Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:28:21.437Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prodigy Lists and the Use of the Annales Maximi1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Elizabeth Rawson
Elizabeth Rawson
Affiliation:
New Hall, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is generally supposed that on the publication of the Annales Maximi in the Gracchan period (if not already at some point before their formal publication) historians, or some historians influential on the tradition, eagerly made use of this new source of material. The yearly lists of publicly expiated prodigies in Livy and related authors are usually considered to form the best evidence for this view. For given the elder Gato’s remark about the famines and eclipses of sun and moon recorded on the tabula dealbata which is said to have formed the basis of the published work, and given the only two fragments of the latter dealing with the republican period, that from Cicero recording an eclipse (perhaps of 400 B.C.) and that from Aulus Gellius about lightning striking the statue of Horatius Codes (the date is undetermined but a hostile Etruria is presupposed), no one can doubt that prodigies were indeed to be found in the Annales Maximi. It is of course agreed that the lists given by Livy and others include only an incomplete selection of each year’s prodigia and that they are deformed by repetition and errors. But in fact certain features of these lists suggest, at least, that rewriting and corruptions go pretty deep; even, perhaps, that it was not the Annales Maximi at all from which they were drawn. It is the purpose of this paper to draw attention to these disquieting peculiarities, and to the even more disquieting consequences that follow.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , May 1971 , pp. 158 - 169
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 158 note 2 For recent expressions of this view of the origins of the lists, Händel, P., in Pauly– Wissowa s.v. prodigium (1959);Google ScholarBloch, R.Les Prodiges dans l’Antiquité classique(1963);Google ScholarSchmidt, P. L.Iulius Obsequens und das Probleme der Livius’Epitome (Akad. der Wiss. und Litt.Mainz, 1968Google Scholar). Among more general works note Ogilvie, R., Commentary on Livy 1’–V (1965).Google Scholar

page 158 note 3 H. Peter Historicorum Romanorum Reliquiae: Annales Maximi, test. 1, frags. 1 and 2.

page 158 note 4 See esp. Klotz, A., ‘Cassius Dio zur Geschichte des zweiten punischen Krieges’, Rh. Mus lxxxv (1936), pp. 68and 97 ff.Google Scholar, showing that Livy and Dio select different prodigies from a fuller common source (perhaps Valerius Antias), which was doubtless itself not exhaustive.

page 159 note 1 de Haruspicum Responso, 11–22; 28.–62

page 159 note 2 Livy, 22. 1. 10 and 28. 11. 2; both passages making it quite clear that procuration is regarded as taking place initio veris.

page 159 note 3 Luterbacher, F.,Der Prodigienglaube und Prodigienstil der Römer, 1904.Google Scholar

page 159 note 4 Peter, op. cit., T 2.

page 159 note 5 de Saint-Denis, E., ‘Les Énumérations de prodiges dans l’uvre de Tite-Live’ R. Phil, xvi (1942), pp. 126 ff.Google Scholar

page 159 note 6 Mrs. Henderson, I. M., reviewing P. G. Walsh, Livy: His Historical Aims and Methods (1961) in J.R.S. lii (1962), p. 277Google Scholar, points out that it is most natural to suppose that the tabula was reused each year after being sponged clean; the crucial question is therefore when the information was first transferred to the permanent record of the Annales Maximi.

page 160 note 1 It might be pointed out that he argues (op. cit., p. 415) that the earthquake in the list for 461 is confirmed by the well-known contemporary seismic activity in Greece. But a forger might know of this too.

page 160 note 2 Peter, op. cit., T 2 ( ’ Cicero, de Or. 2. 12.52).

page 160 note 3 See lists tin Luterbacher, op. cit., and in Wülcker, L., Die geschichtliche Entwicklung des Prodigienwesens bei den Römern (1903).Google Scholar

page 161 note 1 Mommsen, Th., Epistola de Romanorum prodigiis ad Ottonerm Jahnium (1853), in Gesammelte Schriften, 7. 168.Google Scholar

page 161 note 2 Livy 27. 37. 6; 39. 22. 5.

page 161 note 3 See analyses in Mommsen and Wülcker, opp. citt.

page 161 note 4 Livy 8. 14. 2:Lanuvinis civitas data sacra-que sua reddita, cum eo ut aedes lucusque Sospitae Iunonis communis Lanuvinis municipibus cum populo Romano esset.

page 162 note 1 Krauss, Franklin B., An Interpretation of the Omens, Portents etc. in Livy, Tacitus, Suetonius, Diss. Philadelphia, 1931.Google Scholar

page 162 note 2 Augurs also were strictly observant of different categories of land; Varro, LL 5. 33 distinguishes in this connection Romanus, Gabinus, peregrinus, hosticus, and incertus.

