herodotus
5. 9 0 ; cf. 7. 6). Moreover, the early notices of the consultation of the
libri look genuine. In 496 during a famine they recommended the
institution of the cult of Liber, Libera, and Geres (D.H. 6. 17; cf.
654

399 B.C.

5- 13. 5

2. 41. 10 n.). In 461 after a host of prodigies they recommended

certain rituals (D.H. 10. 2) and warned of internal and external dis
turbance (3. 10. 6-7 nn.). In 433, during a pestilence, they were
interpreted by the duoviri as recommending the foundation of a temple
of Apollo (4. 25. 3 n.). These recommendations have the hallmark of
authenticity and, together with the present passage, strongly support
a Greek origin.
The duoviri sacris faciundis, expanded in 367 into decemviri and, per
haps in 82 or 81, into quindecimviri, were originally the keepers of the
books. T h e increasing introduction of Greek cults on the advice of the
Greek-inspired books meant that their responsibilities gradually
broadened into general supervision of all Greek rites (Varro, de Ling.
Lat. 7. 88) both in Rome and outside. Here again the development is
consistent and credible. Whether established under the kings or not,
duoviri are a feature of the early Republicconsuls, tribunes, quaes
tors, d. perduellionisand the provision that the books should only be
consulted by them on a decision from the Senate is in keeping with the
position of that body in the constitution.
For detailed discussion of the libri Sibyllini the reader is referred to
H . Diels, Sibyllinische Blatter, 1890, 6-20, Wissowa, Religion, 536 ff.;
W. Hoffmann, Wandel u. Herkunft d. sib. Biicher in Rom (1933);
Altheim, History of Roman Religion, 240-2; R. Bloch, Melanges Ernout,
21 ff.; Latte, Religionsgeschichte, 160-1 : of the duoviri to J . B. Garter,
Mem. Am. Acad. Rome, 1 (1917), 9 - 1 7 ; A. A. Boyce, T.A.P.A.6g (1938),
161 ff.; Latte, op. cit. 397-8.
13. 6. lectisternio: the ceremony whereby certain gods are invited to par
take of a sacrificial feast. Couches are brought out with images of the
gods reclining on them and tables are laid before them with viands.
Three questions present themselves in connexion with this passage.
(1) Where was the ceremony introduced from? In origin it is un
doubtedly Greek, corresponding to the dto&vla and the KXLVTJV
oTpaxrcLL although the Greek rites were much more representational
and vivid than the R o m a n (Athenaeus 6. 239 b ff.). There was an old
cult of Juppiter Dapalis (Cato, de Re Rust. 132; cf. Juppiter Epulo;
Cicero, de Orat. 3. 73) that dates back to the earliest levels of Greek
influence in Roman religion (Latte 74), in which food-offerings were
made to Juppiter with prayers for good crops. T h e lectisternium, how
ever, is a more sophisticated institution. L. lists this as the first and
places the third in 364 (7.2. 2), the fourth in 349 (7. 27. 1), and the fifth
in 326 (8. 25. 1), and there is no reason to doubt the facts. T h e in
fluence of the Sibylline oracles also points to a Greek source, as do
the characters of the gods involved. Delphi has been suggested and
the introduction of the lectisternium used to confirm the tradition of the
subsequent consultation of Delphi (15. 3 n.). But Hermes and Herakles
6

55

5- 13-6

399 B.C.

have no place in Delphic theoxenies (Diodorus 8. 32. 2). Etruria is

another candidate. Paintings in the 'Tomba del letto funebre* at
Tarquinii have been interpreted as depicting a lectisternium (Messerschmidt, Studi Etrusc. 3 (1929), 519; BasanofT, Evocatio, 157-8) and
the close relationship with Caere at this date makes the hypothesis
look attractive, since Caere had long contacts also with Delphi. T h e
six deities and the rites, however, are too specifically Greek and if
there was any single home of the cult it should probably be sought
in southern Italy.
(2) W h a t common characteristics or attributes have the six deities
to account for their selection? T h e circumstances of all the early
lectisterniasevere pestilencesmay be taken as proof that the deities
are invoked for their powers of healing or protection. Apollo naturally
heads the list, although in much later lectisternia he is replaced by
Juppiter, and he is naturally accompanied by Latona (25. 12. 13;
C.I.L. i 2 , p . 252 : the association of Le to and Apollo in Greek is common).
At the other end Mercury and Neptune must be included in their
capacities as protectors of trade and seafaring, to safeguard des
perately needed food-supplies. There is no suggestion of the powers
of the old Italian god Neptune. T h e puzzle revolves round Diana and
Hercules. L. has one other equally tantalizing and uninformative
reference to a lectisternium and a supplicatio ad aedem Herculis in 218
(21. 62. 9). The oldest cult of Hercules, at the Ara Maxima in the
Forum Boarium, near the Circus Maximus, was a private cult in the
hands of two families, the Pinarii and the Potitii (1. 7, 12 n.), and was
no state cult. In this worship Hercules was evidently characterized
as a god of commerce (Plautus, Rudens 150; see Latte 215). This role
might, therefore, seem to fit him for an association with Mercury and
Neptune but such a solution seems excluded by the fact that the Ara
Maxima cult was still in the fourth century in private hands, and
because it is expressly stated that apud aram maximum observatum ne
lectisternium fiat (Macrobius 3. 6. 16), which may be taken as evidence
that the Ara Maxima Hercules did not participate in lectisternia either.
Other shrines of Hercules are indeed known. One of H. Invictus (or
Victor) was situated adportam Trigeminam with a festival on 13 August
(Fasti Allif.; Macrobius 3. 6. 9 ff.). Another, the temple of Hercules
Magnus Custos in the Circus Flaminius (Ovid, Fasti 6. 209-12 ; Fasti
Venus.), is of uncertain date. In both cults the attributes of Hercules
remain veiled in mystery, but some evidence can be adduced for
supposing that he was regarded as being in these other cults not a
commercial god but (at least primitively) an agricultural god. Offer
ing was m a d e to Hercules and Ceres on 21 December (Macrobius
3. 11. 10) and a sacrum Herculi is prescribed for the month of J u n e
in the Menologia Rustica (Fasti Vallens.), perhaps to be identified
656

399 B.C.

5- 13- 6

with the festival of Hercules Magnus Custos on 4 J u n e given by other

Fasti. In short it could be held that Hercules was included in the
lectisternium either as a purifying god of agriculture or as a god of
commerce. We cannot decide for certain, since Diana equally may
have been included either as the guardian of woods (Nemorensis =
nemorum incola; cf. C.I.L. 6. 124) or as the protector of women ( =
^.pre^itg ElXelBvia).
(3) Is the text of L. here correctApollinem Latonamque et Dianam,
Herculem, Mercurium atque Neptunuml D.H. 12. 9 writes fxlav fxev
AITOXXCJVI teal ATJTOL, erepav Se c //pa/cAef /ecu AprefjuSi, rpinqv Se ^Epfifj

Tloaeihcbvu L. clearly implies that there were only three lecti with two
gods apiece. In view of this, and since L. and D.H. must depend
ultimately on the same source identified as Piso by D.H., editors have
transposed the text and written Herculem et Dianam (Wolfflin, Luterbacher, Weissenborn-Muller; cf. 22. 10. 9). If the problem were a
purely religious one, L. or his source might have been influenced by
the fact that Apollo, Latona, and Diana do appear as a triad (Pliny,
N.H. 36. 34; C.I.L. 6. 32) and rearranged the order of the gods as a
result. But the problem is linguistic. This arrangement and linking of
the nouns has no parallel in L. (Kuhnast, Liv. Syntax, 286 ff.). Wolfflin's
transposition should therefore be accepted. T h e variation between
-que, et, and atque is only significant stylistically (Catterall, T.A.P.A.
69 (1938), 301); cf. 6. 22. 5, 8. 37. 6, 9. 38. 8. For detailed discussion
of these obscure points see Pascal, Riv. di FiloL 22 (1894), 2 7 2 ^ 5
Wissowa, Religion, 421 ff.; R.E., 'lectisternium'; Bayet, Les Origines
de VHercule Romain, 260 ff.; W. Hoffman, Philologus, Suppl. 27 (1934),
68 ff.; H. Lyngby, Beitrage z. Topographie des Forum-Boarium-Gebietes,
5 3 - 5 6 ; J . Gage, UApollon Romain, 168 ff.; Latte 242-4.
13. 7. tota urbe: the Bank-Holiday atmosphere, evoked by this de
scription of friendly hospitality throughout Rome, is specially said
by D.H. 12. 9 to have been an addition by Piso (fr. 25 P.). It is false.
O n other occasions lectisternia were not accompanied by such scenes
of general rejoicing with the release of prisoners and the suspension of
crime. Piso took it from Greek models. At the Dionysia and the
Thesmophoria it was customary rovg Seoyxarra? acfrUadat, rov Seafiov
(ZDemosthenes614.
2 3 ; Plutarch, Moralia 303; Athenaeus 14. 640 a;
see Headlam on Herodas 5. 80). Since the lectisternium was a Greek
ritual, it was reasonable to suppose that it would be attended by the
normal Greek holiday. But if the concept was Greek, the picture is
Roman and recalls in particular the scenes during the Saturnalia
(Macrobius 1. 7 passim', Arrian, Epict. 4. 1. 5 8 ; Athenaeus, loc. cit.).
It is worth noticing that L. intensifies the Roman and the religious
character by introducing two extra phenomena of which there is no
trace in Piso. iurgiis ac litibus temperatum is borrowed from the prohibition
814432

657

uu

5. 13- 7

399 B.C.

in force during sacrifices (Cicero, deDivin. i. 102 : cf. Notiz. Scavi, 1928,
392 ne quis litiget neve rixam faciat). vinctis dempta vincula (in Piso the
holiday was for , i.e. slaves) is paralleled by the rules
connected with the house of the Flamen Dialis (Aul. Gell. 10. 15. 8
vinctum si aedes eius (Jlaminis) introierit solvi necessum est et vincula per impluvium in tegulas subduci atque indeforas in viam demitti).
13. 9. antea: 8. 5 ff.
13. 12. Punctuate nee ita multo post iam palantes veluti forte oblati;
populatores Capenatis agri reliquias pugnae absumpsere. oblati denotes the
victims who are attacked, the Gapenates (cf. 15. 4, 9. 31. 7, 10. 19. 16,
40. 55. 4 ) : they are a wandering rabble (palantes; cf. 2. 26. 3, 4. 55. 4)
who form a chance prey for the Roman foragers {veluti forte oblati;
cf. 24. 48. 7). T h e numerous emendations of the sentence ranging
from Grevier's quingenti (for veluti) to Madvig's velut tati forent are
neither necessary nor beneficial. See C.Q. 9 (1959), 283.
14. 1. communicatum: 4. 54. 7.
14. 3 . priore . . . proximo: L. is thinking of consular rather than
calendar years. We are still in the year 399 but L. regards it as closed
{haec eo anno acta) and so can call the insanabilis pernicies (13. 5) an
event of last year {proximo anno) and the exceptional winter (13. 1)
the winter of the year before that {priore anno).
14. 4 . libris fatalibus: 15. 11. T h e term is wider than and inclusive of
the Sibylline books. It would also include the books of Etruscan
discipline.
discrimina . . . confundi: the distinction between plebeian and patri
cian gentes was being blurred by destroying all patrician privilege and
allowing patricians and plebeians to be equally eligible for supreme
office. For the question of plebeian gentes see 2. 1. 10 n.
14. 5. L. Valerium: 4. 49. 7 n.
M. Valerium: 24. 1, M.f. M.n. Lactucinus Maximus according to
the Fasti. His father is unknown unless he is to be credited with the
triumph recorded by the Fasti for 437 (4. 20. 1 n.). For the cognomen
Lactucinus cf. Pliny, JV".//. 19. 59.
M. Furium: 1.211., 10. i n . L. Furium: 4. 51. 1 n.
Q. Servilium: 8. 1 n. Q. Sulpicium: 8. 1 n. Both are given cognomina
but not at 8. 1 which is suggestive of a different source.
The Alban Lake
T h e tunnelling of an outflow for the Alban Lake is a matter of history.
T h e tunnel survives to this day and still functions. T h e entrance is
below Gastel Gandolfo, the outlet at La Mola. T h e total length of the
tunnel is some 8,125 ft., with a height of approximately 5ft. 3 in., and
an average width of 3 ft. 11 in. From La Mola the stream flows above
658

398 B.C.

5- ! 5

ground for some 3 miles before joining the Tiber. Its date, its purpose,
and its connexion with the Siege of Veii require, however, detailed
discussion.
The existing stone-work provides no answer to the question when
the tunnel was constructed. The square arch at the outflow dates from
the first quarter of the first century B.C. but there are extensive stretches
of earlier, undatable masonry (Lugli, Tecnica Edilizia, 358). An attempt
to establish the date of the construction was made (e.g. by de la
Blanchere) by connecting it with the cuniculi built for drainage pur
poses widely throughout Etruria and Latium from the eighth century
onwards. In consequence many scholars hold that L.'s date for the
emissarium is too late and that in reality it was constructed by the
Etruscans in the sixth century. This view contradicts the unanimous
testimony of the ancients (Cicero, de Divin. 1. 100; Diodorus 14. 9 3 ;
D.H. 12. 11-17; Plutarch, Camillus 5 - 6 ; Val. Max. 1. 6. 3), and has
not been established archaeologically. There was no question of drain
ing the Alban Lake. The waters diverted off by the emissarium were
not used for irrigation nor is it easy, despite L.'s abundasset (15. 11 n.),
to believe that there was a need to regulate the level of the lake against
a danger of overflowing. The lake is fed by no springs or streams and
the lowest point in the perimeter is a good 300 ft. above the level of
the inflow of the emissarium. On the other hand, there was a real
danger of seepage through the porous strata into the country lying at
the foot of the crater. Swampy ground meant malaria. It does not
demand too much of the Romans (or the Greek experts at Delphi) to
have realized this and to have undertaken works of public hygiene
as well as of ritualistic piety (the lectisternia) to combat the severe
pestilences with which they were currently afflicted.
In short, the case for an earlier date for the construction of the
emissarium is not proved. 398 (or, absolutely, 394) provides an ad
mirable context. None the less the connexion with the Siege of Veii
at first sight seems bewildering. The Alban Lake lies many miles to
the south of Veii, in territory which had long been Latin and had
never been under the control of Veii. It is, of course, true that the
Romans, like the Athenians, could not have been expected to win a
war when crippled with plague. But the psychological importance
attached to the building of the emissarium suggests a profounder con
nexion. If the Romans really did breach Veii by a cuniculus (19. i o n . )
and if at the same time a tunnel was being dug at Lake Albano, the
successful outcome of two superficially similar operations would in
evitably be linked in the minds of the superstitious.
See Piranesi, Antichitd d9Albano; C. Merkel, Die Ingenieurtechnik,
150-3; de la Blanchere, Daremberg-Saglio, s.v. 'emissarium'; T. Ashby,
P.B.S.R. 5 (1910), 277; A. Celli, Die Malaria, 52; J. Hubaux 121-49;
659

398 B.C.

5- 15

G. Baffioni, Stud. Etruschi 27 (1959), 303 ff.; also Gage, Mel. d'Arch.
etd'Hist. 66 (1954), 39 fT.
15. 1. multa nuntiari: the historic infinitive appears to have been read
by the archetype and, since multa certainly was, the text may be kept.
Luterbacher, however, was attracted by U ' s reading multi nuntiavere
which gives a phrase from the prodigy style (cf. 28. 11. 3, 31. 12. 6,
32. 9. 3 , 4 0 . 19. 2).
altitudinem: the flooding of the Alban Lake was a n ancient myth.
It was alleged to have occurred in the reign of Allodius (D.H. 1. 71. 3)
or Amulius (Dio Cassius = Zonaras 7. 1). It is possible that there
was a superstition that the flooding occurred in cycles, like the Nile
(D.H. 12. I O - I I ) , a n d that such a superstition was exploited to ex
pedite the construction of the emissarium. See Pease on Cicero, de
Divin.

1. 100.

15.3.

oratores: Plutarch (Camillus 4.6) names them as Koaaos ALKLWIOS

Kal OvaXepios IJOTLTOS KCLI &dj3ios 'A^OVGTO^. Cossus Licinius must be

P. Licinius a n d the surprising Cossus, apparently a praenomen here,

must in reality be a cognomen. It will either be a confusion of the fact
that he was related to the Cornelii Cossi or even evidence that he was
born a Cornelius Cossus a n d only became a Licinius by adoption.
The omission of the names by L. conforms to his policy of keeping
to the central story with the minimum of distractions.
Delphicum: see 1. 56. 4 n. for a n earlier occasion. T h e tale that the
Romans dedicated a tithe of victory to the Pythia in the shape of
a golden bowl, which was stolen en route by the Liparians but sub
sequently restored through the good offices of the pious Timasitheus,
seems to be founded on fact (25. 7-10, 28. 1-5). It was evidently
dedicated in the treasury of the Massiliots, for even after the golden
bowl itself had been melted down by Onomarchus, the bronze stand
on which it had stood survived for all to see in their treasury (Appian,
ltd. 8 ; see Fouilles de Delphes, 2. 1. 48). The mention of Liparians and
Massiliots looks authentic. When the Lipari islands were annexed 146
years later their special privileges (e.g. hospitium) were confirmed
while the links between Rome a n d Marseilles h a d always been close
(1.45. 2 n.) and still were so (Justin 43.5. 8). T h e dedication, however,
need not entail the consultation. Many scholars accept the one but
reject the other, principally on the ground that the emissarium is older
than 398 and, hence, a fortiori the Romans could not have consulted
Delphi about it. T h e first proposition is not incontrovertible (see
above). It has, however, been argued in addition that the consultation
of Delphi is a doublet of the seer and, since Cicero only alludes to the
latter, is unlikely to be the original story. Furthermore Roman re
ligious law officially forbade the consultation of foreign oracles, per660

398 B.C.

5- '5- 3

mitting reference only to the Haruspices or the libri Sibyllini. Possible

contexts for its fabrication have been recognized in the appeal to Rome
by Delphi in 125 B.C. or in the 'loan' of sacred treasures made to
Sulla by Delphi in 86 (Plutarch, Sulla 12-19). Yet even if Delphi and
the seer are doublets, the latter, a timeless and legendary anecdote, is
more likely to be the child rather than the parent of the duplication,
particularly if Parke is right to see in him the person of Helenus, the
seer of Troy. Such Trojan importations have already been certified in
the story ofVeii. In a national crisis when the ordinary rules were over
thrown, as in the Second Punic War, recourse was had to Delphi.
T h e situation in the 390's was not unlike the Punic Wars. Plague and
war threatened Rome and the lectisternium is symptomatic of a religious
emergency in which the traditional forms were found inadequate
and were superseded. T h e plain fact remains that there is nothing
implausible in fourth-century Rome being in touch with Delphi, or
in Delphi, after the end of the Peloponnesian War, being interested in
Rome. Rome's ties with Caere are very close and the Caeretans were
regular in their attendance on the Pythia.
See Daux, Delphes, 372 ff.; W. Hoffmann, Philologus, Suppl. 27
(J934)> 129 ff.; Parke-Wormell, The Delphic Oracle, 1. 267-9; C.
Lanzani, Miscellanea Galbiati, 1. 129 ff; Latte, Religionsgeschichte,
224 n. 1.
15. 4. senior quidam Veiens: the story is also told by D.H. (12. 11-14),
who makes the R o m a n a centurion (hoxayos), Plutarch (Camillus 4),
and Cicero [de Divin. 1. 100, 2. 69). There are no significant differences
except that L. stresses the religious importance of the episode by con
trasting the youth and age of the figures (15. 7 n.), by modifying
what appears to have been the traditional form of the prophecy (see
below) and by introducing appropriately religious phraseology (e.g.
cecinit). As evidence of the lateness of the anecdote we may note that, as
in the story of Servius Tullius and the sacrifice (1. 45. 3-7), it is in
order for the Romans to cheat but not for the Veientes or the Sabines.
T h e myth will have been attached to Veii rather to provide a counter
part for the Trojan prophecies of Helenus than to prefigure the Evoca
tion of J u n o (Hubaux) which did not require force.
cecinit: the formulation of the prophecy must be due to L. himself.
Cicero gives the text: 'nam ilia praedicta Veientium, si lacus Albanus
redundasset isque in mare fluxisset, R o m a m perituram; si repressus
esset, Veios'. A sidelight on L.'s instictive patriotism is that he passes
over the possibility of Rome's destruction and gives only the second
half of the prophecy (15. 11 n.). L.'s hand can be seen too in the
startling postponement of Romanum and its juxtaposition to Veiis as
well as in the very use ofRomanus (15. 11, 16. 9 ; cf. 2. 7. 2) which must
be a collective singular denoting the Romans as a whole; a qualifying
661

5- 15-4

398 B.C.

noun like imperator cannot be understood in the context and it is

grotesque to suppose that Romanus is a proper name (e.g. Servius
Romanus mentioned in 4. 61. 10: so Hubaux'Tite-Live ait utilise
les archives de la gens Servilia'). T h e synekdoche is quoted by Cicero
from Ennius (de Orat, 3. 168) and is confined to the more sonorous and
prophetic passages of epic (e.g. Virgil, Aeneid 6. 851 with Norden's
note; cf. Horace, Odes 3. 6. 2 with Heinze's note; see Lofstedt,
Syntactical 1. 15-16). It is obviously appropriate that an oracle which
is addressed nominally to a single person (the consulter) but effectually
to his whole country should employ such a form of expression. T h a t
Romane is characteristic of oracular language is confirmed by its
occurrence in two set formulae, Romane, memento (Virgil, loc. cit.;
cf. the oracle in Zosimus 2. 1. 6 ^eyivrjcjdai, 'Paj/xatc) and Romane,
cave (to) (16. 9 ; cf. the parody in Horace, Satires 1. 4. 85 hunc tu,
Romane, caveto). But in true oracles it would always be used as a voca
tive and not, as here, as the subject of a sentence, emitto (15. 11, 16. 9,
19. 1, 51. 6) is the technical term for drawing off water (cf. C.LL,
14. 85 (A.D. 4 6 ) ; and see Housman on Lucan 7. 625). If the form
of the oracle has been reshaped and rephrased by L., there may
still be a germ of truth in it. T h e rivalry between the fate of Veii and
the fate of Rome implied by the version given by Cicero does point
to an old tradition that both would reach the end of their respective
life-cycles at the same time and that only one of them would be
renewed (renovatio temporum). T h e concept of the periodic saecula of a
people was deep-rooted in Etruscan theology. T h e discussion by
H u b a u x (Phoibos 5 (1950), 73 ff.) is visionary.
15. 5. per ambages . . . iaceret: 1. 54. 8, 55. 6, 56. 9.
15. 6. operae Hit esset: 4. 8. 3, 29. 17. 17, 'if he could spare the trouble'.
T h e phrase is of interest for it occurs only in Plautus and Persius,
besides L., and generally in the context of sparing time to listen to
someone (Miles 252 ; Merc. 14; Pseudolus 377). It is clearly a colloquial
cliche, and, as such, is used as a characterizing touch by L. to give
life to the dialogue. T h e grammar of the phrase is discussed in C.R. 8
(1894), 345-7 where it is suggested that operae is dative (cf. voluptati
esse), but a genitive is preferable (Enk on Truculentus 883). For such
formulas of politeness see Fraenkel, Horace, 350, n. 4.
15. 7. iuvenis , . .senem: notice the chiasmus; other sources do not
distinguish so dramatically the ages of the two characters. It may be
right to see a symbolic contrast between the youth of Rome (54. 5
novae urbis) and the old age of Veii, which according to Censorinus
(de Die Natali 17. 5-6) had lived for a thousand years.
15. 10. revocare: an old proverb; cf. Menander's picas' \6yov TLS OVK
avaipeiTai TT6XW, Plutarch, de Garrulitate 10; Horace, Epist. 1. 18. 71 ;
Ars P. 390. T h e religious offence incurred by publishing what should
662

398 B.C.

5- *5-

10

be kept secret is often emphasized, cf, e.g., Pliny, JVM. 3. 65. I cannot
find any exact parallel for the opposite offence. Cf. 2. 36. 2
1 5 . 1 1 . librisfatalibus: 14. 4 n. It does not require sensitive ears to hear
in what follows the solemn ring of prophecy. The desertion by the
gods of Veii has, as le Bas saw, overtones of the desertion of Troy (cf.
Homer, Iliad 22. 213; Virgil, Aeneidi. 351-2) but it is in the language
especially that the awe-inspiring notes are struck. The present passive
victoriam dari, where a personal subject and an active future might be
expected, is characteristic of the language of prophecy. The events of
the future are envisaged as already taking place, victoria dari itself is
rare, occurring outside L. (cf. 16. 10, 3. 8. 11) only in Ennius, Ann.
88 V. and Coelius Antipater fr. 26 P. In both passages can be
heard the tone of Remembrance Day. Unless L. has misconstrued the
purport of the oracle, abundasset must mean not 'had overflowed', for
that eventuality would have presaged victory for Veii, but 'had flooded,
i.e. risen to a great height' (cf. Frontinus, de Aquaed. 94; Varro, de Re
Rust. 3. 5. 2). The deliberate sacral character of the prophecy may help
to elucidate the baffling ut quando . . . abundasset, turn presented by the
manuscripts. It would seem as if either ut (Duker, Crevier, Madvig,
Conway) or quando (Walters, Bayet) was superfluous, but, as Wittmann (Jahrb. f. Class. Phil. 90 (1863), 250) divined, ponderous
repetitiousness is of the essence in such pastiches (cf. 1. 24. 3 n.).
quando should be taken as indefinite 'at any time' and ut quando = ut
primum quando 'as soon as at any time'. Analogies may be found in
utsemel (6. 32.8) or utsubito (Ovid, Heroides 12. 137), although KiihnerStegmann (2. 364-5) offer no exact parallel for ut quando.
16. 1. L. lulius: 10. 1 n. L. Furius: 4. 51. 1 n. For the corruption of
the praenomen cf. 2. 15. 1 n.
L. Sergius: M'.f. L.n. according to the Fasti, a son of the consular
tribune of 404 (4. 61. 4 n.). For his embassy to Delphi see 28. 2.
A. Postumius: probably to be identified with the consular tribune of
381 (6. 22. 5) and censor of 366 (7. 1. 8). His filiation is nowhere given
by the Fasti which preserve here only . . . Regille]nsis. Together with
his brothers, Sp. (26. 2) and L. (6. 1. 8), he is likely to be a son of the
consular tribune of 426 (4. 31. 1 n.). The cognomen Regillensis borne by
successive generations of Postumii was traditionally supposed to have
been earned by the victor of the Battle of Lake Regillus (2. 19. 3 n.)
but such honorific cognomina are anachronistic. The provenance and
even the tribe of the Postumii are unknown except for the faqt that the
name is not Etruscan (Schulze 215). The cognomen recalls the Inregillensis or Regillanus of the Claudii (2. 16. 4 n.); they may also have
migrated to Rome from the Sabine town of Regillum. See Miinzer,
R.E., 'Postumius (57)'.
663

5- *6. I

397 B.C.

P. Cornelius: 19. 2 n. A. Manlius: 4. 61. 1 11.

16. 2. Labicos: 4. 47. 4. T h e incidents of this year, the siege of
Anxur, the attack on Labici, the predatory incursion of the Tarquinienses, may all be presumed to come from the Annales. Sordi (4)
argues that chronological manipulations have resulted in the duplica
tion of the war with Tarquinii in 388 but Rome had to recover
lost ground after the Gallic Sack (6. 4. 8). T h e political colouring,
however, is anachronistic, added to provide continuity and motivation.
16. 5. prope: if prope is right, the phrase must mean 'with a company
consisting almost solely of volunteers whom they had induced to join
by their exhortations' (Foster) and prope be the equivalent of prope
omnium. H.J. Muller, comparing 9. 10. 6 dilectusprope omnium voluntariorumfuit, would even insert omnium, but whereas in 320 the levy was
evidently hampered but not wholly prevented, the implication of
impediebantur is that the consular tribunes were not able to raise any
conscripts and had to have recourse to volunteers, prope omnium is in
appropriate here nor is any parallel for prope voluntariorum = prope
omnium v. forthcoming. It is much more satisfactory, with Kohler and
Boot, to readpropere for prope 'a hastily raised body of volunteers'.
16. 6-7. multos . . . divisam: language and contents recall 3. 10. 1 (n.)
a typically Valerian section. For mortales see 1. 9. 8 n.
16. 9^-11. T h e oracle has often been believed to be a prose version
of an old oracular response, which, if not wholly authentic, went back
at least to the third century. It was versified by Gottfr. Hermann
(Elementa Doctrinae Metricae, 617), Niebuhr, and Walch and is printed
in the Oxford Book of Latin Verse (no. 13) with the laconic date ' 2 5 0 200 B.C.( ?)'. In its present form it certainly is intended to look like an
ancient prophecy. The collective Romane and the menacing cave
(15. 11 n . ; cf. 35. 21. 4 Roma, cave tibi) belong to the oracular style
arid many features recall the character of primitive Latin carmina,
e.g. the alliterative in mare manare, turn iu (1. 24. 8 n.), the peiiphrastic
instaurata . . .facito = instaurato. Closer examination, however, indicates
that the whole prophecy is in fact a later translation from the Greek,
so that the original prophecy will be one of the many spurious Delphic
oracles which were circulating in the Late Republic, pandunturfata is not
sacral. It occurs only here and in Lucan 6. 590 and Statius, Thebaid
10. 162. ut adsolet (1. 28. 2, 23. 31. 15, 24. 31. 7, 32. 1. 9, 37. 14. 4),
on the other hand, is meant to look sacral but is a learned fabrication
as its earliest use, a bogus provision in Cicero, de Legibus 2. 21 (cf. Phil.
2. 82), demonstrates. It does not turn up in any genuinely religious
setting, portare donum for ferre donum is equally untechnical (21/62. 8),
occurring elsewhere in Germanicus 419; Catullus, 64. 279.
cura omissa is a purely Livian phrase (8. 16. 3, 9. 45. 12; cf. Colu
mella 7. 8. 1) and bello perfecto is a sophisticated variant for the normal
664

397 B.C.

5- 6- 9 ' 1 1

hello confecto (cf. Caesar, B.C. 3. 18. 4 ; L. 4. 43. 3, 42. 14. 1). T h e Greek
origin of the prophecy is betrayed not merely by cave (cf. Herodotus
7. 148. 3 K(f>a\r)v 7T(f)v\a;o and other passages collected by Fraenkel,
Horace, 117-18) but by the remarkable use of exsUngues. T h e metaphor
of extinguishing water is not Latin. It is used here for the first time
(and only here in L.; cf Aul. Gell. 12. 1.8). In Greek, by contrast,
it is early established (cf. Aeschylus, Agamemnon 958 with Fraenkel's
note). It is, after all, hardly surprising that a reputedly Delphic oracle
should have begun its circulation in Greek and then been translated
into Latin. See Parke-Wormell, Delphic Oracle, 2, no. 440; I. Kajanto,
God and Fate in Livy, 28.
17. 2. intermissum: cf. 1. 4 where the misfortunes of Veii are also
attributed to a nefas caused by the interruption of the game (sollemnia
quae intermitti nefas). T h e parallelism is deliberate.
vitio creatos: improperly constituted magistrates could not properly
conduct religious ceremonies. For interregnum see 3. 8. 2 n. T h e facts
as a whole are archival. For ihtferiae Latinae see 1. 31. 3 n . ; Wissowa,
Religion, 1246.; Latte Religionsgeschichte, 144-6; Sordi 169-70. T h e
cult of Juppiter Latiaris on the Alban mount was of great antiquity
and the list of communities originally participating in it (Pliny, N.H.
3. 69) shows that it did not include the whole of Latium but only those
communities grouped round the mountain. There were notable
absentees among the Latins, such as Lavinium, Ardea, and Tusculum,
who had cults and leagues of their own. Rome herself cannot have been
a founder-member but the disappearance of so many Alban cities
and her own expansion enabled her to exploit her ancestral connexion
with Alba Longa and gradually to take over the cult, until the distinc
tion between Alban and Latin was obscured and Rome supplied the
priests and Varro could speak of the members of the league as Latini
populi quibus ius fuit cum Romanis. T h e slow transformation accounts
for the discrepant dates of its original foundation. Bob. Cicero, pro
Plancio 9. 23 attributes the league to the Prisci Latini and D.H. 4. 49. 1
to Tarquinius Priscus while the actual Fasti (Inscr. Ital. 13, p. 143 ff.)
ascribe the institution of the feriae Latinae to the Decemvirs. Each has
a grain of truth. T h e festival will go back to the earliest inhabitants
of Latium but its organization seems to owe something to Etruscan
influence (Latte, loc. cit.). T h e name feriae Latinae, however, implying
both the participation of all Latins and not Albans only and the
predominance of Rome, must be later. See also 19. 1 n.
17. 6. Voltumnae: 4. 23. 5 n.
17. 7. antea: 1. 4 n.
17. 8. maxime iam in parte: for the historical basis of this assertion see
34. 8 n. T h e manuscripts here read maxime in ea parte Etruriae . . . novos
665

5.

17-8

397 B.C.

accolas Gallos esse to which it has been rightly objected that ea parte
Etruriae must refer either to Veii or to the rest of Etruria. If it refers to
Veii, it is both untrue since the Gauls had not yet penetrated so far
south, and preposterous in that it makes the reason that deterred the
rest of Etruria from helping not that they were themselves menaced
by the Gauls but that they were afraid to advance into a land which
was swarming with Gauls. If, on the other hand, it refers to the rest
of Etruria, it conveys the impression that the Gauls were already dis
seminated throughout the whole of Etruria, including Veii, although
their chief concentration was still in the non-Veientane section. T h a t
is historically false. Various conjectures (invasisse in earn partem . . . invisitatam. novos . . . esse Madvig; proxime enim earn partem . . . esse Anon.
ap. Weissenborn-Miiller; maxima in parte Luterbacher, Conway) and
repunctuations (negare maxime. in ea parte . . . esse Ruperti, Lallemand,
Ross bach; negare; maxime in ea parte Etruriae (sc. negare). gentem . . .
J a c . Gronovius, Weissenborn, Bayet) have been advocated. Of these
Ruperti's is satisfactory. Although the hyper baton nunc . . . maxime
might seem exaggerated, the idiom antea . . . nunc (tamen) maxime is
familiar (4. 3. 3 n.) and appropriate to the context, ea parte will, then,
refer to the rest of Etruria excluding Veii. Conway excises Gallos
without due cause. In over a third of the instances where L. uses
accola it is in conjunction with some part of Gallu
17. 10. coeptae: there is a tendency in Latin for a passive inf. governed
by coepi to attract coepi into the same voice: e.g. whereas earlier authors
would write urbs aedificari coepit, L. writes urbs aedificari coepta (est)
(55. 2; see Lofstedt, Syntactical 2. 123). Here mitescere is logically the
equivalent of a passive (e.g. pacari) and should deter any attempt to
emend coeptae to coepere (Weissenborn, Wolfflin, Luterbacher).
18. The Election of P. Licinius
There are manifest indications that L. owes the highly flattering
account of the older Licinius' withdrawal in favour of his son to the
chronicler of the family, Licinius Macer. One inconsistency in par
ticular may be noted. It is implied by 18. 2 that the college of consular
tribunes for 400 comprised in all five persons who were re-elected in
the present year whereas the list for that year (12. i o n . ) from Valerius
Antias has six names, of which possibly only one overlaps with the
names given here. See also 19. 2 n.
Little faith can be pinned on the story of the younger Licinius'
office. T h e editors of the Capitoline Fasti firmly opted for the elder
(. . . E]squilinus II) and agreed in that with Diodorus (14. 90. 1), while
the names of his colleagues are plainly corrupt. T h e tradition may
have been old, founded on such stories as the desire of Periander
to resign in favour of his son, or it may have been invented to supply
666

396 B.C.

5-i8

a link in the family pedigree between the older Licinius and G. Licinius
Stolo. T h e manner of his substitution for his father is unconstitutional
and it is naive to believe that the latter should have aged so pre
cipitately in the course of three years (Mlinzer, R.E., 'Licinius (43)').
T h e story is also designed to illustrate a point of law (18. 5 n.).
Genucius' death (18. 8) is taken over from the fate of one of his
descendants, the consul ambushed in 362 (7. 6. 9). T h e contents of
the whole chapter are, therefore, to be treated with the greatest reserve.
See Burck 115.
18. 1. praerogativa . . . creant: so the manuscripts; cf. 18. 2 iure vocatis
tribubus; 10. 22. 1 et praerogativae et primo vocatae omnes centuriae consulem
dicebant. U n d e r the late Republic in the comitia centuriata one of the
centuries of the first class was selected by lot to record its vote first.
It was called the centuria praerogativa and its vote was regarded as
ominous (18. 3 n.). How old the custom was is uncertain but 10. 22. 1
(296 B.C.) is evidence that at that date the sex suffragia or six oldest
centuries of equites voted first as of right and were called praerogativae
(1. 43. n n.). T h e change to a single century chosen by lot presumably
was effected by a reform of the comitia in the third century and was
democratic in intention. T h e evidence for there having been six
praerogativae in early times is admittedly slight but seems to have been
part of the Roman constitutional tradition since the system was re
newed when special praerogativae centuriae were allotted in honour of
G. and L. Caesar and Germanicus, as is attested by the Tabula
Hebana (Tibiletti, Principe e Magistrati, 58 n. 2). They may also have
been discussed in a mutilated note of Festus (290 L. 'praerogativae').
10. 22. 1 is also a Licinian passage and it follows that we should
emend the impossible praerogativa ... creant to praerogativae . . . creant and
understand by them the Sex Suffragia. Even if praerogativa . . . creat
(an anachronistic allusion to the procedure after the reform) was the
right reading, L. (or Licinius Macer) would still be describing the
procedure of the comitia centuriata. Why then does he write iure vocatis
tribubus apparently describing an election in the comitia tributa ? In the
reformed comitia the centuries were correlated with tribes and referred
to by the name of the tribe, iuniorum or seniorum; cf. 24. 7. 12, 26. 22. 2,
27. 6. 3. Other examples of the centuries of the reformed comitia
centuriata being called tribes are collected and discussed by Walbank
on Polybius 6. 14. 7 and it is these that must be meant by L.'s use of
tribus here. See also Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 3. 290 n. 3 ; Staveley,
AJ.P- 74 (1953), * * ; J-R.S. 43 (1953). 34; G.Meier, R.E., Suppl. 8,
'praerogativa centuria'; U . Hall, Historia 13 (1964), 279 n. 49.
18. 2. L. Titinium, P. Maenium, Cn. Genucium, L. Atilium: so the manu
scripts but there are two difficulties. We expect the names to tally
with the college of 400 (12. i o n . ) when Licinius was consular tribune
667

5- i8. 2

396 B.C.

and we expect five names giving a total of six. T h e Capitoline Fasti

have
[L. Titinius L.f. M'.n. Sjaccus II
[P. Licinius P.f. P.n. Calvus EJsquilinus II
[P. Maelius Sp.f. C.n.] Capitolinus II
Q . Manlius A.f. [Cn.n. Vulso Capitolinus]
Cn. Genuciufs M.f. M.n. Augurinus]
L. Atilius L.[f. L.n. Priscus].
Since the whole point of Licinius' gesture is that the entire college of
400 was re-elected with him in his honour, it is futile to attempt to
bring L. and the Fasti into agreement by emendation. Supplements
such as Hill's L. Atilium (jet insequentis P. Manilium) (C.R. 43 (1929),
13 ff.) or Niebuhr's P. Maenium <Q,. Manlium) only address themselves
to half the problem. T h e text must be accepted as it stands with the
implication that Licinius Macer had a different list for 400 from that
in the Fasti or in L. In that event it is unwise to emend Maenium to
Maelium. T h e first Maenius to reach the consulate was C. Maenius,
consul in 338 (Munzer, R.E., 'Maenius (9)') but attempts seem to
have been made to extend the pedigree of this plebeian family back
to the early Republic (4. 53. 2 n.) and a consular tribune in 396 would
be a gratifying stepping-stone. SeeJ.R.S. 48 (1958), 45.
verba fecit: such an intervention in an election is out of the question
but the speech which L. frames for Licinius is touchingly written.
It manages to combine a grave consciousness of legal proprieties with
a pathetic picture of an old and enfeebled man. L. contrives this by
a subtle blend of legal language (18. 3 n., 18. 5 nn.) and highly
coloured vocabulary. As an instance of the latter may be cited 18. 5
effigiem atque imaginem (of a son) for which cf. Cicero, Phil. 9. 12; the
whole passage vires . . . obtunsus is reminiscent of Lucretius 3. 451-4.
Both labare and obtunsus are used only here in this sense in L. and L.
may be soliciting pathos by evoking a poetic description of old age
whether from Lucretius himself or, more probably, from a common
sourceEnnius. In the same connexion for umbram nomenque P.
Licini cf. Lucan 1. 135 stat magni nominis umbra with Getty's note;
8.449.
18. 3 . omen: the choice of the centuria praerogativa was considered an
omen; cf Cicero, de Div. 1. 103 with Pease's note. T h e omen was that
the first names to be spoken were fortunate and so their period of
office would be successful (55. 2 n.). In claiming it as an omen of con
cord Licinius is twisting its force. See Klebs, Zeit. Sav.-Stift. 12 (1891),
237; delPOro, Parola del Passato 5 (1950), 148 ff.; L. R. Taylor,
Party Politics, 56 ff. concordiae must be gen. not dat. since the wordorder shows that it goes closely with omen not petere. 3. 50. 14, which
668

396 B.C.

5. 18. 3

is commonly cited as a parallel for a d a t , is entirely different, utilis

(Aldus, Ruddiman, Walker), therefore, not utili should be read.
18. 4 . sed: A read et si, TT si, M sit, which may be taken as evidence that
the archetype had transposed et and si and that the reading was sub
sequently doctored, etsi is preferable to Madvig's sed. 'Even though
my colleagues may be (as they are) the same or even better, I am no
longer the same: so take my son instead.'
18, 5. vicarium: in the Republic vicarius was used either of a slave kept
by another slave (Horace, Sat. 2. 7. 79) or in the most general sense
of a substitute, proxy, or 'locum tenens' (Cicero, Verr. 4. 8 1 ; 3. 86),
but with the increasing complexity of provincial government it be
came necessary for some system of delegation to be evolved. In order
that the ultimate responsibility should rest with the governor it was
legally desirable that the governor should be answerable for the con
duct of any deputy and that could only be achieved if the deputy
was his son and so subject to patria potestas. Hence under the empire
the rule was formulated legati vicarios dare non alios possunt nisi filios
suos (Papinian, Dig. 50. 7. 14; Marcian, Dig. 50. 7. 5. 4). Whether
the procedure went back as far as the Republic is not stated but the
present passage looks like a tendentious precedent. See Schneider,
R.E., Vicarius'.
do dicoque: cf. 22. 37. 12 sedem ei divae dare dicare. Licinius makes it
sound like a religious dedication. For the formula cf. Cicero, Verr.
4. 6 7 ; Lex Arae Iovis Salm. ( = C.I.L. 3. 1933).
honorem . . . mandetis: 4. 3. 5, 57. 2, the technical term; cf. Cicero,
Verr. 4. 81 ; Tacitus, Annals 4. 6. 2.
18. 7-12. T h e campaign is borrowed from 362 (7. 6. 7-9) as the
indecisive conclusion reveals: the panic at R o m e with the scenes of
women on the walls and of public prayer are taken from the Iliad,
as Hector goes out to battle. T h e whole passage is intended to heighten
the psychological excitement before the final episodethe Fall of
Veii. T h e prayer is of a familiar typean d7T07rofi7rrj by which the
supplicant prays that evil may be directed elsewhere; cf. Catullus
63. 92 with Kroll's note; Orph. Hymn. 3. 12, 11. 21.
19-23. The Capture of Veii
T h e tapestry of the capture of Veii is woven from four threads which
can be wholly trustedthe person of Camillus and the fall of the
Etruscan city, the ritual of evocatio and the institution of the cult of
J u n o R e g i n a (31.3 n.), the cuniculus (19. i o n . ) , and the dedication to
Apollo at Delphi (23. 8, 28. 1-5 n.). Details of ritual ceremonies were
turned into historical episodes ( 2 1 . 8 n., 22. 6 n.) and the cuniculus
was spun into a fairy-story. It is only the colouring of the tapestry
which is false. For later ages Camillus was the prototype of the great
669

