Historia Augusta Papers

HISTORIA AUGUSTA PAPERS RONALD SYME

CLARENDON PRESS • OXFORD 1983

Oxford University Press, Walton Street, Oxford OX2 6DP London Glasgow New York Toronto Delhi Bombay Calcutta Madras Karachi Kuala Lumpur Singapore Hong Kong Tokyo Nairobi Dar es Salaam Cape Town Melbourne Auckland and associated companies in Beirut Berlin Ibadan Mexico City Nicosia Oxford is a trade mark of Oxford University Press Published in the United States by Oxford University Press, New York © Sir Ronald Syme 1983 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in anyform or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Syme, Ronald, Sir, 1903Historia Augusta papers. Includes index. 1. Scriptoreshistoriae Augustae. 2. RomeHistoriography - Addresses, essays, lectures. 3. Rome - History - Errors, inventions, etc. - Addresses, essays, lectures. 4. Roman emperors - Biography - Addresses, essays, lectures. 5. Rome - History - Empire, 30 B.C. -284 A.D.- Addresses, essays, lectures. I. Title. DG274.S333S991983 93T .01 82-23965 ISBN 0-19-814853-4

Typeset by Oxford Verbatim Limited and printed in Great Britain at the University Press, Oxford by Eric Buckley Printer to the University

PREFACE O n Roman Papers I and II (1979) is to follow before long a third volume covering items published during the decade 1972-81. Various reasons enjoined the segregation of fiteeen pieces devoted to the Historia Augusta. Primacy is accorded to a literary approach, much under neglect from scholars; while historians had been intent on problems of date and purpose imposed by the enigmatic and fraudulent product. This collection is a sequel to three books: Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968); Emperors and Biography (1971); The Historia Augusta. A Call for Clarity (Bonn, 1971). Indeed, the first four of the eighteen chapters in Emperors and Biography were texts reprinted from the Bonn Colloquium. That is also the source often of the fifteen now presented: submitted at meetings held between 1970 and 1981. Much of the same or the similar, it may be said. That happens when expositions of abstruse topics are designed each to be intelligible by itself. Moreover, the revolutionary thesis declared by Hermann Dessau came against resistance long perpetuated. Conviction that the archegete was right all along the line entailed and encouraged a contrary pertinacity. The curious or the erudite may be amused by a statement vouch­ safed in 1973 (Ch. VII, p. 108). Invoking poets (as was suitable to the context), the author announced a desire to renounce and recede. Which might have held, 'ni animus inquies opere pasceretur' - as Livy happened to explain in the preface to one of his late books. Two years passed, and the congenial activity resumed. The present volume reproduces the original texts unaltered, apart from the correction of minor or obvious errors. Additions are con­ fined to internal cross-references in the annotation. For help with proofs I am grateful (and not for the first time) to the friendly offices of Eric Birley, Anthony Birley, Timothy Barnes. The Index, exacting task, was undertaken by Elaine Matthews. . Wolfson College March 11, 1983

R. S.

CONTENTS I.

Fraud and Imposture

1

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

12

III.

Marius Maximus Once Again

30

IV.

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

46

The Ancestry of Constantine

63

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

80

Bogus Authors

98

II.

V. VI. VII.

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

109

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

131

The End of the Marcomanni

146

XI.

Fiction in the Epitomators

156

XII.

More Trouble about Turbo

168

XIII.

Hadrian and Antioch

180

XIV.

Emperors from Etruria

189

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed?

209

BIBLIOGRAPHY

224

VIII. IX. X.

XV.