page 162 note 3 For Gabii see Beloch, , Röm. Gesch., p. 155; for Compsa, p. 589Google Scholar

page 163 note 1 The following non-Roman places are mentioned: Latin colonies’Alba 206; Ariminum 223, 194, 192, 104; Bononia 135; Cales 218; Carseoli 93; Fregellae 211, 203, 93; Hadria 214, 194; Spoletium 214, 91; Setia 204; Suessa 199, 198; Federate or foreign’Aefula 197; Aetna 140, 135, 126; Apulia 214, 133, 93; Ardea 198, 133; Arpi 217, 125; Arretium 198, 108, 96, 93, 92, 91; Bruttii 199; Cephallenia 163, 140; Compsa 213, 154,; faesulae 96, 94, 92; Falerii 217; ager Ferentinus 133;Lacus Fucinus 137; Gabii 214, 176, 163; Gallia 218, 173, 122, 113; Lavinium 137; Lipara islands 126; Lucanie 200, 113, 104, 93; fleet in Macedonia 99; Mantua 214; Marrucini 214; Nuceria 104; ager Perusinus 106; Praeneste 217, 214, 166, 140, 137,117? 93; Rhegium 136, 91; Rhodes 223? Sardinia 217; Sicily 217; island near Sicily 183; Syracuse 177; Teanum Sidicinum 166; Trebula 106, 105, 104; in Tuscis 223, 102; Urbinum 95; in Vestinis 94, 91; Vulsinii 208, 104, 94, 93; Volaterrae 92.

page 163 note 2 See McDonald, A. H., ‘Rome and the Italian Confederation (200–186 B.C.)’, J.R.S. xxxiv (1944), pp. 11 ff.Google Scholar

page 164 note 1 See Bloch, , op. cit., pp. 139 ff.Google Scholar

page 165 note 1 Cicero, de Divinatione, i. 20.

page 165 note 2 See also Weinreich, O., ‘Omina- und Prodigienkataloge im aelteren römischen Epos’, in Studies Presented to D. M. Robinson, 2 (1953), pp. 1147 ffGoogle Scholar

page 165 note 3 Münzer, F., Beiträge zur Quellenkritik der Naturgeschichte des Plinius (1897), 2. 6.Google Scholar

page 166 note 1 Cicero, , de Orat. 2. 12. 52 and de Leg. 1. 2. 6.Google Scholar

page 166 note 2 Geizer, M., ‘Die Glaubwürdigkeit der bei Livius überlieferten Senatsbeschlüsse über rümische Truppenaufgebote’, Hermes lxx (1935), pp. 269 ff.Google Scholar = Kleine Schriften, 3. 220 ff.

page 167 note 1 Klotz, A., Livius und seine Vorgänger (1940).Google Scholar

page 167 note 2 Ciccro, de Orat. 2. 12. 52 = Peter, HR Rel. Annales Maximi, Test. 1.

page 167 note 3 Servius, ad Aen. 1. 373 = idem, Ibid. Test. 2.

page 167 note 4 Livy 8. 40. 5.

page 167 note 5 Cicero, ad Atticum, 13. 30. 2.I follow Shackleton Bailey’s order for these letters, but see now Badian, E., ‘Cicero and the Commission of 146 B.C.’, Hommages àMarcel Renard, 1. 54 (1969).Google Scholar He raises the question whether, since sec. were apparently fairly easily available, the late annalists could forge them wholesale. It seems to me that the answer must be, regrettably, yes.

page 167 note 6 ad Atticum, 13. 32. 3.

page 168 note 1 ad Atticum, 13. 33. 3 (inserting Spurius with Shackleton Bailey; see, contra, Badian).

page 168 note 2 Ibid. 13. 6. 4.

page 168 note 3 Ibid. 13. 4. 1.

page 168 note 4 Brutus, 3. II (written in 46).

page 168 note 5 If we doubt the inclusion of all magistracies, should we also doubt Servius’evidence that the work was in eighty books and called after the pontifex maximus rather than simply designated as great ?

page 168 note 6 Momigliano, A., ‘Some Observations on the Origo Gentis Romanae’, J.R.S. xlvii (1958), pp 56 ff.Google Scholar ? Secondo Contributo alla Storia dei Studi Classici (1960), p. 145Google Scholar; Puccioni, G. ed., Origo Gentis Romanae, 1958.Google Scholar

page 168 note 7 Aulus Gellius 4. 5 = Annales Maximi frag. 4: ea historia de aruspicibus ac de versu isto senario scripta est in annalibus maximis libro undcimo et in Verri Flacci libro primo rerum memoria dignarum. Crake’, J. E. A. useful but rather optimistic article, ‘The Annals of the Pontifex Maximus’, Cl. Phil, xxxv (1940), pp. 375 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar, lists the earlier literature on the subject.