5- 19-23

396 B.C.

statesman who despite the ingratitude of his fellow-citizens and the

turmoils of the times remained loyal to Rome and to his principles and
eventually brought salvation and concord. He was the prototype of
the elder Scipio, of Sulla, of Augustus himself. It comes, therefore, as
no surprise to find that there are many details which are embroidered
from the later statesmen. Scipionic lines may be discerned in Camillus'
sentiments over Veii (21. 14 n.) and in the name of his magister
equitum (19. 2 n.) or, from later chapters, in his voluntary exile
(32.8-9 n.) and his treatment of Falerii (27). Some at least of these may
be due to Ennius in the first instance (19. 2 n., 49. 3 n.). Other touches
are as certainly added later. Camillus' prosecutor in the earlier levels
of the story was Sp. Carvilius (Pliny, N.H. 34. 13) from the example
of 212 B.C. when M. Postumius Pyrgensis was accused by a Sp. Car
vilius. In the later versions his name is L. Appuleius, bringing to mind
the notorious demagogue L. A. Saturninus. Camillus' triumph, what
ever its foundation in legend, is darkened with the shades of the late
Republic (23. 4 n.).
L. therefore took over a work of art, which was already highly
elaborate, as it had been fashioned by a Sullan annalist. His own
contributions to it were stylistic and psychological. The Fall of Veii
after a ten-year siege demanded a stylistic presentation which should
at least recall the epic story of the Fall of Troy. L.'s imagination was
quickened by the comparison and expressed itself in many phrases
and details which were meant to strike the reader as poetic (19. 1 n.,
2 1 . 5 m ) . His arrangement of material, which at first sight might seem
jerky, is similarly calculated to recall epic treatment. The serial
narration of events is in the best epic manner whereby a continuous
story is told in a succession of episodes. L. goes out of his way to insert
distinct incidents (20. 4-10 n., 21. 8. n., 21. 14 n., 21. 16 n., 22. 6 n.)
which break up the flow of the main account much as Virgil builds
up the account of the Fall of Troy from isolated transactions. This
way of organizing the material achieves the secondary purpose of
highlighting the moral of the story. Earlier versions had stressed the
naive moral that human success invites divine jealousy (<f>66vo$). L.
goes farther. Camillus courts both human and divine jealousy (20. 2,
20. 9, 21. 14 n.) and the retribution which comes, undeservedly, from
both gods and men is thrown into relief by the sharp transitions.
Within the overall epic pattern which L. may in part have inherited
from a tradition that went back to Ennius, there is a nice delineation
of characters, shown in the language of the principal characters.
Camillus is always formal and proper (20. 2 n., 21. 14 n.). Contrasted
with him is the outspoken demagoguery of Licinius and Ap. Claudius
(20. 5 n., 20. 7 n.).
The material for his insertions is culled from Licinius Macer. The
670

396 B.C.

5- 19-23

natural conclusion is that the rest of the story is taken from Valerius
Antias: either 19. 1 or 19. 3 would be an easy place for the switch
over to be made. It has been pointed out that the Scipionic elements
would come easily from the pen of an annalist who wished to do
honour to another Cornelius, Sulla.
The ancients at least did not find the treatment unsatisfactory, for
the passage was often imitated in antiquity. Cf, e.g., for 19. 3
Claudian, Bell. Get. 435 ff.; for 20. 4 Tacitus, Hist. 1. 13; for 21. 9
Tacitus, Germania 3 ; for 21. 15 Tacitus, Annals 4. 39. 1.
The principal works to be consulted are: for the legends of Veii,
J. Gage, Huit recherches, 73 ff., 143 ff.; Hubaux; J. Bayet, tome 5,
App. 128 ff.; for Scipionic and later elements in the figure of Camillus,
O. Hirschfeld, KL Schriften, 273 ff.; E. Taubler, Klio 12 (1912),
219 ff.; A. Momigliano, C.Q. 36 (1942), 111-20; for L.'s sources and
treatment, Soltau 175-6; Burck 109. See also Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 297 ff.; P. Burger, Sechzig Jahre aus der alteren Geschichte
Roms; Miinzer, R.E.y Turius (44)'.
19. 1. ludi Latinaeque: 17.211. ludi and feriae amount to the same thing
holidaybut by later convention ludi came to be reserved for the
public games (scaenici, in circo) which became a regular feature of
Roman holidays. In 396, however, such ludi were not a feature of
Roman festivals, so that the distinction between the ludi and the
feriae implied here is anachronistic.
appetebant: only here in L. with ace. of motion towards. The use is
rare elsewhere (Cicero, ad Brut. 1. 2. 1; Apuleius, Met. 4. 8) and sets
a highflown tone for what is to follow; cf. 7. 26. 5.
19. 2 . fatalis dux: so also of Scipio (22. 53. 6, 30. 28. 11). Camillus
stands in the same relationship tofatum as does Aeneas. The expression
and the conception behind it may go back to Ennius.
servandaeque patriae: servare patriam was originally a military citation
(9. 4. 11-13, 21. 46. 10, 22. 14. io, 23. 11. 3 et al.) which gradually
spread into ordinary parlance (Cicero, Phil. 13. 46; pro Sestio 4 1 ;
pro Flacco 103). As a title (conservator patriae was assimilated to the
reverential Greek Gwrrjp and, losing the defining patriae, became a
standard element in the style and title of the emperor (Alfoldi,
Mus. Helv. 9 (1952), 223). Novak's servandamquepatriam (cf. 2. 1. 11) is
unnecessary.
Scipionem: the first of the Scipiones but the Fasti prefer P. Cornelius
Maluginensis (16. 1). Although the Scipiones were a branch of the
Maluginenses, the Fasti are no doubt correct. The appearance of a
Scipio here in such Scipionic surroundings is too tendentious (Miinzer,
R.E., 'Cornelius (328)'). He reappears as consular tribune in 395
(24. 1) and interrex in 391 (31.8) and since Scipiones are attested in the
next generation (consul in 350) we may accept the existence of the
671

5- *9- 2

396 B.C.

first P. Cornelius Scipio in this generation but believe that partial

historians have transferred important happenings to a relatively un
important man.
19. 4. pavore: in 18. io they had been deterred from flight. T h e dis
crepancy is evidence of change of source.
19. 5. Latini Hernicique: 3. 4. i o n .
19. 6. ludos: 3 1 . 2 .
Matutae: 23. 7 n.
19. 7. Nepesino: the town of Nepet, later Nepe (mod. Nepi), lay on
the line of the later Via Amerina some 5 miles south of Falerii Novi.
Like its western neighbour Sutri, its fate was bound up with the for
tunes of Veii. For Veii provided access to the Ciminian plain in which
they lay and once the power of Veii was circumscribed they were
exposed to Roman advance. O n the Fall of Veii Nepi made an alliance
with Rome (Diodorus 14. 98) but was recovered by the Etruscans
in 389 when Rome's power was curtailed by the Gallic invasion. It
was recaptured almost at once by Camillus and was colonized either
in 383 (6. 21. 4) or 373 (Veil. Pat. 1. 14). For details of its history see
Philipp, R.E., 'Nepet'; G. C. Duncan, P.B.S.R. 26 (1958), 68. T h e
exact course of events is opaque. T h e present campaign has been seen
as a doublet of the campaign of 389 (6. 2. 2 ff.; Sordi 4-5).
19. 8. fortuna: 4. 37. 7 n.
quaestorem: 4. 53. 10 n.
19. 10. cuniculus: the recurrence of the story apropos of Fidenae
(4. 22. 4 n.) indicates that there was a long-standing tradition that an
Etruscan siege was once successfully ended by means of a cuniculus.
T h e antiquity of the legend is further corroborated by its connexion
with the draining of the Alban Lake (15. 1 n.). T h e construction of
siege-mines was familiar to the Greeks and was employed, e.g., at the
siege of Plataea by the Plataeans (Thucydides 2. 76; cf. Xenophon,
Hellenica 3. 1. 7) and if the Roman engineering technique was suf
ficiently advanced to build the Alban tunnel, there is nothing to have
prevented them being able to mine the walls of Veii. T h e curiosity is
that recent excavations on the neck of the Veii peninsula where the
Romans must have encamped have uncovered substantial stretches
of the fifth-century defences of the city and show that the rampart
ran over a number of earlier cuniculi which had been filled in with
tight-packed sherds, stones, and earth. These cuniculi, constructed
originally for drainage, are a regular feature of the landscape. T h e
discovery is summarized and illustrated by J . B. Ward-Perkins
(P.B.S.R. 27 (1959), 43 ff.). It is a tempting conjecture to believe that
the Romans succeeded in clearing one of the filled-in cuniculi and
thereby penetrated the defences. T w o further points may be noted.
There are no traces of cuniculi near the arx, the Piazza d'Armi, nor
672

396 B.C.

5. 19. 10

could any have been dug there. O n the other hand one of the biggest
and most spectacular surviving cuniculi, carrying water from the Fosso
di Formello to the Fosso Piordo, passes right under the site of the
Roman camp.
19. 11. senae: one hour below ground and five above, or six hours
below ground as a spell (Bayet, Gage, de Selincourt) ? 6. 4. 10 cum in
sex partes divisus . . . senis horis in orbem succederet proelio is decisive for the
former although singulae horae would be expected. T h e escapers in
The Wooden Horse found that it was impossible to dig for more than
an hour at a shift.
20. 2. litteras: Camillus is careful to frame his request in the punc
tiliously correct language of official dispatches (8. 13. 11, 31. 31. 20,
45. 23. 1). An interesting parallel is afforded by Cato's reply to Cicero
when the latter approached the Senate formally for a supplicatio and,
as he hoped, a triumph (adFam. 15. 5. 2).
20. 4-10. The Motions of P. Licinius and Ap. Claudius.
T h e section is an interruption which conflicts sufficiently with the
thread of the narrative, even apart from the suggestive ferunt, to show
that L. has adopted it from a separate account. Mommsen (Rom.
Forschungen, 1. 265; cf. Aul. Gell. 4. 10. 3) drew attention to the oddity
that Licinius was called on to speak first. As a plebeian and a relatively
junior ex-consular tribune he had no entitlement to the position and
his preferment should be ascribed to the family bias of Licinius Macer.
T h e whole debate is intended to provide a motive for Camillus 5
prosecution (32. 8-9 n.). T h e theme of praeda Veientana is assiduously
cultivated.
20. 5. Appius' speech is violent and declamatory, invoking the tricks
and phrases of Republican mob-oratory, si semel (20. 5), used only
here in L., is colloquial (four times in Plautus; cf. Terence, Hecut.
478). inaequalis also is found elsewhere in L. only at 41. 20. 3 but cf.
[Sallust,] Epist. 1.8. 6. For avidas manus (20. 6) cf. Horace, Sat. 2. 3. 151.
fortium bellatorum 'gallant warriors' is a hackneyed platitude (Plautus,
Miles 11; Pseudolus 992; Tacitus, Annals. 1. 67 et aL). Notice also the
assonances (inaequalem, inconsultam; doni. . . domos; praerepturas . . .
praemia . . . praedator) and the remarkable alliteration periculiqae praecipuam petere partem.
20. 6. ut segnior: 'the quicker a man was to seek the lion's share of
danger and hard work, the slower he would be to snatch what he
could for his own enrichment'.
20. 7. Licinius' reply is moderate and conciliatory.
21. The Assault of Veii: Evocatio
Camillus, like a second Ulysses, marshals the resources of war and
814432

673

XX

5-21

396 B.C.

religion against Veii. T h e ritual of evocatio was designed to persuade

the tutelary deity of an enemy city to leave that city and accept a new
home in Rome. It differed from exoratio (Servius, ad Aen. 12. 841), in
which the deity was persuaded to change his allegiance but not his
home, and from devotio. T h e ceremony was in the form of a contract
between the assailants and the god, the assailants offering part of the
sacrifice (exta) in exchange for the god's removal and promising him
a new home (votum). It was not a magical rite. It was only effective in
theory between communities properly constituted by the same or
similar religious solemnities (urbes), for otherwise the god could not be
led to expect his customary attention in his new home. T h e only
certain examples of the use of the evocatio, with one notorious exception,
are against Etruscan cities (Veii, Volsinii (Propertius 4. 2. 2-4) and
Falerii Veteres (Ovid, Fasti 3. 8 4 3 ; cf. 5. 52. 8)) so that the rite, as
would be expected, may be claimed as Etruscan. M a n y questions
remain unanswered. Did the cult have Anatolian precedents ? Was the
physical removal of the cult-statue to Rome always part of the ritual
or was it added when anthropomorphic conceptions of the gods be
came fashionable? T h e exception is the case of Carthage (Servius,
loc. cit.; see Fraenkel, Horace, 237-8) where it seems that the old ritual
was deliberately refurbished and given a new application in order to
eliminate once and for all the power of Rome's great rival. If so, it
was a piece of religious improvisation by the pontifices.
It is a curious fact that in three of the four cases the tutelary deity
was known at Rome as J u n o (Regina, Guritis, Caelestis). It has been
suggested that each of the different deities was intentionally renamed
(and even resexed) by the R o m a n pontifices as J u n o because J u n o was
the goddess who was eventually persuaded to abandon a persistent
vendetta against the founders of Rome. O r it may be that J u n o was in
three cases the nearest equivalent in the R o m a n pantheon: S. Ferri
conjectures that the deity who presided over Veii was U N I T U R A N
(Studi Etruschi, 24 (1955), 107). There were, however, many other
evocationes now unknown to us (Pliny, N.H. 28. 18) and the ratio of
three Junos to one (Vertumnus) may be purely coincidental.
There can be no question that the tradition in respect of Veii is
true. T h e religious calendars preserved the date of the institution of
the cult of J u n o Regina. But much of its prominence in the story of
Veii will be due to the excitement aroused by the spectacular use
of evocatio against Carthage. T h e terms of the carmen were preserved in
cuiusdam Furii vetustissimo libro (? L. Furius Philus, consul 136 B.C., who
was a friend of Scipio Aemilianus: cf. Serenus Sammonicus ap.
Macrobius 3. 9. 6 ff.) and were specially brought up to date for that
occasion: 'si deus, si dea est cui populus civitasque Carthaginiensis
est in tutela teque maxime ille qui urbis huius populique tutelam recepisti,
674

396 B.C.

5-21

precor venerorque veniamque a vobis peto ut vos populum civitatemque

Garthaginiensem deseratis, loca templa sacra urbemque eorum relinquatis absque his abeatis, eique populo civitatique metum formidinem
oblivionem iniciatis, propitiique Romam ad me meosque veniatis nostraque
vobis loca templa sacra urbs acceptior probatiorque sit, mihique
populoque Romano militibusque meis propitii sitis. si <ista> ita
feceritis ut sciamus intellegamusque voveo vobis templa ludosque facturum\
L. abbreviates the prayer, prefacing it with an extraneous invocation
of Apollo but the italicized words show that the elements of the original
prayer are still perceptible. Instead of detailing the ritual as a ritual,
L. made it part of the narrative, incorporating the different acts as
historical episodes (21. 8 n., 22. 3 n.) and recasting the prayer in
literary language which conveys the atmosphere but not the uncouthness of actual devotion. Notice the anaphoric tuo . . . tuo . . .
tibi. . . te . . . te, common to prayer-style (3. 17. 6 n.). T h e form
sequare for sequaris is unique in L. (see 28. 44. 2) and must be used for
effect.
See the over-imaginative study of V. Basanoff, Evocatio, 42 ff.;
H u b a u x 154 ff.; S. Ferri, Hommages Herrmann, 350 ff.
21. 5. ignari: the passage should be read along with the last moments
of Troy as described by Virgil, Aeneid 2. 241 ff.: note especially 248-9.
Both authors are likely to have had Ennius in mind (R. G. Austin, J.R.S.
49 ( T 9 5 9 ) J 24)> which would account for certain eccentricities of lan
guage. For in partem praedae vocatos cf. Virgil, Aen. 3. 2 2 2 - 3 ; for icti
furore cf. Catullus 63. 79. ingruo (21. 4, 32. 7, 37. 1, 4. 30. 8, 6. 3. 1,
6. 6, 7. 25. 9, 25. 26. 15, 26. 25. 10, 26. 41. 21, 28. 44. 15, 29. 10. 1,
37. 23. 2, 41. 21. 5) is not used by Cicero, Sallust, or Caesar. Indeed
except for a solitary use in Plautus (Amph. 236) it is not found before
Virgil {Aen. 2. 301, 8. 535 al.). T h e facts indicate that the word was
regarded as poetic and L. uses it in poetic contexts (Stacey, Archivf.
Lat. Lex. 10 (1898), 4 6 ; against, Gries, Constancy, 43-45). Notice the
long and involved sentence from Veientes ignari describing the con
flicting emotions and fortunes of the besieged, and the rhetorical
plurals conveying an exaggerated sense of the danger (vatibus = the
Veientane seer, oraculis = Delphi, deos = J u n o , alios = Apollo).
2 1 . 8 . fabula: called by Plutarch (Camillus 5) a . T h e insertion
comes from another source since it conflicts with 21. 10 (edidit) and
the dramatic character of it (fabula, scaenis) suggested to Ribbeck a
fabula praetextata (Rh. Mus. 36 (1881), 321). This is unlikely. L. does
not elsewhere consult plays as authorities and the dramatic element
was as much a feature of Hellenistic history as of drama itself, fabula
for L. means a story to which he attaches little belief (22. 6, 1.4. 7)
and the present passage should be compared with Praef 6.
T h e story springs from Etruscan ritual. A stage in the sacrifice was
675

5- 2 i . 8

396 B.C.

the removal of the exta for inspection by the haruspices (exta rapere,
prosecare: see below) and if certain conditions or features were observed,
a successful outcome to a war was predicted (31.5. 7, 3 6 . 1 . 3, 42. 3 0 . 9 :
see Thulin, Etr. Discipline 2. 48-49 for further details). T h e annalist
misinterpreted rapere^ taking it literally as 'to snatch' and not tech
nically 'to cut out' and devised the anecdote to suit the meaning. Such
a theft might also be thought to have magical efficacy, as in 41 the
besieged Perugians attempted to kidnap Octavian in the middle of a
sacrifice (Suetonius, Aug. 14. 3 ; see B. Nogara, Gli Etruschi e la loro
civiltd, 198). T h e anecdote accounts for the ritual.
prosecuisset: mistranslated by Plutarch, who cites Livy, as /cara/coXovdrjaavn (? a misreading = prosecutus esset), it is the t.t. for cutting
out the sacrificial entrails; cf. Paulus Festus 69 L. exta rapere may be a
loose equivalent for the same action or denote a preliminary ritual
such as the rapid removal of the entrails from the body; cf. Suetonius,
Aug. 1 semicrudaextaraptafocoprosecuit. In the annalistic version Camillus
may have been responsible in person for seizing the exta (6. 23. 1 1 ;
cf. Sulla in Augustine, de Civ. Dei 2. 24).
adaperto: 25. 30. 10, 45. 39. 17. Elsewhere first in Ovid (Amores
1. 5. 3, 3. 12. 12).

2 1 . 9 . veri: both terms of a comparison with similis in L. must agree in

number. Thus veri similis (3. 47. 5, 21. 38. 8, 47. 5, 26. 22. 15, 34. 50. 7,
41. 3. 10; cf. veri similius in 5. 11. 7) but similia veris (6. 20. 4, 10. 20. 5,
29. 20. 1; cf. 26. 49. 6, 37. 11. 4). Therefore veris (Madvig; see
Wolfflin, Livian. Kritik, 14).
21. 10. eo tempore: the awkward resumption marks a return to the
main narrative.
in aede Iunonis: for the text see C.Q. 9 (1959), 283; cf. 29. 14. 3
in aede Iunonis Sospitaestrepitum editum. A large temple, i 5 ' 3 5 x 8 - o 7 m . ,
has been excavated on the Piazza d'Armi and sixth-century terracotta
friezes and antefixes recovered. In style and decoration it was not
so elaborate as the Portonaccio temple on a platform to the west of
the city from which important statuary has corne, but it must be the
temple referred to by L . ; for not merely is it the only one within the
arx but it alone shows a distinct break in votive deposits, confirming
the evocatio archaeologically. See Stefani, Mon. Ant. Line. 40 (1944),
228-90; Andren, Acta Inst. Rom. Sueciae 6 (1940), 8-9. For the identi
fication with the Portonaccio temple see A. de Ridder, Rev. Etudes
Grec. 33 (1920), 364; Pallottino, Arch. Class. 2 (1950), 122 ff.; Santangelo, Bolletino d'arte, 1952, 1476.; Stefani, Notiz. Scavi, 7 (1953),
29 ff.; Ferri, Arch. Class. 6 (1954), 1156.; Hubaux 2481?.
saxa tegulaeque: cf. Virgil, Aeneid 2. 445 ff.
21. 14. rerum: 21. 60. 8 praeda parvi pretii rerumfuit. 'The loot consisted
of objects of greater value than expected.'
676

396 B.C.

5. 21. 14

precatus: Camillus' sentiments are clearly analogous to, and pro

bably imitated from, the sentiments of Scipio Aemilianus over Car
thage' (Momigliano; see Duckett, Studies in Ennius, 44). Repeated by
D.H. (12. 14, 16), Plutarch (Camillus 5), Zonaras (7. 21), and Val.
Max. (1. 5. 2), they echo a familiar Greek cri-de-cceur<j>Qovep6v TO
deiov, cf. 45. 4 1 . 7 (Aemilius Paulus): Plutarch, Antony 44. 5). But L.
adds one unusual feature which is absent from the other sources, even
Val. Max. and Zonaras who are derived from him. Whereas the others
concentrated exclusively on the envy of the gods, L. associates with it
the envy of man. T h e resulting prayer is in appearance conventional
(note the repeated ut. . . ut characteristic of a formal style (cf. 22. 11. 4,
37. 50. 4), the order sua populique Romani (cf. the Evocatio prayer in
Macrobius 3. 9. 8 mihiquepopuloque Romano), the address si cui deorum
(see Liegle, Hermes 77 (1942), 266) but in content is startling. T h e
effect is to focus attention on the theme ofpraeda Veientana. L. eschews
a divine in favour of a human explanation of Camillus' career. T h e
passage is discussed by M . Treu, Wiirz. Jahrbiicher f. d. Altert. 2 (1947),
63-74: cf. H . H . Scullard, J.R.S. 50 (1960), 61.
2 1 . 15. publico: deleted by many editors e.g. Glareanus, Gronovius,
Dobree (Adv. Critica, 2. 379), publico is attested by all the manuscripts
and is required to balance privato.
2 1 . 16. convertentem: to turn to the right was an act of ritual per
formed during the adoration of a god or cult-object. L. appears to con
nect it with Camillus' prayer at the sight of the spoil and not directly
with any cult of a particular god. In this he is certainly wrong. Although
the Iguvines performed such a turn at the closing act of a prayer
(Tab. Iguv. V I A 6 1 B 11), by the Romans it was always per
formed in the presence of the sacred object (Plautus, Cure. 69-70;
Pliny, N.H. 28. 25; Suetonius, VitelL 2 ; Lucretius 5. 1199; Plutarch,
Q.R. 14; Marcellus 6). It is likely to be another act in the ceremony of
evocatio which has been detached and made into a separate historical
incident. See Koch, Gestirnverehrung im Alten Italien, 20-21. It will have
been performed by the celebrant when he came face to face with the
statue of the deity who was to be evoked. T h e whole episode, like the
earlier case of exta rapere (21. 8-9), is betrayed by traditur memoriae to
be an insertion from another source whose identity is revealed by
the allusion to Licinia familia in 22. 2. L. reverts to Valerius at 22, 3.
22. 1. sub corona: 4. 34. 4 n. Early Rome was too poor to have slaves
for show or for domestic service and too limited to require them for
industry and agriculture. Thus references to slaves (2. 4. 5, 4. 29. 4,
34. 4) are part of the annalistic colouring, important only for showing
how the Romans thought of their early history. T h e present sale
of captives may be the first authentic case, for with the growth of
677

5- 22. I

396 B.C.

ager publicus slaves became worth while as labourers. T h e first slavemarket was in 259. See Clerici, Economia e Finanza, 125 ff.; H . Volkmann, Die Massenversklavungen . . . in der hellenistisch-romischer eit3 36
( = 150) ff.
22. 3. egestae: from egero.
amoliri: L. tells of the removal of J u n o Regina to Rome in suitably
elevated language, amoliri is used three times by Plautus in pompous
tones (cf. Most. 371 = 391 ; Pseud. 856) and once by Sisenna (fr. 74 P.)
but not otherwise in prose before L. T h e tone is continued by the
choice of iuvenali (22. 5) for iuvenili (1. 57. n n.) and the epic fato
urgente (22. 8; cf. Virgil, Aen. 2. 653). For molimentum cf. Sisenna fr. 72;
Caesar, B.G. 1. 34. 3. Notice too that L. describes the approaches
made by the young men to the goddess with phrases which in any
other context would sound sacrilegious (for admovere manus cf. 11. 16 n . ;
attractare cf. Cicero, pro Caelio 20). But cf. Virgil, Aen. 2. 719.
22. 4. iuvenes: cf. 22. 5 certae gentis sacerdos. A dim recollection of the
fact that the Veientane cult was in the hands of a single gens (cf. the
Potitii and Pinarii at Rome) for which a substitute had to be found
when J u n o was removed to Rome. Basanoff and Hubaux explain
the connexion of iuvenes and J u n o by a common etymological root.
22. 5. quidam: Plutarch (Camillus 6), specifically citing Livy (ALOVLOS
Se (fyrjaiv), states that it was Camillus who addressed the goddess. It
clearly ought to have been Camillus, since Camillus is the principal
figure in the story and subsequently appears in the garb ofJuppiter as
a triumphator, but, as Clericus in a good note on this passage ob
served, Plutarch must be quoting from memory and made a natural
confusion (21. 8 n.). This is a more likely explanation than that
Plutarch had a variant text of L. (Basanoff) or that Plutarch was
really quoting from another source but mistakenly calls it Livy
(A. Klotz, Rh. Mus. 90 (1941), 282 ff.).
22. 6. fabulae: 21. 8 n.
adminiculis: Etruscan cult-images were designed to be carried as is
proved by the discovery at Veii of terracotta statue bases with slots
7 cm. in diameter through which wooden poles could be slipped
(E. Stefani, Notiz. Scavi, 1946, 36 ff; M. Renard, Latomus 8 (1949),
i 9 ff.).
22. 7. templum: 31. 3 n.
The Return of Camillus
T h e pageantry of Camillus' return to Rome is divided into five
distinct scenes:
(1) maximum imperatorum suggests the practice whereby a victorious
general was hailed 'imperator' by his troops and retained the appella
tion as a semi-official title till he laid down his imperium on his return
678

396 B.C.

5- 23

to Rome. The practice is first attested for Scipio Africanus, in 209

(27.19.4).
(2) grates dis agentium: on the news of a victory the Senate might
decide to order a supplicatio or public thanksgiving of so many
days' duration. T h e first act was the giving of thanks in the temples
of Rome (30. 40. 4 ; Cicero, ad Fam. 15. 4. 13, 13. 3), and in par
ticular the temple of Capitoline Juppiter (38. 51. 8 ; AuL Gell. 4.
18).
(3) supplicationes: see 3. 63. 5 n. Four-day supplicationes are attested
for 203 (30. 17. 3) and 197 (32. 31. 6). It is doubtful whether supplica
tiones after victory had yet been devised.
(4) adventus: although not a formal part of the return, the arrival
of the victorious general was always greeted with popular demon
strations (22. 61. 14).
(5) A triumph, as Cato rather tartly pointed out to Cicero, did not
follow automatically from the voting of a supplicatio although in prac
tice the two generally went together. See Halkin, La Supplication
a"Action de Graces, 49 ff.
T h e picture as a whole is of the return of a great national hero.
Such undoubtedly Camillus was but many of the individual features
must be copied from the return of a Scipio or even a Sulla. All that
would have been known about Camillus would be the bare fact that
he celebrated a triumph. T h e interesting thing is that this triumph
should have been inflated until by the addition of the four white
horses and the imitation of Juppiter it became a source of scandal
and the alleged sacrilege was m a d e the reason for Camillus' exile. The
process is easy to detect. The triumphator was traditionally dressed
like Juppiter and on the roof of the temple of Capitoline Juppiter
there was a statue-group of a quadriga, made by a Veientane artist,
to which a prophetic myth about the destinies of Rome and Veii
was attached (Festus 340 L . ; Plutarch, Publicola 13; Servius, ad Aen.
7. 188). T o associate the conqueror of Veii with the Veientane quadriga and to invent a triumph in the guise of Juppiter were natural
developments. A second tradition, of less clear origin, credited Romulus
also with a triumph with four horses (Propertius 4. 1. 3 2 ; Dio 52. 1 3 . 3 :
cf. Virgil, Aen. 3. 537). Romulus and Camillus alone enjoyed that
honour and the moral, which the historians meant their readers to
draw, was obvious. Camillus was a second RomulusRomulus ac
parens patriae conditorque alter urbis (49, 7 n.). Which triumph was in
vented as a pendant to the other we cannot say, although it is plausible
that the Romulus triumph should have been invented as a defensive
precedent when an anti-Camillus movement among historians
assailed his reputation.
It is in the light of these facts that Caesar's action in using four white
679

3. 23

396 B.C.

horses for his triumph should be judged (Dio 43. 14. 3 ; see Momigliano, C.Q_. 36 (1942), 113 with references). Caesar was staking a
claim to be the heir of Romulus and Camillus. It makes no historical
sense to believe that the whole of the Camillus episode was invented
by some enemy of Caesar's to discredit him. The Camillus legend is
old and Caesar tried to turn it to his account. Now L. is at pains to tone
down the sacrilegious side, blaming Camillus' exile not on the impiety
of the triumph but on the political issue of the spoil. We may see in
this contemporary significance. Octavian too saw himself as a second
Romulus (24. n n.; 1. 7. 9 n.; Suetonius, Aug. 7) and while he did
not make Caesar's mistake of indulging in flashy exhibitionism, he
was anxious to turn the past to his own account. In both 30 and
29 B.C. Octavian was acclaimed Imperator and was voted supplicationes and a triumph. This by itself would not have given rise to com
parisons with Camillus were it not that the scenes which greeted his
adventus both at Brindisi and at Rome were among the most demon
strative ever witnessed (Dio 51. 4. 4-5, 19, 20-21 ; see P. Grenade,
Origines du Principal 254 ff.).
23. 6. Solisque: the mention of the Sun as well as Juppiter as an
object of comparison must post-date the introduction of the Hellenic
mythology about the Sun, i.e. after the beginning of the third century
B.C. (Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 117).
23. 7. Iunoni: 31. 3 n.
Matutae Matris: an ancient Italic goddess (cf. Oscan Maattiis),
whose name shows her to be concerned with maturity and fertility
(Maturus). Her festival, the Matralia, celebrated by free women on
the traditional date of the dedication of the temple (11 June), is
remarkable for the oddity that they prayed not for their own but for
their sisters' children (pueri sororii; see Plutarch, Q.R. 16, 17; Ovid,
Fasti 6. 559). It was Aunts' rather than Mothers' Day. This quaint
custom may be based on a mistaken rationalization of the old prayer
formula which used pueri of the female sex and sororii not as an adj.
from soror but from sororiare (cf. Festus 380 L. sororiare mammae dicuntur
puellarum cum primum tumescunt; cf. 1. 26. 13 n. sororium tigillum). The
primitive cult was courotrophic: the goddess presided over child-birth
and child care, as the highly anatomical statuettes of her plainly
show. Tradition makes Servius Tullius the first founder of the temple
(19. 6; Ovid, Fasti 6. 477 ff.) and Camillus the refounder but the
connexion with Servius Tullius is legendary.
The temple of Mater Matuta was always associated with that of
Fortuna in foro Boario. Both temples were dedicated on the same day
(11 June; Fasti Ant.), both lay in the Forum Boarium, both were
burnt in 213 (24. 47. 15) and restored the following year (25. 7. 6).
Their site has recently been identified. Near the church of S. Omobono,
680

396 B.C.

5- 23- 7

close to the Forum Holitorium, there were uncovered two adjacent

rectangular cellae dating from the second century B.C. T h e two cellae
lie side by side and their proximity would nicely account for their
common fortunes. T h e deposits from the lowest level beneath the
cellae included fragments of Attic pottery dating from c. 470.
Their foundation is, therefore, later than Servius Tullius and he was
credited with it merely because of his legendary interest in one of the
pair, Fortuna. T h e second problem, where the cult originated and
why Camillus refounded it at Rome, can be answered definitively.
There is no connexion with the evocatio ofJ u n o . T h e reference to J u n o
Matuta (34. 53. 3) is a mere mistake and there is no trace, as Basanoff
alleged, of evocationes being accompanied by attendant dedications.
The whole connexion of Mater Matuta with Veii is annalistic rationa
lization. T h e goddess's name suggests Volscian and Oscan (Italic
not Etruscan) origins and we know that a centre of the cult was at
Satricum where a large quantity of votive stipi have been found. It is
significant that the earliest finds cannot be put much before 420 and
that a revolt of Satricum is recorded in 393 by Diodorus (14. 102. 4).
T h e concentration of interest on Veii and Etruria tends to obscure the
equally pressing danger from the Volscians in the south. T h e gravity
with which the Romans viewed it is revealed by the campaigns of
these years and by the dispatch of a colony to Circeii in Volscis
(24. 4 n.). T h e foundation of the temple of Mater M a t u t a is to be
seen against that background, not necessarily as a result of an evocatio,
which could probably only be performed between related cultures,
but as a matter of policy, as a step to promote friendly relations with
the inhabitants of the key city of Satricum. See Platner-Ashby; H . J .
Rose, Mnemosyne 53 (1925), 407 ff.; C.Q. 28 (1934), 156; Halberstadt, Mater Matuta; Link, R.E., ' M a t u t a ' ; H . Lyngby, Die Tempel
d. Fortuna u.d. Mater Matuta, 22 ff.; Beitrage z. Topographie, 47-49;
Dumezil, R..L. 33 (1955), 144; G. Lugli, Roma Antica, 544 ff.;
Maule-Smith, Votive Religion at Caere, 75-87; Latte, Rom. Religionsgeschichte, 97.
2 3 . 8. agi. . . coeptum: 2. 33. 1.
2 3 . 1 1 . donum: 25. 4-10, 28. 1-5.
23. 12. Volscis et Aequis: from the Annales. T h e war was being pro
secuted vigorously throughout the Siege of Veii and a successful out
come is implied both by the dedication of the temple of Mater Matuta
(see above) and by the colonization of Circeii (24. 4 n.).
24-30. Interlude
T h e climax of Veii is over. T h e task before L. now was to carry the
reader along to the second climax of the bookthe capture of Rome.
With the exception of the isolated episode of Falerii (27 n.) 5 the raw
681

5- 24-30

395 B.C.

materials did not offer much scope. There were scattered facts in the
Annales, details about colonies (24. 4, 29. 3), military operations
(24. 1-2, 28. 5 ff), and prosecutions (29. 6) but nothing coherent.
In compensation L. or his precedessors elaborated a theme which
would provide a connexion for the doings of these years. T h e safety
of Rome depended on h u m a n and divine factors, on Camillus and on
proper relations with the gods (pietas). T h e indispensability of Camillus
is brought into the open by the episode of Falerii (26. 10, 28. 1), the
value of pietas is illustrated by the tale of Lipari islanders and the gift
to Apollo (28. 2-5). The black side of the picture is provided both by
the dire opposition of the tribunes to Camillus, who with a short
sighted disregard for the interest of Rome seize on the issue of the
praeda Veientana and by constant attrition succeed in compassing
Camillus' exile, and by the sacrilegious proposals to transfer the city
of Rome to the site of Veii (24. 5-11, 30. 6). Good and evil are carefully
balanced and the apparent triumph of evil induces a frame of mind
in the reader which expects a disaster of the magnitude and sudden
ness of the battle of the Allia (32. 7).
24. 1. insequens: 395 B.C.
P. Cornelios: for Scipio see 19. 2 n. Cossus, P.f. A.n. (Mtinzer, R.E.,
'Cornelius (i2o) 5 ), is shown by his filiation to be a son of the consular
tribune of 408 (4. 56. 2 n.).
M. Valerium: 14. 5 n.
K. Fabium Ambustum iterum: in the Capitoline Fasti. . . stus III. See
4. 61. 4 n.
L. Furium: 4. 51. 1 n. Q. Servilium: 8. 1 n,
24. 2. sorte: sorti Ver. A rule may be formulated from L.'s usage.
Where the name of the person to whom a province or the like is
assigned is named in the dative next to the ablative of sors the form
sorte is used to avoid ambiguity, i.e. Valerio sorte provincia evenit; cf.
2. 8. 6, 3. 64. 4, 37. 50. 8. Where the person and sors are separated by
the province the form sorti is used, i.e. Valerio provincia sorti evenit; cf.
4. 37. 6, 29, 20. 4, 31. 6. 1. Therefore sorti should be read here and
sorte in 28. 45. r r . For the war see 8. 4.
vi. . . operibus: 22. 8, an unconscious repetition. See 1. 14. 4 n.
24. 3 . pax: from the Annales, whose character is also conveyed by the
language. Notice the perfect passive depopulatus, only used in com
munique style (e.g. Caesar, B.G. 1. 11. 4, 7. 77. 14), and felix arbor, a
technical expression (cf. Lex ap. Fronto 183.25 van den H o u t ; Cato ap.
Paulus Festus 81 L . ; Aul. Gell. 10. 15. 15; Macrobius 3. 20. 2 ; see
1. 26. 6 n.). T h e felling of the arbores felices was both an economic and
religious blow to the Capenates. For similar reprisals cf. 6. 31. 8 ; Dio
fr. 40, 23 Melber.
24. 4. coloniam in Volscos: Circeii, dated by Diodorus to 393 (14. 102.
682

395 B.C.

5- 24. 4

4). It was intended as a stronghold to impede the Volscian advance

from the south and should be viewed in conjunction with a strengthen
ing of the relations with Satricum (23. 7 n.). For the early history of
Circeiisee 1. 56. 3 n.; E. T. Salmon, C.Q. 31 (1937), 111-13. T h e size
of the colony, 3,000 Roman citizens with 3 ^ iugera apiece (4. 47. 7 n.),
calls for comment. There is enough available land in the area for a
colony of such dimensions but it is inconceivable that it should be
founded with 3,000 citizens from Rome. Citizen-colonies were always
small (300 families was the prescribed number from 329-184) because
situated in places where their development was restricted geogra
phically or economically. Instead, therefore, of forming self-contained
communities on their own the colonists remained citizens of Rome.
Even if Rome could have spared 3,000 citizens at this date, the result
ing colony would have been big enough to have its own constitution.
Therefore, either the figure of 3,000 is fictitious or their designation as
cives Romani is false (cf. also 4. 47. 7). In all likelihood a small citizen
establishment was supplemented by the addition of Latins (34. 42. 6;
see S her win-White, Roman Citizenship, 72-76).
24. 5. pulcherrima urbs Veii: for a discussion of the proposal to migrate
to Veii see 51-54 n.
24. 7-8. Ver. reads partim plebs partim senatus habitando distinaba . . .;
N has partem plebi partem senatus destinabant [a P) habitandos Veios. What
ever the exact text the sense must be as determined by Mr. G. W.
Williams (J.R.S. 45 (1955), 228). T h e proposal being canvassed was
to transfer part of the plebs and part of the patres to refound a new
Rome at Veii but not to abandon Rome entirely. This is demanded
by the second half of the sentence duasque urbes communi republica incoli
a populo Romano, where the populus Romanus must be inclusive of plebs
and patres. Since the obdurate resistance of the Senate to the proposal
is assumed throughout, senatus cannot be the subject of destinabant;
the Senate would never have detailed any part of the citizen body as
emigrants to Veii. And if senatus cannot be the subject of destinabant,
it follows that plebs (Ver.), which is exactly parallel to senatus, cannot
be either and that plebs is wrong. T h e only people with an interest in
starting the new settlement were the disaffected colonists who had no
wish to be relegated to the distant swamps of Circeii. They are the
subject of the preceding verbs censebant and praeponebant and should be
of destinabant as well. T w o possibilities are open:
(1) reading partem plebis partem senatus, either insert ad before habitan
dos Veios ('they detailed some plebeians and some patricians for in
habiting Veii': so Heerwagen, Luterbacher, Weissenborn) or delete
habitandos Veios (Bayet). T h e sense is adequate but the reading remote
from the manuscripts.
(2) Better, with Mr. Williams, to follow the lead given by Ver. and
683

5- 2 4 . 7-8

395 B.C.

read partiplebis parti senatus habitandos destinabant Veios. For the intrusive
m in the manuscripts cf. 3. 44. 1, 64. 8, 67. 7, 4. 13. 3, 9, 17. 4, 58. 12,
5- 2 3 - 5> 3 1 - 5> 44- i> 5 1 - x> 5 2 - r3> 6 - 4- 9- F o r t h e word-order cf.
39-6.
24. 10. victam . . . victrici: the arguments used by the optimates call to
mind the refusal of some Athenians to quit Athens at the time of
Salamis (Herodotus 8. 41, 55 j and see now the decree of Themistocles:
the parallel between the sack of Athens by the Persians and of R o m e
by the Gauls is developed in later chapters) and the intensity of their
feeling can be seen from their fiery language, in contrast to the
measured terms used by Camillus (25. 4-6). T h e two speeches are
nicely designed to balance one another. For the indignant use of -ne ut
see 4. 2. 12 n . ; for the hysterical citius se morituros (9) cf. 24. 3. 12;
subigere as a synonym for cogere is colloquial (before L. used only by
Plautus, e.g. True. 783 and Sallust, Catil. 51. 18 (speech of Caesar)).
24. 1 1 . T. Sicinium: nothing else is known of him, but his proposal
is in accord with the reputed sympathies of his family (cf. 2. 32. 2 n.,
40. 14 n., 58. 2 n., 3. 54. 12 n.).
Romulo, deifilio: 1. 40. 3 n., in the context of active propaganda
about the removal of the capital of the Empire from Rome (50. 8),
the phrase cannot but have held significant overtones for a R o m a n
audience. Octavian, who toyed with the idea of taking the name
Romulus, was styled divijilius.
2 5 . 4. damnata voti: 'bound, as they were, to discharge their v o w ' :
damnare voti is sacral (7. 28. 4, 10. 37. 16, 27. 45. 8, 39. 9. 4 ; Nepos,
Timol. 5. 3 ; Fronto 95. 20 van den H o u t ; Macrobius 3. 2. 6). Against
the passionate outbursts of plebeians and patricians alike, Camillus
preserves an impassive front, res moventes is the technical term in law
for movables (Aul. Gell. 11. 18. 13; Dig. 33. 10. 2, 39. 5. 3 5 ; see
Wolfflin, Archiv f. Lat. Lex. 10 (1896), 10); cf. the intransitive use of
movere in, e.g., terra movit. As Crevier saw, a colon not a comma is
required after decumae.
25. 7. T h e matter was referred to the pontifices, within whose com
petence fell all matters concerning the performance of vows and
dedications. Their judgement is naturally formulated in legalistic
terms. For quod eius cf. 34. 2 ; for conceptum votum cf. 41. 21. 1 1 ; Macro
bius 1. 10. 21; C.I.L. n . 3081 vootum . . . cuncaptum.
2 5 . 8. pollicitae: sc. sunt. T h e sentence should be punctuated pollicitae
. . . aurum, et omnia ornamenta sua in aerarium detulerunt 'they promised
gold and contributed all their jewels'. There is no need, with Morstadt, to delete et, taking pollicitae as a participle. T h e voluntary
contribution by the matrons and their reward seem to be a doublet
of the similar occasion a few years later. See 50. 7 n.
684

394 B.C.

5- 26-27

26-27. The Capture of Falerii

T h e Fall of Veii and capitulation of Capena left Falerii as the next
prey open to attack. Even if her former association with Veii (8. 4,
16. 1 ff., 17. 6) had not established an implacable hostility in Rome,
her strategic position, commanding both the Tiber highway and the
overland routes to Etruria, made her too important and too poten
tially dangerous a neighbour to be overlooked. The tradition that
Gamillus captured the city in 394 B.C. (or an equivalent date) squares
therefore with the prevailing situation and the military details of the
account are evidently founded on fact (26. 5 n.), despite the outbreak
of hostilities again in 357 which continued down to the final revolt
and reduction of the city in 241 when the inhabitants were transferred
to a new site. T h e sack of Rome by the Gauls set R o m a n expansion
back by at least twenty-five years and there is nothing to be wondered
at in the slow reclaiming of lost ground from 380 onwards.
Falerii (Veteres, to distinguish it from F. Novi founded in 241),
the modern Givita Castellana, 'stands on a narrow neck of land,
guarded by almost sheer precipices nearly 300 ft. high. T h e approach
from the west alone is easy and direct; this was in antiquity defended
by a wall'. T h e defensive properties of the site, like Veii, commended
it for settlement. Gato speaks of an Argive settlement (Pliny, N.H.
3. 51), but this, together with other Greek connexions noted by D.H.
(1. 21), were no doubt legends growing up round the influence which
Greece exerted over southern Etruria especially in the sixth century
and which is attested by the large number of Greek finds in the city
and the vicinity. It was at all times an Etruscan city, not one of the
Twelve Peoples but closely linked with the fortunes of Veii and
Fidenae.
T h e bare record of Gamillus' capture of Falerii had at some date
drafted on to it the edifying tale of the Faliscan schoolmaster (cf.
Florus 1. 6. 5 ; Eutropius 1. 20. 1 ; Orosius 3. 3. 4 ; Frontinus 4. 4. 1;
de Viris Illustr, 23. 1; D . H . 13. 1. 1-2; Plutarch, Camillus 10. iff.;
Dio 23. 4). If L.'s account of the debate in the Senate in 171 B.C. (42.
47. 6; cf. Diodorus 30. 7. 1) substantially represents the arguments
used on that occasion, it was already a stock example for orators.
There are features about it which are plainly anachronistic (27. 1 n.),
but the spectacle of 'the hunter hunted' or the beater beaten (cf.
Horace, Epist. 2. 1. 71) has a pleasing justice about it which is peren
nial. An ingenious theory proposed by Gage would see it as an aeticlogical legend explaining a primitive ritual analogous to that of the
Lupercia binding and beating (fustigatio). If the story is not historical,
its origin will lie in Hellenistic exempla (27. 1 n.) rather than in ritual.
L.'s treatment of the story is characteristic. The military details
685