I Fraud and Imposture* I. Introduction T H E occasion of the present colloquium is felicitous on two counts. It marks the inception of a project that was brought to the notice of the Fondation Hardt about seven years ago, in the design of filling a gap in classical studies: there existed no book on the theme of forgery in Greek and Latin literature. Today we have in our company Dr Speyer, already a known expert in the field, whose large and handsome volume came out this month. 1 The briefest inspection shows it comprehensive, penetrating, impeccable. Indeed, its excellence might appear to render the colloquium superfluous - or at the least to constitute a challenge of abnormal gravity. Speyer's book is not confined to classical antiquity. As is proper, it includes the rich treasures ofJewish and Christian productivity. As in rhetoric and erudition, so in invention and fraudulence, each religion in turn exploited the audacities oiGraecia mendax. And wide perspec­ tives offer. Our investigation will concern definitions and categories, types of fraud and imposture, the various devices that clever rogues have used to simulate the authenticity of a document. For example, the alleged provenience, its accuracy (notably the plausible details, the fabricated names and invented persons). Again, questions of purpose and motive come in all the time, with a further refinement: how far has there been in some instances a serious and sustained effort to deceive. The colloquium itself is devoted to a severely restricted selection of test cases. Yet it should not be solely or primarily directed to segregat­ ing the false and the true. The theme brings up for assessment each and all of the scholarly criteria valid for verification. The following remarks are designed merely to introduce a discus­ sion, the trend and results of which it cannot by the nature of things anticipate. They are general or cursory in character (albeit at the same time condensed) and will allude to a number of themes, aspects and items which are npt expected to turn up in this particular colloquium. * Reprinted from Pseudepigrapha I, Entretiens Tome xviii (Fondation Hardt, 1972), 3ff. 1 W. H. Speyer, Die literarische Fdlschung im heidnischen und christlichen Altertum, Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft i 2 (1971).

2

Fraud and Imposture

II. Parallels in other media They are variously instructive for comparison. First of all, fakes in art and archaeology. 2 Here, as with a manuscript or a map, material and fabric can be put to the test of an advanced laboratory technique, such as that which recently condemned most of the small pottery idols emanating from Hacilar in Anatolia. That may not be necessary when the anachronism is flagrant. For example, the frieze of turkeys superimposed on the wall of a medieval edifice at Schleswig (the American bird had not yet been imported into Europe). Nor did it require much artistic flair to discredit the effigy of Etruscan Diana that stood for many years in the museum at St. Louis. On the other hand, the spurious Vermeers are admirable; and some unpretentious pro­ ducts of skilled workmanship, like the fragments of archaic Greek sculpture made by Dossena, might have baffled suspicion, had there not emerged precise information about the agents who employed and exploited him. Indeed, the detection of a single fake may lead to the discovery of whole factories serving a profitable market. However, all question of profit apart, these branches of forgery will permit entertaining inferences about human motives - the spur of emulation, the aspirations of an unrecognized artist, the artistic delight in deception for its own sake. To this rubric bogus inscriptions stand in close relevance. Of some the original text is not available for scrutiny, only a copy, but others, though preserved on stone or metal, can also be treated as literary texts, since they originated as such. Hence a method independent of the purely epigraphic criteria of material and letter forms. They are liable to betray their nature through style and language, through gross errors or clear anachronisms. And once again the incentive may not be far to seek - the expert's passion and the collector's mania, the desire to extend knowledge. And finally, as elsewhere, sheer exhilaration, and the spirit of mockery. III. Criteria of authentication First of all, doubts may be provoked for external or surface reasons. The general impression may suffice to condemn. That is manifestly the case for Plutarch, Parallela Minora, with its rich equipment of spurious erudition. And it is totally implausible that certain docu­ ments can ever have existed, such as a letter of M. Aurelius to the Roman Senate testifying to the role of Christian soldiers in the Miracle of the Thundering Legion. 2

Useful specimens will be found in O. Kurz, Fakes2 (1967).

