Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T06:37:44.340Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lucreti Poemata and the Poet's Death

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

F. H. Sandbach
F. H. Sandbach
Affiliation:
Trinity College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 54 , Issue 2 , June 1940 , pp. 72 - 77
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1940

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 72 note 1 Helm, R., ‘Hieronymus' Zusatze in Eusebius' Chronik’ (Philologus, Suppl. xxi. 2), 33.Google Scholar

page 73 note 1 See the preceding foot-note.

page 73 note 2 Hermes, 1936, 421.Google Scholar

page 73 note 3 See most recently Naumann, H., ‘Suetons Vergilvita’, Rh. Mus. 1938, 334Google Scholar, who argues that, apart from one or two sentences, the Life is the authentic text of Suetonius' Life of Virgil.

page 73 note 4 Vitae Vergilianae, xi-xii.Google Scholar

page 73 note 1 The life which goes under the name of Philargyrius, an abridgement of Donatus, has a natali suo, but it was either abridged or interpolated from an inferior manuscript of the MEFABP group (cf. Naumann, 335, 374). One might suggest that a natali is derived from na 1 aetatis.

page 73 note 2 Ovid, , Fasti, 3. 771.Google Scholar

page 74 note 1 Privatleben, 130, followed by Regner, J. in P.W. s.v. tirocinium foriGoogle Scholar, and Bliimner, H., Die römischen Privataltertümer, 335 ff.Google Scholar

page 74 note 2 Frag. 127, §§ 8–10 (Jacoby). This evidence does not entirely lose its force because Nicolaus falsely reckons Octavian's age at this time to be still 14. Octavian assumed the toga in October. His predecessor in the pontificate, L. Domitius Ahenobarbus, was killed in August. Was the reason why Octavian did not wait till the Liberalia for his toga that it was desired to take this opportunity of making him a pontifex?

page 74 note 3 ad All. ix. 6. 1, 9. 2, 19. 1;Google Scholarde Officiis, ii. 45;Google Scholarad Fam. xiii. 11. 3.Google Scholar

page 74 note 1 The statement to be met in some works of reference that the age was 14 to 16 seems to be derived from the imperial household. Blümner's remark that the ceremony was usually postponed for imperial persons must be due to oversight, being flatly contrary to the evidence. Of private individuals under the Principate we know that Persius was 16 (v. 30 ff., Vita, § 5), and Marquardt may be right in concluding that Crispinus (Statius, Silvae, v. 2), angustis animus robustior annis, was also 16. The future Emperor Galba, if any reliance is to be put on Dio Cassius' story (56, 29) that he took the toga on the first day of the month in which Augustus died, was 17, provided that ancient authorities are right in agreeing that he died aged 72. But Suetonius inconsistently says that he was born on 24 December 3 B.C., which would make his age 15, approaching 16. This year could have been obtained by reckoning 72 pairs of consuls inclusively from 69, the year of his death, whereas they should have been reckoned exclusively from the year in which he last had a birthday, which in this case happened not to be the same.

page 74 note 2 If aetatis suae is accepted and the ceremony supposed to have taken place in the normal way at the Liberalia, then to accept the statement about the consuls means that we must believe that Virgil took the toga when only 14 years and 5 months.

page 75 note 1 The material to support the view that they were largely obtained by forced interpretation of the poems will be found in the edition by E. Diehl.

page 75 note 2 Σ vulgata add yet another: Lucretius was Virgil's uncle.

page 75 note 3 For theories of the relation of this to what Quintus had said see p. xxxv of Diels's edition and add Bignone, E., Atene e Roma, 1936, 66.Google Scholar On lumina see Sikes, E. E., Lucretius, 38.Google Scholar

page 75 note 1 It is hardly relevant to quote Ovid, , Amores, 1. 15. 23.Google Scholarcarmina sublimis tune sunt peritura Lucreti, for the poets, not averse from poetic plurals, were particularly fond of this one: a single book, as the Culex (3), a poem, as the Coma Berenices (Catull. 65. 16), perhaps even a couplet (Ovid, , Fasti, 2. 568) may be called carmina. Aulus Gellius (1. xxi) tells us that Virgil found the word amaror in carminibus Lucretii. This is more noteworthy, as being in prose, but carmina is not poemata, and Gellius may have been affected by the common poetic use of the word.Google Scholar

page 75 note 2 Examples in Marx, , Lucilius, 2. 129; a similar distinction was made between δίήγηоίς and δίήγημα.Google Scholar

page 75 note 3 338 Marx. tota Ilias una Dousa, totaque ilia summa MSS. Further emendation is uncertain, but the sense seems clear. See also Warmington, E. H., Remains of Old Latin, 3. 126.Google Scholar

page 76 note 1 The reading et proprium numerum is uncertain. The same alternation of poemata and uersus is found in Quintilian, Inst. Oral. 1. 8. 10: ‘denique credamus summis oratoribus qui ueterum poemata uel ad fidem causarum uel ad ornamentum eloquentiae adsumunt… uidemus Enni etc.… inseri uersus.’ Cf. 1. 2. 14. Perhaps the same meaning is to be seen in Cicero, ad Att. 1. 16. 18: ‘quae poemata quasque historias de'αμαλθεία habes ad me mittas’. The poemata might be epigrams, but they might also be extracts from poems, just as the historiae will have been extracts from prose works on mythology.

page 76 note 2 Cf. Comp. Verb. pp. 13, 14, 36, 129Google Scholar, and Demosth. p. 972.Google Scholar

page 76 note 3 Quoted by Blass, F., Hermes, 1895, 314.Google Scholar

page 76 note 4 Cic. ad Fam. 12. 18. 12Google Scholar, Vitruvius 103. 8, Apul. Apol. 5.Google Scholar

page 76 note 1 So F. Bockemüller, p. 5 of his edition of Lucretius.

page 76 note 2 So Schanz, M., Geschichte der römischen Litteratur 3, i. 2. 41Google Scholar. There is only an unintelligible vestigial remain of this view in the revised edition by C. Hosius.

page 76 note 3 Most recently Professor Farrington, B., Modern Quarterly, 1938, p. 216Google Scholar and Science and Politics in the Ancient World, p. 191, finds much significance in the supposed self-contradiction.Google Scholar

page 76 note 4 So much was suggested by F. Bockemüller, loc. cit. It may be observed that Memmius, who is so honorifically mentioned, and the Ciceros were at this time all publicly bound to Caesar, and Marcus was on good enough terms with Memmius three years later (ad Fam. xiii. 1–3).

page 77 note 1 I have disregarded the Vita Borgiana, accepting the usual view that it is a Renaissance fraud. Rostagni, A., ‘Ricerche di biografia lucreziana, II’, Riv.fil. 1939, 113, argues that it contains genuine matter that goes back to Probus. It ascribes Lucretius' birth to 95 and gives him 44 years of life, and therefore does nothing to support the current opinions against which this article is directed.Google Scholar