5- 26-27

394 B.C.

are recounted in professional language (26. 5 n., 26. 6 n., 26. 8 n.) but
his tone changes abruptly when he deals with the schoolmaster episode.
This, for L., is an exemplum, a specimen virtutis (26. 10), and it is told as a
self-contained unity, mos erat. . . is cum . . . (27. 1-2) marks the new
beginning and can be compared with L.'s method of starting an
incident erat turn . , . is cum . . . (2. 33. 5 n,). T h e situation is then
described in an involved sentence with subordinate clauses leading
up to the confrontation with Camillus (ad Camillum perduxit).
Camillus' reply is elevated in language and content (27. 5 n.) and the
story ends with the gentlemanly behaviour of the Falisci who respect
Camillus' fides sufficiently to be inspired into an equal act of fides
themselves. T h e great stress laid on fides (27. 11, 27. 13 (bis), 27. 15,
28. 1) points the moral of the tale and the whole concludes on a quiet,
almost formal notepace data exercitus Romam reductus.
See Bormann, Arch. Mitteilungen aus Oest.-Ungarn 11 (1887), 103 ff.;
Gage, Huit recherches, 34 f.; H u b a u x 306 ff.; Frederiksen and WardPerkins, P.B.S.R. 25 (1957), 128 ff.
26. 2. L. Furius: 4. 51. 1 n.
C. Aemilius: 32. 1, according to the Capitoline Fasti from 391 B.C.,
Ti.f. Ti.n. (Mamercinus), a grandson of the consul of 470 (2. 61. 1 n.).
Nothing is known of his father.
L. Valerius Publicola: L.f. L.n., a son of the consular tribune of 414 (4.
49. 7 n.). For his subsequent career see Volkman, R.E., 'Valerius (298)'.
Sp. Postumius: to be identified with the censor of 380 (6. 27. 4).
Munzer (R.E., 'Postumius (61)'), arguing from Diodorus* omission
of his name, believes this consular tribunate to have been invented
because constitutional theory required a censor to have held consular
office. Postumius' record (28. 5-13) is, however, too deeply ingrained
in the Annales.
P. Cornelius iterum: no closer identification is provided by any of the
sources. In theory he might be Maluginensis (19. 2 n.), Ccssus, or
Scipio (24. 1 n . ) : see 19. 2 n. T h e collaboration with Camillus points
to Maluginensis. T h e confused KdrXos Ovfjpos in Diodorus (14. 97. 1)
is perhaps a conflation of Aemilius and Valerius. There is no need
with Mommsen (Rom, Forsckungen, 2. 229) to regard the last three
names given by L. and the Fasti as spurious, for Diodorus is waywardly
inaccurate.
26. 3 . elanguit: 1. 46. 7.
2 6 . 5 . asperis confragosisque . . . artis . . . arduis: the adjectives are almost
perfunctory, a familiar characteristic of the military assessment of a
situation (cf. 'bushy-topped trees'); cf. Varro, de Re Rust. 1. 18. 4
confragosus atque arduis clivis; Cicero, pro Sest. 100; Sallust, Catil. 7. 5;
Seneca, Dial. 4. 13. 1; Frontinus 2. 5. 24; Tacitus, Hist. 3. 17; Annals
i5- 38.
686

394 B.C.

5. 26. 6

26. 6. indidem: a certain emendation by Kern of N's indicem, restoring

a word (= ex eodem loco) only found in military or official contexts
(Nepos, Epam. 5. 2 ; Frontinus 2. 4. 5 ; Itin. Alex. 23 ; cf. the inscription
published in Notiz. Scavi, 1936, 333 no. 194 convenito indide; see also
27- J 2 . 5> 25. IJ > 28. J - 6> 39- J2 1 : 2. 9. 2 n.).
26. 7. trifariam: the army is divided into four divisions, one standing
guard and three engaged in constructing the c a m p ; cf. 4. 22. 5.
26. 8. multi caesi: notice the short, decisive sentences in the style of
military communiques by which the victory is announced.
26. 10. ni fortuna . . dedisset: for the text see C.Q. 9 (1959), 283-4.
Fortune gives Camillus an opportunity of displaying his virtus, already
known in war, in another sphere and at the same time securing a
speedy victory. So 27. 13 vos fidem in bello quam praesentem victoriam
maluistis. For cognitae . . . rebus cf. 21. 53. 8; for specimen virtutis cf.
8. 7. 8. None of the proposed conjectures, e.g. (for et cognitae) simile
cognatae Heusinger; incognitae Anon., Gronovius, Walker, improve on
the manuscripts.
27. 1. magistro liberorum et comite: the educational system of paedagogi
was, as its name implies, wholly Greek in origin. In primitive Rome
children were educated by their parents, a practice historically exem
plified by the upbringing of the Gracchi, or sent to common schools
(3. 44. 6 n.). In the latter event they would have been attended to
school by a slave, later known as a pedisequus (cf. ad Herennium 4. 65),
whose duty was not to instruct but merely to escort his charges.
Paedagogi, slaves who were both teachers and companions of the
young, became known to the Romans first perhaps through New
Comedy (Plautus, Bacch. 431 ff.; Pseud. 447) and were shortly after
wards introduced into the Roman system as part of the hellenizing
tendency in R o m a n education (cf. ad Herennium 4. 14; Cicero, de
Amic. 74; ad Att. 12. 33. 2). T h e Faliscans with their close Greek
contacts might in theory have adopted a Greek tutorial system of
education 250 years before the Romans but the whole story is seen
through Roman eyes (cf. 27. 2 hostium) which makes it more likely
that the detail is anachronistic, contemporary perhaps with the vogue
enjoyed by the episode in the second century, comite is technical; cf.
Suetonius, Claud. 3 5 ; Martial 11. 39. 2 : see Schuppe, R.E., 'Paidagogos'.
27. 2. [dum] modo: dam or dummodo is clearly otiose as there is no
subordinate clause, dum is interpolated by Ver. at 24. 2 (cf. also
3. 67. 6), and therefore should be deleted here altogether (Hertz)
rather than emended [diu Weissenborn, Bayet; turn Gronovius; secum
Zingerle).
27. 5. inquit: the arguments used by Camillus may be traditional,
for they reflect a characteristically Roman opposition to a common
687

5.27.5

394 B.C.

Greek attitude to society and war which stems from or was at least
formulated by Plato. In the Republic Plato accepts a Social Contract
explanation of the origin of society (369 B-372 D ) , a belief in societas
pacto humano. He furthermore argues that war is the business of the
whole citizen-body and that women and children should take part in
it as well (466 E) In the pursuit of war there are certain international
conventions to be observed with regard to fellow Greeks but against
barbarians war is total, knowing neither quarter nor mitigation
(470-1). Much of Plato's thinking on these topics was inherited by
Epicurus whose Kvpiai A6at exhibit striking resemblances to Camillus'
w o r d s (e.g. 33 OVK rjv TI /CGL0' iavro SiKaioavvq aAA' V rats /xer' dXArjAcov
GVdTpO<f>aiS

KCL0' OITTJALKOVS

S77 7TOT GLL T07TOVS (JVvd-qKTJ Tt? V7Tp TOV

fir) p\a.7TTiv 77fiXa-TTTeadcu).The apologists of Roman imperialism in

the second century would have had to counter such a philosophical
stand and deployed arguments such as Camillus uses herethat there
was a ius gentium, that children were exempt from war, that society was
founded not on contract but on nature. It is, therefore, improbable
that L. was solely responsible for inventing them and the agreement
of L, and Plutarch (Camillus 10) points to a common, older source,
perhaps a source at least as old as the debate of 171.
Camillus speaks in philosophical terms. Notice ingeneravit, used only
here by L. but by Cicero in the de Finibus (5. 33, 36) and the de
Legibus (1. 27; ita generavit Ziegler).
similem: it was an ancient commonplace that an unworthy victor
brought dishonour both to himself and to the conquered. See Denniston on Euripides, Electra i8g with references there cited.
27. 6. belli... iura: 31. 30. 2-3 (based on Polybius). Cf. also Polybius
5. 11. 3-4 with Walbank's note.
27. 7. et ipsos: 'against those who are armed themselves'.
2 7 . 8 . opere: ' siege- works'.
27. 1 1 . et curia: in curia Ver. L. writes curia et forum at 7. 6. 12 which
perhaps strengthens the claims of N here.
27. 12. invideat: contrast 21. 15 n. The reminder serves to keep
Camillus' future plight in the reader's mind.
dedimus: 1. 38. 1 n. T h e form of surrender may be purely R o m a n but
the reasoning behind it is again based on Greek thought. It is interest
ing to contrast with the two salutaria exempla the pragmatic doctrine
of the Athenians in the Melian Dialogue (Thucydides 5. 87 ff.).
Moral considerations were not relevant to the issue of the war (5. 101).
The immediate concern of the Athenians was to bring the Melians
by force into the Empire (5. 91). T h e Romans on the other hand
display fides and the Faliscans regard membership of the Roman
community of greater value than the enjoyment of their own auroi>ofua,
a view which would have been anathema to the Melians or any other
688

394 B.C.

5. 27. 12

Greeks (5. 112), L. echoes a traditional Roman counterblast to Greek

propaganda against apxq- For the ideas behind the Melian Dialogue see
especially de Romilly, Thucydide et V imperialisme athe'nien, 232 ff.;
A. Andrewes, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 186 (i960), 1-10.
27. 15. pecunia: a Faliscan indemnity could have been recorded in
the Annales.
28. 1-5. The Embassy to Delphi and the Liparians
From the Roman angle the project to dedicate an offering to Apollo
is credible enough (15. 3 n.). Moreover, the intervention of the Lipa
rians at this period suits the history of the archipelago as attested from
other independent sources. Lipara, a natural base for naval opera
tions, had been colonized in the sixth century by Cnidus and in the
fifth century pursued her own policies. In 427 she resisted the attempts
of the Athenians to subdue her by force (Thucydides 3. 88) but her
seafaring freedom, vulgarly termed 'piracy' as were the activities of
the Samian Aeaces, was chiefly threatened by the aggressions of the
Etruscans before Cumae (474 B.C.) and the Carthaginians. Athens,
Etruria, and Carthage were her natural enemies and it is to be remem
bered that at different dates Etruria and Carthage (Aristotle, Politics
i28o a 36 ff.; cf. also the first Roman treaty) and Athens and Carthage
had made treaties of alliance (Thucydides 6. 88. 6; see B. D. Meritt,
Haw. Stud. Class. Phil., Suppl. 1 (1940), 247-53). Lipara survived
these combinations. Pausanias (10. 16. 7; see Frazer on 10. n . 3]
recounts without dating a battle between 5 Liparian and 20 Etruscan
ships in relays of 5 which resulted in the capture of all the Etruscan
ships'. av$Gav ovv is AeXfovs

rat? aXovcrais vavalv apidfiov tcra ATTOX-

Xwvos dydXfxaTa. The date must be before Cumae, for the Etruscans
never ventured so far afield again. Fragments of the dedication set
up on that occasion survive (Bourguet, B.C.H. 35 (1911), 149 ff.) and
the lettering is dated to c. 500. The respect for Delphi and the ruthless
interception of vessels on the high sea are typical. In 396 the Cartha
ginian Himilco had levied a payment of 30 talents on the island,
without succeeding in cowing the inhabitants (Diodorus 14. 56. 2 ) ;
the Liparians would be anxious both for revenge and for financial
reparation. At first sight therefore a Roman ship was an ideal target.
Rome was still, in the foreigners' eyes, a predominantly Etruscan city
and her treaty relation with Carthage would be recalled. It does
credit to Timasitheus that he discerned the difference. See further,
Ziegler, R.E., 'Lipara'; L. Zagami, Le hole Eolie, 55-58.
28. 1. albi: 23. 5 n.
28. 2. crate?'am: 25. 10, the formal term which is used in good Latin
only of dedicatory bowls (Cicero, Verr. 4. 131: otherwise vulgar) in
814432

689

vy

5.

a8. 2

394 B.C.

preference to the poetical crater or the Etruscan cretera. See Clausen,

C.d.i3(i963)585.
L. Valerius: 4. 49. 7 n. T h e elder is more likely, rather than the
young Publicola (26. 2 n.). Diodorus dates the embassy to 396.
L. Sergius: 16. 1 n. A. Manlius: 4. 61. 1 n.
28. 3 . Romanis vir similior: a typically Livian sentiment; cf. 4. 9. 8,
30. 7. 6 and contrast Plutarch, Camillus 8. T h e Roman people is in
large measure the hero of the history.
28. 4. donumque et decus: for Lipara's connexion with Delphi see above.
regenti: 3. 71. 5 n.
hospitium: publicum hospitium was a formal relationship of great
antiquity between a state and an individual citizen of another state
(Aul. Gell. 5. 13). It created an obligation on the contracting state to
provide for the needs of the hospes when travelling or visiting in their
territory and, if necessary, to provide a patronus for him in a court of
law. T h e obligations were reciprocal to the extent that the hospes was
expected to provide the same facilities for official delegations from
the contracting state when they visited his own. T h e relationship was
symbolized by a tessera hospitalis. It is uncertain when hospitium was
originated but the historicity of Timasitheus and the three Roman
ambassadors is confirmed by the fact that when Lipara was annexed
by the Romans in 252 the rights of the descendants of Timasitheus
were scrupulously regarded (Diodorus 14. 93). hospitium is, therefore,
likely to date from the first contacts of Rome with more distant neigh
bours and the entry hospitium . . . data to come from the Annales. For
further details see Mommsen Rom. Forschungen, 1. 326 ff.; Leonhard,
R.E., 'hospitium'; Badian, Foreign Clientelae, 11 ff.
28. 5. senatus consulto: cf. Dessau, I.L.S. 6095 = Ehrenberg and
Jones, Documents no. 355 ( cf. 354, 356), for the form of such documents.
eodem anno: the details are annalistic. There is no contradiction with
the reference to a peace in 23. 12, for the duration of it was not specified.
28. 6. Verruginem: 4. 55. 8 n.
28. 8. increparet: Postumius' tirades against his troops and their
answering protestations belong to a common rhetorical category. Cf.
2. 59. 9 n . ; 3. 68. 13. L. cultivates a military style of writing for the
narration of these incidents: e.g. for 28. 10 corpora curare cf. 3. 2. i o n . ;
for 28. 8 ignavissimo ac fugacissimo cf. the Plautine parody in Persa 421
edax, furax, fugax: fugax is not found in good prose before L. (30.
28. 3 ) ; for 28. 10 pernox cf. 21. 49. 9, 32. 11. 9, not in prose before L . ;
cf. Virgil, Georg. 3. 230 with H; Ovid, Met. 7. 268 et al. See also 28. 13 n.
T h e description of the night battle owes much to the account of
Epipolae in Thucydides 7. 4 3 - 4 4 ; in particular the effects of moon
light visibility (7. 44. 1-2 = 28. 12) and the ambiguity of shouts
in the darkness (7. 44. 3 = 28. 10).
690

394 B.C.

5. 28. 10

28. 10. et hand: connective et introducing a new sentence is wrongly

disallowed by Madvig. Pettersson rightly compares 4. 48. 2 (n.).
28. 13. litterae . . . laureatae: 45. 1. 6-7; cf. Cicero, inPisonem^g; ad Att.
5. 21. 2: see Halkin, La Supplication, 80-83. The terse announcement
is in the spirit of the real thing.
29. 1. continuare: 25. 13, 26. 3. They included T. Sicinius as well as
Q . Pomponius and A. Verginius (29. 6 n.).
29. 2. annum post quintum decimum: the last pair of consuls held office
in 409 (4. 54. 1) and L. brings out the significance of the return to the
consulate by giving a date (3. 30. 7 n.) which squares with the
eponyms given in the text. If it is possible at so long range to deter
mine the true causes of events, the reason for the change should be
found in connexion with the appointment of censors (5. 31. 6 n.) and
in the tradition preserved in the Capitoline Fasti that the true consuls
of 393 were L. Valerius Potitus and P. or Ser. Cornelius Maluginensis
who [vitio facti abdicaru\nt and were replaced by Lucretius and Sulpicius as suffect consuls. The consular tribunate was created to deal
with an aggravated military situation and it was attended by a
parallel creation, the censorship. The aim, as has been shown (4. 7.
i n . ) , was to make the fullest and best use of Rome's manpower
resources. With the fall of Veii and the reduction of the ager Faliscus
and the ager Capenas, the emergency was over. The threat from the
Gauls was still no bigger than a man's hand. Only the southern danger
subsisted. It was therefore a natural moment for normal conditions
to be restored and for Rome to take stock of her position after the
ravages of pestilence and prolonged warfare. Hence the censorship and
hence the election of consuls, but in the disqualification of the first
pair of consuls we may see a desire to make a break with the tainted
years that had preceded. Valerius and Cornelius were vitio facti be
cause the system which had elected them was itself of an irregular kind.
The return to normal government had a special relevance both for
the 8o's and for the 20's.
L. Lucretius Flaws: to be identified with L. Lucretius Tricipitinus
(32. 1). He was probably the son of P. Lucretius, consular tribune in
419 B.C. (4. 44. 13 n.), but the filiation is nowhere preserved.
Ser. Sulpicius Camerinus: Q.f. Se[r. n.J, according to the Capitoline
Fasti; cf. 32. 1. A son of the consular tribune of 402 (8. 1 n.). See
Munzer, /?.., 'Sulpicius (31)' and '(94)'; Fruin, Neue Jahrb.f. PhiloL
149 (1894), 115 ff.
29. 3 . legem: the proposal to remove to Veii mooted in 24. 7.
Vitelliam: 2. 39. 4 n.
29. 6. A. Verginio et Q,. Pomponio: Pomponius might be a brother of
M. Pomponius (13. 3 n.). Nothing else is known either of him or of
691

5- 29- 6

393 B.C.

Verginius, who appears to have abandoned the radical tradition of

his family as witnessed in the tribune of 461 (3. 11. 9 n.). Mere
obscurity would not in itself cast doubt on the story but two other
oddities are suspicious. (1) This is the only recorded occasion on which
plebeian tribunes were arraigned to answer for their conduct during
their office. (2) T h e case bears a striking resemblance to two pre
vious cases, in 423 and 401, when two pairs of consular tribunes
were prosecuted before the comitia tributa and fined 10,000 asses each
(4. 40. 4 n., 5. 11. 4 n.). T h e fines are certainly a later addition and
the judicial functions of the comitia tributa (2. 35. 5 n.) irreconcilable
with the status of the consular, although not of plebeian, tribunes.
Cumulatively the peculiarities of the story indicate a deeper confusion.
It may tentatively be supposed that Verginius and Pomponius were
consular not plebeian tribunes from one of the years for which it is
known that eponymous lists did not survive (cf. L. Verginius in 402;
M . Pomponius in 399). A solution along these lines would bring them
into harmony with the two earlier cases which were also based on
fact. When the Annales were published and the bare detail of the
prosecution of Verginius and Pomponius brought to light, it had to be
incorporated into the overall pattern of history. Since no magistrates
of that name were recorded for 395-3 it was alleged that they were
plebeian tribunes and the case was used to provide legalistic ammuni
tion, in particular perhaps to provide a precedent for the condemna
tion of the tribunes in 84 B.C. In that connexion it may be recalled
that one of the most distinguished lawyers of the late second century
was an A. Verginius (Cicero, Laelius 101; Pomponius, Dig. 1. 2. 2. 40)
and another Verginius was tr. pi. in 87. T h e tendentious nature of the
story is seen in the political cliches which it contains (29. 8 n., 29. 9 n.).
T h e two speeches of Camillus (29. 8-10, 30. 1-3) as well as the pro
testations of the Senate (30. 4-6) are couched in unmistakably con
temporary terms. See Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 289 n. 2 ; Botsford,
Roman Assemblies, 288-9; H . Gundel, R.E., 'Verginius (4)'; 'Pom
ponius (13)'.
29. 8. evertisse: cf. Sallust, Oratio Lepidi 23.
29. 9. telum: 3. 55. 3 n.
30. 1. aris foris que \ 28. 42. n , often appealed to by Cicero in patriotic
outbursts of emotion {Phil. 2. 72; in Catil. 4. 2 4 ; cf. Sallust, Catil.
5 2 - 3) 59- 5J s e e Otto, Sprichworter s.v.). Strictly both arae a n d / o n
refer to domestic worship (Nisbet on de Domo 1)'the altars on the
hearth of the house'. There is no evidence of separate altars in private
houses distinct from the hearths. Equally commonplace are, e.g., inter
dimicationem patriae (cf. Phil. 14. 37), monumento gloriae (cf. Verr. 4. 88;
in Catil. 3. 26), insistere vestigiis (cf.pro Sestio 7). The rhetorical character
692

393 B.C.

5- 30. 1

is further illustrated by the two tropes, the contrast between personal

advantage and public disadvantage and the opposition of the con
queror and the conquered. T h e former is a favourite antithesis of
Greek orators; cf, e.g., Nicias in Thucydides 6 . 9 . 1. T h e latter, which
is reinforced by repetition (24. io), touches an ancient superstition
enunciated also by Lucan 1. 128 (victrix causa dels placuit sed victa
Catoni) that the gods are on the side of the victors; see further S. Ferri,
Hommages Herrmann, 350.
30. 2. urbem latam: referring to the models or pictures of defeated
cities carried in the triumphal procession.
30. 4. punctuate his adhortationibus principes concitati; patres, senes iuvenesque, . . . venerunL T h e leading members of the Senate are roused to
action and organize a demonstration of the whole body of patres,
young and old. For the text see C.Q. 9 (1959), 273. Notice the alliterativefortissimefelicissimeque (43. 7, 28. 9. 7, 31. 20. 2 ; Seneca, Suas. 2. 4 ;
Paneg. 12. 47. 2 ) ; dimicassent desererent; exsulem, extorrem (a legal t a g ;
cf. 2. 6. 2 ; Aul. Gell. 2. 12. 1 is domo patria fortunis . . . careto, exsul extorrisque esto. For melius fuerit see 3. 41. 3 n. Their language matches
their fears.
30. 7. una plures tribus antiquarunt: for the number of tribes see 2. 21.
7 n. It is difficult to see how the memory of a defeated bill would have
been preserved. T h e story is part of the legendary tradition about
Camillus (51-54 n.) whereas the distribution of ager Veientanus in lots
of 7 iugera may be an annalistic detail. Veii continued to exist after its
sack. T h e allotments are bigger than previously given (e.g. 2 iugera
at Labici; 4. 47. 7 n.) but the added detail that land was allotted to
other male plebeians than patres familiae, if genuineand there are no
grounds for doubting that patria potestas extended also to plebeians
points to a state of affairs in Rome where severe shortage of man
power required the creation of exceptional family-units to take over
the allotments. Diodorus' variant totals (14. 102 /car' avpa SQVTCS
irXidpa Tcaaapa, <l>s & rives eiKooi QKTW) reflect a confused computation
of the 7 iugera in L . : 7 x 4 = 28. irXidpa is the conventional equivalent
of iugera. Some confirmation of L.'s figures is derived from the fact
that the Roman had to create a new rural tribe, Tromentina, to
contain the new inhabitants (6. 5. 8). See L. R. Taylor, Voting Dis
tricts, 48 n. 3.
31-32. Annalistic Notices, jg2-i

B.C.

The years 392-1 contained at least one event, the prosecution of

Camillus, which was capable of extended and dramatic treatment.
L. gives it only cursory treatment and is content to present the other
matters baldly and without elaboration. His motive in so doing was
693

5- 3^-32

392 B.C.

clearly to preserve the shape of the book with its two main themes,
the capture of Veii and the capture of Rome. T o dilate upon incidental
occurrences would spoil the symmetry (1-32 : 33-55). Hence the com
pressed and annalistic style (cf. eodem anno 31. 3, 5, 32. 6).
T h e ultimate source of the notices, with the same exception of the
trial of Camillus (32. 8), must be the Annales although the person of
M . Caedicius may be rather traditional than monumental (32. 6).
T h e direct source used by L. cannot be determined with certainty.
T h e only significant pointers are the allusion to Manlius' cognomen
(31.2 n.) and the evident anachronism of the trial. T h e latter indicates
a late Sullan date for the source. T h e tendentious slant of 32. 8-9 (n.)
encourages the belief that L. continues to follow Valerius Antias.
Notice the prominence of L. Valerius Potitus (triumph in 31. 4) and
the confidence in numbers (32. 3).
3 1 . 2. L. Valerius: 4. 49. 7 n. T h e election of consuls rather than con
sular tribunes continues the atmosphere of normality which was
rudely shaken by the news of Gallic infiltration and the resignation of
the consul in time to allow a new college of consular tribunes to under
take military operations, if necessary, before the end of the cam
paigning season (32. i n . ) .
M. Manlius: T.f. A.n., according to the Capitoline Fasti, which
makes him a cousin of the consul of 379 (6. 30. 2). T h e earlier history
of the family is unrecorded. L. (and his source) agree with the Fasti
in identifying him as the famous M . Manlius who saved the Capitol
(n. on ch. 47) and was later impeached for tyranny, although Diodorus
evidently distinguished the two (14. 103. 1 AvXos MdXXtos: 14. 116. 6
MdpKos TLS MaXXios v&ot;os avrjp). Diodorus may have for once pre
served a more authentic tradition, because the aetiological explana
tion of the cognomen Capitolinus alluded to by L. is manifestly late.
In reality the Manlii, like the Sestii and the Quinctii, assumed the
cognomen to distinguish one branch of the family which lived on the
Capitol. For fuller details see Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 179-99.
Ver. has the order fuit postea cognomen, but in this expression postea
always precedes/w^ (2. 16. 4, 33. 5, 36. 36. 3 ; Sallust, Jug. 5. 4 ; Hist.
2. 45 M . ) . O n the other hand postea normally occupies second place
(cf., in addition to the above, 2. 13. 1 ; Nepos, Alcib. 3. 2 ; Paulus
Festus 107 L.). T h e word-order of both N and Ver. will be wrong.
Write cui postea Capitolino fuit cognomen.
magnos ludos: 19. 6, 2. 36. 1 n.
3 1 . 3 . aedes Iunonis reginae: the temple was built near the modern
church of S. Sabina but the exact site has not been found. In choosing
the Aventine, outside the pomerium, the Romans were motivated not
by the fact that J u n o was not a Roman goddessshe had her cult on the
Capitol and her worship was widespread throughout Etrusco-Latin
694

392 B.C.

5- 3i-3

communities (cf. Iuno Regina at Ardea; Pliny, N.H. 35. 115)but

because she was originally the patroness of the enemy and, as such,
was suspect (cf. Vortumnus). The temple is mentioned in the Punic
Wars when it was evidently the centre of uninhibited female devotions
(21. 62. 8, 22. 1. 17, 31. 12. 9: hence the retrojected matronarum studio
here). The restoration under Augustus (Res Gestae 19) will have
occurred later than the writing of this book. See Platner-Ashby s.v.;
Merlin, VAventin, 196 ff.
31. 4. perseverantior caedendis infuga: the reading given in the O.G.T.
is that of N : Ver. reads perseverantius instead of -ior. Editors who accept
the text (Luterbacher, Bekker, Pettersson) interpret the abl. as the
equivalent of in + abl. The absence of a (pro) noun defining caedendis is
difficult (in iis caedendis H. J. Mliller; caedendis is Bayet) and it should
be noted that L. only uses the adverbial form perseverantius (21. 10. 7,
41. 10. 3), never perseverantior. There must be a deep corruption and
Ver.'s text is the starting-point for emendation. In its present state Ver.
can be deciphered as caed. . eis infuga (Mommsen read (/for e) from
which quod perseverantius caedem eis infuga fecit can be conjectured. For
the change offuit to fecit see Hey, Thes. Ling. Lat.y Tacio', 85. 50 ff.
in fuga is standard in these contexts and should not be changed
(6. 24. 11, 25. 11. 6, 25. 34. 14).
triumphus: listed by Malalas 7 p. 183 B.
31. 5. Volsiniensibus: the first mention of the powerful city (mod.
Bolsena: Etr. Velsuna), a member of the twelve peoples of Etruria,
which lay on the edge of the large Lago di Bolsena, some 50 miles
north of Falerii. It can only be supposed that an expedition of such
distance was in the nature of a probe to explore the upper waters of
the Tiber rather than part of a constructive campaign by either side.
The figures of casualties are undoubtedly exaggerated but the notice
of hostilities is genuine enough. For the site and archaeological re
mains of Volsinii see R. Bloch, Mel. a"Arch, et d'Hist. 59 (1947), 9 - 3 9 ;
62 (1950), 53-120; 65 (1953), 39~ 6 1 - F o r i t s l a t e r history see R.E.,
'Volsinii'.
novum: 'a new war, namely with the V.'.
famem pestilentiamque: 3. 2. 1 n., from the Annales. Ver. reads
caloribus nimiis which is accepted by Mommsen and Bayet as meaning
'at the time when the heat was excessive' (cf. 2. 5. 3 mediis caloribus).
But nimio colore is always causal, never temporal (cf. Varro, de Re Rust.
1. 41. 2: Cicero, pro Sex. Roscio 131 ; Martial 9. 90. 9) and therefore
caloribus nimiis must be so here too and be taken in conjunction with
siccitate. N's caloribusque n. must be read: for the omission of -que cf.
40. 3, 40. 7, 6. 4. 4.
Sappinatibus: 32. 2, 32. 4 (bis). The name, which does not figure in
any other ancient text, is given variously. Ver. has Sapienatibus here
695

5- 3i. 5

392 B.C.

but is deficient in the two later passages. Salp- is given by N here and
by the majority of manuscripts in all three places in 32 except that
M has the dittography sal sappinates in 32. 2 and sappinates once in
32. 4. T h e variation between Sal- and Sap- may go back to the edition
of Symmachus. Since there is no connexion with the Umbrian river
Sapis (Pliny, N.H. 3. 115) or the tribus Sapinia (31. 2. 6, 33. 37. i ) , we
have no external criterion for deciding between the forms. Etruscan
names, however, while showing examples of Sappinius and Sapienus
(Schulze 223) offer no root Salp and, unless L. is himself at fault, the
choice should lie between Ver.'s Sapienates and M's Sappinates. T h e
former is to be preferred since the correction of i to /, with sub
sequent transposition, accounts for the corruption Sapien > Saplen ->
Salpen -> Sappen.
T h e site of the city is equally controversial. T h e most favoured
candidate is Orvieto (Kiepert, Atlas, 1901, pi. x x ; Hlilsen, R.E.,
'Sappinates') but Orvieto is too large and prominent a site for a
people who make only a single appearance in history. Recent excavaby the French school at La Civita, a hill some 4 kilometres south of
Bolsena, have revealed a small but prolonged Etruscan community
which came to an end c. 390 (Mel. d'Arch. et d'Hist. 67 (1955), 49-70).
T h e facts thus make La Civita a possible candidate although without
epigraphic confirmation the identification must remain provisional.
superbia inflati: elati N, accepted by Bayet and Luterbacher; cf.
4. 13. 3 n., 54. 8 n. Despite Ver.'s weakness for iriflatus, the reading is
decidedly superior here. Cf. 45. 31. 3 ; Seneca, JV.Q,. 4 j&ra*/l2 j Apuleius,
Apol. 18; Lactantius, Inst. 6. 24. 24. For the confusion of the words cf.
37. 12. 4 ; Suetonius, Nero 37. 3.
agros Romanos: ager was the land surrounding a city (e.g. ager
Faliscus, ager Veientanus) while the plural agri refers to the individual
fields of farmers. Hence while the phrase ager Romanus occurs thirtyeight times in L., the plural agri Romani is not elsewhere met (3. 6. 7 n . ;
cf. 3. 30. 4 ager Romanorum, 2. 43. 1). Ver. omits Romanos here and it
could easily be due to dittography after ag-ros (cf. 40. 9 n.).
31.6. C. Iulius: 4.56.2 n. The censors had been elected the previous year.
His colleague was L. Papirius Cursor (9. 34. 20). T h e Capitoline Fasti
confirm that Julius died in office, and the notice looks annalistic.
A passage of Festus (500 L.) has been used, e.g. by Beloch, to descredit
the notice but the interval of 15 years defined by Festus refers to the
gap between 393 and 380 (6. 27. 4 ; see R. V. Cram, Haw. Stud. Class.
Phil. 51 (1940), 75-77). M . Cornelius (P.f. M.n. according to the
Fasti) must be a son of the consular tribune of 404 (4. 6 1 . 4 n.) of
whom nothing else is recorded. The reason advanced for the fact
that in historical times no replacements were made if one of the
censors deceased (24. 43. 4, 27. 6. 18) cannot be true but was designed
696

392 B.C.

5- 3 i -

to represent in an irreproachable light a purely political safeguard

ensuring the maintenance of the Roman principle of collegiality. See
H . J . Rose on Plutarch, Q.R. 5 0 ; Mommsen, Staatsrecht, 1. 216 n. 2.
3 1 . 7. demortui: mortui Ver. but demortuus is the technical term for a
magistrate who died in office (Lex. Urson. 67. 12; Acta Fratr. Arv.
(A.D.

21) 2. 2 3 ; et a/.).

per interregnum: 3. 8. 2 n.
3 1 . 9. incommoda: a reason in line with 4. 7. 2. T h e true cause
may have been either the disorganization caused by the plague or
the news of the impending threat from the Gauls.
32. 1. Kalendis: 3. 6. 1 n. T h e Capitoline Fasti do not record their
early abdication but L.'s version is to be preferred.
L. Lucretius: 29. 2 n. Ser. Sulpicius: 29. 2 n.
M. Aemilius: Ver. adds iterum which must be an anticipation of
C. Aemilius iterum (26. 2 n.) since no other Aemilius is listed in the
immediate past. His filiation is given by the Capitoline Fasti as
M a m . f. M.n., which would make him a younger brother of the
consul of 410 (4. 53. 1 n.) but there is some difference over his
praenomen and hence over his identity. T h e Capitoline Fasti call
him L. Aemilius, identifying him with the consular tribune of
389 (6. 1.8); L., on the other hand, calls him M . Aemilius and starts
the series of consular tribunates held by L. Aemilius in 389. Clearly
there were two separate lines of speculation about him. Nothing else
is known of this M . Aemilius.
L. Furius: 4. 51. 1 n.
Agrippa Furius: Sex.f., according to the Capitoline Fasti and the
same as the consul Furius Agrippa mentioned by Frontinus (2. 8. 2).
The only Sex. Furius known in the previous generation is the consular
tribune of 420 (4. 44. 1 n.) and the age-gap is right. Broughton gives
Agr. Furius the cognomen Fusus but if his filiation is correctly con
jectured he will rather be a Medullinus.
C, Aemilius: 26. 2 n.
32. 2. Volsinienses . . . Sappinates: from the Annales, but the casualty
figures are Valerian.
32. 3 . primo concursu: the word-order of Ver. is superior to c. p. pre
served by N and printed in most editions; cf. 1. 25. 4, 3. 4. 8, 5. 49. 5,
6. 24. 1; Caesar, B.G. 6. 8. 6, 7. 62. 3, a military cliche which is most
unlikely ever to be found in the reverse order.
injugam versa: N, having lost versa by omission, corrected in jugam
to injuga. In this case too Ver. preserves the military expression proper
to the annalistic context; cf. 27. 14. 9 ; BelL Afr. 17. 1 ; Curtius 4.
15. 32; Tacitus, Agricola 3 7 ; Hist. 2. 26, 4. 3 7 ; Pliny, Epist. 6. 16. 18.
32. 5. indutiae: from the Annales. For stipendium cf. 27. 15, Volsinii is
697

5- 32. 5

391 B.C.

next mentioned as at war with Rome in 308 (9. 41. 6) but the setback
to Rome's expansion caused by the Gallic invasion disengaged the
two cities for several generations.
32. 6-7. M. Caedicius
A solitary occasion on which a supernatural voice was heard, with
the immediate consequence of a major defeat for Roman arms, readily
induced the superstitious to venerate the site of the manifestation.
Hence the cult of Aius (cf. aio; Locutius or Loquens is a secondary
epithet to explain Aius). That the occasion was 391 need not be
doubted, since the superstition will have been associated with the
events, like the appearance of Pan before Marathon (Herodotus
6. 105). Aius was classed as a deus indiges (Varro ap. Aul. Gell. 16.17. 2 ;
Cicero, de Div. 1. 101, 2. 69).
M. Caedicius, the man who hears the forecast of disaster (caedes)>
is a later addition (2. 52. 6 n., 5. 45. 7 n.).
The site of the altar subsequently erected to Aius (cf. 50. 5, 52. 11)
at the north corner of the Palatine in infima Nova via (1. 41. 4 n.) has
not been recognized. See Platner-Ashby s.v.; W. F. Otto, Rh. Mus. 64
(1909), 459; Latte, R.E., 'Locutius'; Archiv f Relig.-Wissen. 24 (1926),
244; E. Schwyzer, Rh. Mus. 84 (1935), 116; F. Altheim, History of
Roman Religion, 192 ; Klio 30 (1937), 44-46; Basanoff, Latomusq (1950),
13

ff

'
32. 6. Gallos: according to Cicero the voice was inarticulate and
confused.
32. 8 - 9 . The Trial of Camillus
The trial of Camillus has suffered from much tendentious distortion
and the version given by L. represents one of the latest stages of that
process. I do not doubt that Camillus was in (voluntary) exile at the
time of the Gallic sack and it can be shown that in the earliest strata
of history Camillus did not return in time to be the popular saviour of
the city but the reasons for his absence can only be hazarded.
(1) Pliny, JSf.H. 34. 13 'Camillo . . . obiecit Sp. Carvilius quaestor
quod aerata ostia haberet in domo\ This suggests a trial for peculatus
conducted before a quaestor or quaestors and brought upon appeal
to the comitia centuriata (Cicero, de Domo 86). The procedure is not
incredible. As financial officers the annual quaestors would naturally
be involved at this date as they were later in the similar trial of
T. Quinctius Trogus (Varro, de Ling. Lai. 6. 90-92 citing the commentarii
quaestorum). They will have taken over in financial cases the functions
previously exercised by the quaestores appointed ad hoc (2. 35. 5 n.).
The name Sp. Carvilius, however, proves that tendentious addition
had already been made. Sp. Carvilius is the twin of the tr. pL of 212.
698

391 B.C.

5- 32. 8-9

(2) If a quaestorial trial for peculatus is the earliest and perhaps

authentic version, the next stage was to convert it to a tribunician
prosecution before the people (D.H. 13. 5. 1). The change was made
probably by the Sullan annalists for party political purposes. The
choice of name for the tr. pi. (L. Apuleius) is transparent (32. 8 n.).
In the tribunician case the charge may have been, as given by L., a
fraudulent division of the praeda Veientana (Servius, ad Aen. 6. 825;
Appian, Ital. 8).
(3) Finally Diodorus mentions an alternative charge (14. 117. 6
tvioi Se <f>acnv) that Camillus was condemned because of his triumph
with white horsesan invention by some enemy of Caesar's if
Diodorus' source can be dated so late. The size of the fine must be
fictitious (2. 52. 5 n.) and in consequence it is variously reported
(100,000 asses in D . H . ; 500,000 in Appian; 10,000 in Augustine,
de Civ. Dei 2. 17). For other quaestorian prosecutions see 3. 24. 3 n.
and, in general for the trial of Camillus, Miinzer, R.E., 'Furius (44)';
Botsford, Roman Assemblies, 244-5; Latte, T.A.P.A. 67 (1936), 27;
Brecht, Perduellio, 266 n. 3.
32. 8. L. Apuleio: the name is Latin rather than Etruscan (Schulze
460 n. 1), the earliest form being Appuleius. The first historical
member of the family is Q,. A. Pansa, consul in 300. The author of
the de Viris Illustribus (23) adds the cognomen Saturninus, thus making
explicit the resemblance with the notorious L. Apuleius, tr. pi. in
103 and 100, on whom the present figure is entirely modelled.
32. 9. precatus: Appian remarks on Camillus' 'Achillean5 prayer
(-7-7)1; AxlhXeiov evx^jv). The allusion is to Iliad 1. 233-44.
quindecim: 2. 52. 5 n.
33. 1-3. Clusium and the Invasion of the Gauls
Casaubon noted in the margin of his copy at this section: 'cf. Helenam,
Lucretiam, Verginiamprincipium a libidine ortum'. In truth the
story is a romantic explanation, typical of the Hellenistic age, de
signed to account for the invasion of the Gauls. It is of some antiquity,
being found at least in Cato (fr. 36 P.), but there can be little historical
truth in it. Clusium was too remote for an isolated pocket of Gauls
to have had any chance of survival nor is there any archaeological
evidence for such relations between Clusium and the Gauls at this
date as are presupposed by the story. Above all, Clusium is too far
away from Rome to have been of any concern in 390. In the third
century, on the other hand, there is ample evidence that Clusium was
a storm-centre in Roman affairs and was also deeply involved with
the Gauls (Polybius 2. 25 with Walbank's notes). It would therefore
be in character for Roman historians to have invented the earlier
precedent for hostility between Rome and Clusium in order to provide
699

391 B.C.
5- 33- i-3
both propaganda and justification for contemporary actions. T h e
motive (dulcedine frugum maximeque vini) is conventional and is repeated
apropos of a quite different migration by Justin 43. 3.4. T h e antagonism
between Arruns and Lucumo recurs in the similar story of the sons
of Demaratus (see note on 1. 34). Together with the embassy of the
Fabii (35. 5 n.) all the incidents give rise to the gravest misgivings.
See further Hlilsen, R.E., 'Clusium'; J . Gage, Rev. Hist. ReL 143
(r953)> i 7 - 2 o 8 ; J . Wolski, Historia 5 (1956), 35-39; H. Homeyer,
Historia 9 (1960), 346.
3 3 . 3 . inliciendae: Gage, comparing a rival version of the story in
Pliny {N.H. 12. 5 quod Helicoficumsiccam et uvam oleique ac vinipraemissa
tulisset), and seeing in the person of Helico an aetiological explanation
of the cult ofJuppiter Elicius (cf. Gr. eAif), would read eliciendae here
unnecessarily since the emphasis is on the country of arrival, not on
the country of departure.
isfuerat: ipsefuerat Ver., isfuerat ipse N. Ver.'s reading is right, is ipse
is very strong (3. 5 1 . 3 ; see Mlitzell on Curtius 3. 20. 21) and is never
found divided.
poenae . . . nequirent: poena . . . nequiret Ver. There is nothing to
choose between the singular and plural. Ver. is prone to omit n or m
in the middle of words where it affects the number (4. 27. 3 n.) but
here Lucumo is a single person guilty of a single offence.
33. 4-35. 3. The Gallic Migrations
T h e second external challenge which the newly organized Rome had
to meet was an invasion from Gaul. L.'s account fills the remainder
of the book and counterbalances the narrative of the Fall of Veii
which occupies the first half. T h e two threats, from Etruria and from
Gaul, are the climax of the first five books, showing Rome for the first
time as a stable political community (40. 1-2) and intimating the
prospect of her future imperial greatness (54. 3-5). To underline the
importance of the Gallic invasion from an artistic as well as from an
historical point of view, L. borrows a device from Hellenistic historians
who, rationalizing the practice of Herodotus and Thucydides, intro
duced major campaigns in a foreign country with a 6description of
that country, its chief peculiarities, and the origins and customs of
its inhabitants' (Fraenkel, Horace, 429; Norden, Die germanische Urgeschichte, 1 ff.; K. Triidinger, Studien zur Gesch. der gr.-rom. Ethnographie,
(Basel, 1918)). It would have been pointless to give an ethnographical
digression on R o m e ; so L., instead of describing the invaded country,
describes the invaders and, by touching on Etruria (33. 7-11) as well
as Gaul, bridges the gap between the two halves of the book. It can
be seen from the practice of other historians (e.g. the Africae situs in
Sallust, Jugurtha 17-19 and the Britanniae situs in Tacitus, Agricola
700