Fraud and Imposture

3

In fact, the genre itself often conveys initial suspicion. The prime instance is letters of sages and statesmen. Richard Bentley showed the w a y w h e n he exposed the letters of Phalaris; and in the sequel the fatuity of his opponent, a young nobleman called Boyle, served only to reinforce his axioms. Parallel to letters as a favourite branch of prose fiction were the biographies of those whose lives lacked action or any full and accurate record: that is, poets and philosophers. The suitable line of succession runs towards Lives of Saints and Acta Martyrum (few of the latter genuine or based on genuine documentation). T o compose orations on set themes was normal and indeed neces­ sary practice in the schools of rhetoric. Sometimes the subjects are fictitious and anonymous, but scenes and characters from history had a strong appeal. The alert and scholarly Asconius has a cursory reference to speeches of Catilina and C. Antonius, ostensibly delivered in the electoral contest of 64 BC. Barely worth the mention, he says, for they were written by anti-Ciceronians, the obtrectatores Ciceronis. The notice is valuable for it demonstrates a motive that was more literary than political. Impersonations of this type were called prosopopeiae by Quintilian. He registers the argument we might adduce when suadentes Caesari regnum; and Juvenal in fatigue and disdain alludes to the pack of pupils w h o advise Sulla to give up the dictatorship. An extant specimen of the genre (it may be suggested) is the pair of suasoriae that bear the name of Sallust and the title Epistulae ad Caesarem senem. Letters are not sharply to be distinguished from orations. They were used as exercises in style or asjeux d'esprit. It may be doubted whether authenticity was asserted (or credited) in the Letter of Hannibal to the Athenians published recently in the H a m b u r g Papyri. The amiable habit has persisted into the modern time. In Proust some of his jeunes filles w o n d e r whether ' m o n cher Sophocle' is the proper form for Corneille to employ when addressing the Athenian dramatist. N e x t to the genre, the provenience. For example, when a piece of writing does not belong to the main tradition of an author's corpus. Again, w h e n what is offered purports to be the translation of a missing original. N o r is any confidence inspired by a manuscript said to have been discovered in a library, a temple, or a tomb (the circumstantial details added for plausibility generally help to give the thing away). 3 T h e person w h o guarantees a document is likewise relevant. Any inscription depending on the sole testimony of a notorious forger like Ligorio is suspect. It is only by a rare chance that it can be redeemed and that happens through extraneous confirmation. 3

W. H. Speyer, Bucherjunde in der Glaubenswerbung der Antike (1970).

4

Fraud and Imposture

IV.

Motives

As has been indicated, certain types of writing are prima facie under a cloud. Similarly, when the purpose behind a fabrication is all too patent: a detailed exposure, however seductive to the curious and the erudite, may not always be essential or even possible. First of all, a political purpose. T o compromise an individual, a party, or a government, recourse has been had in every age to the forging of incriminatory material. O n e of the earliest instances may well be the letter which Pausanias the Regent sent to Xerxes, convey­ ing an offer to marry his daughter. It is reproduced by Thucydides and is generally held authentic. N e x t and obviously, national or local pride. When seconded by antiquarian zeal, it is betrayed by its excesses. An inscription 'dis­ covered' beside the river Rubicon in 1525 stood for long years in the marketplace at Cesena: it reproduced a decree of the Roman Senate forbidding any governor, 'sive praeses sive proconsul', to bring an a r m y into Italy. Other copies were reported. The original, however, was already on literary record, in the commentary on Lucan published in 1471. 4 T h e 'Rubicon Decree' may well call to mind the so-called 'Themistocles Decree' found at Troezen. The plea for any kind of authenticity is debilitated by the evidence of other patriotic Athenian d o c u m e n t s which appear to emanate from literary composition. 5 N o r has America failed the challenge of curiosity or fame. T w o palmary exhibits authenticate explorations before Columbus. First, the runic stone at Kensington in Minnesota, disinterred from the roots of a tree: it was set up (it proclaims) by a party of Norsemen in 1362. 6 Second, the Phoenician inscription observed and copied on the coast of Brazil in 1881 (the original is no longer extant): it commemorates the survivors of an expedition despatched by Hiram the King of Tyre, setting out from Eziongebir on the Red Sea. 7 N e x t , fabrications devised to reinforce the claims of a religion or the antiquity of its doctrines. The Hellenistic Age witnessed a plethora of Jewish pseudepigrapha, notably such as were designed to demonstrate that the science and learning of the Greeks was late and derivative. 4

For the whole story see the annotation on CIL xi *30. This estimate of the problem is maintained by C. Habicht, Hermes lxxxix (1967), 356 ff. 6 See now S. E. Morison, The European Discovery of America. The Northern Voyages, A. D. 500-1600 (1971), 74 ff. 7 Authenticity is defended by Cyrus Gordon, an eminent expert in Semitic languages, in Orientalia xxxvii (1968), 75 ff.; 425 ff., and also in his book Before Columbus: Links Between the Old World and Ancient America (1971). 5

Fraud and Imposture

5

T h u s Plato as anticipated by Moses, or Abraham the parent of astronomy. Further and likewise, the need was soon felt for additional documentation about Christian origins. The correspondence between Christ and Abgarus the ruler of Edessa was extracted from the arch­ ives of that city and duly given credit by an ecclesiastical historian (Eusebius). Less pretentious is the anonymous romance that recounts the travels of Paul and his lady companion Thecla, well furnished with suitable edification and plausible inventions. Tertullian knew who had written it, a presbyter in Asia. Late Antiquity produced an exchange of letters between Paul and Seneca which, as Jerome says, 'a plurimis leguntur'. His comment falls short of an expression of belief in authenticity. Jerome was both a g o o d scholar and a master in the art of fiction, as he discloses by his life of Paul, the proto-hermit: that is, the predecessor of Antony, who found him in the wilderness and superintended his obsequies, a pair of lions excavating the grave. The purpose of the letters seems clear e n o u g h , namely to bring into close and amicable relations at an early stage the best of t w o worlds, the Christian saint and the pagan philosopher. For, as Tertullian had said, 'Seneca saepe noster'. Similarly, philosophical sects had fostered the production of pseudepigrapha. T h e purpose was to defend, expound (or even modify) the doctrines of a school or teacher. The most peculiar specimen is perhaps the Pythagorea, originating in southern Italy. The collection appears to contain pieces of different dates. A final motive was the satisfying of curiosity about the lives and early writings of authors w h o subsequently acquired the rank of classics. Hence the circulation of iuvenilia like the Culex which Antiquity without exception believed to be Virgilian; as for Horace, Suetonius reports elegiac verses and a letter to Maecenas. So far so good. The class of writing, its provenience, its motive: any one of these reasons may be enough to justify suspicion and charge the defence with the onus probandi. V. Internal evidence A clear anachronism of fact or language may suffice to condemn, likewise a historical error or grave misconception. When the com­ poser betrays knowledge of future events, his prescience is not easy to explain away. T h e Second Letter of Sallust (in the manuscript order) is assigned by most of its recent champions a date shortly before the outbreak of the Civil War, but its author was inadvertent. He writes under the influence of three assumptions: he knows that war will

6

Fraud and Imposture

come, Caesar will win, Caesar will increase the size of the Roman Senate. Next, the criteria of style and language. Imitation of a later writer can be surmised or detected. The Ciris, it can be maintained, is not an early work of Virgil for it reveals the use of Ovid as well as Virgil. Moreover, the imitation itself may be weak and defective, the whole workmanship incompetent. That is the case with the Culex. Advo­ cates of authenticity must argue that after an unpromising debut the poet made rapid and startling advances. Suetonius, it may be noted, pronounced a summary verdict on the Letter to Maecenas of'Horace'. His reason was stylistic, namely obscurity, 'quo vitio minime tenebatur'. By contrast and by paradox, a skilful performer incurs the risk of imitating all too closely an author with a distinctive idiosyncrasy. Exaggeration of salient features is a common tendency in parody and pastiche. And there is another trap. An impersonator may be repro­ ducing the general manner of an author whose style has changed and developed. There is an early Plato and a late Plato; and if one were to compose a Tacitean pastiche it would be well to decide whether to imitate, for example, the Historiae or to attempt the mature and concentrated manner on show in the first hexad of the Annales. To conclude. It is clearly la bonne solution, la solution elegante, if a fraud collapses on internal evidence, a single item dealing the decisive blow. When that is not possible, cumulation or convergence has to be applied, not without labour and hazard, but sometimes furnishing instruction and delight.