DIGRESSION ON E T R U R I A AND GAUL

5.33.4-35.3

10 ff.) that such digressions were inserted to heighten suspense and

to focus attention on the drama which is about to unfold.
T h e materials for such an excursus would not be available in the
bare chronological narratives of annalists. As a Paduan L. was doubt
less interested in the history of Cisalpine Gaul but oral tradition is
not enough. T h e question of L.'s sources has recently been re
examined in great detail by Helene Homeyer (Historia 9 (i960),
345-61)3 who argues that for the Etruscan section (33. 711) L.
used Varro who in turn based his researches on Cato's pioneering
work (note 33. 9 capita originis, 33. 11 gentibus origo). In support of
this view she argues from the general principle that for L. not to have
availed himself of the scholarly investigations of Varro is 'nicht denkbar' to particular resemblances (33. 10 = Cato-Varro ap. Pliny,
N.H. 3. 130; 33. n = Cato-Varro ap. Pliny, N.H. 3. 133). In the
Gallic section, on the other hand, as in the chapters on the Gallograeci (38. 16. 1 ff.), she would detect strong rhetorical influences and
would attribute them to the Schools and so indirectly through
Posidonius to earlier natural philosophers. T h e answer may be more
economic. L. nowhere else shows knowledge of Varro's writings. In
many places this neglect is striking (see Introduction, p. 6). Nor
are the resemblances which Homeyer quotes here at all compelling.
As for the Gallic section I feel that more account needs to be taken
of the Greek elements in it. It is as much a matter of outlook as of style:
his summary7 is entirely from a Greek not a Roman point of view
(34. 6 n., 34. 8 n . : so also 33. 8 Graeci vocant). And at many points
it betrays evidence of translation from the Greek. Thus a Greek
ethnographer is a serious claimant for the Gallic excursus at least.
There are in effect only two claimants, Posidonius (who wrote a
systematic account of Gaul [F. Gr. Hist. 87 F 116; see F. Beckmann,
Geographie una1 Ethnographie in Caesar, 1930, especially 104 ff.) and, a
generation later, Timagenes (F. Gr. Hist. 88 F 2, 7, 14, 15). T h e case
for Posidonius is strong. In Book 103 L. gave a full-scale Gallic ethno
graphy which is regarded, e.g. by Norden and Triidinger, as being
derived from Posidonius. Particular points of contact between the
present excursus and Posidonius tend to the same conclusion (e.g.
for 34. 1 cf. Strabo 4. 176; Caesar, B.G. 6. 12 ; for 34. 4 quantum vellent
cf. Caesar, B.G. 6. 23. 7 - 8 ; the double ager Insubrium; the synchroniza
tion of the Celtic expansion and the foundation of Marseilles). Not
withstanding the persuasive advocacy of M r . J . J . Tierney for
Posidonius, whose claims are also maintained by Duncker, Jullian,
and Grenier, I think that the case for Timagenes is as strong, pars
Galliae tertia est reads like an echo of the opening of Caesar's Bellum
Gallicum. Timagenes published his Gallic researches to exploit the
curiosity aroused in the R o m a n world by Caesar's conquests. They
701

5- 33- 4-35- 3

DIGRESSION ON ETRURIA AND GAUL

were certainly available to Strabo when he started work in Rome in

29 B.C. (Introduction, pp. 2, 4). The case for Timagenes gains some
support from two closely parallel passages in Justin (24. 4 ; 20. 5. 7-8).
Justin epitomized Pompeius Trogus and Trogus relied on Timagenes.
Momigliano (Athenaeum 12 (1934), 45-56) argues that Trogus has
copied Livy direct but Trogus sites the migrations in Illyria and
Pannonia and supplies extra details which cannot come from Livy.
Whether Timagenes is included in the levissimi ex Graecis of 9. 18. 6 or
not, he is not to be excluded here. I regard it as almost certain that
the Etruscan and the Gallic digressions came from the same source.
See further Mullenhof, Deutsche Alt. 2. 250 ff.; Hirschfeld, KL
Schriften, 1-18; Soltau, Hermes 29 (1894), 611 ^ > Ogilvie, J.R.S. 48
(1958), 41 ff.; also C. Jullian, Histoire de la Gaule, 1. 243 ff.; A.
Grenier, Les Gaulois, 6 3 ; H. Homeyer, op. cit.
33. 4. equidem haud abnuerim: 1. 3. 2 n. The refusal by an author to
commit himself to the solution of a disputed problem is especially
characteristic of the ethnographical style (Fraenkel, Horace, 429-30
quoting Sal lust, Jug. 17. 2; Tacitus, Agricola 11. 1; Germania, 46. 6).
seu quo alio Clusino: not an alternative, otherwise unrecorded, version
attributing the blame to some other Clusine (Bayet, tome 5, 55 n. 1)
but a categorical suspension of a judgement.
3 3 . 5 . eos.. .fuisse qui: for this awkward construction see Klotz on Bell.
Hisp. 3. 1.
ducentis quippe annis: cf. 34. 1 Frisco Tarquinio Romae regnante; 34. 8 n.
Massilienses erant ii navibus a Phocaea prqfecti. Massilia was founded
c. 600. Tarquinius Priscus ruled for 38 years (1. 40. 1 ; Cicero, Rep.
2. 36) which on the conventional dating, used with only minor varia
tion by L. and his sources, places his reign from 616-578. The Battle
of Allia was fought in 390 (Varr.) so that the figure of 200 years and
the other notices are all consistent. Both the connexion between the
first Celtic emigration and the foundation of Massilia and the date
of that migration are unhistorical. The Celts came into Italy from
Switzerland and south Germany, not from Gaul direct (T. E. S.
Powell, The Celts, 21 : see the critical examination of the archaeological
evidence by R. Pittioni, OesL Akad. Wissenschqft, 233 (1959), 3. 4-22).
The Celtic ethnos itself was not formed till the fifth century B.C. and
the culture of Gaul in 600 (the Halstatt period) was not so advanced,
nor the pressure of population and shortage of land so acute, as to
permit such a movement (see J.-J. Hatt, Histoire de la Gaule Romaine,
1959, 19-31 with bibliography). The archaeological evidence from
Italy confirms that Celtic penetration of Italy only began after c. 500.
The first certain Celtic tombs in the Po valley belong to the La Tene
epoch (Jacobsthal, Early Celtic Art; E. Baumgaertal, Journ. R. Anthrop.
Inst. 67 (1937), 231-86; for an unsuccessful attempt to defend the
702

DIGRESSION ON ETRURIA

5- 33- 5

early date see L. Pareti, Studi minori, 1. 365 ff.). See also 35. 3 n. The
Celtic penetration of north Italy has been the subject of much recent
investigation; see G. A. Mansuelli, Hommages Grenier, 3. 1067 ff.;
R. Chevallier, Latomus 21 (1962), 356 ff.
The synchronization of the foundation of Massilia and the Celtic
emigration with its double distortion of date may be due to Posidonius
(Strabo 4. 179). It was inspired by the Gallic attack on Massilia
shortly before the invasion which led to the capture of Rome (Justin
43. 5. 4-8: see Jullian 1. 253 n. 3).
antequam . . . oppugnarent. . . caperent: the subjunctives emphasize the
causal connexion between the arrival of the Gauls in Italy and their
subsequent attack on Rome (Wackernagel, Vorlesungen, 1. 247).
Etruscan Rule in Italy
33. 7. Tuscorum: Etruscorum Ver. Livy uses either form indiscrimi
nately. Palaeographically Etruscorum is preferable after the preced
ing pugnavere. See Catterall, T.A.P.A. 69 (1938), 300.
ante Romanum imperium late terra marique opes patuere: Cato speaks in
similar terms (fr. 62 P.); cf. [Servius], ad Aen. 10. 145. The memory of
the Etruscan domination of Italy was well maintained. Its detailed
accuracy indicates that it was kept alive by a succession of Etruscan
writers (the Tuscae Historiae mentioned by Varro ap. Censorinus, de
Die Nat. 17. 6) from whom it passed into the mainstream of Roman
history. The expansion from the primitive limits of Etruria, bounded
by the rivers Tiber and Arno, commenced at least in the seventh
century and, in its first phase, was directed southward. The Etruscans
established control over Campania with Capua as their capital and
penetrated as far as Pompeii (J. Heurgon, Recherches . . . de Capoue preromaine; A. Boethius, Gli Etruschi in Pompeii; A. Maiuri, Atti R.
Accad. d* Italia 4 (1944), 121 ff.). Such extensive penetration presupposes
at least temporary control over Latium and Rome (notes on 1. 34,
2. 9-15). The southward expansion was checked by a series of re
versesthe Battle of Aricia (2. 14. 6 n.), the naval defeat at Cumae in
474, and the destruction of the Campanian empire by the Samnites in
423 (4. 37. 1 n.). Increasing difficulties in the south may have been
responsible for the switch of activity to the north. Archaeologically
there appears to be no radical distinction between the Villanovan
culture and the later Etruscan discoveries at Felsina (Bologna), which
might suggest that the Etruscans had been in possession of the area
and the whole Po valley from their first arrival in Italy. The literary
tradition, however, including the mythical foundation of Felsina by
the Perugian Aucno (Servius, ad Aen. 10. 198; cf. Silius Ital. 8. 599;
S Veron. Aeneid 10. 200; the name Uqnus has been identified on a
recent fragment of an Etruscan vase in Rome) speaks with one voice
703

5- 33- 7

DIGRESSION ON E T R U R I A

of a northward expansion. Etruscan-type tombs appear in the late sixth

century. Progress was impeded by the geographical barrier of the Alps
as well as by the resistance of the Veneti and the Umbrians in the east
and the Ligurians in the west, and their control was ephemeral, for
the Gauls appear on the scene by the end of the century.
Etruscan sea-power is attested from an early period {Horn. Hymn.
7. 6 - 8 ; and cf. Palaephatus, Apist. 20; Diod. 5. 19 ff.). 1 T h e historical
sources provide details of individual naval operations, e.g. at Lipari
(Strabo 6. 275), the straits of Messina (Strabo 6. 257), Corsica
(Herodotus 1. 166) which are confirmed by inscriptional evidence
such as Hiero's dedication after the Battle of Cumae ( = T o d 22) or
the Latin elogium at Tarquinii mentioning a naval expedition to Sicily
(published by M . Pallottino, Stud. Etruschi, 21 (1950-1), 147 ff.). But
the extent and duration of their power is exaggerated. It is doubtful
if the Etruscans ever had a good outlet to the Adriatic or obtained
control of it. Etruscan penetration to the north-east coast is confined
to the fifth century and the last years of the sixth, during which period
the Aeginetan colony of Spina controlled the northern Adriatic
(Strabo 5. 214 a>s* QaXavvoKpar-qvavTOJv; see N . Alfieri-P. Arias, Spina;
R. L. Beaumont, J.H.S. 56 (1936), 179). In the Tuscan sea their
power declined rapidly after Cumae. Nautical motifs, figuring on
Etruscan vases from the beginning of the sixth century (R. Vighi,
Rend. Accad. dei Lincei 8 (1932), 367 ff.), bear out the tradition of
Etruscan innovations in shipbuilding (D.tt. 1. 2 5 ; Pliny, N.H. 7. 209).
33. 8. Atriaticum mare ab Atria, Tuscorum colonia: Atria (mod. Atri),
not to be confused with the Picene Hadria or Hatria, lay at the mouth
of the Po. So also Pliny, N.H. 3. 120; Strabo 5. 214; Justin 20. 1. 9.
T h e name is variously spelled by the manuscripts {Atria M, Adria nX)
and by editors, but the etymological note of Varro (de Ling. Lat.
5. 161 atrium appellatum ab Atriatibus Tuscis; cf. Paulus Festus 12 L ;
[Servius], ad Aen. 1. 726) guarantees the unaspirated form Atria. T h e
testimony of other writers (e.g. Plutarch, Camillus 16 Abpiav KOXOVVIV
euro TvppyviKrjs TTOXCWS ft&plas) is late and derivative. T h e Romans
generally referred to the Adriatic as Hadria or Hadriaticus (Thes.
Ling. Lat. s.v.). O n the use and derivation of the ancient names of the
Adriatic see R. L. Beaumont, op. c i t , 203-4; Walbank on Polybius
2. 14. 4. Atria was not in fact an exclusively Etruscan foundation.
Justin (20. 1. 9) calls it a Greek colony and the archaeological remains
1
Etruria does not figure in the Thalassocracy Lists (Myres, J.H.S. 26 (1906),
84 ff.), but neither does Persia, perhaps because the surviving lists are a conflation
of two distinct lists, one a catalogue of Mediterranean sea-power down to Miletus,
the other a catalogue exclusively of Old Greek sea-power beginning with Lesbos.
Some such division is indicated by Caria being misplaced at the head of the wrong
list.

704

DIGRESSION ON E T R U R I A

5- 33- 8

indicate a mixed Graeco-Etruscan community like Spina (G. B.

Pellegrini-G. Fogolari, Stud. Etrusc. 26 (1958), 103 ff.).
Graeci eadem Tyrrhenum atque Adriaticum vocant: the Greeks invariably
employ the unaspirated A8p- (Ahpi-qv-q Eur. Hipp. 736; Ahpias Lys.
32. 25; Isocrates, PhiL 5. 2 1 ; Polybius 1. 2. 4 ; ionic ASpl-qs Hecataeus
F 101-2 B Jacoby; Herodotus 1. 163; see Partsch, /?.., 'Adria').
Adriaticum (N) is, therefore, to be preferred to Hadriaticum (Ver.). Note
the Greek point of view.
3 3 . 9. incoluere urbibus duodenis terras: on the twelve cities of Etruria see
Dennis, The Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria (1883), xxxi; Bormann, Arch.epigr. Mitteilungen aus Osterreich-Ungarn, 11 (1887), 103 ff.; J. Heurgon,
Historia 6 (1957), 85-89; F. Sartori, Cocalos 3 (1957), 38-60, who
illustrates the prevalence of the number 12 in the organization of
Greek cities. They may have been Arretium, Cortona, Perugia (9. 37.
12; Diod. 20. 3. 5 ; Steph. Byz. s.v. neppaicnov; see Shaw, Etruscan
Perugia, 37), Volsinii (10. 37. 4 ; Val. M a x . 9. 1 ext. 2 ; Pliny, N.H.
2. 139), Caere, Tarquinii, Vetulonia, Vulci (C.I.L. 11. 1432; see
Canina, Etruria Maritima, 1. 28-35 for a discussion of this relief which
may have contained personifications of all twelve cities), Volaterrae,
Clusium (2. 9. 1), Rusellae (28. 45. 18), and Veii, later replaced by
Populonia (28.45. 15) which [Servius] (ad Aen. 10. 172) explicitly says
was founded post XIIpopulos in Etruria constitutos. With a cult-centre at
the fanum Voltumnae (4. 23. 5 n.), holding annual games on the Greek
pattern (Tabula Hispelli = C.I.L. 11. 5265) presided over by an
annual sacerdos (5. 1. 5) who was one of the twelve lucumones
(Servius, ad Aen. 8. 475), the league seems to have been originally a
religious federation which later came to acquire a political function
as a forum where national decisions could be taken. In this respect
it closely resembled the Ionian Confederacy, also twelve in number,
but specifically Ionian influences are only detectable in Etruria after
the migrations of the middle of the sixth century (R. Bloch, Historia
6 (1957), 53 ff-; Schachermeyr, Etr. Fruhgeschichte, 90 ff.; Blakeway,
B.S.A. 33 (1933), 170 ff.). Thus it is likely that the Etruscan political
leagues only date from that period. If so, the innovation will be short
lived, and a tradition about the detailed constitution of the league
will hardly have been established. Twelve did not remain a constant
n u m b e r ; for in imperial times inscriptions record a praetor XV populorum (C.I.L. 11. 2115) and Plutarch, Camillus 16 speaks of the eighteen
cities of Etruria Circumpadana. If it was primarily a religious organi
zation, it would be natural for parallel federations to be set up in
Etruscan provinces, such as in Cisalpine Gaul mentioned by L. here
(under the hegemony of Mantua, according to Servius, ad Aen. 10. 202)
and in Campania (Strabo 5. 242). See further 1. 8. 3 ; G. Camporeale, La Parola del Passato 13 (1958), 5-25.
814432

705

Z Z

5- 33- *o

DIGRESSION ON E T R U R I A

33. 10. excepto Venetorum angulo: i. i. 1-3 n.

The Raetians
33. 11. Alpinis . . . ea gentibus haud dubie origo est, maxime Raetis: for the
most judicious summary of views on the origin of the Raetians see
E. Vetter, Glotta, 30 (1943), 67-81 ; M . Pallottino, The Etruscans,
93-94. L. is corroborated by Pliny, JV.H. 3. 133 Raetos Tuscontm
prolem arbitrantur a Gallis pulsos duce Raeto and Justin (20. 5-8). The
similarity of all three passages indicates a common source and deprives
them of any independent value. Horace, on the other hand, associates
the Celtic Vindelici with the Raeti (Odes 4. 14; cf. also Pliny, loc. cit.)
but on such a topic the evidence of a poet is hardly to be taken
seriously. They are linked simply because both had been defeated.
More significant is Strabo (4. 206) who calls the Raetic tribes of
Genauni and Brenni Illyrians. While the question is perhaps in
soluble and it is unlikely that any ancient author had dependable
evidence, it is worth remarking that archaeologically there are no
traces of Etruscan civilization in the Adige (J. Whatmough, Harv.
Stud. Class. Phil. 48 (1937), 184-8) although they have been discovered
elsewhere north of the Alps (J. G. Szilagyi, Acta Antiqua Hungariae,
1 (1952), 419 fT.) and that the place-names cannot be shown to have
specifically Etruscan affinities (von Planta, Prdhist. ^eitschrift 20 (1929),
2 8 5 - 7 ; G. Battisti, Dizionario toponomastico Atesino). T h e main support
for L.'s statement has been found in the interpretation of the late
(post-300) inscriptions in Raetian ( = Whatmough, Prae-Italic Dia
lects, nos. 172-248). Some 70 in number, they have not been satis
factorily deciphered. It is notable that the clearest affinities with
Etruscan or Venetic have been claimed in inscriptions from places
closest to Etruria and Venetia. Thus P.I.D. 237, found at Magre,
contains the word valtikinua which is associated with ven. voltiyen, while
G. Battisti has detected Etruscan terminations and forms in inscrip
tions from Etruscan border-lands (Stud. Etruschi 18 (1944), 199 ff.;
19 (1946-7), 249 ff.). More general affinities with Illyrian (e.g. P.I.D.
188 maieye = Illyr. maz-, mas-; cf. H . Krahe, Geogr. Nameny 28) suggest
that the Raetians were related to the Illyrians, that their language
was Indo-European but was contaminated by local contact with more
advanced neighbouring civilizations, and that the Etruscan veneer
misled antiquarians into detecting in it a decadent form of Etruscan.
Livy's Tradition of the Migration
T h e detailed account of the migrating tribes which follows is
founded not on historical fact but ultimately on the ethnographical
rationalizations made, in particular by Greeks, during the second and
first centuries at Rome. It is the heir of Hecataeus' method of descrip706

DIGRESSION ON GAUL

5- 34

tion /caret eOvrj. T h e tribes mentioned by L. are distributed over the

areas which they occupied shortly before Caesar's conquest, indicating
that ethnographers took the contemporary picture as the basis for their
reconstruction of the migrations and grafted on to it plausibly Gallic
names of tribes and persons derived from Cisalpine sources. So the
motivation of the emigration is derived from Greek literary tradition
rather than from memory. T h e wanderings of Bellovesus and Segovesus
can be compared with the wanderings of the sons of the Lydian king
Atys (Herodotus i. 9 4 ; D . H . 1. 27-28) or of the sons of the Arcadian
Lykaon (D.H. 1. 11).
34. 1. haec accepimus: not necessarily by oral legend; cf. 1. 24. 4, 3. 39.
1, 3 . 6 9 . 8 , 4 . 3 4 . 6 , 5 . 2 2 . 6 .
Prisco Tarquinio: 4. 23. 1 n. for the order.
Celtarum quae pars Galliae iertia est: cf. Caesar, B.G. 1. 1. 1. The
two passages can scarcely be independent. Apart from the linguistic
resemblance, L. and Caesar are alone in confining the term Celtae
to the central area of Gaul between the Garonne and the Marne.
Elsewhere 'Gaul' and 'Celt' are used indifferently of the whole ethnic
body (e.g. Pausanias 1. 4. 1; Strabo 4. 189; Schweighaliser, Index
Polybianus, 'promiscue ol TaXdrai et ol KeXroC). Caesar's distinction
is a new systematization, based perhaps on an ethnographical survey
which, as in the pacification of any foreign country, accompanied
his campaign. The influence of such a survey, designed to improve
on the amateurish work of Posidonius, might be provocative enough to
explain the tendentious opposition of Diodorus (5. 32. 1). T h e three
fold division of Gaul is also reflected in Strabo 4. 176 who is generally
agreed to be following either Timagenes or Caesar himself here.
See further Jullian 1. 2 3 0 - 8 ; Holmes 244-320; Grenier 11-15;
A. Klotz, Rh. Mus. 96 (1953), 62-67.
penes Bituriges: T h e Bituriges Cubi who in Caesar's day occupied
the diocese of Bourges. T h e tradition of their hegemony is supported
by the presence of a branch of the tribe (Bituriges Vivisci) on the
coast at Bordeaux, the natural outlet to the Atlantic (Pliny, N.H.
4. 108; C.I.L. 13. 566), but is not elsewhere mentioned. In the second
century Gaul was dominated by the Arverni until their defeat in 121
at the hands of Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus (27. 39. 6 (207 B.C.);
Caesar, B.G, 7. 4. 1 ; see Jullian 2. 542-52). Thereafter no single
power was paramount and by 60 the Bituriges, although still a con
siderable force, were dependants of the Aedui (Caesar, B.G. 7. 5. 2).
ii regem Celtico dabant: the form Celticum is unique here. Weissenborn
and Hirschfeld compare Illyricum and Noricum but these are the
official names just because they are the Latin equivalents of names
commonly and originally encountered in Greek, kosticus, which has
707

DIGRESSION ON GAUL
5- 34- i
also been adduced, belongs to a different category altogether, being
a word of a special, academic solemnity (Fraenkel, Horace, 117 n. 2).
Celticum must correspond to the Greek TO KCXTLKOV and betrays thereby
the Greek original of the whole section. Another stylistic feature, the
disproportionate frequency of the resumptive is in comparison with
L.'s normal usage (e.g. it . . . dabant. Ambigatus is fuit; 34. 5 is . . .
excivit; 34. 8 Massilienses erant ii. . . id Galli. . . rati; cf. 34. 3 hie . . .
ostendit; 34. 8 ipsi. . . transcenderunt), in spite of the synoptic nature of
the narrative which lends itself to staccato brevity, may reflect the
typical 6 8e, OVTOS 8e, 17V yap OVTOS found in the loose writing of late
Greek (Norden, Antike Kunstprosa, 1.126 ff.; cf. Timagenes F 5 Jacoby).
34. 2. Ambigatus: only here, but except for the Latin termination,
the name is unimpeachable: prefix ambi- ( = 'around') as in Ambidavus, Ambilatri, Ambiliati, Ambirenus; stem as in Abugato (on
a gold coin of the Bituriges). Others translate it 'King of the World'
(Homeyer, op. cit. n. 34). See J . Rhys, Proc. Brit. Acad., 1905, 114;
Schulze 542.
virtute fortunaque cum sua turn publica: fortuna is not sheer luck, the
Greek wilful or incalculable rvxq, but a providence presiding over
the destinies of individuals (29. 26. 5 ; first in Ennius, Trag. 172 fortuna
Hectoris) and states (1. 46. 5, 2. 40. 13, 3. 7. 1 di praesides ac fortuna
urbis, 6. 30. 4 - 6 ; first in Cicero, in Catil. 1. 15; Sallust, Catil. 4 1 . 3).
This was also a Greek idea (as early as Pindar, Olymp. 12) and its
introduction into Roman thought was a consequence of the dis
semination of Hellenistic ideas. In other contexts L. uses virtus in the
passive sense of the good fortune bestowed by a protecting providence
upon individuals and states, generally as a reward for pietas, in which
connexion it is the virtual equivalent otfelicitas (22. 58. 3, 30. 12. 12,
28. 32. 11). But in the conventional juxtaposition ofvirtus and fortuna
(actively as here or passively as 1. 25. 2, 6. 32. 7, 22. 12. 10, 23. 42. 4,
43. io, 42. 49. 2, &c.) fortuna is not to be thought of as a reward for
virtus, virtus is not the same as pietas and R o m a n religion did not ascribe
to the gods such complete responsibility for events as to disallow the
independent effects of h u m a n excellence or shortcoming. See further
Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy (1957), especially 63-91 ; H . Erkell,
Augustus, Felicitas, Fortuna (Diss. Goteborg, 1952).
adeo frugum hominumque fertilis: if Gaul was so fertile, why did some
have to leave? According to L., because the nation became un
manageably largea unique and incredible reason, not included
even in the exhaustive list compiled by Seneca, adHelviam 7. 4. All the
other sources give the regular reason of land-hunger for the Gallic
migrations (Plutarch, Camillus 15; Caesar, B.G. 6. 24. 1; Appian,
Celtica 2. 2, cf. Livy 39. 54. 5). This, coupled with the sanctity of
forests which would prevent land clearance, the glamour of the Po
708

DIGRESSION ON GAUL

5- 34- 2

valley, and the pressure from the north, is a satisfactory rationalization

of the movement. T h e parallel passage of Justin (24. 4 abundante
multitudine, cum eos non caperent terrae quae genuerani) allows us to conjec
ture that so far from his having had access to a variant tradition, L.
has merely misunderstood his authority, taking, for example, the
adjective evKapnos literally of the fecundity of crops rather than human
beings.
34. 3 . Bellovesum ac Segovesum: both authentic n a m e s : Bello- as in
Bellognatus, Bellovaci; Sego- (Germ, sieg) as in Segobriga, Segovia,
on a stem -vesus or -vassus ( = servant). See Homeyer, op. cit. n. 34.
34. 4. Hercynei saltus: the upland districts of south Germany, in
historical fact the original cradle of the Celts from which they mi
grated into Gaul (Caesar, B.G. 6. 24. 2 ; Tacitus, Germania 23. 1, on
which see Norden, Urgeschichte, 358 ff.). Cf. Strabo 7. 293-4.
34. 5. is quodeius expopulis abundabat: eius sc. regni or turbae, a conflation
of quod ex populis abundabat, 'the surplus population of the tribes 5
(cf. Cicero, ad Att. 15. 15. 3) and quod eius abundabat, 'so much (of
the population) as was surplus' (a formula common in legal contexts
e.g. C.I.L. i 2 .585 (Lex Agraria), 25 ager locus queisup]ra screiptus est, quod
eius agrei locei post [h.] I. rog. publicum populei Romani erit, extra eum
ag\rum locum . . . ; and, in L., cf. 5. 25. 7, 31. 4. 2, 38. 23. 10, 54. 3,
39. 7. 5, 45. 7, 42. 8. 7). quodeius, unexpected in a non-legal context,
may have been used to correspond to a Greek idiom. Editors, since
Rhenanus, have referred eius to Ambigatus, despite the impossibility
of is and eius referring to different people, or emended (e.g. eis ex
eruditissimus Gronovii amicus; e sex . . . [Senones] M a d v i g ; regis ex
Zingerle).
Bituriges . . .: 'some of the Bituriges..'.' not 'the Bituriges'. T h e seven
named tribes are co-extensive with, not a mere part of, the populi:
for the list comprises the principal tribes of Gaul. Bellovesus took
a percentage from each, which accounts for the fact that the Senones
can be called on twice to supply emigrants (35. 3 n.).
Arvernos, Senones, Aeduos, Ambarros, Carnutes, Aulercos: their position
in historical times can be roughly fixed by later references and
by the boundaries of ancient dioceses. T h e Arverni (fr. Auvergne)
were situated in the modern departments of Central and Puy-de-D6me.
L. gives no hint of their subsequent importance (34. 1 n.). T h e
Senones occupied the diocese of Sens (Caesar, B.G. 2 . 2 . 3 ; Pliny, N.H.
4. 107; Ptolemy 2. 8. 10-11). Their presence in the list of tribes
raised by Bellovesus was doubted as early as Sigonius (who substituted
Santones; cf. Caesar, B.G, 1. 10. 1) on the ground that in 35. 3 the
Senones are said to be the last wave of migrants and cannot also be
among the first (but see 35. 3 n.). T h e Aedui are located in the
departments of Saone-et-Loire and Nievre: their eastern boundary
709

5- 3 4 - 5

DIGRESSION ON GAUL

with the Sequani in classical times is stated to have been the Saone
(Strabo 4. 186; Ptolemy 2. 8. 12; cf. Caesar, B.G. 1. 12. 1). Their
name is aspirated by editors; the manuscripts give Aeduos here, but
in 34. 9 H{a)eduorum M7r, Aeduorum A. T h e unaspirated form is invariable
in Greek (AlSovaiot, in Steph. Byz.; AiSovoi or AlSovoi in Strabo 186,
192; Ptolemy 2. 18. 19; Cass. Dio 38. 32 ; see Ihm, R.E., 'Aedui') and
should therefore be accepted here. T h e territory of the Ambarri
(? = Ambi-arari) comprised the area north of Lyons between the
Rhone and the Saone. T h e Garnutes possessed the dioceses of Ghartres,
Orleans, and Blois. At least six branches of the Aulerci are mentioned
(for details see Ihm, R.E., 'Aulerci'; Diehl, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v.) but
there is general agreement that they occupied the region of Maine.
It is implied that Bellovesus' tribes formed a compact group and the
historical situation of the seven named tribes distributes them compactly
over the central region of metropolitan Gaul. Such a distribution only
became settled in the late third century and neither in 600 nor in 390
would the pattern have been the same. L.'s source has selected the
names of the migrants from the ethnic m a p of contemporary Gaul.
See further T . R. Holmes, Caesar's Conquest of Gaul, Geographical Index.
in Tricastinos: exact site disputed and perhaps not determinable,
since the population was liable to shift (Walbank, J.R.S. 46 (1956),
39). T h e evidence is conflicting, but the approximate vicinity is re
presented by the area round Stf Paul-Trois-Chateaux (Desjardins).
They were already settled, according to tradition, in the locality
when Hannibal crossed the Alps. See Scherling, R.E., 'Tricastini';
Sir G. de Beer, Alps and Elephants, 36.
34. 6. de Hercule fabulis credere libet: cf. Timagenes F 2 Jacoby 'Amfitryonis filium Herculem ad Geryonis etTaurisci saevium tyrannorum
perniciem festinasse quorum alter Hispanias, alter Gallias infestabat
superatisque ambobus coisse cum generosis feminis et concepisse
liberos plures et eas partes quibus imperitabant suis nominibus appellasse'. Hercules was a peerless globe-trotter (cf. Lucian, Vera Historia
1. 7) and as the boundaries of the human world were enlarged his
exploits were extended with them and became identified with the
deeds of local heroes. Greek contact, coincident with the foundation
of Massilia, transferred the Geryon labour from Italy (1.7. 3-15 n.) to
Gaul (Diod. 4. 19), and a dim memory of a prehistoric Gallic king
dom, echoed in the story of Ambigatus and the Bituriges (34. 1 n.),
nourished a legend that after founding Alesia Hercules was the pro
genitor of the Gallic race, the dispenser of its laws, and the guardian
of its commerce (Diod. 5. 24). Tacitus {Hist. 3. 42) pays mute testi
mony to the same legend by preserving the name of the Portus Herculis Monoeci ( = Monaco). With the opening-up of Germany he
moved north to take over the mantle of Donar or Thorr (cf. Tacitus,
710

DIGRESSION ON GAUL

5- 34- 6

Germania 3). There was a Herculis castra in the Low Countries. See
Haug, R.E., 'Hercules'; Jullian 2. 120 n. 6, 145.
34. 7. ab Saluumgente: so N, except Salluviorum H (and, by contamina
tion, O E * ) ; in 34. 8 the nonsensical patientibus silvis was corrected by
Valesius to patientibus Saluis (cf. 35. 1 favente Belloveso); in 35. 2 (see
note) N has Salluvii qui, where the corrupt qui (it has no verb to govern)
casts doubt on the reliability of Salluvii. The Latin name for the tribe,
who lived between the Rhone and the Maritime Alps, was Salluvii
(C.LL. i 2 . p. 4 9 ; Amm. Marc. 15. 11. 15; Livy, Per. 60, 61, 73; Pliny,
N.H. 3. 36; Florus 1. 19. 5, 1. 37. 3). The Greek form was UdXves
(Strabo 4. 178, 180, 181, 184-6, 203; Ptolemy 2. 10. 8; Appian,
Celtica 12; Steph. Byz. s.v.) or ZaAAue? according to some manuscripts
in the above passages. An alternative shortened form Sal(l)ues (e.g.
Veil. Pat. 1. 15. 4 ; Jul. Obsequens 90, 92) or Salui (cf. Santones and
Santoni for the variant termination of Gallic names) was based on the
Greek name. It should be replaced throughout in this homogeneous
section (viz. Saluum, Saluis, Salui) but not necessarily at 21. 26. 3.
See Hirschfeld, Kl. Schriften, 11; Homeyer, op. cit. 353-4.
34. 8. Massilienses erant ii navibus a Phocaeaprofecti: two expeditions are
recorded: c. 600 (600/599 Timaeus ap. Ps.-Scymn. 211-14; Solinus
2. 5 2 ; 598 Eusebius, Chron.; 599 Jerome, Chron.; temporibus Tarquinii
regis Justin 43. 3. 4 ; Aristotle ap. Athenaeus 13. 576a; Strabo 4. 179 :
this agrees with the archaeological evidence on which see Blakeway,
B.S.A. 33 (1932-3), 170-208; J.R.S. 25 (1935)5 129-49; P. BoschGimpera, C.Q. 38 (1944), 53-59), and c. 540 1 (after Harpagus' cap
ture of Phocaea: Herodotus 1. 166; Thucydides 1. 13. 6 (see Gomme;
I am convinced by Blakeway's interpretation of these two passages);
Antiochus ap. Strabo 6. 252; Isocrates, Archidam. 97; Pausanias
10. 8. 6; Seneca, ad Helviam 7. 8; Isidore, Origines 15. 1. 6 3 ; Agathias,
Hist. 1. 2). It is probable that Massilia was founded, partly for trading
purposes, by Phocaea c. 600 and that the colony was reinforced by
fugitives c. 540 after their Pyrrhic victory over the Carthaginians
during an attempt to colonize Corsica. Timagenes dealt with
the subject (F 2 Jacoby), but we have no idea what absolute date
or synchronization Timagenes gave to the event. Some confusion is
evident in L. All the interlocking indications of time (33. 5 n.) are
consistent with the original colonization c. 600, whereas his language
[navibus a Phocaea profecti) suggests that he has the more dramatic
escape from Harpagus in mind. For a full examination of the evidence
1
The date is usually given as 546 but this is too early. It was the final stage of
Harpagus* crushing of Pactyas' revolt. We know from Babylonian records that
Gyrus captured Babylon in 539/8 and Herodotus says that Pactyas waited until
Gyrus had departed for Babylon before revolting, which can hardly be earlier than
54*-

711

5. 34- 8

DIGRESSION ON GAUL

see J . Brunei, R..A. 50 (1948), 5 - 2 6 ; P.-M. Duval, Historia 5 (1956),

238-9ipsi per Taurinos saltusque Iuliae Alpis transcenderunt: saltus iuliae alte
alpis 7T, saltusque iuriae alpes H (7r's reading is a valueless dittography).
According to L.'s tradition the Gauls, coming from the Tricastini
through the Taurini (Turin) to the Ticinus (Ticino), celebrated as
the site of Hannibal's victory, and Milan, must be supposed to have
come over the Cottian Alps (Mt. Genevre) and followed a route
similar to Hannibal's (The Passage of H. over the Alps, by a member of
the University of Oxford (1820), Introduction, p. 27). L. appears to
bring them over the wrong pass. T h e Julian Alps are in the extreme
north-east of Italy above Trieste, nowhere even remotely near Turin.
It is possible that L. has made a mere mistake, such as led Thucydides
to speak of the Tepwalos KOXITOS (6. 104. 2) when he meant the
Scyllacian Gulf. O r it is possible, as J . Heurgon (R..L. 34 (1956),
85-87) has recently argued, that what were subsequently known as
the Cottian Alps were in 25 B.C. known as the Julian Alps, but
Vitruvius c. 25 B.G. can write that Alpibus in Cotti regno est aqua
(8. 3. 17) which suggests that the appellation C o t t i a n ' was already
established by then, while 'Julius' is associated with the area of the
Julian Alps as early as the foundation of Forum Julii and Julium
Carnicum in the 50's. It is, therefore, more probable that the mention
of the Julian Alps in L. is ,a conflation of two separate traditions, one,
historically accurate, which brought the Gauls into Italy from the
north-east and a second, influenced by Hannibal's passage, which
led them over M t . Genevre to Turin (D'Arbois de Jubainville). T h e
conflation may have been due to the confusion of a Julian Alpine
tribe called TavplaKoi oi NwpcKol (Polybius; cf. Strabo 5. 213) with
the better-known inhabitants of Turin. Traces of such a north-eastern
infiltration survive in Polybius and both traditions were certainly
discussed by Timagenes. It is noteworthy that Timagenes in another
fragment (2 Jacoby) speaks of a Tauriscus who devasted Gaul. See
Homeyer, op. cit. 354-5
per Taurinos: for the use ofper with peoples cf. 10. 20. 1, 21. 38. 7;
for the singular Alpis cf. Ovid, Ars Am. 3. 150; Florus 1. 22. 50.
34. 9. fusisque acie Tuscis: the Etruscans, according to Nepos ap.
Pliny, N.H. 3. 125, had founded a city, Melpum, at the site of the
later Milan, which was destroyed by the Gauls in 396 on the same
day that Camillus captured Veii. No trace of it has been found and it
cannot in fact have been built before c. 525, when the Etruscans
reached the area. L.'s chronology is again at fault, for he dates the
foundation of Mediolanium to c. 600 (33. 7 n.), thereby implying
that Melpum was destroyed some seventy-five years before it could
possibly have been built. T h e tradition of fighting between Etruscans
712

DIGRESSION ON GAUL
5- 34- 9
and Celts in the latter half of the fifth century is strikingly confirmed
by the grave-stelai from Felsina (c. 500), depicting combats between
cavalry or hoplites and ill-armed foreigners. There is an evident
parallel with Hannibal's victory in 218 B.C. See Walbank on Polybius
2. 34. 10; Nissen, //. Land, 2. 180 ff.; Homeyer, op. cit. 3 5 3 ; Mansuelli,
op. cit. 1072-3.
agrum Insubrium appellari. . . cognominem Insubribus, pago Aeduorum: no
such Gallic clients of the Aedui are known. T h e n a m e in Celtic means
Very wild* (Holder, Alt-celt, Sprach. s.v.; Philipp, R.E., 'Insubres')
from which Jullian (1. 291, n. 6) conjectured that it was a war-name
chosen by the migrating tribes. The mention of the Insubres has been
used (e.g. by Hirschfeld) as evidence that L. is following Nepos, him
self an Insubrian (Pliny, Ep. 4. 28. 1).
cognominem: Gk. 7TWW(JLOV, a geographical caique. See Norden on
Virgil, Aen. 6. 378 ff.; Ogilvie, Eranos 55 (1957), 201 ; J.R.S. 48 (1958),
43 n. 49. 77-A read cognomine but a noun would have to be nomine
(Nipperdey).
Mediolanium: a Celtic name, recurring throughout Gaul and Britain
(see R.E., s.v. ( i ) - ( 6 ) ; A. Longnon, Revue celtique 8 (1887), 375-8),
of uncertain etymology: the prefix medio- is Eng. 'mid-'. A late popular
etymology analysed it as lanigero de sue nomen (Sid. Apoll. Epist. 7. 17.
2. 20; Claudian, Nupt. Hon. Aug. 183; Isidore, Origines 15. 1. 57). T h e
Greek form appears to have been McSioXdvtov (Strabo 5 . 2 1 3 ; Ptolemy 3.
1. 3 3 ; and to be restored with some manuscripts in Polybius 2. 34) but
was contracted to MeSioXavov under Latin influence (cf. Plutarch, Marcellus 7), the Latin form being regularly Mediolanum (Pliny saep.; Tacitus,
Hist. 1. 70; Suetonius, Augustus 20). L. here (and 34. 46. 1) follows
the Greek model. See Mommsen, C.I.L. 5. pp. 6 3 3 - 4 ; Hirschfeld 12.
35. 1. alia subinde manus Cenomanorum: the four other successive waves
of migrants are to be taken as occupying the intervening 200 years. In
general the account agrees with Polybius 2. 17, except that Polybius
adds Adoi and Hvapes while omitting the Salui and differs from L.'s
order. T h e Adoi are generally identified with the Laevi (35. 2 n . ;
see Walbank on Polybius 2. 17. 4), who elsewhere are firmly described
as Ligurian, not Celtic; but it is more likely that Polybius either wrote
or certainly meant the Salui. T h e variation of order is not significant,
for the whole sequence of Gallic invasions is not based on contem
porary traditions but, at best, on a late rationalization from the
presence of separate racial groups in Cisalpine Gaul, and the sequence
will be governed by the order in which antiquarians considered the
groups and by a general principle such as that the farthest advance
into Italy will have been made by the latest arrivals.
Cenomanorum: 'another band consisting of C . \ Germanorum M S S .
7T3

5- 35- i

D I G R E S S I O N ON GAUL

but Glareanus's correction is accepted in view of Polybius (sup.

cit. rovofidvoi) and Pliny, N.H. 3. 130 Brixia Cenomanorum agro. The
same corruption is found at Cicero, Balb. 32. T h e Cenomani lived
round Le Mans.
Elitovio: Etitovio is printed by editors but, while -ovius is a common
termination (cf. Britovius, Virovius), Etit- has no Celtic parallel.
MTT have Elit- with which I h m compared C.I.L. 12. n 74 matribus
Elitivis Capella.
ubi nunc Brixia ac Verona urbes sunt: confirmed by Pliny, sup. cit. and
Catullus 77. 34. T h e territory of the Cenomani was extensive, stretch
ing from the Ollius (Oglio) to the Athesis (Adige) and including
Cremona and M a n t u a (Strabo 5. 213; see Ptolemy 3. 1. 27). See
Walbankon Polybius 2. i7.4;Hiilsen,/?."., 'Cenomanni ( 3 ) ' ; G. E. F.
Chilver, Cisalpine Gaul, 80.
35. 2. Libui considunt post hos Saluique: on Saluique see 34. 7 n.; for the
subsequent fate of the Libui cf. 21. 38. 7, 33. 37. 6 : elsewhere they are
called Libicii, e.g. by Pliny {N.H. 3. 124 Vercellae Libiciorum ex Saluis
ortae), Ptolemy (2. 6. 68, 3. 1. 32) and Polybius (/le/fc'/aoi) but a
similar variation occurs in the case of the name of Libya (cf. Tacitus,
Ann. 2. 6 0 ; Virgil, Aen. 1. 33g). Their Gallic provenance is unknown.
Fuller details in Homeyer, op. cit. n. 60.
Editors from Rhenanus to Madvig (Bayet marks a lacuna) punc
tuated : alia subinde manus_. . . cum transcendisset Alpes, ubi nunc Brixia ac
Verona urbes sunt, (locos tenuere Libui) considunt. post hos Salluvii....
The
implication of this is that the Libui were an indigenous Ligurian
population or, at least, a previous wave of invaders (as in Polybius).
T h e parenthesis is intolerably awkward and destroys L.'s favourite
dactylic clausula (- ^ ^ - ^) which he employs in descriptive or
narrative passages, as below 35. 2 . . . sese tenuere; 35. 3 . . .fines
habuere. T h e Libui and Salui are always associated (cf. Pliny, sup. cit.;
21. 38. 7 per Saluos (saltus codd. Salassos Lipsius) . . . ad Libuos Gallos
deduxerint). See Philipp, R.E., 'Libicii'; Madvig, Emendationes Livianae,
145; F. Altheim, History of Roman Religion, 33.
prope antiquam gentem Laevos Ligures: cf. Pliny N.H. 3. 124. The
Ligurians, who linguistically were pre-Indo-European, occupied a
wide tract along the French and Italian Riviera. They have left their
traces in place-names, the Laevi, in particular, being commemorated
by the R. Lavagna and the Commune di Leivi (U. Formentini, Riv.
Stud. Ligur. 15 (ig4g), 218-19). They are hardly to be identified with
the AdoL of Polybius (35. i n . ) since their Ligurian nationality is as
old as Cato. In 33. 37. 6 Laevos Libuosque cum pervastassent (Romani)
it is clear that the campaign is raging on the borders of the Ligurian
(Laevi) and Gallic (Libui) lands: the Libui are not being classed as
Ligurian, as Altheim and others have maintained.
714