VI. Complications and perplexities When a document is unobjectionable at first sight and cannot be condemned outright for anachronism, inaccuracy, or defects of style, the enquirer runs into trouble. Collections of letters are suspect, but they may include genuine items - which in fact have been the incentive and starting-point for supplementation, sometimes by different hands and at long intervals of time. Most of the Platonic epistles betray their true nature at once, not least Ep. XIII, with its ingenious equipment of 'corroborative details', such as the robes destined for the daughters of Cebes. They shall be Sicilian linen, it is specified, not the expensive fabrics of Amorgos; and the identity of Cebes is conveyed by an allusion to the Phaedo under its alternative title. But Ep. VII continues to divide the experts, evoking arguments of wide range and singular subtlety, as is fitting, for this is a piece of superior workmanship, and

Fraud and Imposture

7

the problem is of paramount importance not only for Platonic studies but for the history of Sicily. N o other collection offers a comparable appeal. Some letters of Apollonius of Tyana were in the possession of the Emperor Hadrian, so Philostratus avers in his biography of the sage. Which may, or may not, be true. As for the extant collection, Ep. LXIII (to the address of Julia D o m n a ) has been admitted by critics almost without exception; and there are curious local details about Samos, for example, that look convincing (Epp. X X X I X f.). N o n e the less, doubt is legitimate. T h e Greek epistles of Brutus, which enjoyed some favour, have n o w been firmly discounted. 8 O n the other hand, as a warning against excess of scepticism, it is salutary to observe that strong reasons have recently been adduced for accepting the letters of Demosthenes. 9 A further problem arises. Astute fabrications blend the false and the true. T h o u g h it be pseudepigraphic, a piece of writing may yet be close to the events it describes or transmit information from good sources no longer extant. With what degree of confidence can it therefore be utilized? Ep. VII, if not by Plato himself, is an apologia for his actions (it is held), composed by a member of the school familiar w i t h the thoughts and motives of the Master. Similarly the Commentariolum Petitionis attributed to Cicero's brother. T o waive the question whether Cicero stood in need of advice from his brother (and that is not perhaps a valid objection), the content of this electioneering manual is far from contemptible. Some who hesitate, or reject the authorship, have nevertheless been tempted to cite the pamphlet as illustrating the practices of political life at Rome. W h e n the whole genre is suspect, the plausible or the unobjection­ able conveys no guarantee. Philostratus' romantic biography men­ tions .(as was natural) a number of historical characters, such as Nerva and the Guard Prefect Casperius Aelianus. But his 'authority' for s u n d r y transactions, namely Damis, is probably bogus; and it is no easy task to separate facts from fiction. Again, the correspondence between Paul and Seneca is in error about the date of the great fire at R o m e , yet some are disposed to accept the total and the categories of buildings then destroyed. Caution is to be prescribed everywhere. Adepts in historical fiction had at their call a multitude of devices. Notably tricks with personal n a m e s . T w o contrasted types are in evidence. The rare name suggests authenticity, the c o m m o n and unobtrusive excites no distrust. A noble lady called 'Falconilla' appears in the Acts of Paul and Thecla: the n a m e is unusual, it adheres to the family of Q . Pompeius Falco (consul 8 9

J. Deininger, RhMcix (1966), 356. J. A. Goldstein, The Letters of Demosthenes (1968).

Fraud and Imposture

8

suffect in 108), which was not u n k n o w n in the province of Asia. 10 By contrast 'Procla' as the procurator's wife in the letter of Pilate to H e r o d : 'Proculus' shows one of the highest frequencies among Roman cognomina. VII.

Definitions

' F o r g e r y ' is no doubt a convenient term. Yet it should now be asked h o w far it is useful or correct. The word exudes an odour of personal guilt and criminal handiwork; the intent is to defraud or at the least to deceive; and notions of legal penalty or redress may not be far distant. Various questions therefore come up. First, who suffers injury from a 'literary forgery', and how can the damage be assessed? When the act is contemporary, no grave problem. Passing one day through the b o o k market at R o m e , Galen noticed that spurious tracts were on sale, bearing his name. In this instance, the purchaser would be victimised. Also Galen, but perhaps less so, for the fraud bore witness to his fame. It is another matter when deceased worthies are impersonated, let alone such as never existed. As concerns names and labels it is a further step when an author, from diffidence or discretion, prefers that his work should circulate a n o n y m o u s or carry a name not his o w n . There is a world of difference between faking for profit and using an innocent pseudonym. All in all, ' i m p o s t u r e ' will often prove a more helpful designation than 'forgery'. N e x t , not all forgeries were made for profit in money or for the benefit of a party, a cause, a nation. The attempt might be made to d r a w a distinction, to seclude fabrications and works of propaganda intended to serve religious or political ends (most Jewish forgeries belong to this type). Finally, a large number of literary impostures in any age have been perpetrated without any serious purpose or hope of deceiving the reader. When for one reason or another an author has chosen to write u n d e r an invented name, the deceit may be mild, venial or temporary; he m a y not be loath to allow the truth to percolate. Most important, a deed of deception may actually be intended to be seen through sooner or later. T h e contriver of a hoax derives a double delectation from his ingenuity. H e fools the reader - and then the reader comes to realize that he has been taken in.

10

His granddaughter Sosia Falconilla is attested by Dessau, ILS 1105.

Fraud and Imposture

9

VIII. Life and letters Investigation into literary imposture leads along many by-paths and t h r o w s up a n u m b e r of entertaining by-products. It also illuminates central territories and the dark regions. First, the psychology of fraud. Imposture has its roots among motives and impulses that lie beneath the decent masks and hypocrisies of normal existence. They range from vanity and conceit to the desire for secrecy or escape, the appeal of playing a false role, the seductions of deceit and mockery, the delight in mendacity for its own pure sake. At the same time, and by contrast, the psychology of faith and belief. M a n y frauds have had a long survival, outlasting the decline of credulity and the advance of critical methods. It would afford a melancholy instruction to classify the attitudes and emotions that refuse to surrender the patently spurious or the totally implausible. T h e y are sometimes conditioned by education, creed and nationality. In the present age defenders have been found of pre-Columbian inscriptions, or the correspondence between Paul and Seneca. Second, the sociology of literary production. Without under­ estimating energy and talent in the individual, it is desirable to insist again and again upon the conditions of time and place and milieu in which the different kinds of writing emerge and flourish. The pathological aspect of the whole subject is literary fraud, precisely. T h e term itself can hardly be applicable before a mature epoch in social development, when the existence of literature as such has come to be recognized: that is to say, books and authorship and a reading public. T h e spurious presupposes the genuine. Therefore fable and legend is extraneous to the theme. T h e faking of history can serve for guidance, with Ctesias as the primordial exhibit. From the royal Persian archives this person produced a whole dynasty of rulers of Media, beginning with 'Arbaces' (whose name is that of a contemporary general). Here the dishonest intention is obvious; and the term 'fictional history' is appropriate, since the art and science of authentic history had already been created. H o w and where a line might be drawn between fictional history and the historical novel is a question. It crops up almost at once with the w o r k of an emulator. Xenophon's Cyropaedia is mostly romance, but the framework and the main characters are historical. It is much to be regretted that no book exists dealing with historical fiction in classical antiquity. T h e genre (if such it deserves to be called) was deliberately excluded from treatment by B. E. Perry in The Ancient Romances