D I G R E S S I O N ON GAUL

5- 35- 2

Poenino deinde Boii Lingonesque transgressi: cf. 21. 38. 6. The Pennine
(Gr. St. Bernard) is regarded as a pass or route, not a mountain,
hence the ablative. The provenance of the Boii and their capital
Gorgobina (Caesar, B.G. 7. 9. 6) is disputed. They evidently abutted
the territory of the Aedui in the vicinity of Avaricum since they
supplied Caesar with corn during the siege of that city (B.G. 7. 9.
12-13). If they lived on the east bank of the river Allier, their associa
tion with the Lingones who lived immediately to the north near the
head-waters of the Marne and the Saone would be natural. See T. R.
Holmes 426-30; Ruge, R.E., 'Boii ( i ) ' ; Walbank on Polybius 2. 17. 7.
Umbros agro pellunt: an Italic people related to the Sabellians who
had already been displaced by the Etruscan expansion of the sixth and
fifth centuries and confined to the central Apennines. The Iguvine
tablets remain the principal evidence for their language. See Walbank
on Polybius 2. 16. 3 ; Nissen, It. Land. 1. 502-8.
35. 3 . recentissimi: implies that they were new-comers (cf. also Ps.Scylax 3. 82) but they are named in 34. 5 (n.) among the earliest
migrants. On general grounds it is likely that the Senones, who were
the van of the expansion, should have been among the early settlers
and this is confirmed by Celtic tombs at Casola Valsenio in Picenum
which contain Attic Black Figure ware, acquired presumably from
Spina, datable not later than 490 B.C. (Arias, Notiz. Scavi, 1953,
218 ff.). It is possible that there were two waves of Senones but an
easier explanation of the doublet lies to hand. Polybius (2. 17. 7)
says that the Senones occupied the extremity of the Celtic expansion
ra reXevrata npos OaXdrTrj. If this or a similar Greek phrase occurred
in L.'s source, he may well have mistranslated it, giving rcXevraios a
temporal rather than a topographical force. There is indeed no good
evidence that the captors of Rome in 390 were called Senones. The
earliest versions of the Gallic catastrophe (Theopompus ap. Pliny,
N.H. 3 . 5 7 ; Heraclides ap. Plutarch, Camillas 22; Aristotle ap. Plutarch;
cf. Polybius 2. 22. 4) do not specifically name the Celtic tribe. The
later version, which identified them with the Senones (Diod. 14. 113. 3 ;
Strabo 4. 194; Plutarch; Appian, Celtica n ) , may well be a throw
back from the conquest of the Senones in 283 B.C. See Mommsen,
Rom. Forsch. 2. 300; J. Wolski, Historia 5 (1956), 32-35; Mansuelli,
op. cit. 1075-7.
ab Utente Jlumine usque ad Aesim: mod. Montone and Esino, i.e. from
Ravenna to Sinigaglia.
idparum cerium est: 33. 4 n.
35. 4-55. The Fight Against the Gauls
The second half of the book, treating of Rome's adventures with the
Gauls, is presented as a continuous narrative (41. 3 n., 46. n n.).
715

5- 35- 4-55

391 B.C.

T h e events are told as a series of episodic units, each illustrating some

quality in the Roman people. L.'s immediate source is unlikely to be
Licinius Macer but could be either Valerius Antias or Q . Claudius
Quadrigariuscertainly an author of their generation. See J.R.S.
48 (1958), 4 3 ; M . Zimmerer, Der Annalist QC.Q. (1937).
35. 4 - 3 6 . The Embassy of the Fabii
T h e whole story is baseless. T h e Clusines would hardly have turned
to Rome for help. It is a duplication of the single combat between
Gaul and Roman immortalized in the legend of Gorvinus. Polybius
does not allude to it. In its earliest form two (the usual number) un
named ambassadors went to Glusium to spy on the Gauls and became
involved in the fighting. T h e Gauls demanded reparation and were
offered by the Senate first financial compensation and then the lives
of the offending ambassadors. T h e assembly under the persuasion of
the father of the culprit, who happened to be consular tribune, refused
to ratify the solution (Diodorus 14. 113. 3 - 7 ; cf. D.H. 13. 12). Later,
doubtless under the influence of Fabius Pictor, the ambassadors were
identified as Fabii but, as no particular Fabius could be cited definitely,
the problem of identification was resolved by increasing the size of
embassy from two to three, to comprise all three Fabii who were jointly
consular tribunes in 390. T h e ensuing complication that consular
tribunes could not also have been legates during their year of office
was got round by transposing the embassy from 390 to the previous
year. Traces of unco-ordination can be seen in L. (35. 5, 36. 6 n.).
L. makes the story a moral and psychological pretext for the im
pending disaster at the Allia. Notice the emphasis on the failings of
the Fabiipraeferoces legatos Gallisque magis quam Romanis similes; contra
ius gentium. It became a favourite subject for debate in the Schools
(Quintilian 3. 8. 19). See Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 3 0 3 - 7 ;
Ed. Meyer, Apophoreton, 139-42; Bruckmann, Rom. Niederlagen, 41-42.
35. 4. genus armorum: rhetorical imagination, for the weapons used
by the Gauls of the period (throwing-spears, iron thrusting swords,
daggers, round shields) did not differ significantly from those em
ployed by the Romans, unless L. is thinking of the gaesatae who
created such an impression on Polybius (2. 22. 1 with Walbank's
note). O n the other hand, unlike the Romans, they did fight in open
rather than closed formation. For details see Powell, The Celts, 104 ff.
cis Padum ultraque: cf. 9. 32. 9.
35. 5. M. Fabi Ambusti: no person of this name is known unless he is
the same as M . F. Vibulanus, consul in 442 (4. n . 1 n . ; see Munzer,
R.E., 'Fabius (39)').
35, 6. cognosci: lit was better to make the acquaintance of the Gauls
in peace rather than in war'.
716

391 B.C.

5- 36. 1

36. 1. responsum: the moderate request of the Gauls contrasted with

the intemperate brutality of the Fabii is brought out by the different
character of their language. For the 'parliamentary' viros fortes see
R. G. M . Nisbet on Cicero, in Pisonem 54; for mortales see 1. 9. 8 n. In
the R o m a n reply notice the brusque minari arma (Cassius, adFam. 11.3.3)
and for quid rei esset see 1. 48. 1 n.
36. 3 . agro: 'the Gauls need land which the Glusines own in greater
quantity than they farm', quern makes the transition from the general
concept of land to the particular area which the Glusines own, but
the construction would be sensibly eased by Morstadt's cum.
36. 5. in armis iusferre: for the thought see 3. 37. 7 n.
36. 6. urgentibus: 22. 8, 32. 7. T h e phrase is echoed by Tacitus, Germania 33. 2 ; Lucan 10. 30. Gf. Virgil, Aeneid 2. 653.
iuventutis: at variance with their election to the consular tribunate
next year and with the fact that two of them had already held that
office and so must have been over thirty. It is a survival from the older
version of the story in which the fathers of the legates rather than the
legates themselves were leading citizens.
36. 9. decerneret: the reading of N has been unreasonably doubted.
T h e subject is senatus; cf. 23. 3 and other examples in Thes. Ling Lat.
s.v. 'decerno' 142. 31.
36. 10. cladis forte . . . acceptae: acceptae stands for a future passive
participle (accipiendaeTa.11. F a b e r ) ; cf. 1.9. 1 1 ; Seneca, Dial. 10. 15. 3.
36. 1 1 . tribus Fabiis: the Gapitoline Fasti preserve only the entry
Q. Fab]ius M.f. Q[n.] but the names are given by Diodorus 14. n o . 1.
T h e three Fabii must be K. Fabius, consular tribune in 404 (4. 61. 411.),
Gn. Fabius, consular tribune in 406 (4. 43. 1 n., 58. 6 n.), and an
otherwise unknown Q . Fabius. Allegedly they will have taken office
on 1 July (32. 1), a mere fortnight before the battle of the Allia.
Q.Sulpicius Longus: presumably Q.f. Ser. n., son of the disputed consul
of434 (4. 23. 1 n.). Historically he is likely to have been the leading figure
at Rome during the disastrous months of the Gallic invasion because it
was he who made the offering before the battle (Macrobius 1. 16.23) a n < ^
conducted the defence of the Capitol (48. 8), but his standing was over
shadowed by the role invented by historians for the saviour Camillus.
Q. Servilius quartum: 5. 8. 1 n.
P. Cornelius Maluginensis: 5. 19. 2 n . ; Servilius according to the
manuscripts, but Diodorus records his nomen as Cornelius a n d the
cognomen Maluginensis is confined to that gens. T h e error arose from
repetition of Q,- Servilius.
37-38. The Allia
T h e Battle of the Allia was fought on 18 July. There is no surer date
in Roman history. A dies ater, its memory was perpetuated in the
717

5- 3738

390 B.C.

religious calendar (Aul. Gell. 5. 17. 2 ; Macrobius 1. 16. 23). We can

be certain also that the R o m a n army was led by Q,. Sulpicius, that it
was accompanied by some allied troops (Polybius 2. 18), that it made
its stand on the left bank of the Tiber where the Allia (Fosso della
Bettina) joins the main river, and that it was overwhelmingly defeated
with many casualties by drowning (4. 33. 10 n.). These are facts.
Historians did make minor changes. T h e allied contingent was for
gotten in order to mitigate the disaster by stressing R o m a n isolation
(Walbank on Polybius loc. c i t ) . Diodorus (14. 114), by what may
be no more than a simple confusion, transferred the scene of the
battle from the left to the right bank. The details of the engagement
itself had to be imagined and the numbers conjectured (70,000 in
Diodorus; 40,000 in Plutarch and D.H.). T h e time-lag between the
battle and the occupation of Rome could be adjusted to taste (39.
in.).

With so little room for manoeuvre it is not to be expected that L.'s

version would present any striking peculiarities. A few details suggest
that L. took it from a relatively late source (38. 3 n.) but he retells it
starkly and with emotion. The syntax is periodic with the exception
of occasional short sentences to mark the decisive stages (38. 6, 38. 7).
T h e importance of the occasion is signalized by a certain elevation
of language (37. 1 n., 37. 2 n.). As always L. singles out the
psychological cause of the disasterthe temeritas of the tribunes
(37. 3), the unnerving spectacle of the Gauls (37. 6), the demoraliza
tion of the Romans (38. 5).
For the battle itself see G. Thouret, Fleck. Jahrb. f. Phil, Supp.
Band, 1880, 136 ff.; C. Hulsen, Die Allienschlacht (Rome, 1890); Ed.
Meyer, Apophoreton, 137 ff.; Sigwart, Klio 6 (1906), 341 ff.; E. Kornemann, Klio 11 (1911), 335 ff.; J . Kromayer, AbhandL Sachs. Akad.
(phil.-hist. KL), 34 (1921), 28 ff.; Schachermeyr, Klio 23 (1930), 277 ff.;
J Wolski, Historia 5 (1956), 38-41. For L.'s account see Burck 123 ff. ;
Bruckmann, Rom. Niederlagen, 4 2 - 4 4 ; E. Gatin, En Lisant Tite-Live,
II5_l8,

37. 1. moles mali: only here in L . ; cf. Lucretius 3. 1056; Cicero,

carm.fr. 39. 4 ; Ovid, Met. 11. 494; Seneca, H.F. 1239.
adeo: the new episode, as often (2. 2. 2), is introduced by a moralizationquern deus vult perdere dementat priuswhich reaches back through
the orator Lycurgus (inLeocr.2) to the Greek tragedians (cf. Sophocles,
Antig. 620) and even Homer (Iliad 9. 2 1 ; cf. Theognis 402 ff.). See
Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational, 38-39.
ingruentem: 21. 5 n.
ultima: 'as a final resource'.
37. 2. ab Oceano: not necessarily in conflict with the ethnology of
ch. 34, since it was a rhetorical commonplace thus to exaggerate the
718

390 B.C.

5- 37- 2

outlandishness of strangers. Gf. Cicero, Verr. 5. 6, 5 0 ; de Prov. Cons.

29. 3 i , 34helium ciente: only here in classical prose; cf. Virgil, Aeneid 1. 541,
12. 158; Siliusltal. 5. 335.
37. 4 . ira: quick temper is an invariable ingredient in the conven
tional picture of the Gauls (44. 4, 49. 5, 10. 28. 3, 38. 17. 7; Polybius
2. 35. 3). For impotens with the gen. cf. 29. 9. 9 ; Tacitus, Hist. 4. 44.
T h e dactylic clausula (iter ingrediuntur) is striking.
37. 5. Notice the word-order: the clipped phrases (equis virisque, longe
ac late, fuso agmine) lead up to loci separated from immensum and post
poned to the end of the sentence.
37. 7. lapidem: on the Via Salaria.
37. 8. truci cantu: another conventional hallmark of the Gauls; cf.
39- 5> 3 8 - x 7- 4 ; Polybius 2. 29. 5 ; Caesar, B.G. 5. 37. 3 ; Tacitus,
Annals 1. 65.
38. 1. nee auspicato nee litato: 1. 36. 6 n.
38. 3 . Brennus: a name not a title (cf, e.g., C.I.L. 13. 677; see Holder,
Alt-celt. Sprach. 1. 501), anachronistically introduced from the cele
brated leader of the Gauls who invaded Greece in 280 (38. 16. 1).
In Polybius and Diodorus the commander of 390 is unnamed.
concucurrissent: the reduplicated form is undisputed at 29. 18. 10;
cf. Priscian 2. 533. See also 8. 7. 9.
38. 4 . fortuna . . . ratio: cf. Diodorus 14. 114. 3 etre /caret TVXTJV etre
Kara npovoiav. T h e relation of Diodorus' source for the Gallic disaster
to L.'s source has not been adequately elucidated but the resemblances
between them are striking and close (cf. 38. 8 ^ 'LTTTOVTCS ra oirXa;
38. 9 '- TLV$ V7TO TOV fiapovs KaraSvofievoi;

38. 9 >' oi fiV 7rAetcrTOt TGW

cf.
also 55. 2, 55. 3 : see the latest discussion by Wolski). It is, however,
certain that the part played by fortune in the battle of Allia was not
invented by L. but was a long-standing attempt to save Roman pride.
Cf. Cannae (23. 24. 6, 23. 22. 1).
38. 5. omnium: Gronovius's certain correction ofhominum.
38. 8. defugit: lit. 'fled d o w n ' ; the word is elsewhere only found in
this sense in 'Itala', Ios. 10. 27 and Arnobius, Nat. 4. 5. They fled
down-stream (cf. 37. 7 defluens).

39-43. 5. The Gallic Occupation of Rome

T h e immediate aftermath of the Allia was the occupation of Rome,
whose defences at this time amounted to a ditch and turf-wall which
were inadequate to withstand a resolute assault. T h e fact of the
7J9

5 39-43- 5

390 B.C.

occupation is indisputable and has left its mark archaeologically

(55. 1 n . ; see L. G. Roberts Mem, Amer. Acad. Rome, 2 (1918), 55-65)
but the extent of it is less certain. It would be natural for Roman
historians to minimize their indignity and there are many places
where this tendency can be seen at work. There is a half-suppressed
tradition that the Capitol as well as the city was captured by the
Gauls (Ennius, Annals 164 V . ; Lucan fr. 16; see O. Skutsch, J.R.S.
43 (1953) 77-78; M. J . McGann, C.Q. 7 (1957), 126-8) which, it
might be held, represented the real truth before it was glossed over
and modified by Roman propagandists. T h e literary tradition is, how
ever, ambiguous and in the face of the persistent legend about Manlius
and the Geese and in default of any archaeological confirmation it is
better to accept that only the city and not the Capitol was occupied.
One other detail seems grounded in solid factthe tradition of L.
Albinius and the removal of the sacra to Caere (40. 7-10 n.). T h e other
incidents which make up the first stage of the Gallic occupationthe
withdrawal to the Capitol, the massacre of the elders in the Senate,
the battle on the slopes of the Capitolare derived from popular or
family mythology and supplemented by rhetoric and imagination.
L., who continues to use the same late source, develops each
episode as a stage in the restoration of Roman morale, as exempla
pietatis, which culminates with the repulse of the Gauls (43. 3). This
revival makes a fitting moment for him to change the scene to Camillus
at Ardea. T h e episodes are presented vividly. Typical of his sense of
drama is that whereas in Diodorus (14. 115), Polybius (2. 18), and
Verrius Flaccus (Aul. GelL 5. 17. 2), the Gauls reach Rome after
three days, L. to enliven the story compresses the time-interval to
a single day. Wolski is mistaken in supposing that L. here preserves
an authentic detail.
39. 1. quoque: bridges the transition from the Romans to the Gauls.
Strictly only the Gauls and not the Romans as well were immobilized
by surprise at their success but cf. 43. 1, 1. 33. 6 (Nye, Sentence Con
struction, 40). The methodical steps taken by the Gauls (primum
deindepostremoturn demum) are contrasted with the disordered panic
shown by the Romans.
T h e whole description of the entry of the Gauls into Rome is inspired
partly by memories of the aftermath of Cannae (39. 4 n.) and partly
by literary models such as Herodotus' account of the Persian attempt
on Delphi (41. 8 n.) and of the Persian sack of Athens. In \ articular
the resemblance between the massacre of the senators and the liquida
tion of those Athenians who had taken refuge on the Acropolis and
between the abortive attempt on the Capitol and the successful ascent
of the Acropolis is to be noted.
mos: cf. Caesar, B.G. 6. 17. 3.
720

390 B.C.

5-39-3

39. 3 . perdita re: the singular is colloquial (Terence, Enn. 258) and,
as such, is appropriate in the mouth of barbarians.
39. 4 . crederet: N read crederent but if nemo is right the subject must be
the singular nemo. T h e corruption is, however, deeper. As the text
stands there is an anacoluthon between Romani who must be the sur
viving inhabitants of Rome and comploraii omnes who are the missing
casualties and, since the scene is set at Rome, the anacoluthon can
scarcely be justified. T h e text of complorati. . . impleverunt is guaranteed
by the significant repetition in 22. 55. 3 against such drastic changes
as that proposed by Sigonius. T h e trouble must lie with crederent and
I suspect that the termination has been affected by the preceding
-erant. T h e neatest solution is that of Heerwagen who would read
credere et but the hist. inf. linked by et to an aorist is artificial and cannot
easily be paralleled. I would consider either credebat. complorati (for
the limitation of Romani by nemo cf. 37. 38. 4 regii. . . aliquot interfecti
sunt) or neminem . . . credidere et (for the pleonasm neminem quemquam
cf. Kuhnast, Liv. Syntax, 202; Riemann, Etudes, 133 ff.; for the varia
tion -ere et -erunt cf. 38. 10 petiere et. . . confugerunt), Welz replaced quam
Romam by cum but that does not meet the logical objection that
Romani and complorati are not identical.
39. 5. stupefecit: elsewhere in early prose only Cicero, de Orat. 3. 53
which is a quotation. A strong word to match the disaster (Accius,
four times in Virgil, Ovid).
39. 6 - 7 . Some doubt surrounds the precise words in which the
Romans' anticipations are framed. It is clear that there are three
views: (1) primo adventu, (2) deinde sub occasum solis, (3) turn in noctem,
signalized by the temporal pronouns. With the first two a verb has
to be understood such as Gallos invasuros esse, while in the third the verb
is expressed (dilatum consilium esse). T h e first two are also qualified
by clauses introduced by quia with the ind. although the whole passage,
being the views of the Romans, is in or. obi. The ind. must be used to
distinguish actually observed phenomena (the Gauls had come up
to the city: there were only a few hours' daylight left) from inferred
intention which are given in the first case by a parenthesis (mansuros
enim . . .foret) and in the third by the clause quo . . . inferrent.
T h e difficulty is concerned with the words given by the manuscripts
as ante noctem rati se (om. Ver.) invasuros. T h e structure of the passage
shows that these words must give the grounds for supposing t h a t the
Gauls would attack before nightfall, based on the observation that
there was only a little daylight left. This rules out N's reading since
the subject of rati se would have to be the Gauls but Ver.'s rati (omit
ting se) is no easier: it could only be construed as a nom. pendens, for the
subject of the main sentence is not the Romans but omne tempus.
Luterbacher's escape from the predicament was to read ratis (sc.
614432

721

3A

5-39-6-7

390 B.C.

Romanis) as a self-contained abl. abs. (cf 4. 44. 7, 60. 1), but a verb
of thinking is not called for at all since the entire sentence is itself in
or. obi. Walters's enim [rati se] gives admirable sense, balancing mansuros
enim, but is palaeographically incredible, while Bayet's satius, if palaeographically attractive, is linguistically impossible (Shackleton Bailey,
Propertiana, 132). Both demands are satisfied by certe, which is also
commended by G. W. Williams (J.R.S. 45 (1955), 229): see further
Cd-5
(I9 1 1 )* H39. 8. continens: 'hard upon the long-drawn-out anxiety came the
disaster itself.
39. 9. placuit: the scene of separation together with the arguments used
in its support {solacia) is a feature of the conventional description of
a beleaguered city which stems from Thucydides (cf. 2. 6. 4, 78. 3 ;
notice TO axpelov). Equally the emotional outbursts attendant on such
separations were elaborated by Hellenistic historians who took as
their model the picture of the Athenian withdrawal in Thucydides
7. 7539. 1 1 . flaminem sacerdotesque Vestales: flaminem sacerdotesque et Vestales
Ver. T w o problems arise: (1) Who is referred to by the singular, unqualified^mm^m? (2) Can sacerdotesbe an attribute of Vestales or did L.
mean, as the reading of Ver. suggests, to distinguish the Vestals from
the other bodies of priests and include both among the fugitives on the
Capitol? O n the first point we should compare 40. 7 where the
Flamen Quirinalis and the Vestal Virgins are working hand in glove.
In writing flaminem without further definition L. is probably guilty
of over-simplification of his sources. We should not delete the word
(Ruperti, Mommsen). Secondly, over the choice between Ver.'s and
N's reading, it must be noted that the story is centred solely on the
Flamen Quirinalis and the Vestals and in none of the sources is
mention made of other priests and that Ver. is prone to insert et after
-que; cf. 4. 14. 4, 5. 40. 7. For sacerdotes Vestales Weissenborn compares
Aul. Gell. 1. 12. 14, 10. 15. 3 1 ; cf. Livy 5. 40. 10, 50. 3.
cultum eorum: sc. sacrorum but the Romans did not have a cult of
sacra: sacra were one form of the cult of the gods. Ver.'s cultum
deorum is to be preferred. For the expression cf. Varro, de Deorum
Cultu; Livy 1. 21. 2, 5. 46. 3 ; Cicero, Tusc. 1. 64; Florus 1. 2. 2.
39. 12. periturae: Stacey, in company with Luterbacher and H . J .
Muller, read peritura with urbe (cf. Sallust, Jug. 35. 10) claiming the
phrase as poetic and Ennian. But periturae is the unanimous testimony
of the manuscripts and peritura would be otiose after imminenti ruinae
urbis. Cf. Seneca, Epist. 104. 11; Austin on Virgil, Aen. 2. 646.
39. 13. quo id aequiore: Jung, elaborating Ver.'s reading, proposed
quod id iniquiore animo 'because the people were taking it (the disaster)
harder than was right' (cf. 34. 2. 14, 44. 35. 4) but the idiomatic quo
722

390 B.C.

5-39. 13

with the comparative ('that so they should bear it more equably')

must not be thrown away.
40. 1. commendantes'. often used of leaving bequests; cf. Cicero, in
Catil. 4. 23.
trecentos: 54. 5 n.
quaecumque: cf. Cicero, in Catil. 4. 2 ; pro Mil. 100: Caesar, B.G.
1. 31. 14.
40. 3 . humani. . . mali: both Ver. and N have the dat. plural humanis
. . . malis, which could be retained if taken after superesset ('they were
leaving nothing that might go beyond human miseries' i.e. they left
no space for anything but misery; for humana mala cf. 48. 6, 23. 18. 10;
for superesse with the dat. cf. 9. 38. 3, 25. 10. 6, 19. 16). T h e sense, how
ever, is much less good than Finckh's humani. . . mali 'supplied the
final touch of human wretchedness'.
40. 6. exsequentes: 'following their own hopes and executing their own
plans'. A zeugma, but not harsh enough to justify reading sequentes
with Madvig. For consilia exsequi cf. 36. 43. 8.
40. 7-10. The Removal of the sacra to Caere
If the preceding scenes of distress in Rome are imaginative, the legend
that the sacra were conveyed to Caere is one of the few genuine strands
in the tradition. It is not an aetiological account of the word caerimonia (Paulus Festus 38 L.; Val. Max. 1. 1. 10). It is a story which
would have been long remembered for the credit it reflected both on
the devotion of the Flamen Quirinalis and the generosity of L.
Albinius and its antiquity seems vouched for by Aristotle [ap. Plutarch,
Camillus 22. 4 TO /xev dAwvcu TTJV TTOXIV VTTO KeXrcov aKpifiws hrj\6s

iartv

aK7]Koa>s, TOV 8e owoavTa AevKiov). When Aristotle was writing, M .

Furius Camillus had not yet been built up into the major figure of the
saviour of Rome. It was L. Albinius, the m a n who was responsible
for preserving the religious life of the city intact, who was regarded as
its ultimate saviour (cf. his Elogium = Inscr. ItaL 13, no. 11). Con
firmation of the antiquity of the story can be found also in the reward
given by the Romans to the Caeretans (50. 3 n.) and in a well-sup
ported notice of a victory of the Caeretans over the Gauls, perhaps in
387/6 (Diodorus 14. 117. 6; Strabo 5. 220). T h e ties between Rome
and Caere were of the very closest throughout the period.
T h e aetiological myth that the place known as doliola was so called
from the burial of the sacred objects in jars there is erroneous, for two
jars were themselves among the sacra which were to be saved. Ktpafios
TpwiKos was preserved in the temple of the Penates at Lavinium
(D.H. 1. 67. 4) and the Penates, in the shape of the Dioscuri, used to
receive two amphorae at the main centres of the cult, Sparta and
723

5. 40. 7- J o

390 B.C.

Tarentum. These amphorae correspond to the doliola (Plutarch,

Camillas 20. 8). It is probable that the sacred doliola and the place
called doliola have no connexion. For the site of the place doliola see
Platner-Ashby s.v.; see also Weinstock, J.R.S. 50 (i960), 113-14;
Gage, Huit recherches, 195-6; Maule and Smith, Votive Religion at Caere,
4 1 - 4 3 ; Sordi 36-52.
40. 7. flamen... Quirinalis: the tradition was unanimous that the Flamen
Quirinalis and the Vestals were responsible for the safeguarding of
the sacra but it was a tradition which seems to have descended not in
official cult or record but in the family of the Albinii. T h e father of L.
Sestius Quirinalis (cos. suff. in 23 B.C.) married an Albinia (Cicero,
pro Sestio 6; see Syme, Class. Phil. 50 (1955), 135)- T h a t the Vestals
should have escorted the sacra is natural enough. T h e sacra were
housed in the penus of the temple of Vesta (D.H. 2. 66; Ovid, Trist.
3. 1. 29). It is the mention of the Flamen Quirinalis which is un
expected. T h e Flamen Dialis was admittedly debarred by the provision
that he could not leave Rome for more than two nights (52. 13 n.).
but the pontifex maximus, as in 241 (Ovid, Fasti 6. 437-54), or the rex
sacrorum are more natural candidates. T h e only other occasion when
the Flamen Quirinalis and the Vestals are linked together is the Consualia (Tertullian, de Spect. 5. 7; cf. Varro, de Ling. Lat. 6. 21). T h e
common significance may be that Consus is a god of storing and, there
fore, the flamen who attended his cult would be a proper person to
attend the storing of the sacra. Furthermore, the Consualia are Sabine
( 1 . 9 . i n . ) and Quirinus was the god of the Sabine community on the
Quirinal before he was identified with Romulus (see n. on 1. 16). Thus
it was natural that the Flamen Quirinalis rather than any other priest
should preside at the Consualia and, in turn, assist the Vestals in the
preservation of the sacra.
4 0 . 8 . despui: for taboos against spitting see Frazer, Golden Bough,* 3. 196.
ferunt: feruntur Ver. N, but the passive is less effective and vivid and
Val. Max. (1. 1. 10 cum flamen Quirinalis virginesque Vestales sacra onere
partito ferrent) seems to have read the active in his text of L. (Kohler).
sublicio : 1. 33. 6 n.
40. 9. L. Albinius: perhaps the consular tribune of 379 (6. 30. 2
M. Albinius and in Diod. 15. 51. 1 AevKios Aafilvios) T h e name is
Etruscan, common at Pisaurum (Schulze 118-19). For the family as a
whole see 2. 33. 2 n.
de plebe [Romana] homo: Livian usage is constant in the phrase de
plebe homo. If de plebe is qualified by an adj. it follows homo as at
3. 19. 9. humillimus homo de vestra plebe. If de plebe is unqualified it pre
cedes, as 2. 36. 2 Latinio de plebe homini, 55. 4. Here de plebe precedes
and must in consequence be unqualified. It is assumed that Albinius
was a Roman.
724

3 9 0 B.C.

5. 40. 9

vehens: habens -(Ver., N) is impossible and sufficiently refuted by

Val. Max., loc. c i t , who has vehens. Madvig's avehens accounts more
satisfactorily for the corruption which occurs also at Plautus, Miles
938; Accius, fr. 370 R.
40. 10. publicos: the masc. can be retained. T h e Vestals were accom
panied by the flamen.
se ac suos: in favour of Ver's omission of se it could be argued that
L. Albinius was not explicitly stated to have been riding in the wagon
himself. O n the other hand se ac suos provides a perfect balance to the
double sacerdotes sacraque and such haplographies are common in Ver.
(cf. 3. 62. 1, 5. 32. 4, 6. 6. 10).
4 1 . The Massacre of the Senators
A stirring tale which will have had its origin not in ritual but in the
traditions of the gens Papiria. It may be true: generations later in a less
critical situation Decius Mus was prepared to sacrifice himself. There
are two facts, apart from the explicit mention of the carmen (41. 3),
which point to the conclusion that the senators were deliberately
offering their lives by devotio: the detail that the Gaul touched
Papirius' beard (41. 9) and the observation that they had all held
consular magistracies. T h e person who devoted himself had to be cum
imperio (8. 10. 1 1 ; Cicero, de Nat. Deorum 2. 10; 26. 10. 9 shows that in
times of crisis past holders of imperium could be re-invested with it, as
was the case here) and did so clasping his chin (manu subter togam ad
mentum exsertd). By taking hold of Papirius' beard the Gaul was inter
rupting the ritual gesture.
As it is told by Livy the story has lost some of its precision by
improvement. There was in fact only one triumphator who is likely
to have been still alive ( 3 1 . 4 n., L. Valerius) and the description of
the doomed senators arrayed in their finery is connected with
the custom of burying magistrates in their full robes of office (toga
picta; cf. Veil. Pat. 2. 71 ; Polybius 6. 53. 7; see Mommsen, Staatsrecht,
1. 441 n. 2). Moreover, L. minimized the role of devotio (it is only given
as a variant, sunt qui) and instead paints a secular picture of old men
stoically awaiting their end. In this L., or rather his source, must have
had in mind the famous example of Cn. Octavius in 87 (Appian,
B.C. 1. 71). For L. the whole tale is not a religious act but an example
of Roman virtus. See Wissowa, Religion, 384; H . Wagenvoort, Roman
Dynamism, 3 1 - 3 3 ; Gage, Huit recherches, 128 (for a theory of an
ephebic ritual); Burck 127.
4 1 . 2. aut: better ac Ver. No disjunction is intended between honores
and virtus; for ac virtutis cf. 4. 33. 5, 7. 32. 10, 8. 13. 11, 21. 49. 13,
22. 5. 2, 25. 23. 1.

augustissima: the toga picta, a purple, golden-embroidered toga, worn

725

5-4i. 2

390 B.C.

by triumphators and allegedly the traditional dress of the kings. See

Ehlers, R.E. 'triumphus', cols. 504-5.
tensas ducentibus: tensae are the wagons which carried the images of
the gods to public spectacles. They were escorted in procession.
medio aedium: the plain abl. for in medio is found elsewhere only in
Virgil {Aeneid 3. 354, 7. 59, 563) and Vitruvius. L. uses in medio at
1. 9. 5, 57. 9 &c. and in should probably be restored here too.
eburneis: 4 1 . 9. T h e adjectival form eburnus is not used by L.
41. 3 . M. Folio: so given by Ver. N read Filio which was 'emended'
to Fabio by TT\. T h e corruption was old since Plutarch calls him Fabius
{Camillas 2 1 . 3 ) unless he has confused him with K. Fabius Dorsuo
(46. 1 n.). Folius will be the consular tribune of 433 (4. 25. 2 n.).
carmen', for the formula cf 8. 6. 13, 9. 8, 22. 10. 2. Quiritibus Romanis
is unusual and inaccurate but cf. 26. 2. 11. exercitibus Romanis would
be possible (cf. Macrobius 3. 9. 10 ff.).
41. 4. contentione: continuatione Ver. but contentio is usual of fighting;
cf. Cicero, Tusc. Disp. 5. 77; ad Fam. 3. 10. 5 ; Hirtius, B.G. 8. 19. 2,
29. 1 ; Amm. Marc. 24. 2. 13.
arcemque solam: for the text see Housman on Manilius 1. 779.
4 1 . 5 . agmine: in Ver. the following letters are preserved : ]rum a . . . .
e . . n . . . . iruunt. See 3. 51. 10 n. There is no mechanical explanation
of the extra letters here so that it is possible that an adj. has fallen out in
N. If so, ingenti fits best (cf. 6. 15. 2, 34. 10. 1). J u n g would read "^itu
patientia.
41. 8. dis: 'men most like to gods also in the dignity which their
countenance and gravity of expression conveyed'. Gf. the very similar
description in 1.7. 9. T h e picture may owe something to Herodotus'
account of the Persian attempt on Delphi (8. 35-39; cf. also the Gallic
assault on Delphi in Pausanias 10. 23).
41. 9. ad eos velut ad: the second ad is unlikely to have been wrongly
preserved by Ver. which is guilty of few, if any, dittographies of this
kind.
M. Papirius: in Plutarch {Camillas 22. 6) he is reported as TlaiTeipios
Mavios and in Val. Max. 3. 2. 7 as M. Atilius. In both authors the
name is probably corrupt, for, although the suggestion that he was
entitled to a triumphator's baton is mere invention, he is likely to be
M . Papirius Mugillanus (4. 45. 5).
41. 10. nulli : notice the clipped phrases, blunt infinitives, and plain
asyndeton with which L. rounds off the episode and introduces the
sack of Rome (the Romae aXojais as Gasaubon aptly called it). T h e
effect is enhanced by the emphatic nulli mortalium (cf. 29. 25. 4) with
the rare nulli for nemini and the weighty mortalium (1. 9. 8 n.). T h e
infinitives are historic, not governed by diciiur.
exhaustis: sc. tectis.
726

390 B.C.

5. 42-43. 5

42-43. 5. The Occupation of Rome

From tradition we pass to literary invention. L. describes the scene of
destruction in conventional colours but gives it an original treatment
by stressing not so much the events as the impression of the partici
pants. It is seen first from the Gallic (sine ira, sine ardore; solitudine
absterriti; cunctatio; venerabundi) and then from a Roman point of view
(cladis spectaculo; flexerunt animos). See Eichler, De consilio el arte in
Titi Livi prima decade, 4 7 ; Burck 127. Notice the poetic reminiscences
in the language (42. 4 n.).
42. 3 . concipere: 'the contrast is between a mental grasp' ( = concipere)
'of a quick series of confusing and frightening events (which is relatively
difficult since it requires an intellectual effort and is not an essential
quality in a soldier) and being able to stand fast' ( = constare) 'against
the assault of men's eyes and ears' (G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 45 (1955),
229). Lipsius's consipere, accepted by Bekker, Lorentz, Luterbacher,
Rossbach, and others, is clearly wrong.
42. 4 . sonitusflammae: cf. Virgil, Georg. 4. 409. Other expressions which
occur in poetry and only here in L. in prose are ora et oculos (cf. Virgil,
Aeneid 12. 657), oculos flectebant (cf. Virgil, Aeneid 4. 369, 6. 788;
Ovid, Met. 7. 584), occidentis patriae (cf. Virgil, Aeneid 12. 828), arma
ferrumque (42. 8 ; cf. Virgil, Aeneid 10. 10, n . 218).
42. 6. noctem: N read inquietam rightly, since lux is the dawn and
inquietus is used only to describe periods, not moments of time. In
particular it is associated, as might be expected, with night; cf. Val.
Max. 8. 14 ext. 1; Tacitus, Annals 1. 65. 1; Seneca, de Clem. 1. 9. 3.
Note also 10. 43. 12; Seneca, Epist. 56. 8; Augustine, Civ. Dei 22. 22;
Pliny, Epist. 6. 20. 2. T h e passage is discussed in C.Q. 9 (1959), 282.
4 3 . 1. quoque: 39. 1 n.
ultima: 'to make a final effort'; cf. 2. 28. 9.
4 3 . 5. obsideri: the passive can be retained; cf. 3. 51. 2.

43. 6-46. The Recall of Camillus

T h e change of heart at Rome and the recall of Camillus from Ardea
are one of the most daring fabrications in R o m a n history. While
certain episodes of this section (e.g. 46. 1 n. Fabius Dorsuo; 46. 7 n.
Pontius Cominius) are rooted in tradition, and there may have been
a popular legend even about Camillus, the exploits of Camillus are
designed to save R o m a n reputation. T h e proofs can be stated simply.
Polybius (2. 18. 2-6, 22. 5), based on Fabius Pictor, knows nothing
of Camillus or of any intervention to rescue Rome. According to him
the Romans bought the Gauls off. T h e earliest version of Pontius
727

5. 43- 6-46

390 B.C.

Cominius' adventure made no connexion with Camillus. Thirdly,

C. is alleged to have been elected dictator by the people, despite the
fact that there was at least one consular tribune in Rome, Q . Sulpicius,
who could have named him dictator in the proper manner. Popular
election to the dictatorship was a precedent established for the first
time for Minucius in 217 and repeated by Sulla in 82 (Appian, B.C.
1. 99). T h e story that Camillus was recalled by popular vote to the
dictatorship can be no older than 217. It was evidently a fruitful
field for constitutional speculation still in the age of Sulla, for the
version in L., which derives from an author of that period, is com
plicated by legal niceties which seem to be specifically directed to the
situation provoked by Sulla (46. 11 n.).
T h e remaining episodes, the defeat of the Gauls by the Ardeates
(43. 6-45. 3) and the defeat of the Etruscans by R o m a n refugees under
Q . Caedicius (45. 4-8), are also inventions designed to heighten the
tension and to build up a worthy scene for the return of Camillus. T h e
two forces outside the city have redeemed their reputation and proved
their worth. It remains for the inhabitants of Rome itself (notice
46. 1 Romae interim) to do the same and the city will have purged its
guilt and have deserved the favour of heaven. See Burck 128-30; and
for the historical issues Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 287-381 ;
Bandel, Rom. Biktaturen, 34; Taubler, Klio 12 (1912), 224; Momigliano, C.Q. 36 (1942), 113.
43. 6. ad . . . virtutem: to be taken with duxit. Camillus is seen through
out as the agent of destiny, the fatalis dux (cf. 43. 8),
44. 1. veteres amici: the speech is finely written without being strictly
rhetorical in conception. It is probable from the appearance of a
similar one in Plutarch {Camillus 23) that L. has expanded a speech
which he found in his source. Such speeches before battles are a
standard feature of Hellenistic histories. After justifying his presump
tion in speaking Camillus reveals the heaven-sent chance for ven
geance offered by the Gauls and ends with a personal pledge that if he
fails to win a resounding victory, he will accept the worst that lies in
store for him. T h e allusion to novi cives in 44. 1 disregards the fact
that, on L.'s own evidence, Ardea was a Roman colony. T h e senti
ments and the language are commonplace: e.g. for the thought periculum cogit. . . in medium conferre cf., for example, Thucydides 7. 64. 2
(Nicias). For 44. 3 nee enim . . . sunt cf. Cicero, Laelius 7 1 ; for non recuso
cf. 3. 68. 13. T h e denigration of the Gauls, akin to the Greek view
of barbarians, is equally conventional; for their appearance cf. 37.
4 n . ; for their drunkenness cf. Plato, Laws 637 d; Polybius 2. 19. 4 ; for
their nomadic disorganization cf. Polybius 2 , 1 7 . 1 1 ; for their primitive
728

390 B.C.

5- 44- i

habits cf. Polyhius 2. 17. g. Equally conventional is the language;

for 44. 1 condicionis meae oblitum cf. Seneca, Dial. 6. 11. 4 ; for quod
quisque possit . . conferre cf. Cicero, Brutus g g ; for 44. 5 vagi. . . palantur
cf. Sallust, Jug. 18. 2 ; for ferarum ritu cf. 3. 47. 7 n . ; for 44. 7 zWw*
pecudes trucidandos cf. Sallust, Ca/z7. 58. 21.
But the tone is raised by a few characteristic touches. Notice the
colourful phrases which give interest and stature to the personality of
Camillus, e.g. 44. 3 decus . . . pariendi found in Plautus, True. 517 and
[Virgil], CataL g. 58 but not in prose before L.; for 44. 6 rivos aquarum cf.
Lucretius 2.30,5. 13g3 ; Virgil, Eel. 5 . 4 7 , 8 . 8 7 ; for somno vinctos (9.30. 9)
cf. Ovid, Met. 11. 238 (the phrase is not found earlier: Gries cites
Cicero, Verr. 4. 90 religione . . . vinctum as a prose parallel but the choice
of word is determined by the pretended etymology of religio: see
Stacey, Archivf. Lat. Lex. 10 (1898), 26; Gries, Constancy, 65-66).
eguit: the conjecture, made first by Walker, is confirmed by Ver.
which can be read . . uit.
commune periculum: this, the word-order of Ver., is standard; cf.
Cicero, Verr. 1. 153; de Oral. 2. 2og; Part. 4 4 ; ad Fam. 4. 15. 2, 6. 1 . 3 ;
ad Att. 11. 1. 1; Caesar, B.G. 1. 3g. 4 ; Bell. Afr. 27. 2. There
is no reason of emphasis or rhythm to depart from it here and
to follow N.
44. 4. qui . . . adventant: Conway and Bayet accept the sole testimony
of L and read adventant (with the collective sing, gens), punctuating
with a full stop after pariendi. Earlier editors put the full stop after
adventat, understanding the subject from hoste. T h e latter is clearly
preferable. L. only uses advento (cf. 23. 43. 8, 25. 21. 1) and effuso
agmine (cf. 2. 5g. 8, 10. 14. 5, 42. 65. 2, 44. 3g. 8) of an enemy army
and not of more general groups such as races. Secondly, Latin
recognizes an idiom by which a generalization about a country or
people is expressed without further introduction by gens est: cf. Ovid,
Fasti 5. 581 gensfuit et campis et equis et tuta sagittis; Met. 10. 3 3 1 ; Cicero,
Tusc. Disp. 1. 101 ; Tacitus, Hist. 4. 15. 1.
44. 5. palantur: Wakefield (on Lucretius 2. 10) preferred populantur
but see 44. 1 n.
44. 7. haec omnia Galliamfieri: N's reading has been accepted by many
scholars and defended by Dobree {Adv. Critica, 2. 16) but Ver. had
a Gallis and no reputable support has been adduced for the construc
tion of Galliam. With Ver.'s a Gallis, fieri by itself would not be intel
ligible and a further change is required (ferri Frigell, auferri Zingerle,
Burck). I would prefer to see the variation between N and Ver. as
a sign of deeper corruption. In 6. 40. 17 L. writes cumpraeter Capitolium
atque arcem omnia haec hostium erant which points to Gallorum (Cobet).
Gallica would be less good..
arma, frequentes: the punctuation, originally proposed by Allen
729

5- 44- 7

390 B.C.

{Emendationes Livianae Alterae, (1867), 8), is a great improvement on

the traditional, which put the adj. unnaturally at the end of the clause.
Forfrequens sequor cf. Lucilius 1142 M . Ver. has frequentesque which is as
good if not better. For the loss of -que cf. 3. 24. 5 n. Casaubon glosses

4 5 . 1. aequis iniquisque: 'friend and foe alike believed'; for the phrase
cf. 2. 32. 7, 44. 4. 6 ; Plautus, Amph. 173; Propertius 2. 3. 50; Seneca,
Medea 195.
corpora curant \ 3. 2. 10 n.
primo silentio noctis: 7. 12. 1. N's primae s. n. is not found.
4 5 . 2. intuta: an historian's word (9. 41. 1 1 ; elsewhere only in Sallust,
Or. Phil. 17, and Tacitus, e.g. Hist. 1. 33. 2 et al.).
45. 3 . incursione . . .facta: Ver. has excurstone ab oppidanisfacta, omitting
inpalatos. excursione is the choicer word (3. 38. 5, 24. 29. 4) and is more
apposite since we are concerned with the Antiate sally from their city
rather than with the inroad on the Gauls, in palatos is a typical
Nicomachean gloss introduced after exc. had been corrupted to inc. to
explain the objective of the assault. T h e source of the corruption
lies in incursiones facerent below.
45. 4. quadringentensimum: 54. 5 n.
invisitatOy inaudito: cf. 4. 33. 1, 5. 37. 2. T h e asyndeton of nearsynonyms is solemn (cf. 27. 43. 7, 40. 28. 2) and is here particularly
appropriate since it is almost sacral and the words bear a special
emphasis (G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 45 (1955), 228).
45. 6. miseratio: the play of emotions is conventional; cf. Sallust,
Or. Lep. 5 ; Quintilian 4. 2. 112.
45. 7. Q. Caedicio: 32. 6-7 n. T h e personage is a throw-back from the
third century; cf. the exploits of Q . Caedicius, trib. mil. in 258 (Cato
fr. 83 P.). T h e story is modelled on the events of 212 when the soldiers
in Spain appointed L. Marcius their general (25. 37. 6 ; see Mommsen,
Staatsrecht, 1. 692 n. 1). Nothing else is known of Caedicius: for
further speculations see BasanofF, Latomus 9 (1950) 13 ff.
45. 8. ad Salinas: the Salinae, or salt warehouses, were close to the
Porta Trigemina (Plautus, Capt. 90; 24. 47. 15). Their sally would
have brought the Romans based on Veii to the very outskirts of the
city, but the detail is not credible.
46. 1-3. C. Fabius Dorsuo
T h e legend of C. Fabius has its origin in cult. It is the story which
accounted for a particular ritual procession conducted by the gens
Fabia on the Quirinal. T h e connexion of the Fabii with the Quirinal
is not otherwise attested, although it is presumed by the topography
730

390 B.C.

5- 4& 1-3

of 2. 49. 3-7, when the Fabii set out for Cremera, nor can any historical
Fabius be shown to have had his house on the hill. There is, therefore,
at first sight some temptation to accept the version given by Gassius
Hemina (fr. 19 P.) that Fabius went to tend a cult of Vesta, but
Gassius' obsessive interest in Vesta makes his version suspect (cf. frr.
7, 12, 32) and the probable connexion between Luperci Fabiani
( 1 . 5 . 1-2 n.) and the Quirinal might confirm the association of that
gens with the hill. For other gentile cults see Altheim, History of
Roman Religion, 137-44; s e e a ^ s o Otto, R.E., T a u n u s ' ; Wissowa,
Religion, 559 ff.
46. 2. statum: from sistere, cf. 23. 35. 3.
C. Fabius Dorsuo: the praenomen is given as G. by Livy here and at
52. 3. Val. Max. 1. 1. 11 also calls him G. Dio, the only other author
to cite the praenomen, calls him KalotDv (fr. 24. 6) which is more pointed.
T h e cognomen is also variously given: Dorsuo by L. here and for the
consul of 345 (7. 28. 1); Dorso by Gassius (Aopaojv), by Fast. Hyd.,
and by Chr. Pasch. for the consul of 345 and by Veil. Pat. 1. 14. 7 for the
consul of 273. Dorsuo is the better formation: it will describe some
physical peculiarity about his back (cf. Sura). Gf. C.I.L. 14. 3236
(Praeneste) L. Samiari{os) M.f Dosuo.
Gabino cinctu: so Ver. No participle is required, cf. Sallust, Jug.
33. 1. Editors have been led astray by 8. 9. 9, 10. 7. 3 ; Val. Max.
1. 1. 11 Gabino ritu cinctus (cf. C.I.L. 11. 1420. 25) but the text is sound.
T h e Gabine dress was a method of wearing the toga which left the
arms free and unimpeded. It was worn by celebrants on numerous
religious occasions, e.g. at the Ambarvalia (Lucan 1. 596) or at the
opening of the temple of Janus (Virgil, Aeneid 7. 612) but no common
factor can be traced to explain its use. T h e ancients held that it was
originally the dress worn for battle (Festus 251 L . ; Servius, ad Aen. 7.
612) but this is no more than a guess from the term procinctus and from
the ancient enmity with Gabii. It is more likely that it was the traditional
dress worn by Gabine priests which was taken over for certain R o m a n
cults when Gabii merged with Rome at the end of the sixth century
(1. 54. i o n . ; see Mau, R.E., 'cinctus'). There may have been a special
connexion between the original community and cults on the Quirinal
and the cinctus Gabinus: cf. Virgil, Aeneid 7. 612 ipse Quirinali trabea
cinctuque Gabino.
terrorem: 'unmoved by shouts or threats'.
46. 3 . religione: the superstition of the Gauls was proverbial; cf.
Caesar, B.G. 6. 16. 1.
46. 4. (jtumerus) etiam viresque: so Ver., instead of the simple etiam vires
of N. T h e two nouns are wanted, and are found together at 25. 27. 8,
28. 16. 13. For similar omission in N cf. 4. 25. 4, 5. 53. 1.
ex Latio : the detail, if in any way it represents an authentic tradition,
731

5- 46. 4

390 B.C.

is interesting in that it tends to confirm the belief that in the earliest

legend and in actual fact (37-38 n.) the Latins were associated with
the Romans in the resistance to the Gauls. Such troops would not be
voluntarily as L. tendentiously assumes (notice the cynical in parte
praedae essent; cf. 19. 5), but regular contingents as stipulated by the
Latin treaty. Gf. 3. 4. 10 n., 4. 29. 4, 51. 8.
46. 7 - 1 1 . Pontius Cominius
T h e later developments of the story of Pontius Gominius are easy to
unravel. In Diodorus 14. 116 (cf. Aul. Gell. 17. 2. 26) Pontius carried
out his perilous journey merely in order to reopen communications
between the besieged and the Roman army at Veii. There is no sugges
tion of negotiations with Camillus. These were added to the story
later when Camillus was interpolated into the history as the saviour
of Rome and it became necessary to devise some constitutional justi
fication for his position. So much can be seen from the inconsistencies
in the story as told b y L . himself (cf. Plutarch, Camillus 25). For Pontius
to have conveyed both the army's request for a leader and Camillus'
rejoinder to the S.C. passed in his favour that he would not accept
office unless specially enabled by the comitia curiata, he would have
had to have m a d e two journeys. It follows that the first stage in the
elaboration of the story was that Pontius who hitherto had made a
somewhat pointless expedition was now supposed by historians to
have been the messenger responsible for the news of Camillus' vindica
tion, recall, and election. T h e second stage was inspired by political
doubts about the legality of such popular elections. It is tendentious.
It should be compared with arguments about the constitutional
position of the Fabii at Cremera (2. 48. 10 n.) and may be attributed
to Licinius Macer in revolt from Sulla's high-handed action in
nominating himself dictator in 82.
T h e genesis of the story is inscrutable. Pontius appears to be an
Oscan praenomen = Quintus (Schulze 212). Cominius is taken by
Schulze (108 n. 4 ; there are instances at Tarquinii and Capena) to be
Etruscan but the cognomen of the consul of 501 (2. 18. 1 n.) indicates
rather an Oscan or southern Italian origin. T h e family is attested
from an early time (8. 30. 6; cf. Val. Max. 6. 1. 11). We might
speculate that it was an old family tradition among the Cominii b u t
the Cominii were never important at Rome. T h e other extreme, that
he is a mystical personification of the commentarii pontificum (Gage,
Huit recherches, 37 n. 2), is less inviting.
See further Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen, 2. 3 2 3 - 5 ; Klotz, Rh. Mus.
91 (1942), 268 ff.
46. 9. neglectum hostium custodia: 24. 46. 1. For the text see CQ. 9
(i959)> 2 7 8 .
732

390 B.C.

5. 46. 9

in Capitolium: cf. 47. 2. In 6. 17. 4 the Gauls, following his route,

are said to have climbed per Tarpeiam rupem. This is only rhetori
cal fancy and cannot be used to unseat the traditional location of the
Tarpeian rock (H. Lyngby, Beitrdge zur Topographie des ForumBoarium-Gebietes, 79-86). T h e popular misconception may have been
encouraged by the belief that one of the guilty sentries who allowed
the Gauls to ascend by the same path was punished de saxo (47. 10).
46. 10, revocatus: to be taken, as Wittman rightly observes, not with
comitiis curiatis but with iussu populi. T h e comitia curiata were only con
cerned with questions of imperium, not with judicial matters.
46. 1 1 . seu: the punctuation adopted in the O.G.T. creates an in
tolerable gap between seu and its main verb (lex lata est). It also
removes a characteristic feature of L.'s stylethe short sentence con
cluding an episode. I would punctuate with H . J . Mtiller after habere
but retain seu quod, understanding perduxere in the second member of
the sentence. ' T h e ambassadors dispatched to Camillus at Ardea
conducted him immediately to Veii or, as I am inclined to believe,
after a delay caused by his refusal to leave until he heard news that
the lex de imperio had been passed.' seu is guaranteed in this phrase by
8. 30. 9.
auspicia: 3. 1. 4 n.
lex curiata: it was a generally held belief in the last century of the
Republic that a consul or other magistrate or pro-magistrate could
not exercise imperium in the military sphere unless in addition to being
popularly elected by the comitia centuriata and, if a pro-magistrate,
allocated a province by the Senate, a lex de imperio was passed in his
favour by the comitia curiata. This assembly, originally the assembly of
the curiae or old families, survived in historical times only symbolically.
T h e curiae were represented by lictors. Its competence was, however,
maintained and championed as in the matter of the Rullan land-bill
in 63 (Cicero, de Leg. Agr. 2. 20) or the governorship of Appius
Claudius in 54 [ad Fam. 1. 9. 25). T h e origin of its power is a matter
for dispute but the lex de imperio must be a creation of the Republic
not the Regal period. It may be hazarded that on the expulsion of the
kings the formal investiture and delegation of power was assumed
by the curiae, as the most ancient body in the community, but that with
increasing democracy the practical selection of magistrates passed to
the comitia centuriata, leaving only the formal aspects, such as the ius
auspicii, to the c. curiata. For modern discussions of the problem see
Latte, Nachr. Gotting. Ges. 1924, 636.; Voci, Studi Albertario, 2. 7 3 ;
Rubino, Untersuchungen, 3671!.; Beseler, %eit. Sav.-Stift. 57 (1937),
356; de Francisci, Primordia Civitatis, 577-84. Clear accounts may
be found in Botsford, Roman Assemblies and in Staveley, Historia 5
( ^ ) , 84-90.
733

5-47

390 B.C.
47. M. Manlius and the Geese

T h e story of Manlius and the geese is the authentic stuff of history.

No modern scepticism can seriously shake its claims. Scholars have
attempted to explain it away as a mere aetiological myth of the
cognomen Gapitolinus common among the Manlii. Others have seen
it as an imitation of the abortive attack by Philip on Byzantium in
346 when the defenders were aroused by the barking of dogs (Diodorus
16. 77. 2-3). But the original story carries more conviction. Only
the rewards paid to Manlius savour of later antiquarianism (47.
8n.).
T h e one doubt attaches to the geese. Geese were not, so far as we
know, sacred to J u n o . They are not figured in her company on monu
ments and the only other notorious geese in Roman history are those
sacrificed by Domitian to Mars (Martial 9. 31). But it is certain that
on the Capitol there was an auguraculum, a place where divination was
held ex tripudiis, by the manner in which birds treated their food.
The birds were not specified (Cicero, de Div. 2. 73) although in later
times hens were kept for the purpose, but there is some evidence to
suggest that hens were only imported in the fourth century so that it is
consistent to believe that initially geese were kept not as specifically
sacred to J u n o but for divination. T h e annual ceremonies described
by Cicero {pro Sex. Roscio 56) were designed to perpetuate the memory
of the event. Cf. Ovid. Met. 8. 684; Columella 8. 13.
It is of passing interest that according to a well-attested tradition
Dumbarton Castle was saved on a famous occasion in the same
mannera security precaution imitated in more recent times by a
Dumbarton whisky firm {Sunday Telegraph, 10 December 1962). See
further I. Netusil, Woch. f. Klass. Phil., 1897, 1073; Barbagallo, Riv.
Fil. 40 (1912), 411-37; Mtinzer, R.E., 'Manlius (51)'.
T h e telling of the story has been analysed by Walsh {Livy, 250-1)
who demonstrates its underlying structure. T h e scene is set in a simple
sentence (47. 1), and rounded off by a simple sentence (47. 6). T h e
story itself is told in two parts, first from the Gallic and then from the
R o m a n point of view, each part being introduced by a complicated
subordinate sentence (47. 2 - 3 ; 47. 4) and being intensified by short
sentences describing the critical actions (47. 4 anseres . . . abstinebatur;
47. 5). T h e climax of the whole episode is put in historic presents
{vadit. . . deturbat) and finally historic infinitives {proturbare . . . deferri).
Walsh might have added that as in other heroic episodes the language
is deliberately heightened (47. 2 n., 3 n., 4 n., 5 n.), and makes an
effective blend with the conventionally military idiom (47. 7 n.).
47. 2 . ad Carmentis: 1. 7. 8 n.
saxo: in, found in M, is intrusive; aequus in does not occur, whereas
734

390 B.C.

5- 47- 2

aequus adscensu or the like is common in L. (Fugner, Lexicon s.v. 'aequus').

T h e true reading must be saxo adscensu aequo. See Shackle ton Bailey
on Propertius 4. 4. 83.
sublustri: 'pale', only here in L . ; elsewhere Virgil, Aeneid 9. 373:
Horace, Odes 3. 27. 31 ; Val. Flacc. 3. 142a traditional poetic
epithet for night.
in vicem : cf. 23. 38. 3 = inter se. For its usage cf. Frei, Thes. Ling. Lat.
s.v. T h e rules suggested by Austin on Quintilian 12. 10. 1 are too
schematic.
47. 3 . animal: the generic singular in apposition to the plural canes
can be paralleled by Ovid, Met. 15. 120. It is not found elsewhere in
prose.
47. 4. Iunonis: 4. 7. 12 n.
crepitu: the word is unique in this sense.
M. Manlius: 31. 2 n.
dens: only used in poetry of a call to arms (Catullus 68. 88 with
Kroll's note; Virgil, Aeneid 6. 165, 10. 198; Sil. Ital. 7. 42).
47. 5. manibus: for this use of the plain abl. cf. Ovid, Amores 1. 13. 39
and see Kenney, C.Q.8 (1958), 57.
47. 7. laudatus donatusque: the terms and the use of ob are technical
for the reward of military gallantry, ob is only found in Cicero in this
phrase, which is evidently fossilized in formulae of citation. Cf.
Plautus, Amph. 260, 534; Varro, de Ling. Lat. 5. 9 0 ; Cicero, Verr.
5. 110; in Pisonem 4 4 ; see K. Reissinger, Vber . . . ob undpropter (Progr.
Landau, 1897-1900).
47. 8. selibras: the precise figures are suspicious and can hardly have
been preserved in the tradition. There was a familiar custom by which
on New Year's Day clients gave presents, called strena, to their patrons,
or friends to friends. In Republican times these gifts consisted of food
and wine (Plautus, Stichus 461 ; for other references and a history
of the later development of the custom see Nilsson, R.E., 'strena')
and their origin was explained as rewards for prowess (strena a strenuitate; but cf. Festus 410 L.).
47. 9. more militari: the passage has been expounded by Daube
(J.R.S. 31 (1941), 184). mos militaris refers to the general's right to
punish a mutinous or incompetent army either by decimation or by
total victimization (2. 59. 11 n.). It does not specify the particular
method of military execution. Q . Sulpicius, for whom see 36. 11 n.,
threatened to punish all the sentries but was deterred by the unanimous
clamour of the soldiers who insisted that only one man was guilty. We
cannot with certainty determine what offences were punished by
hurling from the Tarpeian rock. T h e fate of the guilty sentry seems
to have deceived L. (6. 17. 4) into believing that the ascent of the
Capitol had also been made up the Tarpeian rock.
735

5- 48-50

390 B.C.
48-50. The Withdrawal of the Gauls

Legend and fiction are again blended in the narrative of events which
precedes Camillus' great speech and covers the withdrawal of the
Gauls. In the welter of confused anecdotes the surest legend is the
ransom paid to persuade the Gauls to leave. In its earliest form (Polybius 2. 18. 3) the Gauls heard news of an invasion by the Veneti in
their rear and accordingly retreated home unharmed. There is no
mention of Camillus, no mention of an avenging defeat. T h e ransom
is assumed but not stated. A rival tradition, followed by Timaeus,
which may well be true, held that the Gauls had been defeated and the
ransom recovered, not by the Romans but by the Caeretans in Sabine
country (Diodorus 14. 117. 7 ev rip Tpavaltp 7rehito\ Strabo 5. 220).
T h e first change was to substitute the Romans for the Caeretans,
a change that may have been inspired by the Livii Drusi in the early
third century (Suetonius, Tib. 3. 2). Later developments brought
Camillus into the picture (Diodorus 14. 117; Servius, ad Aen. 6. 8 2 5 ;
cf. Polybius 2. 22). T h e Romans entered into negotiations with the
Gauls and paid the ransom, but as the Gauls were withdrawing
northwards Camillus came up on them and recovered the gold in a
decisive engagement. T h e site of the battle is disputed (49. 6 n.),
Pisaurum according to Servius, OveduKiov according to Diodorus.
T h e version followed by L. improves the tale still more. Plague forces
the Gauls, not the Romans, to open negotiations and Camillus arrives
not after the ransom has been paid and the Gauls have departed but
at the very climax of the scene. T w o details enable us to fix the date
of the source with precision. It must be before 52 B.C. (48. 8 n.), and is
likely to be related to the work of Q . Claudius Quadrigarius (48. 8 n.).
Other less reliable threads have been interwoven. Topographical
speculation provided the legend of the busta Gallica (48. 3 n.) notwith
standing that the mention of pestilence and heat contradicted the
traditional chronology which dated the Gallic occupation of Rome from
July to February. Religious antiquarianism added the ludi Capitolini,
(50. 4 n.), and the foundation of the temple of Aius Locutius (50. 5 n.).
Above all, the curious story of bread being thrown to the hungry
Gauls is a myth to explain the cult of Juppiter Pistor (Val. Max.
7.4. 3 ; Lactantius, Inst. 1. 20. 33 ; Ovid, Fasti 6. 350 with Frazer's n . ; see
Ehlers, R.E., 'pistor (2)': the altar was on the Capitol but in reality the
cult may have been of a thunder-god (pinsere)). T h e same spirit of
antiquarianism supplied the remaining detailsthe rewards paid to
Caere (50. 3 n.) and the matrons (50. 7 n.).
W h a t was in historical truth a Roman humiliation has become
for L. a R o m a n victory, a victory which more than counterbalances
the clades Alliensis (49. 5-6). He presents it in a highly dramatic fashion.
736

390 B.C.

5. 48-50

T h e turning-point is the arrogant tauntintoleranda Romanis vox, Vae

victiswhere alliteration and word-order combine to throw forceful
emphasis on the moment. It marks the TTzpnrirzia. For at that juncture
divine intervention brings Camillus on to the stage (49. 1, cf. 49. 5)
and L. stresses that the Romans have earned their reprieve by their
piety. Hence after the defeat of the Gauls he devotes much space (50)
to the honours and thanksgivings paid to the gods. Throughout L.
is interested in the psychological background. T h e episode is treated
as a unity, but is not distinguished by any striking effects of language.
Instead of suggesting by contrived language the world of the past, he
seems rather to be concerned to bring out certain contemporary over
tones (49. 7 n.).
See Burck 132-4; and on the historical aspects Miinzer, R.E.,
'Furius (44)', cols. 331-9; F. Altheim, Rh. Mus. 93 (1950), 275;
J . Gage, Rev. Arch. 43 (1954), 141-76, with summary and bibliography
of earlier discussions; Sordi 145-51.
48. 2. tumulos: evidently the hills of Rome. See 3. 7. 2 n.
ferente: 'being a-swirl with ashes as well as dust whenever the
slightest wind blew'.
48. 3 . gens: the hardihood of the Gauls and the bleakness of their
climate were conventional (Cicero, de Prov. Cons. 3 3 ; Caesar, B.G.
1. 16. 2). angor, of physical pain, is found in Pliny, N.H. 8. 100 and
A m m . Marc. 17. 7. 6: it is inapposite here. Cornelissen conjectured
languore, cf. 44. 33. 10.
vulgatis: 2. 4 1 . 4 n.
bustorum: 22. 14. n . It is located by a Sullan inscription (C.LL. i 2 .
809 in [scal]eis [Canjinieis ab cleivo \infi\mo busteis Galliceis versus [adsu]mmum
cleivom). Presumably it lay at the foot of the Capitoline hill which the
Scalae Caniniae ascended. T h e true origin of the name was unknown
even to the ancients, for Varro {de Ling. Lat. 5. 157) gave a different
explanation. It has been associated with the human sacrifice of Gauls
(Gallus et Galla), in 226 and 217, in the Forum Boarium, while PlatnerAshby suggest that the tradition arose from the discovery of a pre
historic cemetery. Busta implies that the ashes of the cremated were
interred on the spot and not, as is Roman practice, carefully collected
for preservation. Such disregard was a characteristic of the Gauls
remarked by Pausanias (10. 21). Gage speculates in Hommages Grenier
2. 707 ff.
48. 5 . L. Valerium: either Poplicola, the consular tribune of 394
(26. 2 n.), or Potitus, the consular tribune of 414 (4. 49. 7 n.). There
is no means of deciding and the notice is in any case unhistorical
(2. 18. 6 n.). Notice the involved sentence in which the humiliation
of the Romans in being reduced to treat with the Gauls is explained
and extenuated.
814439

737

3B

5.48. 5

390 B.C.

stationibus vigiliis(que}: the asyndeton is too harsh and vigiliis is

hardly a gloss, since stationes refers to day-time guard-duty, vigiliae
to night-watch (cf. 44. 33. 8-10).
48. 8. Q.Sulpicium: Festus (510 L. quod iniquisponderibus ex(igi} a barbaris querente Ap. Claudio) suggests that in one version the chief role
in the negotiations was taken by Ap. Claudius not Q . Sulpicius. It is
legitimate to surmise that this was suppressed by Q,. Claudius Q u a drigarius, who substituted Q . Sulpicius because of the leading position
which he enjoyed in the tradition and perhaps because of the cognomina Galba and Gallus employed by that gens. D . H . 13. 13 does not
name the R o m a n : Plutarch and Zonaras give Sulpicius, from L.
mille: so also Diodorus, Plutarch, and Zonaras. D.H., however,
makes the total 25 talents = 2,000 pounds which was the sum found
in 52 B.C. when Pompey instigated excavations in the solium of the
temple of Juppiter Capitolinus (Pliny, N.H. 33. 14; Varro ap. Non.
338 L.). It follows that whereas D.H.'s source must be later than 52,
L.'s must be earlier.
48. 9. gladius: Plutarch and D . H . say that Brennus added the ^OJGTTJP
as well as his sword to the weights. Much ingenuity has been misspent
in speculating on the significance both of Brennus' action and of his
words (see, especially, Gage, Rev. Arch. loc. cit.) but the simplest
explanation is undoubtedly the right one. T h e Romans complained
that the weights were dishonest. Brennus disdainfully claiming that
justice is irrelevant between victor and vanquished ('Might is Right')
hurls a sword, the emblem of justice, into the scales. For Justice and
her sword see Deubner, Roscher's Lexicon, 'Personifikation', col. 2112.
In consequence Camillus can retort with the very same argument
ferro, non auro (49. 3 n . ; cf. Festus 510 L.).
(vae victis, as Festus shows, was proverbial. Both N and Ver. add
an unwanted esse, probably by dittography. Rossbach would read
victis. ecce, sed. . . '.)
49. 1. forte quadam: 1. 4. 4 n.
49. 2. negat: the spirit of legalistic quibbling is characteristic of Sullan
annalists. T h e dictatorship was held to put all other magistracies into
suspension.
49. 3 . iubet: notice the stirring tones in which Camillus is made to
speak, ferro, non auro was evidently a famous saying for it is attributed
by Ennius to Pyrrhus (Ann. 196 V.; see Momigliano, C.Q. 36 (1942),
113) and also used by Justin of the Aetolians (28. 2. 4) and Mithridates (38. 4. 8). For arma aptare sc. corpori cf. Virgil, Aeneid 2. 672, 11. 8 ;
Seneca, Phaedra 5 3 3 ; Sil. Ital. 5. 131.
In the same v e i n ^ w sit is used with a positive force 'it is a duty',
rather than negatively 'it is permissible' (see Shackleton Bailey,
738

390 B.C.

5- 49- 3

Propertiana, 91 who cites Virgil, Aen. i. 7 7 ; Ovid, Fasti 1. 532) and

ulcisci is used passively under the influence of the preceding passive
infinitives (elsewhere only in Ennius, Trag. 147 V . ; Sallust, Jug. 3 1 . 8
(speech of Memmius); Val. Flacc. 4. 753). T h e total effect is intended
to emphasize Camillus' stature.
49. 6. Gabina via: 22. 14. 11. If the battle is unhistorical, the choice
of site may have been determined by a corruption of the Caeretan
tradition which knew of a defeat of the Gauls in Sabinis (Sordi 148-9).
ductu auspicioque: 3. 1. 4 n.
nuntius: 4. 10. 5 ; Hirtius, B.G. 8. 21. 3 ; Cicero, de Imp. Cn. Pomp. 25.
Cf. the rhetorical hyperbole so graphically employed in J o b 1.
49. 7. inconditos: 3. 29. 5 n. T h e praises bestowed on him are of interest
in that they reflect the official compliments of the late Republic which
became the honorific titles of the emperors (see Alfoldi's series of
articles in Mus. Helv. 1952-4). Romulus, also applied to Cossus
(4. 20. 2), recalls the ironic nicknames of Sulla, Cicero, and Caesar
(Fordyce on Catullus 29. 5). parens patriae was first used loosely of
Fabius Cunctator (Pliny, N.H. 22. 10) and formally of Cicero (in
Pisonem 6 with Nisbet's note). Scipio Africanus may have been the
first to be acclaimed a Second Founder but it is significant that
Marius (Plutarch 27. 9) claims to be a Third Founder, thereby in
dicating that the tradition which made Camillus conditor alter was
already current (cf. Manilius 1. 784 f.). But clearly all these terms,
although first applied to Camillus by the Sullan annalists, had an
equal relevance for L.'s audience. Augustus was not hailed pater
patriae until 2 B.C. but the title had been in the air long before (Horace,
Odes 1.2. 50). Augustus was regarded as Father and Founder and
Guardian (Syme, Roman Revolution, 520). Above all, he had toyed with
the idea of taking the name Romulus and had only been dissuaded
by the advice of his counsellors to abandon it in favour of Augustus
(Dio 53. 16. 7). Thus although the tradition that Camillus was com
plimented in these terms may well be older than L., a Roman reader
of the 2o's would be bound to feel their contemporary force. See
L. R. Taylor, C.R. 32 (1918), 158-61; G. M . Hirst, A.J.P. 47 (1926),
347-5749. 8. migrari: 51-54 n.
49. 9. relinqueret: 34. 51. 2, 35. 6. 4. remitto (Ver.) is not found in
this phrase.
50. 2. /ana omnia: Mommsen argued that since not all the shrines were
captured (e.g. the Capitoline temples, on the traditional account,
were saved) L. could not have written 'because the enemy had oc
cupied /ana omnia'. Hence he proposed quoad which has been generally
accepted. But the implication of 49. 3 (in conspectu habentesfana deum)
739

5- 50. 2

390 B.C.

is that for rhetorical purposes Camillus regards the whole religious

world of the Romans as in enemy hands. Furthermore quod is guaran
teed by the succeeding sentences: cum Caeretibus hospitium pub lice fieret,
quod . . . recepissent. . . ludi Capitolinifierent,quod Iuppiter . . . tutatus esset.
T h e quod-clauses do not correspond to the technical quod. . . verba
fecerunt of S. C. and, indeed, there is no trace of official language in
this passage. It is therefore inappropriate to turn the verbs into a
solemn tricolon. L. and Ver. have independently been guilty of
separate omissions. Read restituerentur terminarentur expiarenturque.
per duumviros: 13. 5 n.
50. 3 . hospitium'. a variant tradition (Aul. Gell. 16. 13; Strabo 5. 220;
E (Aero) Horace, Epist. 1. 6. 62) named the reward which the Caeretans received on this occasion as civitos sine suffragio. T h a t status is,
however, more probably a punishment imposed on Caere after her
defeat in 353, as other sources say (7. 19. 6). For civitos sine suffragio,
as an analysis of its character indicates (Badian, Foreign Clientelae,
15-20; but see Sordi 36-49), was a hurried expedient designed to
remove the danger of an independent Caere without the necessity of
destroying the city in the way that Veii had been destroyed. T h e
former services of the Caeretans saved her from that. Hence a special
category analogous to that of resident aliens (only permanent where
the latter was temporary) was created and its members enrolled in
so-called Tabulae Caeritum. They enjoyed the duties and privileges of
Romans except for voting and holding office. T h e system enabled
Rome to have direct control of Caere without being forced to a ruth
less exercise of naked brutality. L.'s notice about hospitium, for which
see 28. 5 n., is to be regarded as authentic.
deum: deorum Ver., but deum is invariable where immortalium is
added.
50. 4. ludi Capitolini: the origin of the games was evidently lost in
obscurity since there are several distinct accountsTertullian (de
Spect. 5) says they were founded by Romulus. T h e late Republican
antiquarians, represented in Plutarch (QR. 5 3 ; cf. Romulus 25) and
Festus (430 L.), attributed them to Camillus, as a celebration not of
the deliverance of the Capitol but of the capture of Veii in 396 (hence
Sardi venales). T h e real origin was, therefore, lost. T h e attribution to
Romulus merely illustrated that the Romans regarded the games as
primeval. Their attribution to Camillus is inspired by the concept
of Camillus as Second Founder, and their connexion with Veii or
the Capitol represents two separate lines of speculation, the one
investigating the strange ceremony of the old man ('the king of Veii')
led in procession, the other the name Capitolini. No confidence can,
therefore, be placed in this notice (see Piganiol, Recherches, 80 ff.;
Habel, R.E., Suppl. 5, 'Ludi Capitolini'; H u b a u x 299 ff.).
740

390 B.C.

5- 50. 4

T h e games were held on the Ides of October. T h e collegium

Capitolinorum is attested in republican and imperial times (ad Q.F.
2. 5. 2 ; C.I.L. 14. 2105) when it was closely associated with the college
of Mercuriales (2. 27. 5 n.).
50. 5. Aio: 32. 6 n.
50, 6. cellam 13. 19. 7, in the temple of Juppiter O . M . on the Capitol.
Ver. reads quo re for in quae, probably by accidental omission of in (cf.
40. 10) and anticipation of the succeeding re-ferri. Its reading should
not, therefore, be preferred to N's.
50. 7. iam ante: Ver. substitutes antea which is never found at the start
of a sentence without a correlative nunc (1. 21. 2, 2. 4. 5).
laudatio: 25. 8. Diodorus (14. 116) defines the honour paid to the
matrons as the right i</>9 dpfxarcov oxeioOaithe honour which L.
attributes to their earlier contribution for the dedication to Delphi
for which service Plutarch (Camillus 8), on the other hand, gives
laudationes as the reward. There is, then, no firm tradition and the
explanations of the two customs are to be regarded as mere aetiological
speculation. T h e right of Roman matrons to ride in carriages was of
long standing and was variously explained (Ovid, Fasti 1. 617 ff.;
Plutarch, QjR. 56 with Rose's note) whereas funeral panegyrics of
women were of recent date. Cicero (de Orat. 2.44) says that Q.Lutatius
Catulus (cos. 102) was the first to deliver one, so that L.'s source here
must be subsequent to Lutatius. If the honour paid to the matrons
was popularly supposed to be connected with voluntary contributions,
a connexion perhaps invented for propaganda purposes in the Punic
Wars (cf. 26. 36. 11) to stimulate donations, and if the annalistic
tradition had unearthed two possible occasions for such generosity,
it became necessary that rewards should be found for both. In this
way a pedigree for the laudationes could be invented. See Vollmer,
Jahrb.f. Klass. Phil., Suppl. 18 (1891), 453-9. It is to be noted that the
chief festival of the matrons, the Matronalia, was celebrated on
1 March, while the withdrawal of the Gauls from Rome was tra
ditionally dated to 1 February (Plutarch, Camillus 30).
50. 8. paratam: cf. Diodorus 14. 115 TTOXIV . . . Trpoa<j>ar<x)s v<f>' iavrwv
KaTC(TKVaOfJ,V7)V.

51-54. The Speech of Camillus

T h e proposed removal of the capital from Rome to Veii raises interest
ing questions. As are many other things associated with Camillus,
it is reduplicated. In L. the proposal is raised after the sack of Veii
(24. 5-11) and again now. Nothing helps us to decide when the
tradition began. Its absence from Polybius need not be significant
since he gives only the most attenuated account of the period. Even so,
it is likely to be of recent origin. T h e proposal to send a colony to Veii
741

5- 51-54

390 B.C.

suggests Gracchus' proposal to recolonize Carthage (Junonia) in 122,

so that the whole story may well have been unearthed as a dis
couraging precedent by the opponents of Gracchus. T h e developed
version, the proposal to transplant the entire population to Veii and
the abandonment of Rome as the capital of the Roman world, should
be seen against the background of the Social Wars. T h e Italian con
federates claimed their city, Corfinium, as the capital of Italy and
renamed it Italia (Sydenham nos. 617-28, see Syme, Roman Revolution,
359 ff.). Rome had to reassert her authority both by military action
and by propaganda. She seconded her success in arms by the diligent
dissemination of the idea that Rome had a destined position as caput
return. The propaganda succeeded and the idea became conventional
(Cicero, de Leg, Agr. 1. 18, 2. 86). In the minds of Romans of the late
Republic the fortunes of Rome were associated with the continued
existence of the city as the capital. Hence there was always a sinister
undertone of rumour that the capital was to be transferred. We know
of malicious gossip about Julius Caesar (Suetonius 79. 3). It was still
a subject for joking in A.D. 64 after the Great Fire (Suetonius, Nero 3 9 ;
see McGann, C.Q^. 7 (1957), 128 n. 1).
In the light of this prevailing suspicion we may ask how far Camillus'
speech expresses L.'s own opinions on contemporary affairs or how
far it is a mere rhetorical elaboration of a theme already given by
his source or how far it is what L. thought appropriate for Camillus
in that predicament to say. T h a t much of it is derived from an earlier
source is clear from the parallel speech in Plutarch {Camillus 31)
where, however, it is addressed to the Senate (but cf. 50. 8 universo
senatu prosequente). It is clear, too, that many of its sentiments are
appropriate to the character of the pious Camillus (cf. 51. 5, 6, 9, 10).
It does not, however, follow from this, as Fraenkel argues, that the
arguments used by Camillus, even if conventional, were not sincerely
held by L. himself. T h e speech is not a mere reworking of material
already employed by Claudius Quadrigarius. It is L.'s own work,
designed to form a tail-piece to the first five books. Its formal construc
tion and its debt to Cicero (p. 743) are symptomatic of the advanced
technique which L. could deploy. Its contents recapitulate the con
tents of the whole book and highlight the great moments of the
narrative which L, has already spread before us (e.g. 51. 1 = 46. 10,
5i- 6 = 15, 5 1 - 7 = 32- 6, 52. 3 = 46. 2, 52. 8 = 17. 2, 52. 10 = 23. 3,
52. 11 - 31. 3, 53. 9 = 44. 5, 54. 5 = 33). A few interesting dis
crepancies of fact (52. 8 n., 16 n., 54. 5 n., 7 n.) prove that the speech
was written by L. and deliberately placed at the end of the book
both as a counterpoise to the speech of Claudius (5. 3-6) and as a con
clusion to the whole volume.
T h e message of the speech is simple. Not propaganda for the policies
742

390 B.C.

5- 51-54

of Augustus. L. was too young and too obscure. Not a personal con
fession of a religious faith. L. shared the cultured caution of his con
temporaries. But an appeal for peace, for the defence of civilization
as he knew it with its tradition and ceremony, its custom and grandeur,
for concord and, above all, for the preservation of Rome.
Only in so far as Augustus shared the same aims can the speech
be said to be Augustan in outlook or in sympathy (54. 7 n.),.
In style it is consciously Ciceronian. In just such terms Cicero
might have reflected upon Rome on his return from exile. This is
not to say that L. has borrowed directly from Cicero but merely that
he has been well schooled in the same discipline. I add below a list
of phrases which have parallels in Cicero:
For 51. 1-2 contentiones . . . dimicatio cf. ad Fam. 2. 6. 5 ; for 5 1 . 2
quoad vita suppetat cf. de Leg. Agr. 2. 100; for 5 1 . 8 tenarum orbi documento
cf. Verr. 4. 82 ; for 51. 10 caeci avaritia cf. pro Quinctio 83; for 52. 1 ecquid
sentitis cf. in Pis. 9 4 ; for e naufragiis emergentes (a common metaphor)
cf. Or. Fr. B. 13. 6; for 52. $forsitan aliquis dicat cf. pro Sulla 84; for
52. 6 ne . . . generatim . . . percenseam cf. in Pis. 86; for 52. 8 quid. . .
intersit cf. Verr. 5. 7 5 ; for 52. 9 recordamini cf. Phil. 2. 28, 5. 2, 13. 5 ; for
53. 1 res ipsa cogit cf. de Leg. Agr. 3. 10; for incendiis ruinisque cf. pro
Sestio 121; for 53. 2 stante incolumi urbe cf. in Catil. 2. 2 ; for 53. 4 gloriosa
posteris cf. post Red. in Sen. 25; for turpis . . . gloriosa cf. de Fin. 2. 97; for
53 5 hoc necessitatis imposuisse cf. pro Sulla 35; for 53. 7 scelera . . .
dedecora cf. in Pis. 32; foi 54. 3 natus educatusque (1. 29. 4) cf. Verr. 3. 60.
Cf. also 51. 5 n., 52. 7 n., 54. 3 nn., 54. 6 n.
M a n y of the arguments used are equally commonplace: in particular
the comparison with the casa Romuli (53. 8 n.) and the concluding
laudes Romae (54. 2-7). It is also significant to observe the clausulae
which in this speech correspond more closely than elsewhere to the
practice of Cicero. Cf. e.g. 52. 8 ff.
See further the brief but thorough summary in Fraenkel, Horace,
268 n. 1 ; and, among other recent works, Burck 134-6; Klingner,
Livius; Ullmann, La Technique des discours, 63-65; Altheim, History
of Roman Religion, 4 2 0 - 2 ; Syme, Roman Revolution, 305; Hubaux 74-88;
Kajanto, God and Fate in Livy, 31-32.
5 1 . 1-2. Prooemium: principium a nostra persona
T h e trope of the consolations of exile is fully developed by Cicero
in the Tusculan Disputations (5. 107 ff.; cf. also ad Fam. 4. 4. 4, 7. 3. 4).
It was conventional to assert that no man could be in exile if he was
a m o n g good men (de Fin. 5. 54).
5 1 . 1. contentiones: Ver. inserts h(a)e but cf. 4. 59. 5, 3. 67. 4. hae
would have no reference.
si miliens: a conjecture first made by Ruddiman's friend MacKenzie.
743

5-5i. i

390 B.C.

The readings of Ver. and N point to si mille senatus consultis (Otto)

but the plural is awkwardly joined to the singular populi iussu and
cannot be justified. For si milieus cf. Aug. c. Petil. 3. 11. 12 si milieus
(similans codd.) tantum talia . . . dicat.
51. 2. perpulit: neither perculit nor pertulit is possible.
Kardaraais: summa causae.
51. 3 . repetimus: the present, given by both Ver. and N, is logically
preferable to Frobenius's repetiimus. The first clause is concerned with a
continuing objective ('Why are we trying to win the city back?'), the
second with a single specific action ('Why did we rescue her from the
enemy's hands?').
homines Romani: for the unexpected addition of Romani cf. 1. 59. 9,
42. 19. 4.
tenuerint: Ver. adds et habitaverint, N habitaverint. Elsewhere in L.
habito is used transitively only in the passive (1. 30. i, 43. 13, 44. 5,
21. 30. 7, 24. 3. 2, 26. 16. 9, 27. 30. 3 ; cf. 5. 24. 8 n.) but there is no
other proven case of a gloss common to Ver. and N, so that habitaverint
is unlikely to be one here (see Du Rieu, De Gente Fabia, 457; Rossbach,
Phil. Woch. 40 (1920), 701).
Tractatio 1: (a) religiosum
51. 4. positae traditaeque per manus: per manus tradere 'to pass on from
hand to hand' is proverbial; cf. Sallust, Jug. 63. 6; Cicero, ad Fam.
7. 5. 3 ; Seneca, Vit. Beat. 1 . 4 ; Quintilian 12. 4. 1 with Austin's note.
For positae Ver. has the variant conditae, a much stronger word which
is more effective in speaking of the simultaneous founding of the city
and her cults (cf. Pliny, N.H. 28. 27 auguria condere). positae is a trivialization (cf. Cicero, de Leg. 2. 27; Tacitus, Hist. 5. 5). See also next
note.
evidens numen: the religious language is continued. The expression
is found on inscriptions (C.I.L. 14. 44) and cf. Apuleius, Met. 11. 13.
21.

51. 5. intuemini. . . invenietis: a rhetorical turn, cf. Columella 3. 8. 1;

Seneca, de Bene/. 3. 30. 2.
prospera: Madvig and Pettersson retain N's prospere but the pair
adversa-prospera is always exactly balanced (26. 37. 2, 28. 17. 8, 42. 15,

45.8.7).
51. 9. terra: the abl. not the dative (or locative) is found with celo; see
Elsperger, Thes. Ling. Lat. s.v. 'celo', col. 768. 61-75.
51. 10. belli decus: 1. 42. 5 n.
(b) pium
52. 1. monumental of actions, cf. 26. 41. 11, 37. 6. 6.
ecquid sentitis: 3. 11. 12, 4. 3 8.
744

390 B.C.

5- 52. 2

52. 2, inaugurate: 1. 6. 4 n.
52. 3. quam par vestrum factum est: so the manuscripts. There is no
expressed antecedent for quod. . . conspectum est and an ellipse is barely
tolerable (Pettersson compares 5. 19. 6, 26. 7, 6. 4. 5, but none is an
exact parallel). Hence vestro (Gronovius; also Lallemand, Bayet), i.e.
quam par vestro facto idfactum est, but in such comparisons it is the term
which is to be unfavourably compared which is put in the nominative
(28, 42. 20). 'Your action is hardly to be compared with the noble
example of G. Fabius.' Gronovius proposed adding isti, Drakenborch
followed by Reiz and Weissenborn ei, either before or after est, but the
point would be made more forcefully and the corruption more readily
explained by vestrum factum (illifacU)) est.
sollemne . . . obiit: 'performed the rites', a religious term; cf
Cicero, de Leg. 2. 19.
52. 6. in Iovis epulo: 13. 6 n.; Camillus lists all the age-old ceremonies
which can only be performed in Rome itself, and which it would be
sacrilege to abandon. The Fasti have the entry epulum Iovis twice,
under 13 November, during the later ludiplebeii, and under 13 Septem
ber, the foundation-date of the Capitoline temple, in the middle of the
ludi Romani (27. 36. 9). The image of Juppiter was displayed and
offerings of food laid on a couch (pulvinar) before it. The ceremony,
being part of the Romanus ritus, is of the greatest antiquity, as its
intimate association with the foundation of the Capitoline temple
might suggest. See Wissowa, Religion, 120 ff.
52. 7. Vestae: 1. 20. 3 n. For the significance for the Augustan age
of L.'s remarks about the aeterni ignes see Koch, Religio, 163-5.
signo: the Palladium, a statue of an armed goddess, said to have
been brought from Troy and to be preserved with other sacra in the
shrine of the Vestals. About the antiquity of the tradition there can
be no question, although there was much speculation as to how the
statue reached Rome: according to some authors it was brought by
Diomede (Cassius Hemina fr. 7 P.), according to others by Aeneas
himself (D. H. 1. 69). These doubts, coupled with the cloak of secrecy
which excluded everyone except the pontifex maximus and the Vestals
from the shrine, led certain ancient scholars to deny the existence of
the Palladium (D.H. 2. 66; Plutarch, Camillus 20) but it was an essen
tial part of Rome's claim to her Trojan past, as it was with other
cities (Argos, Athens, Sparta). It is possible that the actual cult-image
which existed in the late Republic and which is illustrated on the
coins of Galba (Mattingly-Sydenham 1. 206. 72) was a manufacture
of Sullan times, sent from Troy by C. Flavius Fimbria after his success
ful campaign against Mithridates in 85 (Servius, ad Aen. 2. 166;
other texts in Greenidge and Clay, ed. Gray, 183-5). It would, how
ever, be quite wrong to think that the Roman belief in the Palladium
745

5- 52. 7

3 9 0 B.C.

only dated from that period too. It was much older, but L. is being
anachronistic when he calls the Palladium a pignus imperii (26. 27. 14;
Servius, loc. cit. illic imperiumfore ubi et Palladium; Cicero, pro Scaur0 48).
Varro had recognized seven pignora quae imperium Romanum tenent
([Servius], ad Aen. 7. 188; see K. Gross, Neue Deutsche Forschungen 1
( T 935)J 3 2 ff"0 D U t t n e concept is not as old as Camillus. Like the
legend of the Sabine cow (1. 45. 2 n.) or of Olenus, it belongs at the
very earliest to the propaganda of the third century when Rome was
waking to her international responsibilities. See Ziehen, R.E., Talladion'; Bomer, Rom und Troia, 61 ff.; Austin on Virg. Aen, 2. 163.
ancilibus: 1. 20. 4 n.
Mars . . .pater: 1. 20. 4 n.
52. 8. Laviniique: 1. 14. 2 n.
religiosum: 13. 8.
52. 10. memores: i.e. recent actions of the Romans in introducing new
cults as and when divinely prescribed might suggest that they had
not lost their old religious faith.
dedicata: applied metonymically to the goddess, rather than her
temple. The usage, which is only here in L., is found in Cicero, de
Domo n o and 136 and in Horace, Odes 1. 31. 1.
52. 12. sed ab: Ver.'s reading which gives the effective antithesis non
voluntate . . . sed metu is to be preferred to N's si ab which would have to
be understood 'if we were restrained from quitting Rome only by
fear and by enemy action'.
52. 13. quid tandem: Seyffert and Hertz, regarding quid tandem as a
self-contained question (54. 1; Cicero, Verr. 3. 180; de Domo 24)
punctuated with a question-mark after tandem and took de sacerdotibus
with the following sentence; but nonne must begin the new sentence
and for quid tandem de cf. pro Sex. Roscio 118.
noctem unam: is this a different prohibition from the familiar de lecto
trinoctium continuum non decubat (Aul. Gell. 10. 15. 14; Plutarch, Q.R.
40; Tacitus, Annals 3. 71; see Wissowa, Religion, 505 n. 5) ? The editor
responsible for the variant text in TTA (see the O.C.T. apparatus)
evidently thought not, for he wrote ultra trinoctum unam for noctem unam.
And he was right, for we know no other evidence for regulations about
leaving thepomerium rather than leaving his bed. The whole taboo, as
Filhol has recently demonstrated (Hommages a L. Herrmann, 359-68,
with bibliography), stems from the religious significance of the perfect
marriage between the flamen Dialis and his wife and is therefore the
model for the most primitive and rigorous type of marriage (by usus)
which could only be broken by an interruption which in the Twelve
Tables became canonized in law as the rule trinoctium abesse.
L. is either ignorant or simplifying. For the Flamen Dialis see
1. 20. 1.

746

390 B.C.

5- 52. 16

(c) legitimum
5 2 . 1 6 . curiata: even by Camillus' time the comitia curiata was probably
circumscribed in function to the passing of the lex de imperio. See
46. 11 n.
centuriata: the comitia centuriata was in origin the army on parade
(1. 43. 1 nn.) and, therefore, met outside the pomerium (Aul. Gell.
15. 27. 4). Camillus' argument is therefore very weak if he is main
taining that the city of Rome, which is the one place in which the
assembly could not meet, is the only place where the Romans could
properly have assemblies.
Tractatio II: (a) necessarium
Camillus now turns to the positive arguments for remaining in
Rome.
53. 1. at enim . . .posse: preserved only by Ver.
53. 3 . vos: ' y u believe that even if the emigration was inadvisable
then, it is inescapable now; I, on the contraryand do not be sur
prised till you understand my meaningam convinced that even if
it was right to consider going while Rome still stood, to abandon her
ruins now would be grievously wrong'.
incolumi [tota] urbe: Ver. omits tota rightly; cf. 3. 47. 2.
(b) gloriosum
53. 8. casa: there were two straw huts with thatched roofs called
casae Romuli, one on the south-west corner of the Palatine and one,
referred to here, on the Capitol (Virgil, Aeneid 8. 654; D.H. 1. 79;
Plutarch, Romulus 20; Dio 48. 43, 54. 29; Vitruvius 2. 1. 5; Seneca,
Contr. 2. 1. 5); venerated relics of the old village communities, they
were jealously preserved and were restored in the traditional style
whenever damaged. Their great antiquity is shown by their resem
blance to primitive hut-urns. The contrast between primitive simplicity
as symbolized in the casa Romuli and decadent civilization was a
rhetorical trope in vogue in the last years of the Republic and in the
early Empire (cf. Seneca, loc. cit.) and the sentimental appeal to
rustic virtues was an all-too-familiar theme (Cicero, de Rep. 2. 2 - 4 ;
cf., e.g., Propertius 4. 1; Ovid, Fasti 1. 199 ff.; Virgil's Georgics of
course appeals to the same spirit of escapism). See Platner-Ashby
s.v. 'Casa Romuli'; A. Boethius, The Golden House of Nero, 15 ff.
53. 9. maiores: 2. 1. 4 n.
silvas paludesque: the hills of Rome were wooded in prehistoric times
and the intervening ground required the cloacae to drain it before it
became habitable. But for the Romans this picture of woods and
swamps was doubtless a mere inference from surviving namese.g.
747

5- 53- 9

390 B.C.

the asylum inter duos lucos (1. 8. 5 n.) and the lucus Petelinus (6. 20. 11 ff.)
or the Caprae palus (1. 16. 1 n.) and the Lacus Curtius (1. 13. 5 n.).
Capitolio<atque>arce: the standard phrase (Wesenberg; see Fugner,
Lexicon, 1345. 26-36). Capitolium arc(em)que is occasionally found
(2. 49. 7, 6. 14. 4, 15. i i , 16. 2 ) ; Capitolium, arx never.
(c) commodum et utile
Camillus moves to his conclusion with a powerful eulogy of the
natural advantages of the site of Rome. Such eulogies were a common
feature of Greek rhetoric. In very similar terms Xenophon celebrates
Athens (Vectigalia 1), praising her climate, her soil, her strategic
position as a centre of trade whether by land or sea. T h e same points
are made by Ephorus about Boeotia (Strabo 9. 400). L. might there
fore have been expected to include such arguments here but his im
mediate model is perhaps closer at hand. Much of Camillus' nostalgia
echoes Cicero's laments (ad Fam. 2. 11. 1, 12. 2, 13. 3) and Cicero
wrote in his de Republica (2. 5 ff.) an eloquent tribute to Rome's
natural situation. So close are the resemblances in detail between
Cicero's and Camillus' words that it is difficult not to believe that
Cicero has directly inspired L.
54. 1. quid tandem?: introducing the new section.
aut. . . -ve: 1. 18. 3 n.
54. 2 . matrem: 1. 56. 12 n.
superficie: a variation of the commonplace . Cf.
Tacitus, Hist. 1. 84. superficies is the structure as a whole and is merely
further defined by tignis: they are not two separate building materials,
cf. Dig. 41. 3. 23 cum aedes ex duabus rebus constant, ex solo et superficie.
54. 3 . equidem fatebor \ must be taken together and not separated as in
the O . C . T . ; cf., e.g., Tacitus, Dial. 21. 1. It follows that a strong stop,
a colon, must be put after iuvat. Camillus is prefacing his avowed
nostalgia for Rome. *I will make a confession to you, although to do
so involves painful memories.' H e then proceeds to qualify this by
saying 'it is my intention merely to recall my own suffering and not to
blame you for causing it'. T h e received text is lucidly vindicated against
change by G. W. Williams, J.R.S. 45 (1955), 228.
colles campique: cf. Sallust, Jugurtha 50. 6.
macerent desiderio: cf. Afranius fr. 352 R.
5 4 . 4 . vicinum: the structure of the sentence is not immediately apparent.
(1) colles, flumen introduce a list of advantages in apposition to
locum and strictly governed by elegerunt, in which event the list will be
continued by mare (so N) vicinum and regionem Italiae mediam (Madvig),
and be rounded off with the restatement (locum elegerunt) ad incrementum
urbis natum unice locum. Against this it must be urged that expositum should
748

390 B.C.

5- 54- 4

naturally qualify locum and not mare (cf. Cicero, Verr. i. 93 exposita ad
praedandum Pamphylia; Mela 2. 76; Tacitus, Histories 1. 11. 3).
(2) As in the O.C.T., saluberrimos . . . accipiantur is a parenthesis
explaining locum, mart (Bauer, Alschefski) vicinum nee expositum agrees
with locum, as also does regionum Italiae medium *a place close to the sea
but not dangerously close, and situated in the middle of the regions of
Italy'. Against this second interpretation it may be urged that regionum
Italiae medium is not Latin (what are the regiones Italiae ?) and that the
parenthesis is awkward and artificial: having started a list of advan
tages we expect it to be continued, expositum may with equal pro
priety be applied to mare (cf. Seneca, Dial. 12. 9. 7 in omnes tempestates
exp. mari; Mela 3. 39) and for the force of medium cf. 10. 2. 15. O n
balance, therefore, the first alternative is preferable.
54. 5. trecentensimus sexagensimus quintus: the number has mystical
rather than chronological significance. Elsewhere L. mentions 360
(40. 1) and 400 years (45. 4) but both are only round numbers. Accord
ing to the chronology used in 4. 7. 1 and the number of intervening
magistrate years, the date ought to be 364, as was given by Varro and
other chronographers (D.H. 1. 74; Pliny, N.H. 53. 16). Bayet (tome
5. 104-7) believes that L. has borrowed the figure of 365 from a
separate work which gave a long chronology (245 years for the kings,
120 for the libera civitas) but in a rhetorical speech such chronological
nicety is out of place. We know that in A.D. 398 a substantial body of
opinion believed that a great cycle in the history of Rome was drawing
to an end in the 365th year after the Crucifixion (Augustine, de Civ. Dei
18. 5 3 ; Claudian, Inv. c. Eutrop. 1. 1-7, 2. 1 ff.) and in their
foreboding recalled Camillus (Claudian, Bellum Geticum 430 ff.;
Elog. Stil. 2. 390 ff.). It is, then, likely that in dating the capture of
Rome to A.U.G. 365, L. is here influenced by the superstitious concept
of a magnus annus, the period that is m a d e up of as many years as a
year is of days. Until Julius Caesar the R o m a n calendar recognized
years of 355 (or with intercalation 377/8) days but the true length
of the solar year of 365 days was certainly realized (Censorinus, de Die
Natali 19) and only conservative prejudice prevented it being adopted
for the calendar. T h e mystical number 365 was probably but not
necessarily an innovation by L. himself. See H u b a u x 60-88.
cum: 'yet not to speak of single enemiesnot the united strength
of the powerful townships of the Aequi and Volsci, not the combined
might of the armies and navies of Etruria, whose vast domains occupy
the breadth of Italy from sea to sea, has ever been a match for you in war'
(de Selincourt).
Conclusio: amplificatio
54. 6. quae, malum, ratio: H u b a u x comments that Camillus speaks
749

5- 54- ^

390 B.C.

'comme un bourgeois dans une comedie de Plaute', but malum with

a question is a form of emphatic protestation familiar from Cicero
and has nothing bourgeois about it. Cf, e.g., Scaur. 45 quae, malum, est
ista ratio; Phil. 10. 18.
expertis alia experiri: the sense is clear: 'Why do you want to try your
luck elsewhere when you have had such good fortune here ?' A word
is needed to balance alia and cannot be supplied from the context
(Verdiere). haec (Clericus), ilia (Seyffert), ista (Novak) have all been
proposed and supported but talia (Seyffert) both palaeographically
and on grounds of sense is far superior. See also G. W. Williams,
J.R.S. 45 (1955), 228.
54. 7. Capitolinum: 1. 55. 5 n.
liberaretur: sc. from all religious encumbrances, such as evil associa
tions. T h e term is technical, with a special legal flavour (cf. Cicero,
Verr. 2. 76; Dig. 18. 1. 41), and in religious contexts is often linked
with effari (cf. Cicero, de Har. Resp. 12 ; [Servius], ad Aen. 1. 446). For
details see Weinstock, Mitt. Deutsch. Arch. Inst. (R. Abt.), 47 (1932),
Iuventas: in 1. 55. 3-4 (n.) only Terminus is mentioned and in all
the other early sources it is only Terminus who figures (Cato fr. 24 P . ;
Servius, ad Aen. 9. 446; Ovid, Fasti 2. 6696.; cf. also D.H. 3. 69;
Lactantius, Inst. 1. 2 0 ; Augustine, de Civ. Dei 5. 21). T h e addition of
Iuventas seems to have been an antiquarian conjecture by Varro
(D.H. 3. 69) based on his observation that her shrine was within the
cella of Minerva in the temple of Capitoline Juppiter. L. himself,
rather than any source, is responsible for their joint inclusion here,
because in the 20's Augustus, perhaps with one eye on the possibility
of a new magnus annus due to end in 23 B.C., was concerned to develop
the cult of Iuventas, which symbolized an optimistic faith in the new
age to dawn. T h e festival of Iuventas was on 18 October, the day on
which Augustus assumed the toga virilis (C.I.L. 10. 8375; cf. Res Gestae
19). T h e cult itself was old, although subsequently influenced by the
Greek Hebe, particularly in the Second Punic War (a lectisternium for
Hercules and Iuventas was held in 218 (21. 62. 9) and a temple in the
Circus Maximus was vowed to her in 207 (36. 36. 5-6)). See Kroll,
R.E., 'Iuventas'; Lambrechts, Ant. Class. 17 (1948), 355-71 ; Latte,
Religionsgeschichte, 256 n. 1.
di: the monosyllable, held back to the end and separated from its
predicate by the intervening abl. abs., effectively epitomizes the spirit
of the whole speech.
55. The Rebuilding of Rome
T h e contradiction between the jumbled disorder which the city of
Rome presented in the first century B.C. and the logical pattern de750

390 B.C.

5-55

manded by the augural lay-out traditionally ascribed to Romulus and

inherent in the term Roma Quadrata as it was understood caused
much perplexity. Rationally the Romans expected their city to be
planned like a templum. Hence the legend, which L. omits, that
Romulus' lituus was found in the ruins (Cicero, de Div. i. 30; Plutarch,
Camillus 32). In fact they found chaos which they explained as the
result of the haste with which the old city was rebuilt after the Gallic
fire (Tacitus, Annals 15. 43), The explanation is almost certainly false.
Axial town-planning was derived not from the Etruscan templum but
from Greek theories and was introduced into Italy no earlier than
the fifth century. The disorder so evident in Rome was the result not
of haste but of unplanned, piecemeal development over centuries as
in any Tuscan hill-town. Much of the city was burnt and much
rebuilt. So much is clear archaeologically. A stratum of broken rooftiles with carbonized wood and clay has been identified in the
Comitium area, where the old curia Hostilia stood, and can be dated
to the beginning of the fourth century. To the same period must
belong the cappellaccio pavement, which was laid over the Forum,
and various cappellaccio runnels which lead from it. But the fire was
not general and the work was one of repair rather than reconstruc
tion.
The tradition that Rome was burnt and rebuilt is in outline sound
but it was used to account for two later phenomena. After the Pyrrhic
Wars wooden tiling seems to have been forbidden in Rome because
of the fire hazard from cinders (Pliny, jV*.//. 16. 36). The authorities
may have subsidized the transition. In later times the state was known
to have provided the roofing material for a private building (Dessau,
I.L.S. 5588) and it is reasonable that it should have contributed to
wards the cost of such an expensive change as that from shingle to tile.
If so, it was natural to suppose that the state would also have helped
on an earlier occasion when much of Rome had to be re-roofed.
Secondly, the close resemblance of 55. 3 (n.) to the provisions laid
down in colony laws indicates that here again a later institution has
provided historians with an earlier precedent. The surviving examples
of such laws date from post-Sullan times but the formulae for such
documents are conventional and likely to be of long standing. The
terms of Gracchus' law founding Junonia would not have been sub
stantially different and there were doubtless even earlier models. It
would be wrong to see specifically Sullan or Caesarian overtones
here.
See Jordan, Topographie, 1. 434 n. 5; Mommsen, Rom. Forschungen,
2. 330-2; van Deman, J.R.S. 12 (1922), 131; Castagnoli, Ippodamo
di Mileto, 6 7 - 7 3 ; Blake, Ancient Roman Construction, 122 ff.; Boethius,
Golden House of Nero, 33 ff.
751

390 B.C.
5- 55- i
55. 1. opportune emissa: missa Ver. but emittere vocem is standard, cf.
51. 7 et aL Ver. wrongly omits initial e at 3. 63^ 6.
Hostilia: 1. 30. 2 n. It probably perished in the fire; see above.
5 5 . 2. accipere se omen: Plutarch, with a biographer's licence, attri
butes the words not to a passing centurion but to Camillus himself.
It was a form of divination to pick up a chance word or remark and
to accept it in a sense other than that intended by the speaker who
casually uttered it. Such remarks, in Greek /cA^So^e?, were held once
accepted to be irrecoverable. See the discussion by Fraenkel on
Aeschylus, Agamemnon 1653 and the examples collected by Riess, R.E.,
'omen' and Pease on Cicero, de Div. 1. 103.
55. 3 . tegula: cf. Diod. 14. 116 S^/iooxa? KepafilSas ixoptfyovv at \i>*XPl
rod vvv TToXiTiKal KOXQVVTCLL. An inscription from Sparta speaks of
nXivOoi Sa/xdoxat (LG. 5 ( 1 ) 880), but allusions to tegulae publicae are
lacking, materiae caedendae (21. 27. 5, 45. 29. 14) is also official language;
cf. Cato, de Re Rust. 37. 5 ; Caesar, B.G. 3. 29. 1; B.C. 1. 36. 5 ; Ulpian,
Dig. 19. 1. 17. 6.
praedibus . . . perfecturos: for these terms cf. Lex Urson. 75 ( = LL.S.
6087; 44 B.C.) ne quis in oppido aedificium . . . disturbato nisi si praedes II
vir{um) arbitratu dederit se reraedificaturum; LexMalac. 62 ( = LL.S. 6089);
Lex Munic. Tarent. (= LL.S. 6086: after 87 B.C.).
55. 4. dirigendi: derigendi (Zingerle) is perhaps the better form for this
meaning. Cf. the distinction drawn by Isidore, Diff. 1. 153 derigimus
quae curva sunt, dirigimus cum aliquo tendimus. The facts are assembled
by Dittmann, Thes. Ling. Lat.y *dirigo\
55. 5. ut: hardly right, for causa ut is always used with a sense of
purpose (6. 31. 7, 33. 1 . 5 ) : 'the reason for the delay was so that
the enemy should be drawn into battle'. No purpose is intended here.
Perizonius read quod; H a r a n t more simply perferred cur; cf. 7. 9. 2
and further references in Thes. Ling. Lat.y 'caussa', coll. 675-7.

CORRIGENDUM
p. 83, line 22. For Romulus' read R e m u s '

752

INDEX I

PERSONS
L. Accius, 218.
P. Accoleius Lariscolus, 50, 182.
M. Acutius, 646.
Postumus Aebutius Cornicen (cos.
442 B . C ) , 549.
L. Aebutius Helva (cos. 463 B.C.), 404.
M. Aebutius Helva, 549.
T, Aebutius Helva (cos. 499 B . C ) , 284,
286.
P. Aelius (quaestor 409 B.C.), 616.
Sex. Aelius Paetus, 449.
L. Aelius Tubero, 16.
Q. Aelius Tubero, 16-17.
Q . Aelius Tubero (cos. 11 B . C ) , 16.
Mam. Aemilius (mil. trib. 438 B . C ) ,
557 573 588.
C. Aemilius Mamercinus (mil. tr. 394
B . C ) , 686.
L. Aemilius Mamercinus (mil. tr. 389
B . C ) , 697.
M \ Aemilius Mamercinus (cos. 410
B . C ) , 614.
M. Aemilius Mamercinus (mil. tr. 391
B . C ) , 697.
Ti. Aemilius Mamercus (cos. 470 B.C.),
386.
Aeneas, 33, 39-4 579 6 2 8 , 671.
Agamemnon, 579.
Agrippa (Silvius), 45.
M. Agrippa {aed. 33 B . C ) , 214.
L. Albinius, 723, 724.
L. Albinius Paterculus, 311, 313.
Alexander Polyhistor, 44.
L. Alienus, 448.
Allodius, 660.
Ambigatus, 708.
Amulius, 660.
Annii, 327.
T. Annius, 327.
Antalcidas, peace of, 629.
Antenor, 36.
L. Antestius Gragulus, 596.
Ti. Antistius (tr. pi. 422 B . C ) , 596,

Ascanius, 42.
M Asellius (tr. pi. 422 B . C ) , 596.
G. Asinius Pollio, 3.
A. Aternius, 447-8, 521, 648.
A. Atilius Galatinus (cos. 258 B . C ) , 103.
L. Atilius Priscus (mil. tr. 399 B.a.),
654Atys Silvius, 44.
Aucno, 703.
Augustus, 2 ff., 563-4, 676, 680, 684,
739 743 750.
Bellovesus, 709.
Brennus, 719.
Cacus, 55-58.
Gaedicii, 370.
L. Gaedicius, 370.
M. Gaedicius, 698.
Q . Gaedicius, 730.
L. Galpurnius Piso (cos. 133 B . C ) , 125,
213.

G. Galvius Cicero, 448.

G. Canuleius, 527 ff., 529.
M. Canuleius (tr. pi. 420 B . C ) , 600.
Capetus (Silvius), 44.
Capys, 591.
Gapys Silvius, 44, 591.
Sp. Carvilius, 670, 698.
Sp. Carvilius (tr. pi. 212 B.C), 698.
Sp. Carvilius Maximus (cos. 234 B.C),
481.
Cassius, 219.
L. Cassius Caeicianus (mon. c. 93
B . C ) , 278,343.
Sp. Cassius Vecellinus, 277-8, 293,
294, 296, 3 ! 7-18 (treaty), 319
(treaty), 337-9, 343-5.
Claudia gens, 273-4; relations with
Valerii, 376-7; with Laetorii, 377.
Claudius, emperor: his debt to Livy,
533 537 631.
M. Claudius, 479.
Ap. Claudius Caecus, 535.
Ap. Claudius Crassus (mil. tr. 403
B . C ) , 607, 631, 634, 673, 738.
Ap. Claudius Inregillensis (cos. 471
B.C.), 376, 476-89, 503-4.
C. Claudius Inregillensis (cos. 460
B.C.), 423, 508.
Q.Claudius Quadrigarius, 736, 738.
Attius Glausus (Appius Claudius), 274,

600-1.

M. Antonius Greticus, 412.

T. Antonius Merenda, 462.
G. Apronius (tr. pi. 449 B . C ) , 496.
L. Ap(p)uleius, 699.
L. Apuleius Saturninus (tr. pi. 103
B . C ) , 699.
Aquilii, 242, 243.
C. Aquillius Gall us, 242.
Aristodemus, 291, 321.
81443d

291.
G

754

INDEX I

Cloelia, 267 ff.; ? statue of, 268.

Gloclia gens, 123.
Gracchus Cloelius, 439.
Aequus Cluilius, 439, 548.
Tullus Cluilius (Cloelius), 559.
T. Cluilius Siculus (trib. mil. 444
B . C ) , 542.
Cominia gens, 279.
Pontius Cominius, 732.
Postumius Cominius, 279, 327.
Considia gens, 369.
Q. Considius, 368-9.
M \ Cordius Rufus (mon. 46 B.C.), 286.
A. Cornelius (quaestor 459 B . C ) , 437.
Cn. Cornelius Blasio (mon. c. 107
B . C ) , 253.
A. Cornelius Cossus (cos. 428 B . C ) ,
557 ff-, 563"4> 604A. Cornelius Cossus (cos. 413 B . C ) , 611,
617.
Cn. Cornelius Cossus (mil. tr. 414
B . C ) , 617.
Cn. Cornelius Cossus (mil. tr. 407
B.C.), 6 2 1 , 652.

P. Cornelius Cossus (mil. tr. 408 B . C ) ,

617.
P. Cornelius Cossus (mil. tr. 415 B.C.),
608,617.
P. Cornelius Cossus (mil. tr. 395 B . C ) ,
682, 686.
L. Cornelius Maluginensis (cos. 459
B.C.), 433-4, 617, 618.
M. Cornelius Maluginensis (decemvir
450 B . C ) , 462, 617.
M. Cornelius Maluginensis (censor
suff. ?393 B . C ) , 696.
P. Cornelius Maluginensis (mil. tr.
397 B . C ) , 671,686,691.
Ser. Cornelius Maluginensis (cos. 485
B.C.), 437.
P. Cornelius Scipio (mag, eq. 396 B . C ) ,
671, 686.
P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus (cos.
147 B . C ) , 555, 556.
Curiatii, 109, 123, 450.
C. Curiatius (tr. pi. 138 B.C.), 649.
P. Curiatius (tr. pi. 401 B . C ) , 649.
C. Curiatius Philo (cos. 445 B.C) , 528-9.
P. Curiatius Trigeminus (cos. 453
B.C.), 4 5 0 .

M. Curtius, 76.
Mettius Curtius, 76.
C. Curtius Philo (?cos. 445 B.C.), 76,
529L. Decius (tr. pi. 415 B . C ) , 609.
Deldo, 563.
Demaratus, 141.
Dibmede, 579.
Dionysius I of Syracuse, 614, 629.

K. Duilius (?decemvir 450 B . C ) , 461.

M. Duilius (tr. pi. 470 B . C ) , 382, 461.
Cn. Duilius Longus (mil. tr. 399 B . C ) ,
654Egerii, 154.
Elitovius, 714.
Evander, 52, 56, 59.
Fabia gens, 294, 338, 346, 355, 359 ff.,
451 7'6, 730-1.
Cn. Fabius Ambustus (mil. tr. 406
B . C ) , 621, 717.
K. Fabius Ambustus (mil. tr. 404 B.C.),
624,717.
M. Fabius Ambustus, 716.
Q.Fabius Ambustus (mil. tr. 390 B . C ) ,
717C. Fabius Dorsuo, 730 ff.
Q . Fabius Pictor, 178, 716.
Cn. Fabius Vibulanus (cos. 421 B . C ) ,
597-8.
K. Fabius Vibulanus (cos. 485 B . C ) ,
362.
Q . Fabius Vibulanus (cos. 467 B . C ) ,
391-2,4"Q . Fabius Vibulanus (mil. tr. 416
B . C ) , 606, 610, 613.
Faustulus, 49.
Cn. Flavius, 535.
M. Flavoleius, 355.
M. Folius Flaccinator (mil. tr. 433
B . C ) , 573, 604, 726.
Mettius Fufetius, 107, 117-20.
C. Fulcinius, 559.
Furius, also spelled Fusius, 398.
M. Furius Camillus, 626, 630, 631,
672, 673, 678, 686, 693, 727-8, 732,
739 > Scipionic overtones, 670, 671,
677> 679; trial of, 698 ff.
Agrippa Furius Fusus (cos. 446 B . C ) ,
516.
M. Furius Fusus (mil. tr. 403 B.C.), 631.
Agrippa Furius Medullinus (mil. tr.
391 B . C ) , 697.
L. Furius Medullinus (cos. 432 B . C ) ,
5 8 1 , 600, 6 1 1 .

L. Furius Medullinus (cos. 413 B . C ) ,

611, 652-3.
P. Furius Medullinus (cos. 472), 401.
Sp. (or L.) Furius Medullinus (mil. tr.
400 B . C ) , 652.
C. Furius Pacilus (cos. 412 B.C.), 613.
Q . Furius Pacilus (cos. 441 D.C), 494,
55 1 L. Furius Philus (cos. 136 B.C.), 674.
Gegania gens, 123.
M. Geganius Macerinus
B.C.), 516.

(cos. 447

PERSONS
Proculus Geganius Macerinus (cos.
440 B . C ) , 552.
T. Geganius Macerinus (cos. 492
B . C ) , 256.
Genucia gens, 369, 456-7.
Cn. Genucius (tr. pi. 473 B . C ) , 372-3.
T. Genucius (tr. pi. 476 B . C ) , 368-9.
Cn. Genucius Augurinus (mil. tr. 399
B . C ) , 654.
M. Genucius Augurinus (cos. 44 B . C ) ,
528.
Harpagus, 711.
Heraclitus, 449.
Heraclitus of Ephesus, 450.
Ap. Herdonius, 423.
Turnus Herdonius, 199-200.
Lars Herminius (cos. 448 B . C ) , 515.
T. Herminius Aquilinus, 259.
Hermocrates, 450.
Hermodorus, 449.
Hersilia, 73.
Himilco, 689.
Hipparchus, son of Gharmus, 239.
Hippolytus, 193.
Horatia, 114 f.
Horatius Codes, 258-9; statue, 260.
P. Horatius, 109, 114, 116.
M. Horatius Barbatus (cos. 449 B . C ) ,
469.
M. Horatius Pulvillus (cos. 509 B . C ) ,
232, 253.
M. Horatius Pulvillus (cos. 457 B C ) ,
446.
L. Hortensius (tr. pi. 422 B . C ) , 597,
601.
L. Hortensius, 597.
Hostus Hostilius, 77.
'lullus Hostilius, 105-6, 124.
L. Icilius (tr. pi. 456 B.C.), 447.
L. Icilius (tr. pi. 412 B . C ) , 613, 616.
Sp. Icilius (tr. pi. 470 B . C ) , 383.
Inuus, 53.
Julia gens, 123.
Proculus Julius, 84-85.
C.Julius lullus (cos. 482 B . C ) , 350.
C.Julius lullus (mil. tr. 408 B.C.), 617,
696.
L. Julius lullus (mil. trib. 438 B . C ) ,
T 557
L.Julius lullus (mil. tr. 403 B . C ) , 631.
L.Julius lullus (mil. tr. 401 B . C ) , 646.
Vopiscus Julius lullus (?cos. 473 B . C ) ,
371.
C.Julius Mento (cos. 431 B . C ) , 575.
Junia gens, 311.
C.Junius (tr. pi. 423 B . C ) , 594.
L. Junius Brutus, 216, 217, 232.

755

L.Junius Brutus (tr. pi. 493 B . C ) , 311.

M. Junius Pennus, 329.
C. Lacerius, 648.
Laetoria gens, 303.
C. Laetorius, 377.
M. Laetorius, 303.
Sp. Larcius, 229, 259.
T. Larcius, 281-2.
Acca Larentia, 47. 50.
Latinia gens, 327.
T. Latinius, 327.
C. Licinius (tr. pi. 493 B . C ) , 311.
P. Licinius (tr. pi. 493 B.C.), 311.
P. Licinius Calvus (mil. tr. 400 B . C ) ,
652, 660, 666.
P. Licinius Calvus (mil. tr. 396 B.C.),
666 ff.
M. Licinius Crassus, 277.
M. Licinius Crassus (proconsul 29
B.C.), 563.
C. Licinius Macer, 7-12, 543, 570.
T. Livius, life, 1-5; personal comments,
2
4 5 J 322> 3 5 l ; attitude to pro
digies, 404; attitude to religion,
406, 424, 431, 677, 743; attitude to
war, 95, 743; ignorance of Greek,
708, 709, 713, 715; ignorance of law,
478; ignorance of senatorial pro
cedure, 134, 379, 387, 471, 493;
narrative technique, 295, 314-17,
334> 346, 36o> 388, 398, 4">
413, 418, 443, 585, 720; use of
digressions, 626, 700; imitation of
Demosthenes, 517, 590, 650; use of
psychological motivation, 243, 258,
388, 480, 509, 561, 718; interest in
psychology, 295, 398, 463.
Lucretia, 218 ff.
P. Lucretius (?cos. 506 B . C ) , 271.
L. Lucretius Flavus (cos. suff 393
B . C ) , 691.
Hostus Lucretius Tricipitinus (cos.
429 B . C ) , 582.
L. Lucretius Tricipitinus (cos. 462
B . C ) , 410.
Sp. Lucretius Tricipitinus (cos. suff.
509 B . C ) , 228, 229, 232, 253, 254.
L. Maecilius (tr. pi. 470 B . C ) , 382.
Sp. Maecilius (tr. pi. 416 B . C ) , 606.
Sp. Maelius, 550 ff, 555.
Sp. Maelius (tr. pi. 436 B . C ) , 567.
P. Maelius Capitolinus (mil. tr. 400
B . C ) , 652.
Mamilia gens, ig8, 199, 270, 423.
L. Mamilius, 427.
Octavius Mamilius, 198, 286.
Sex. Manilius, 491.
C. Manlius, see A. Manlius Vulso.

756

INDEX I

A. Manlius Gapitolinus (mil. tr. 405

B.C.), 624.
L. Manlius Gapitolinus (cos. 422 B.C.),
597M. Manlius Gapitolinus (cos. 434
B.C.), 571.
M. Manlius Gapitolinus (cos. 392
B.C.), 694, 734.
A. Manlius Torquatus (cos. 241), 94.
T. Manlius Torquatus (cos. 235), 94.
T. Manlius Imperiosus Torquatus
(cos. 347 B.C.), 580.
A. Manlius Vulso (cos. 474 B.C.), 371.
M. Manlius Vulso (mil. tr. 420 B.C.),
600.
P. Manlius Vulso (mil. tr. 400 B.C.), 652.
Ancus Marcius, 125-6.
M. Marcius, 126.
Gn. Marcius Goriolanus, 314-16, 319,
331-2, 334, 336.
G. Marcius Rutilus (cos. 357 B.C.), 126.
M. Menenius (tr. pi. 410 B . C ) , 614.
Agrippa Menenius Lanatus (cos. 503
B.C.), 275, 312 ff.
Agrippa Menenius Lanatus (cos. 439
B.C.), 554.
G. Menenius Lanatus (cos. 452 B.C.),
451L. Menenius Lanatus (cos. 440 B.C.),
552.
M. Valerius Messalla Gorvinus, 229.
M. Metilius (tr. pi. 416 B.C.), 606.
M. Metilius (tr. pi. 401 B.C.), 649.
M. Metilius (tr. pi. 217 B.C.), 606.
Mezentius, 41, 628.
M. Minucius (tr. pi. 401 B.C.), 649.
G. Minucius Augurinus (mon. c.
140 B.C.), 556.
L. Minucius Augurinus (praef. ann. 440
B . C ) , 256, 438, 441, 550, 556.
P. Minucius Augurinus (cos. 492 B . C ) ,
256.
Q . Minucius Esquilinus (cos. 457
B.C.), 445.
M. Minucius Rufus (diet. 217 B . C ) ,
441, 649.
G. Mucius (Gordus Scaevola), 262,
263, 266.
G. Mucius Scaevola (xvvir s.f. 17
B . C ) , 262.
Sp. Naevius Rutulus (mil. tr. 424
B . C ) , 589.
Sp. Nautius, 559.
G. Nautius Rutilus (cos. 411 B.C) 614.
Sp. Nautius Rutilus (mil. tr. 404
B . C ) , 603, 624.
Attus Navius, 150-1.
Q.Navius, 151.
Numa, see Pompilius.

L. Numitorius, 382.
P. Numitorius, 484, 495.
Onomarchus, 660.
Oppia, 349.
Oppia gens, 349,461.
G. Oppius, 461.
M. Oppius, 461, 491.
Sp. Oppius, 461.
Gn. Oppius Gornicinus, 462.
Orgetorix, 504.
Num. Otacilius, 598.
Papiria gens, 147, 238, 615, 725.
M. Papirius Atratinus (? cos. 411
B . C ) , 613-14,615.
M. Papirius Grassus (cos. 441 B . C ) ,
551L. Papirius Cursor (censor 393 B . C ) ,
696.
L. Papirius Mugillanus (? cos. sufF.
444 B.C.), 543.
L. Papirius Mugillanus (cos. 427 B.C.),
5 8 4- . .
M. Papirius Mugillanus (mil. tr. 418
B . C ) , 726.
Q . Petilius Spurinus (praetor 181
B . C ) , 89-90.
G. Papius (tr. pi. 65 B . C ) , 616.
G. Papius (quaestor 409 B . C ) , 616.
Pinarii, 60-61.
L. Pinarius Mamercus (mil. trib. 432
B . C ) , 574.
Poetelii, 461.
? Sex. Pollius (tr.pl. 420 B . C ) , 600-1.
Polydamas, 579.
Pompeius Trogus, 702.
Sex. Pompeius Fostlus, 49.
Numa Pompilius, 88-90, 98-99, 101,
102, 103.

? Sex. Pompilius

(tr. pi. 420 B . C ) ,

600-1.

M. Pomponius (tr. pi. 449 B . C ) , 496.

Q . Pomponius, 691-2.
M. Pomponius Atticus, 565.
M. Pomponius Rufus (mil. tr. 399
B . C ) , 653.
M. Pomponius Rufus, friend of G.
Gracchus, 654.
Ti. Pontificius, 352.
Popilia gens, 653.
M. Popillius Laenas (cos. 359 B . C ) ,
653.
L. Porcius Laeca (mon. c. 104 B . C ) , 373.
Pars Porsenna, 255, 270.
Posidonius, 701, 703, 707.
Postumia, 600, 602.
Postumia gens, 285, 290, 348, 594, 600,
609, 663.
M. Postumius (mil. tr. 403 B . C ) , 631.

PERSONS
A. Postumius Albinus (cos. 99 B.C.),
609.
A. Postumius Albinus (mon. c. 96
B.C.), 286.

A. Postumius Albinus (mon. c. 79

B . C ) , 183.
M. Postumius Albinus (mil. tr. 426
B.C.), 584, 632.
M. Postumius Pyrgensis, 670.
A. Postumius (Albus) Regillensis (cos.
496 B.C), 281-2.
A. Postumius Regillensis (mil. tr. 397
B . C ) , 663.
M. Postumius Regillensis (mil. tr. 414
B.C.), 609 ff.
Sp. Postumius Regillensis (mil. tr.
394 B . C ) , 686.
A. Postumius Tubertus (diet. 431
B . C ) , 572, 576, 579-80.
P. Postumius Tubertus (cos. 505 B.C.),
272.
Potitii, 60-61.
Proca (Silvius), 45.
Volero Publilius (tr. pi. 471 B.C.),
373 fr
Volero Publilius Philo (mil. tr. 399
B.C.), 654.
L. Publilius Vulscus (mil. tr. 400 B.C.),
652.
?Sp. Pullius (tr. pi. 422 B . C ) , 596,
600-1.
Pullius (tr. pi. 248 B.C), 601Pythagoras, alleged books of, 89, 91.

757

Sp. Rutilius Grassus (mil. tr. 417

B . C ) , 606.
G. Scantinius Capitolinus, 502.
P. Scaptius, 523.
L. Scribonius Libo, 546.
Segovesus, 709.
Sempronia, 597.
Sempronia gens, 289, 609.
G. Sempronius Atratinus (cos.
B . C ) , 592, 600 ff.
L. Sempronius Atratinus (? cos.
444 B . C ) , 543.
C. Sempronius Gracchus, 506,
602, 654, 742.
Ti. Sempronius Gracchus, 555,
647.
Ti. Sempronius Longus (cos.

423
suff.
591,
591,
218

B.C.), 592.

Sergia gens, 462.

L. Sergius Fidenas (cos. 437 B . C ) ,
560.
L. Sergius Fidenas (mil. tr. 397 B . C ) ,
663.
M \ Sergius Fidenas (mil. tr. 404 B . C ) ,
624, 649.
M. Sergius Silus, 476.
G. Servilius Ahala, 550-1, 555.
C. Servilius (Structus) Ahala (cos. 427
B . C ) , 583, 603.
G. Servilius Ahala (mil. tr. 408 B . C ) ,
617, 646.
Q. Servilius Fidenas (mil. tr. 402
B . C ) , 644.
P. Servilius Priscus (cos. 463 B . C ) ,
Quinctii, 399-400, 594, 609.
404.
Quinctilii, 123.
Q.Servilius Priscus (cos. 468 B.C), 437.
K. Quinctius, 416-18.
Q. Servilius Priscus (diet. 435 B . C ) ,
T. Quinctius, 441.
568-9, 603, 604.
T. Quinctius Capitolinus (cos. 446
Sp. Servilius Structus (cos. 476 B . C ) ,
B.C.), 516 ff., 543, 579.
367.
L. Quinctius Gincinnatus (cos. suff.
Servius. from Aquinum, 625.
460 B.C.), 417, 420, 428-9, 436, 441.
Servius Romanus, 624.
L. Quinctius Gincinnatus (mil. tr. 438
L. Servius Rufus, 625.
B.C.), 581, 600.
Sestius, also spelled Sextius, 451, 610.
T. Quinctius Cincinnatus Capitolinus
P. Sestius Capitolinus (cos. 452 B . C ) ,
(diet. 380 B . C ) , 444.
45 1 T. Quinctius Poenus (Gincinnatus)
L. Sestius Quirinalis (cos. suff. 23 B.C.),
(cos. 431 B . C ) , 575, 579, 581, 584.
724.
M. Sextius (tr. pi. 414 B . C ) , 610.
M'. Rabuleius, 462.
P. Sextius (quaestor 414 B.C.), 610.
Racilia, 442, 444.
Siccia gens, 382.
Remus, 46-47.
Gn. Siccius, 382.
T. Romilius, 447.
L. Siccius Dentatus, 448, 475-6.
Sicinia gens, 312, 337, 382.
Romulus, 32-33, 46-47, 54> 84-85;
C. Sicinius (tr. pi. 449 B . C ) , 496.
Gamillus as second Romulus, 679.
T. Sicinius (cos. 487 B.C), 337.
Romulus (Silvius), 45.
T. Sicinius (tr. pi. 395 B . C ) , 684.
L. Roscius, 559.
Rutilius, cognomen of Nautii, also spelt C. (or L.) Sicinius Velutus (tr. pi. 493
B . C ) , 311-12.
Rutilus, 408.

758

INDEX I

Q,. Silius (quaestor 409 B.C.), 616.

Silvii, Kings of Alba Longa, 43-45.
A. Spuri . . . (mon. c. 130 B.C.), 596.
? T i . Spurillius (tr. pi. 422 B.C.), 596,
600.
T. Statius, 370.
P. Sulpicius Camerinus (? decemvir
451 B.C.), 415.
Q . Sulpicius Camerinus (cos. 434 B.C.),
571, 604.
Q,. Sulpicius Camerinus (mil. tr. 402
B.C.), 644.
Ser. Sulpicius Camerinus (cos. 500
B.C.), 283.
Ser. Sulpicius Camerinus (cos. 461
B.C.), 415.
Ser. Sulpicius Camerinus (cos. sufF.
393 B.C.), 691.
Q,. Sulpicius Longus (mil. tr. 390 B.C.),
717, 718, 735, 738.
L. Servius Sulpicius Rufus (mon.
c. 43 B.C.), 289.

1O4 fF.
Sp. Tullius, 160.
Ulysses, 579.
Uqnus, 703.
Valeria, 334.
Valeria gens, 250, 321.
Valerius Antias, 12-16, 402.
M'. Valerius (? diet. 501 B.C.), 282.
M. Valerius, 286.
M. Valerius (cos. 505 B.C.), 272, 286,
408.
M. Valerius (aug. 463 B.C.), 408.
P. Valerius, 286.
M'. Valerius Maximus (diet. 494 B.C.),
250, 3 6 , 407M. Valerius Maximus (quaestor 45O
B.C.), 438.
M. Valerius Maximus (mil. tr. 398
B.C.), 658.
M. Valerius Maximus Corvus (cos.
300 B.C.), 232.

Sex. Tampanius, 592-4, 596, 601.

Tampii, 594.
Tanaquil, 143, 144, 161, 209.
Cn. Tar^unies Ruma^, 141, 230.
Tarpeia, 74-75.
Sp. Tarpeius (cos. 454 B.C.), 447-8,
515, 521, 648.
Gaia Tarratia, 245.
Tarquinia, 245.
Tarquinia gens, 141.
L. Tarquinius (mag. eq. 458 B.C.), 442.
Sex. Tarquinius, 207, 209, 230, 288.
Titus Tarquinius, 288.
L. Tarquinius Collatinus, 232, 239, 254.
L. Tarquinius Priscus, 145-6, 161, 187,
284, 702.
L. Tarquinius Superbus, 187, 194 fF.,
199, 204-5, 215, 247 fF., 280, 286-7,
291.

T. Tatius, 72, 81.

Telegonus, 199, 285.
C. Terentilius Harsa, 411-13.
M. Terentius Varro, 6, 701, 750.
Tiberinus (Silvius), 45.
Timagenes, 3-4, 701-2, 707.
Timasitheus, 660, 689, 690.
M. Titinius (tr. pi. 449 B.C.), 496.
L.TitiniusPansa(mil. tr. 400B.C.), 652.
Lars Tolumnius, 558, 621.
C. Trebatius Testa, 502.
L. Trebonius, 516.
Att(i)us Tullius, 326.
(?) C. Tullius (cos. 482 B.C.), 350.
M'. Tullius (cos. 500 B.C.), 283.
Servius Tullius, 156-7. 159-60,680-1;
constitution, 166 fF.; increase of
Rome, 178-9; wall, 179; death,

C. Valerius Potitus (mil. tr. 415 B.C.),

608.
L. Valerius Potitus (cos. 483 B.C.), 343,
401.

L. Valerius Potitus (cos. 449 B.C.),

46O.
L. Valerius Potitus (mil. tr. 414 B.C.),
610, 689, 691, 694, 737.
L. Valerius Publicola (mil. tr. 394
B.C.), 686.
P. Valerius Publicola (cos. sufF. 509
B.C.), 224, 232, 241, 242, 250, 254,

271, 275; cognomen, 253.

Verginia, 454, 476-8.
Verginia gens, 290.
A. Verginius (tr. pi. 461 B.C.), 419.
L. (or D. or A.) Verginius, 479, 495.
Opiter Verginius (cos. sufF. 473 B.C.),
37".
T. Verginius Caelimontanus (cos. 448
B.C.), 515.

L. Verginius Tricostus (cos. 435 B.C.),

568.
L. Verginius Tricostus (mil. tr. 402
B . C ) , 644, 649.
Opiter Verginius Tricostus (cos. 502
B.C.), 277.

T. Verginius Tricostus (cos. 496 B . C ) ,

305.
Vetti Bolani, 609.
Vettius Messius, 578.
Veturia, 334.
Mamurius Veturius, 98, 284.
C. Veturius Cicurinus (cos. 455 B . C ) ,
447, 456.
M. Veturius Crassus (mil. tr. 399
B . C ) , 653.

PERSONS
T. Veturius Gcminus (cos. 462 B.C.),
410, 456.
C. Vetusius Cicurinus (cos. 499 B.C.),
284.
Ap. Villius (tr. pi. 449 B.C.), 496.
P. Villius Tappulus (cos. 199 B.C.), 496.
Vindicius, 241 ff.

759
G. Viscellius (?) Ruga, 311.
C. Visellius Aculeo, 242.
Vitellia gens, 242, 243.
Volumnia gens, 415.
P. Volumnius Amintinus (cos. 461
B.C.), 415.
Vulca, 213.

INDEX II

PLACES AND PEOPLES

(Exclusive of Rome)
Aborigines, 38.
(H)adriaticum mare, 705.
Aedui, 709-10.
Aequi, 129-30, 336, 351, 390, 395-6,
397 398, 425, 435, 436, 438, 439
506, 509, 517, 521, 529, 548, 581-2,
589 627.
Aesis, R. 715.
Aineia, 37-38.
Alba Longa, 43, 120-2, 665.
Albanus lacus, 660; emissarium, 658-9,
672.
Algidus, 396, 407, 529, 614.
Allia, R. 587, 702, 717 ff.
Alps, Julian, 712; Cottian, 712,
Ambarri, 710.
Ameriola, 155.
Antemna, 69.
Antinum, 618.
Antium, 318, 388, 404, 434, 435-6, 618.
Anxur, 622, 641, 644, 651, 664.
Apiolae, 148-9.
Aquinum, 625.
Ardea, 219, 220, 280, 439, 523, 543,
546, 695, 728.
Aricia, 102, 182, 193, 200-1, 269, 280,
523, 703.
Arretium, 620, 705.
Arsia Silva, 248, 249.
Artena, 615.
Arverni, 707, 709.
Athens, supposed embassy to, 449;
relations with Sicily, 580, 614;
plague, 394.
Atria, 704.
Aulerci, 710.
Aurunci, 276.
Avaricum, 715.
Bastarnae, 563.
Bituriges, 707.
Bola, 331, 608.
Boii, 715.
Bovillae, 331.
Brixia, 714.
Caenina, 68.
Gaeno, 388.
Caere, 41, 216, 229, 234, 255, 269, 625,
627, 656, 661, 705, 723, 736, 740.
Gameria, 155, 277, 283.
Gapena, 440, 628, 630, 644, 682, 685.

Gapitulum, 331.
Capua, 580, 591-2, 703.
Carnutes, 710.
Carthage, 580, 614, 674, 689, 711.
Carventum, 614-15, 618, 621.
Casuetani, 614.
Celtae, 707; see also Gauls.
Cenomani, 713.
Girceii, 215, 331, 681, 682-3.
Clusium, 234, 255, 627, 705, 699-700,
714.
Gnidus, 689.
Collatia, 154, 222.
Golumen, 435.
Cora, 276, 280, 627.
Corbio, 287, 331, 332.
Corfinium, 742.
Gorioli, 319, 331, 523.
Gorniculum, 154.
Corsica, 711.
Cortona, 705.
Cremera, 359 ff., 630.
Crustumerium, 68, 284-5.
Cumae, 234, 255, 256, 269 ff., 291, 321,
37! 502, 574 580, 654, 689, 704.
Cures, 79.
Delphi, 458, 664-5; consultation by
Tarquinius Superbus, 216; consulta
tion in 398 B.C., 655, 660-1; offering
by Romans, 689 ff.; supposed source
of lectisterniciy 655.

Dicaearchia, 291.
Ecetrae, 302, 331, 625.
Eneti, 36.
Ephesus, 181-2, 450.
Ere turn, 440.
Etruria, 255, 626 ff, 703 ff.
Euganei, 35.
Falerii, 628, 641, 644, 674, 685-6.
Felsina, 703, 713.
Ferentinae lucus, 200, 280, 329.
Ferentinum, 613, 625.
Feroniae lucus, see Lucus Feroniae.
Ficana, 136.
Ficulea, 155.
Fidenae, 81, 119, 275, 284, 364, 559-60,
569-70, 582-3, 585, 600, 627.
Gabii, 205-6, 209, 731.

PLACES AND
Gauls, 627, 666, 697, 699 ff., 702, 704,
708-15, 716, 719, 720, 727, 728-9,
731* 736, 737Henna, 321, 502.
Hercynei Saltus, 709.
Hermunduli, 135-6.
Hernici, 207, 280, 337, 339-40, 371,
388, 394, 400, 407 5 r 7Illyria, 706.
Inregillum, 274.
Insubres, 713.
Labici, 331, 333, 407, 439, 605-7, 608,
664.
Laevi, 713, 714.
Lanuvium, 283, 439. 578.
Laurentes, 39.
Laurolavinium, 39.
Lavinium, 39, 240-1, 331.
Leontini, 580.
Libui, 714.
Liguria, 714.
Lingones, 715.
Lipari, 660, 689 ff., 704.
Longula, 318, 331.
Lucus Feroniae, 124, 440.
Malitiosa silva, 124.
Mantua, 705.
Massilia, 182, 660, 702, 711-12.
Mediolanium, 712, 713.
Medullia, 155.
Melpum, 712.
Mugilla, 331, 332.
Nepi, 629, 630, 644, 672.
Nomentum, 155, 586.
Norba, 280, 322.
Numicus, R., 41.
Ortona, 350, 625.
Ostia, 138, 139-40, 321, 582.
Pedum, 331, 333.
Perugia, 705.
Phocaea, 711.
Pisaurum, 736.
Poeninum, 715.
Politorium, 136.
Polusca, 318-19, 331.
(Suessa) Pometia, 164, 276, 280, 302.
Populonia, 627, 705.
Praeneste, 285, 359.
Prisci Latini, 45.
Raeti, 706.

PEOPLES

761

Regillum, 274, 663.

Regillus 287; battle of, 281-2, 285 ff.,
663.
Rhegium, 580, 629.
Rusellae, 705.
Sal(l)ues, 711.
Salluvii, 711.
Salui, 711, 713, 714.
Sapienates, 696.
Sapis, R., 696.
Sappinates, see Sapienates.
Satricum, 331, 332, 681, 683.
Saxa Rubra, 364.
Scaptia, 523.
Senones, 709, 715.
Sequani, 710.
Setia, 280, 331.
Sicily, 321; state in 431 B.C., 580; state
in 411 B.C., 614.
Signia, 215, 280, 292.
Sparta, 415, 723.
Spina, 704.
Tarentum, 724.
Tarquinii, 234, 247-8, 269, 630, 656,
664, 704.
Tarracina, see Anxur.
Taurini, 712.
Tellenae, 136.
Tiber, R., 321, 587, 685, 695; floods,
608; prodigies, 653; see also descensio
Tiberina in Index III.
Tolerium, 283, 331, 333, 608.
Tricastini, 710.
Troia, 37.
Tusculum, 198, 279-81, 288. 407, 423,
427, 578, 614-15.
Umbri, 715.
Urvinum Hortense, 597.
Utens, R., 715.
Vecilius, 489.
Veii, 83, 234, 247-8, 351, 359 ff.,
569-70, 582, 585, 589, 622, 625,
626-30, 632, 634, 637, 638, 640,
641, 642, 644, 645, 651, 659, 666,
669 ff., 672, 676, 678, 683, 685, 693,
705, 730, 741 ff.
Velitrae, 308-9.
Veneti, 35-36, 704, 706, 736.
Verona, 714.
Verrugo, 529, 617, 618, 621.
Vetelia, 332.
VetuIonia, 705.
Vindelici, 706.
Volaterrae, 705.

762

INDEX

Volsci, 204-5, 234, 257. 277, 280, 294,

308, 317, 318, 319, 336, 338, 390,
393~4> 396, 4> 438, 439> 5<>6, 509,
517, 521, 529, 546, 548, 592, 618,
622, 627, 651, 681 683.

II

Volsinii, 632, 674, 695.

Voltumnae fanum, 353, 571, 624, 705.
Volturnus, R., see Capua.
Vulci, 630, 705.

INDEX

III

GENERAL
{Including Roman topography)
accensi, 170.
addictio, 4 8 3 .
A d m u r c i a e , 137.
aediles, 406, 5 0 3 , 5 8 3 , 604.
aequare libertatem, R e p u b l i c a n slogan,
448.
A e q u i m a e l i u m , 536.
aerarium, 5 2 1 , 6 1 6 .
aerarium facere, 5 7 3 .
aes equestre, 171, 6 4 3 .
aes grave, 6 2 3 .
aes hordearium, 172. 6 4 3 .
aes rude, 6 2 3 .
aes signatum, 6 2 3 .
age for military service, 508.
ager publicus, 340, 606, 607.
a g r a r i a n laws, 338, 340.
Aius Locutius, 6 9 8 , 7 4 1 .
alter, m e a n i n g of, 4 5 5 .
ampliatio, 602.
ancilia, 100.
A n n a l e s , 6 n. 1, 256, 529, 5 4 3 , 566,
574 577, 6 2 9> 692, 6 9 5 ; m a t e r i a l
from the A n n a l e s , 124, 177-8, 181,
248, 2 5 6 - 7 , 257, 2 7 1 , 275, 279, 282,
284, 285, 294, 302, 3 1 1 , 315, 316,
320, 3 2 1 , 325, 336, 347, 349 350,
359, 367, 3 7 i , 3 8 1 , 3 8 3 , 387, 393,
394, 397, 398, 4 0 1 , 4 0 3 , 404, 405,
407, 4 0 8 , 4 1 1 , 415, 4 2 3 , 434, 436,
445, 446, 4 5 1 , 4 9 5 , 527, 542, 544,
552, 558, 572, 5 8 1 , 582, 5 8 3 , 584,
585, 589, 592, 602, 604, 605, 608,
6 1 3 , 616, 6 2 5 , 6 4 5 , 6 5 1 , 6 5 3 , 664,
682, 689, 690, 694, 697.
annona, 256, 3 2 1 , 552.
antistes, 184.
Apollinare, 513.
Apollo, 5 1 3 ; associated with L a t o n a ,
6 5 6 ; t e m p l e , 574, 5 8 3 , 6 5 5 .
Argei, 104, 258.
armillae, 74, 75.
a r m o u r , hoplite, i n t r o d u c e d , 167, 540,
576.
A r t e m i s , t e m p l e of, at Ephesus, 181.
aspersions on p a r e n t a g e , 161.
Asylum, 6 2 - 6 3 .
A t h e n a , cost of s t a t u e of, 212.
A t r i u m libertatis, 546.
audacia, as a political t e r m , 375.
augurs, 408.
auspices, 5 3 1 - 2 , 5 4 1 , 584.

auxilium, t r i b u n i c i a n , 300, 310, 350,

4 ' 7 , 505.
A v e n t i n e , t h e , 136, 446, 489, 6 9 4 - 5 .
bees, a p p a r i t i o n of, 586.
bona Porsennae, 268.
bona regia, 244.
bos auratus, 5 5 6 - 7 .
burial-customs, 178, 197; of
trates, 7 2 5 .
busla Gallica, 736, 737.

magis

caedes civis indemnati, 506, 567.

C a e l i a n , the, 122.
Caeritum tabulae, 5 7 3 , 740.
Caesar, possible allusions to, 454,
679-80.
Calendar, 95-96.
C a m e n a e , 102.
camillus, 6 3 1 .
campus, see M a r t i u s c a m p u s , T i b e r i n u s
campus.
C a p i t o l i u m , 2 1 1 - 1 2 , 720, 734, 736.
C a p r a e Palus, 8 5 .
career, 139, 506.
carmen triumphale, 4 4 4 - 5 .
C a r m e n t a , 59, 5 8 8 .
Carmentalis, porta, 363-4, 588.
carmina Marciana, 416.
carriages, right of m a t r o n s to ride in,
741.
Casa R o m u l i , 747.
Castor, t e m p l e of, 286, 2 8 8 - 9 , 347
(title), 347 ( d a t e of d e d i c a t i o n ) .
causa liberalis, 4 7 8 , 482.
Celeres, 8 3 ; tribunus celerum, 228.
censorship, 177, 5 4 5 , 5 7 0 ; suffect, 6 9 6 .
census figures, 1 7 7 - 8 .
centuriae, 171, 174; ni quis scivit, 1 7 3 ;
primores a n d posteriores, 150; iuniores et
seniores, 168; praerogativae, 6 6 7 - 8 ; see
also comitia centuriata.
Ceres, t e m p l e of, 256, 2 9 1 , 239, 3 1 1 ,
321, 338-9, 342-4, 4 6 , 52, 503,
654.
c
c
chronological p r o b l e m s , 4 5 5 , 5 6 5 - 6 ,
6
2 9 , 749civitas, 5 2 7 - 8 .
civitates sine suffragio, 740.
classis, classes, 168 ff., 5 8 8 - 9 .
C l a u d i a (tribe), 284, 292.
dementia, 514.

764

INDEX

clientela, 4 7 9 - 8 0 .
cloaca maxima, 2 1 4 ; cf. 747.
Cluilia fossa, 107, 3 3 1 .
C l u s t u m i n a (tribe), 284, 292.
C o d e x Veronensis, inserts s at e n d of
w o r d s , 4 1 0 ; inserts n, 4 7 9 ; inserts
c, 4 2 2 ; inserts -que, 437, 6 9 5 , 7 3 0 ;
omits et, 4 2 2 ; omits se, 4 9 1 , 5 1 1 , 7 2 5 ;
omits initial e, 7 5 2 ; omits final m,
4 2 8 ; interpolates syllables, 4 6 7 ;
shares n o glosses with N , 7 4 4 ;
affects inflates, 5 5 3 , 616, 6 9 6 ; tele
scopes, 410, 4 8 1 , 5 7 3 ; trivializes, 406,
480, 5 1 1 , 5 1 6 ; c o r r u p t s b y assimila
tion, 4 8 4 ; w o r d - o r d e r , 419, 4 2 1 , 430,
437, 467> 475, 476, 5!o> 5*2, 516,
5 J 8 , 5 J 9> 554 57<>> 572, 5 9 1 , 6 4 3 ,
694, 6 9 7 , 729coercitio, 615.
cognomina, 319, 560, 5 6 3 , 569, 6 1 5 . 6 6 3 .
coinage, R o m a n , 6 2 3 .
collegium mercatorum, 304.
colonies, size of, 6 8 3 .
comitia centuriata, 1 7 2 - 5 , 325, 3 8 1 , 497,
667, 6 9 8 , 733, 747.
comitia curiata, 4 0 8 - 9 , 733, 747.
comitia tributa, 310, 3 8 1 , 3 8 5 - 6 , 497,
667, 6 9 2 ; quasi-comitia of a m i n o r i t y
of tribes, 6 0 4 .
C o m i t i u m , 151, 482.
commentarii, 2 3 1 , 535.
conclamatio, 594,
C o n c o r d i a , 346.
condicionem quaerere, 484.
conditor alter, as title, 739.
coniuratio, 362.
consecratio bonorum, 3 4 3 , 500.
consilium domesticum, 328.
consilium . . . virtus, 5 1 1 .
Consualia, 6 6 , 724.
consulship, 2 3 0 - 1 , 5 1 8 - 1 9 , 527.
conubium, 4 5 3 , 477, 5 2 7 - 8 , 537.
co-option of tribunes, 514.
corona aurea, 444, 558.
corona Etrusca, 2 7 3 .
cuniculi, 570, 628, 659, 672.
C u r i a Hostilia, 123.
curiae: R o m u l u s ' creation of,
80;
ceremonies, 117; powers, 4 0 8 - 9 .
curio maximus, 6 0 8 - 9 .
C u r t i u s Lacus, 7 5 - 7 6 , 79.
C y p r i u s vicus, 192.
d a t e of e n t r y into office, 4 0 4 - 5 , 410.
Decernvirate, the, 412, 449 fF., 4 5 1 - 4 ,
4 5 5 , 456, 5 2 1 ; second D e c e m v i r a t e ,
461 ff., 477, 499.
decemviri stlitibus iudicandis, 5 0 1 .
decimation, 385.
d e d i c a t i o n , of temples, 254.

III

deditio, 153-4, 6 8 8 .
deprecatio, 326.
descensio Tiberina, 152, 587.
desertion, military, 579.
deversoria, 202.
devotio, 674, 725.
di manes, 429.
di parentes, see Penates.
di praesdies, 406.
D i a n a Nemorensis, 182, 193, 200, 6 5 7 .
D i a n a , o n A v e n t i n e , 1 8 1 - 3 , 440, 450.
D i a n i u m , 193.
dice, a n c i e n t g a m e s w i t h , 5 5 9 - 6 0 .
dictatorship, 281 fF., 309, 576, 728, 738.
dies Alliensis, 360, 717.
dies Cremerensis, 366.
Diespiter, 112.
Dioscuri, 286, 287, 2 8 8 - 9 .
Dius Fidius, 103.
doliola, 7 2 3 - 4 .
duplicarii, 384.
iiviri aedi dedicandae, 348.
iiviriperduellionis, 114, 3 2 3 - 6 , 339, 3 4 4 .. 5, 369, 370.
iiviri sacris faciundis, 655.
earthquakes, 415.
economic depression at R o m e after
500 B.C., 2 9 3 - 4 , 4 9 7 - 8 , 572.
Egeria, 102.
e m p i r e , a n c i e n t a t t i t u d e to, 6 8 8 - 9 .
E q u i r r i a , 587.
equites, 152; n u m b e r of, 6 4 2 ; dis
m o u n t e d , 286, 288, 5 9 2 ; a t Veii, 6 4 3 ;
census equester, 642.
ergastula, 299.
Esquiline, the, 179.
evocatio, 674 FT., 6 7 7 .
exile, consolations of, 7 4 3 .
exoratio, 674.
fabula, m e a n i n g of, 675.
falsus testis, 326.
familia, 344.
fasces, 62, 2 3 5 - 6 , 2 5 1 , 2 8 1 , 374, 4 6 3 - 4 .
F a u n u s , see Silvanus.
Feriae L a t i n a e , 125, 665.
fetiales, 110-12, 127 fF., 440, 584.
Ficus, see N a v i a , F i c u s ; R u m i n a l i s ,
Ficus.
fidem Quiritium implorare. 300,
Fides, 103.
fines, 369, 4 4 8 , 582, 692, 699.
flamen Dialis, 724, 746.
flamen Quirinalis, 722, 724.
flamines, 97, 722.
F l a m i n i a , P r a t a , 497.
F l a m i n i u s , Circus, 497.
formula census, 546.
fortuna c o n t r a s t e d with virtus, 708.

GENERAL
For tuna inforo Boario, 680.
Fortuna Muliebris, 336.
Fossa, see Cluilia fossa; Quiritium fossa.
fur manifestos, 486.
fustuarium, 640.
Gabinus cinctus, 731.
gaesatae, 716.
geese, 734.
gentes, plebian and Etruscan, 293, 310;
maiores and minores, 147-8, 236;
sacra, 532.
Graecus ritus, 583, 655.
Greek: episodes adapted from Greek
mythology and history:
Alba Longa, 118, 120-1.
Ancus Marcius, 127, 146,
Asylum, 62-63.
Bellovesus, 707.
Camenae, 103.
Consualia, 66.
Coriolanus, 315, 326, 334.
Corioli, 320.
Cremera, 359 ff.
Decemvirate, 453, 457.
Demaratus, 141.
Evander, 52.
Falerii, 688-9.
Hercules and Cacus, 55.
Horatii and Curiatii, 112.
M. Horatius, 254.
L.Junius Brutus, 218.
Lucretia, 219, 221.
Agr. Menenius, 312.
C. Mucius, 262.
Numa, 89, 103.
Numitor, 47.
Pallor and Pavor, 118.
Rome, capture of, 684, 720, 726.
Romulus, 46, 53, 64, 84.
Tanaquil, 144.
Tarpeia, 74-75.
Sex. Tarquinius, 195, 205.
L. Tarquinius Collatinus, 239.
L. Tarquinius Priscus, 143, 151, 161,
162-3.
L. Tarquinius Superbus, 195, 197,
212, 216, 217.

Thalassio, 69.
Lars Tolumnius, 560.
Servius Tullius, 186, 194, 197.
P. Valerius Publicola, 250.
Veii and Troy, 589,620,628,637,663.
Virbius, 193-4.
battle of Regillus, 286 ff., 289.
battle of 509 B.C., 250.
battle of 495 B.C., 302.
battle of 480 B.C., 354.

765

battle of 431 B.C., 579.

battle of 394 B.C., 690.
see also 276, 405.
haruspices, 661.
heads, oracular, 211.
hens, introduced in fourth century
B.C., 734.
Hercules, 656-7, 7 1 0 - n ; at Ara
Maxima, 55-56, 656; associated
with Ceres, 656; Invictus, 656;
Magnus Custos, 656.
hiberna, 633.
hie, corruption of h.d., 644.
hoplite-warfare, 576.
Horatia pila, 116.
Horatiorum sepulcra, 113.
hospitium, 690, 740.
house-construction, ancient, 162.
hunting as military training, 639.
imperator, as title, 679.
imperium, 87, 230-1, 235, 541, 563-4*
611, 615, 636, 725, 733, 735; in
finitum, 412-13; surrender of, 194;
abrogation of, 228-9, 239.
in ius vocatio, 481.
instauratio, 327.
interregnum, 87, 409-10, 471, 599, 611.
Ionian confederacy, 705.
iudicium populi, 325-6, 386.
iugum, 439, 444.
iustae nuptiae, 537.
iustitium, 397.
Janiculum, the, 137.
Janus, 132, 364, 731.
Janus Curiatius, 117.
Janus Geminus, 93-94.
Janus Quirinus, 131-2.
Juno, 674.
Juno Caelestis, 674.
Juno Curitis, 674.
Juno Matuta, 681.
Juno Moneta, 544-5.
Juno Regina, 426, 628, 674, 694-5.
Juno Sororia, 117.
Juppiter, as oak-god, 439.
Juppiter Dapalis, 655.
Juppiter Elicius, 101, 700.
Juppiter Epulo, 655, 745.
Juppiter Feretrius, 70-73, 565.
Juppiter Latiaris, 280, 665.
Juppiter Optimus Maximus, 213, 654,
738> 740, 750; dedication, 253, 745.
Juppiter Pistor, 736.
Juppiter Stator, 75, 78.
Juventas, 750.
, 752.

766

INDEX

land, amount of allocated to settlers,

605, 683, 693.
Latin league, 280, 285, 317, 399-400,
732.
Latona, 656.
laudationes, 387, 734.
law: episodes constructed to illustrate
the provisions of Roman law, 82, 83,
118, 278, 388 (bis), 402, 522, 578,
587, 605, 622, 624.
lectisternium, 655, 657.
lex: data, 449; rogata, 449; sacrata, 313H , 575Lex annalis, 432.
Lex Aternia Tarpeia, 448, 499, 582.
Lex de ambitu (432 B.C.)} 574.

Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex
Lex

Hortensia (287 B.C.), 498.

Ogulnia, 531.
Papiria Julia (430 B.C.), 582.
Porcia, 373.
Publilia, 381.
Publilia (339 B . C ) , 498.
Trebonia, 514, 647.
Valeria (de provocatione 509 B.C.),

252.

Lex Valeria (300 B.C.), 499.

Lex Valeria Horatia (de provocatione
449 B.C.), 499.
Lex Valeria Horatia (de sacrosanctitate
449 B . C ) , 500.
Lex Valeria Horatia (de plebiscitis 499

B.C), 49-9libertas, 233, 235,641.

librifatales, 658.
libri linteiy 544. 55*> 552, 565, 589, 603,
606, 613-14, 631.
libri magistratuum, 543, 565.
libri Sibyllini, see Sibylline books.
lictors, 374.
litterae laureatae, 691.
lituus, 92, 751.
Luceres, 81; see tribes.
lucumones, 142, 705.
ludi Capitolini, 149, 740.
ludi magni, 149, 327.
ludiplebeii, 149, 552.
ludus Troiae, 587.
Lupercalia, 51, 731.
lupi, a Roman slogan, 516.
lustrum condere, 177.
magister equitum, 281.
magister populi, 281.
malaria, 321 ff., 395, 659.
mancipatio, 296-7.
manes, 508-9; see also di manes.
manumission vindicta, 241-2, 246-7.
manus iniectio, 297, 481.
marriage, Roman, 547.
Mars: Nerio Martis, 74.

III

Mars Gradivus, 99.

Martius Campus, 244-5, 364.
Mater Matuta, 680.
Matralia, 680.
Melian dialogue in Thucydides, 8-896.
Mercury, 303, 656.
migrations, reasons for, 700, 708.
militia legitima, 362.
Minucia porticus, 550.
moderatio, 514, 516, 526-7.
modes tia, 514, 526.
Mucia prata, 266.
Mugionia, porta, 77.
Naevia, porta, 262.
navalia, 442.
Navia, ficus, 151.
Neptune, 656.
nexum, 294, 296-8, 303.
Nicomachean edition of Livy: marginal
notes, 473, 549, 585; -que interpo
lated, 365, 647.
nomen and cognomen inverted, 570.
nomen and praenomen inverted, 391.
Nynipharurn aedes, 546.
obituary notices, 320.
optimates and populares. 470.
ovatio, 277.
p. or p =proprium nomen, 208, 270,
458, 528-9.
paedagogi, 687.
Palatine, the 52.
Pan, 52.
Palladium, 745.
TrapaKehevots, commonplaces in, 510.
parens patriae, as title, 739.
parricidium, 114, 325-6, 344-5, 437,
598.
pater patratus, 111.
patres conscripti, 236.
patria potestas, 547, 693.
patriam servare, 671.
patricians, 385-6, 451-2, 536 co-op
tion) ; see also gentes maiores.
pay, military, 622, 637, 643-4, 653.
peculatus, 326, 347, 698.
Penates, 40, 427, 723-4; and diparentes
228; and Dioscuri, 288, 723.
perduellio, 114-15,323~6> 339, 344~5> 6 39plebiscita, 497-9.
plebs, 293-4, 310, 366, 449, 45!-3>
497-8; see also tribunate, secession.
pomerium, 179, 747.
pontifex maximus, 237, 494, 724, 745;
election of, 604.
pontifices, 100-1, 138, 254, 535, 684.
populus, used as equivalent of plebs, 612.
portoria, 258.

767

GENERAL
praeda, 346-7; disposal of, 414, 588.
praefectus annonae, 552.
praefectus urbis, 229, 411.
praeire, 567-8.
praeiudicium, 472.
praetor maximus, 231.
princeps civitatis, 392.
proconsul, 399.
prodigies, public and private, 217, 248,
349,403,415.
provinces, allocation of, 395.
provocation 252, 282, 300, 373, 432, 499.
Publilia (tribe), 653.
Pudicitia Plebeia, 487.
Puteal Libonis, 482.
quaestiones, procedure in, 595, 602;
origin of, 611-12; Manilia, 612;
Postumiana, 611-12.
quaestores, 252, 323-6, 329, 344-5, 437,
598, 616, 698.
Quietis, fanum, 595.
Quinctra prata, 442.
Quirinal, the, 178, 364, 730.
Quirinus, 73, 84, 132, 724; aedes, 568;
Hora Quirini, 73.
Qui rites, 79.
Quiritium fossa, 139.
Ramnes, 80; see tribes.
regia, 216.
rerum repetition 127, 130.
rex sacrorum, 237-8.
right-hand, burnt for perjury, 262.
Rome, earliest settlement, 31-32:
Etruscan, 140-1; Roma quadrata, 751;
sacked by Gauls, 719-20, 751;
rebuilt, 751; eternal, 536, 745;
Romae laudes, 748; disease at, 394-5;
prophecies of fall, 520, 662, 679, 749;
see also 'economic depression'.
rostra, 378.
Ruminalis, ficus, 49.
sacer, 500, 501, 502.
Sacer Mons, 489.
sacra, 532, 723, 745 f.
sacramentum, consular, 226; military,
355.362,431,636.
sacrosanctity, 500, 615.
Salii, 98-99, 167-8.
Salinae, 730.
salt-trade, 138, 257, 359.
sanguinea hasta, 135.
Sapinia (tribe), 696.
Saturn, 290.
Saturnalia, 657.
Scaptia (tribe), 523.
Sceleratus Vicus, 194.
schools at Rome, 480-1, 687.

sea-power, Etruscan, 704.

sea-power, Roman, 640.
secession of the plebs: first, 309 ff.,
447; second, 447, 489, 495~ 6 sedes piorum, 330.
sella curulis, 62, 308.
Semo Sancus, 103, 209.
Senate: under Romulus, 63-64; under
Tarquinius Priscus, 148; in Re
public, 236-7; competence, 198,
475, 57 6 , 584 612; procedure, 134,
200, 300, 305, 468, 471; meetingplace, 568; frequens senatus, 605.
Senatus consultum ultimum, 399.
sententiae, commonplace, illustrated,
108, 159, 187, 188, 190, 225, 243,
254,

3 O 6 > 333,

335.

35^,

380,

39 2 ,

393, 493, 505? 5 2 , 5 2 2 , 524, 534

553, 579, 592, 620, 621, 633, 637,
649-50, 662, 688, 718, 738, 748; used
to introduce episodes, 239, 592, 718,
sex suffragia, 150-1, 171, 667.
sexagenarii de ponte, 552.
Sibylline books, 416, 574, 654-5, 661.
silence, psychological use of, 486.
Silvanus, 248, 250.
slaves, attitude to masters, 635-6;
earliest at Rome, 677.
snake portents, 216.
Sol, 680.
Spes, temple of, 367.
spolia opima, 71-73, 556, 564.
squalor reorum, 386.
statues, earliest at Rome, 559, 596-7.
stipulatio, 297, 485.
stratagems: episodes constructed to
illustrate stratagems, 143, 144-5,
153, 241, 250, 254, 296-8, 373-4,
416-17, 477-8, 486, 494, 506, 547-8.
strena, 735.
sub pellibus habere, 633.
Sublicius pons, 137-8, 258, 364.
suovetaurilia, 177.
supplicationes, 512-13, 679.
sword, as emblem of justice. 738.
Tabernae Novae, 487.
Tarentum, 248.
Tarpeian, the, 210, 733, 735.
templum, 92, 378, 751.
tensae, 726.
Terminus, temple of, 2 1 0 - n , 750.
tessera hospitalis, 560, 690.
T(h)alassio, 69.
Thalassocracics, 704 n. 1.
Tiberina Insula, 245, 364.
Tiberinus Campus, 245.
tigillum sororium, 117.
Tities, 80; see tribes.
toga picta, 725-6.

768

I N D E X III

toga praetexta, 62.

torches, women armed with, 586.
trabea, 164.
Transvectio equorum, 347-8, 587 n.
2.

trees, prophetic, 248; telling to, 439.

tribes, 176, 292-3,604; under Romulus,
80; under Servius, 175; see also
Claudia, Glustumina, Publilia, Scaptia, Tromentina, Voturia.
tribu movere, 573.
tribunal, 482.
tribunate, 294, 309 ff., 325, 353, 366,
373 446, 465> 494 699; co-option,
5*4* 55 J> 647; veto, 539, 599tribunate, consular, 539 ff, 544, 584,
623, 631, 645, 691.
tribunus celerum, 83.
trinundinum, 459, 588.
triumph, 273, 679.
iiiviri a.d.a., 393.
iiiviri coloniae deducendae, 549, 583.
Tromentina (tribe), 693.
tumultus, 604.
Tuscae historiae, 703.
Tuscus vicuSy 269-70.
twelve Etruscan cities, league of, 705.

Twelve Tables, 449-50, 452-3, 477,

481, 486, 499, 501; 506, 507, 521,
527, 582, 598.
Urbius Glivus, 193.
vacationes, 577.
vadimonium, 416 ff., 421.
Velia, 250, 251.
Venus Gloacina, 487.
Venus Equatris, 268.
Vertumnus, 674.
Vesta, 730; temple, 724, 745.
Vestal Virgins, 97-98, 722-4, 745.
Vica Pota, 251-2.
vicarius, 669.
Villa Publica, 570.
vindicatio in libertatem, 483.
vindicatio in servitutem, 482.
Virbius, 193.
vis armata, 225.
vitium, 665.
Volcanalia, 153.
Voturia (tribe), 284.
war, ancient attitude to, 688.
winter-quarters, 633.
wool-making, symbolism of, 222.

INDEX IV

SYNTAX AND STYLE

Carmen style, 101, i n , 112, 115, 124, ne . . . nee = ne . . . neve, 537.
403, 415-16, 660, 664.
nee/ . . . aut . . . neque = necj . . . aut. . .
Military style, 302, 354, 389, 443, 682,
aut, 301.
687.
non modo = non modo non, 535.
Prayer style, 426, 669, 675, 677.
perfect subjunctive (archaic), 93.
potest^ quasi-impersonal, with act. inf.,
atque resumptive, 636.
435Glausulae, 21 n. 1, 264, 335, 389, 414, proxima with gen., 320.
quamvis with indicative, 335.
485, 714, 7I9'.
-que after a short vowel, 320.
coepisse with passive inf., 292, 666.
quoque, position of, 246, 516, 595, 620.
egredior with ace. 507.
repetition,
sacral, 60, 78; unconscious,
-ere and -erunt, 507, 638.
82.
et closing an enumeration of more than
ring construction, 72, 246, 261, 619.
two members, 596.
singular generic, in apposition to plural,
future passive infinitive, 60, 517.
future perfect (archaic), 112.
735.
hie resumptive, 332; connective, 528. sine with subjunctive, 334.
hyperbaton, 58, 162, 459, 666.
sub with ace. and abl., 374.
introductions: type forte . . . turn . . .
tricolon with copula between second
erai, 109, 243, 319, 327, 418, 686;
and third members, 393.
type lucus erat . . . quo . . . eum lucum, ut aut . . . aut uty 303.
103.
-ve: expressing principal disjunction,
is resumptive, 708.
91; expressing subordinate disjunc
ne with imperative, 396.
tion, 30.

814439

3D

INDEX V

LATIN
ad arma, 424.
adaeque, 599.
adclarare, 9 3 .
adeste . . . adeste, 3 7 5 .
aequo Marte, 337.
agitate aures, 389.
alienigenae, 416.
amoliri, 6 7 8 .
apisci, 534arae focique, 692.
arma viri, 334.
at enimvero, 6 4 5 .
at saltem, 78.
augere caelestium numerum, 60.
augustus, 60.
aurora prima, 5 8 .
foflf locatus, 348.
00720 ammo m , 163.
bonum, faustum, felixque, 88.
cadit ira, 335.
cadit spes, 249.
cadunt animi, 389.
cedere nocti, 509.
Celticum, 707.
ciere bellum, 719.
ciere pugnam, 77.
clamor et concursus, 191.
coemptionalis senis, 524.
cognominis, 713.
commilitones, 375.
compar, 67.
compos patriae, 131.
compos praeda, 5 2 2 - 3 .
comprimere, 4 8 .
condicere, 133.
conficere, 522.
confodire, 522.
consciscere, 134.
consentire ( = adsentiri), 134.
convallis, 78.
corio, satisfieri de, 322.
cottidie magis, 420.
crastino die, 377.
cratera, 689.
culpa, 4 8 .
curare corpora, 397.
cuspis, 562.
damnare voti, 6 8 4 .
dare impetum, 287.
decus . . . praesidium, 165-6.
defigere with a b l . , 113.

defluere, 288.
dehinc, 226.
delenimentum, 612.
deme terrorem, 78.
demortuus, 6 9 7 .
deorum benignitate, virtute militum,
describere, discribere, 165.
dicta dedit, 510.
dicto audiens esse, 163, 636.
discedite, 379.
ductu et auspicio, 392.
dum . . . ne, 4 3 3 .

ng.

effrenus, 587.
egens, 249.
ergo ego, 335egregia stirpe, 116.
evidens, 744.
e x c i t u s somno, 5 8 .
expetere, 107.
exposcere pacem, 409.
expugnare, 224.
exsequi, 226.
exsignare, 101.
exsudare, 553.
facesse hinc, 190.
fas (as a n invocation), 130.
fatiloquus, 6 0 .
fecisse videri, 3 7 3 .
felix (of the d e a d ) , 509.
felix arfor, 682.
FERRO, IGNI, quacumque vi possim, 227.
ferro via facienda est, 579.
fidem sequi, 306.
forsan, 486.
fortes bellatores, 6 7 3 .
fortes et felices, 3 6 3 .
fremitus, 389.
fulgent gladii, 113.
fundere etfugare, 307.
gerere rem gladiis, 307.
globus, 357.
gravare, 57.
hodieque = etiam hodie, 6 3 8 .
hodierna luce, 86.
hosticus, 707.
iam satis, 512.
imaginarius, 4 7 4 .
imperitare, n o .
imus, infimus, 184.

LATIN
incensus or infensus ira, 208.
incertus animi, 58.
increpare, 113.
indidem, 687.
indiges, 42.
infensus and infestusy 357, 548.
infit, 108.
infortunium, 202.
ingerere, 389.
ingruere, 675.
inopinatus and necopinatus, 440.
inter tela volantia, 78.
intermiscere, 617.
interpres deum, 60.
intonare, 487.
intutus, 730.
ius fasque, 41.
lacrimae obortae, 224.
liberi (of a single child), 479.
lucescere, 578.
matte, 265.
malum, 610.
meliusest,474.
meminisse horret animus, 329.
metari, 72.
miris modis, 221.
molesbelli,278.
moles mali, 718.
morem gerere, 512.
multa caedes, 579.
multi mortales, 68.
mults saepe, 419.
ne = nae, 646.
ne nunc = nedum nunc, 493.
-ne ut, 532-3.
nectitur dolus, 53-54.
nedum u/, 422.
nimio plus, 329.
numen movere, 210.
ob, 735occidione occidere, 368.
operae est, 662.
operae pretium est audirey 441.
ordines ducere, 375.
os praebere, 591.
otiumterere,221.
pace loquor, 430.
pernox, 690.
perstringit horror, 113.
popule (vocative), i n .
praeceps in volnus abire, 356.
praeda, 302.
praesens, 78.
praestare, 377.
pro deumfidem,518.

procedit, 352.
proceres, 357.
prognatus, 160.
proloqui, 533.
prosecare, 676.
pudet deorum hominumque, 430.
purus, 134.
qua . . . qua, 323.
-que et, 168.
quid ita, 341.
quid si non, 537-8.
quisque = quisquis, 109-10.
quod quoad, 93.
quin = qui-ne (with indicative),
quomodo di volunt, 159.
rapere exta, 676.
rara acies, 357.
redire ad se, 163.
regiones, 92.
reportare for referre, 406.
resupinare, 562.
Romane, cave, 664.
salve parens, 86.
satinsalve,224.
scirelicet,158.
sequius est, 329.
si dis placety 534.
si sciensfallo,355,
sisemel,673.
siris, 131.
somnis, in, 328.
sonitus flammae, 727.
sordere, 575.
sospitare, 86.
spoliari et virgas expediri, 375.
strenuus et fortis, 485, 535.
sublimis abire, 144.
sublimem rapere, 86.
sublustris, 735.
suggillari, 590.
tantisper, 26.
terra marique, 94.
terriculay 646.
tetricus, 91.
turbatores belli, 274.
tuta omnia, 223.
ufcwa (pass.), 739.
unatenore,348.
uf adsolet, 664.
ut fere fit, 188.
f quando, 663.
B*(i) (introducing a prayer), 93.
vacuum . . . facere} 188.

772
vadere, 58.
velitis iubeatis, 187.
veridicusy 60.
vestigia, 224.
victoria dari, 663.
videlicet, 237.

INDEX V
vi viamfaciunt, 594.
viden, videsne, 158.
vinctus somno, 729.
vir, 224.
wcare in partem praedae, 675.
volens propitius, 86.

INDEX VI

A U T H O R S AND PASSAGES
(a) Literary
A n o n . , de Viris Illustribus 14. 6 : 366.
A p p i a n , B.C. 1. 2 1 : 514.
Asconius, in Mil. 31-32 C l a r k : 4 1 8 .
Caesar, B.G. 1. 1. 1: 707.
L . C a l p u r n i u s Piso, fr. 25 P . : 657.
C a t o fr. 58 P . : 280.
Cicero:
pro Balbo 3 2 : 714.
5 3 : 320.
de Domo 1: 385.
1 2 3 - 5 : 343Phil. 9. 4 - 5 : 5 5 8 - 9 .
Tusc. Disp. 3. 8 1 : 6 3 5 .
de Rep. 2. 4 0 : 170.
2. 6 0 : 338.
ad Fam. 9. 2 1 . 2 : 546.
ad Q.F. 1. 1 . 4 : 162.
L. Cincius A l i m e n t u s :
ap. Festus 276 L . : 3 9 9 - 4 0 0 .
ap. A u l . Gell. 16. 4 . 1: 135.
Q . C l a u d i u s Q u a d r i g a r i u s ap. A u l .
Gell. 9. 1 3 : 3 2 3 .
D i o d o r u s Siculus:
n . 6 8 . 7 : 309.
n . 6 8 . 8 : 382.
11. 88. 1: 4 3 8 .
12. 2 3 . 1: 456.
12. 3 1 . 1: 580.
12. 76. 4 : 580.
14. 97. 1: 6 8 6 .
14. 102: 6 9 3 .
14. 117: 736.
Dionysius of H a l i c a r n a s s u s :
3. 29. 7 : 122, 606.
3- 5 6 : 1534. 3 0 : 189.
4. 4 5 . 4 : 2 0 1 .
4. 7 1 : 227.
5. 6 1 : 280, 322.
6. 9 5 : 3176. 9 2 : 320.
7. 6 8 : 328.
8. I 4 ~ 3 6 : 3 3 1 8. 8 9 . 4 : 349.
8. 9 1 . 1: 350.
9- 2 : 350.
9. 6 9 . 2 : 4 1 1 .
10. 2. 4 : 416.
10. 26. 2 : 350.
11. 16. 4 : 472.
12. 9 : 6 5 7 .

E n n i u s 196 V . : 738.
E
~ p i c u r u s , K. A. 3 3 : 6 8 8 .
Festus:
160 L . :
166 L . :
180 L . :
208 L . :
216 L . :
380 L . :
426 L . :
500 L . :

296,
317
339,
476,
28
680,
535,
696,

H o m e r , Iliad:
3. 15 ff.: 286.
4. 220 ff.: 357.
11. 252 ff.: 579.
15- 1-2: 357Horace:
Odes, 3. 30. 8 - 9 : 520.
Sat. 1. 2.^37: 352.
Epist. 1. 5. 4 - 6 : 580.

Justin:
20. 52. 4 - 8 : 702.
24. 4 : 702.
Livy:
7 - 5 - 9 : 540.
10. 22. 1: 3 9 1 .
10. 37. 14: 278.
2 1 . 26. 3 : 7 1 1 .
22. 1. 2 0 : 290.
22. 6. 3 : 562.
24. 5- 5 : 4 6 3 26. 4 8 . 14: 444.
27. 11. 2 : 139.
29. 2. n : 3 9 1 .
30. 1. 9 : 3 9 1 .
30. 10. 12: 3 6 1 .
32. 17. 8 : 307.
33. 8. 6 : 184.
33. 37. 6 : 714.
Lucretius:
1. 2 8 9 : 466.
3. 4 5 1 - 4 : 6 6 8 .
Ovid:
Amores 3. 14: 225.
Fasti 2. 200 ff.: 363 ff.
2. 2 2 3 - 4 : 365.
2. 8 1 1 : 223.
Pausanias, 10. 16. 7 : 689

774
Petronius:
Sat. 124: 587.
Eleg. 28: 486.
Plato:
Phaedo 60 b: 637.
Laws 952 e: 639:
Plautus:
Amph. 212 ff.: 389.
258-9: 154.
Rudens 631: 329.
1269 ff.: I33-4Pliny, N.H.:
18. 15: 556.
33. 45: 172.
34. 13: 698.
Polybius:
2. 17.4: 713.

INDEX

VI

Terence:
Heaut. 281-4: 222.
Phormio 231-3: 119.
Theocritus, Idyll. 15. 28-29: 188.
Thucydides:
1. 13. 6: 711.
2. 7. 2: 580.
6. 104. 2: 712.
Timagenes F 2 Jacoby: 710, 711, 712.
Valerius Antias ap. Pliny, N.H. 28. 15:
211.

Valerius Maximus:
5-8. 2:339.
9 - 9 - 3 : 559Varro, de Ling. Lat.:
5. 81: 541.
5-83: 39 1 6. 7: 218.

3. 22. 11: 318.

Pomponius, Dig. 1. 2. 2. 4: 507.

7. 2 : 218.

Sallust, Hist. 3. 48 M.: 8.

Seneca, de Bene/. 2. 18. 6: 341.
Serenus Sammonicus, ap. Macrobius,
3. 9. 6: 674-5.
Tacitus, Annals, 14. 30. 1: 586.
(*)
C.I.L.:
i 2 . i>P- 55 : 6 o 1 p. 231: 588.
i 2 . 2. 1: 211.

14.3236: 731.
Dessau, I.L.S.:
129: 210.
4318:210.

7-8:92.
7. 105: 296.
Virgil, Aeneid:
2. 241 ff: 675.
2. 486 ff.: 120.
8. 72-73: 260.
9. 186 ff: 263.
9. 590 ff: 354.

1-literary
Oscan Law of Bantia: 176.
. / / . 3 5 ( 1 9 1 1 ) , 149:689.
B.G.U. 611: 386.
Notiz. Scaviy 1928, 392: 658.
Studi e Materiali, 30 (1959), logff.: 289.
Studi Etruscki, 21 (1950), 147 ff.: 704.
Weege, Vase. Camp. Inscr. Ital. 22: 591.

TITI LIVI: AB VRBE

0/ R. s. CONWAY and
Books VI-X. Edited 0/ c. F. WALTERS a
Books XXI-XXV. Edited 0/ c. F. WALTE

I. Books I-V. Edited

H.
Ill.

IV. Books XXVI-XXX. Edited'by s.

K. JOHN

V. Books XXXI-XXXV. Bdited by

A. H. MC

THE GEOGRAPHIC BA

OF GREEK AND ROMA

By

M. CAR Y

FOREIGN CLIENTELAE
By

E. BADIAN

THE ROMAN REVO

By

SIR RON ALD S

GAIUS: A BIOGR
By

A. M. HONOR

OXFORD UNIVER