10

Fraud and Imposture

(1967). Whether justly, it might well be asked. And it may be added that modern attempts to provide a definition of the historical novel have not been notably successful. To proceed. When with the process of time literature itself became a subject in the Hellenistic Age, two contrasted phenomena ensued. First, scholars drew up canons of standard authors, they collated texts and devised criteria of authentication. Second, an educated public called for recreational matter. Hence an incentive to fraud as well as fiction; and, when royal libraries were established, clever men could trade upon the ignorance or cupidity of the custodians. Furthermore, the widening of the geographical horizon consequent upon the conquests of Alexander encouraged a plethora of spurious ethnography and Utopian romance. There were various categories. As elsewhere, a distinction might be drawn between the imaginary voyage and the mendacious travel report. Like the former, the latter might be pseudonymous. IX. Erudition The fashions in imposture vary from age to age, but there are constant features or repetitive patterns. When models of classic excellence were imitated by teachers and by their pupils, emulation might lead to impersonation; and the expounders of texts were often vain and unscrupulous. Scholars invented facts and names and authorities, bold and cynical, for, as Quintilian observed on this topic, it is not easy to refute that which never existed. The experts who were examined by Tiberius on Capri about 'Hecuba's mother or what name Achilles assumed when he hid himself among the women' were no doubt equal to the challenge. There were five variants for Hecuba's mother; and, according to Hyginus, Achilles on Scyros bore the name 'Pyrrha'. In Italy of the Renaissance the passionate zeal for Antiquity issued in all manner of fabrications: texts of classical authors, inscriptions, works of art. The arch-impostor was Annius of Viterbo, who com­ posed many fictional histories. He also carried out an excavation at a site well prepared and planted. n An earlier revival of learning and letters may without impropriety be briefly invoked at this point. Towards the end of the Fourth Century certain writers of the imperial epoch were rediscovered after long oblivion. The texts were copied, edited and elucidated (the clearest instance is Juvenal). In the train of erudition entered erudite fraud. To that age (as most would now at last concede) belongs the 11 For erudite imposture in this age see C. Mitchell, 'Archaeology and Romance in Renais­ sance Italy', in Italian Renaissance Studies (cd. E. F.Jacob, I960), 455 ff.

Fraud and Imposture

11

Historia Augusta, a collection of biographies under the labels of six authors w h o purport to be writing in the times of Diocletian and Constantine. T h e H A , which is to be styled an imposture, or even a hoax, rather than a forgery, presupposes for its ingenious author a suitable milieu and reading-public.

II The Composition of the Historia Augusta* I. The student of the Roman Empire cannot do without the HA. For the years 117-284 it is the sole Latin source of any compass. Hence a double challenge. First, to segregate fact from fiction. Second, to ascertain the purpose and date of the enigmatic product. If that were done the result would contribute to understanding another period of imperial history. In the process, in the long controversy that began in 1889 (the epochal year of Hermann Dessau), the literary approach suffered neglect and obscuration. It would have been advisable to start from structure, composition, and authorship. The larger part of the HA is fabrication. If the inventions were put under scrutiny, the path lay open to uncover the manner and methods of the imposture, to deduce a personality - and to divine a purpose, if any. Such was the main argument of the book Ammianus Marcellinus and the Historia Augusta (1968). It was announced in the preface, it was repeated in later pages and elsewhere. The historian Ammianus, given prominence by the title, was in fact chosen as the point of departure. He was adduced for two reasons. First, influences from a single book of Ammianus were surmised in three passages of the HA standing in close propinquity. Influences or inspiration (be it added for clarity), not 'copying' or 'borrowing', but arising from reminiscence and perhaps from a recitation. Second, if that were not to be conceded, Ammianus by resemblance or contrast could still be put to good employ, like Symmachus and Jerome, in order to illustrate life and letters in the season when the HA was written. That is, in the vicinity of 395, that year on so many counts momentous and memorable. Reviewers sometimes fail to pay due attention to express declara­ tions of an author and may prefer to concentrate their effort on what he had in fact stated to be subsidiary. However, let that pass. The long and careful review from the pen of Alan Cameron acknowledges at the outset the primacy of the literary approach.1 Also what follows from * Reprinted fromJRS lxii (1972), 123 ff. A. D. E. Cameron JRS lxi (1971), 254-67.

1

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

13

it. That is welcome, timely, important. No serious design (he agrees) of propaganda for any cause in politics or religion. Moreover, the thing is not properly to be described as a forgery. Rather impersona­ tion, and even a hoax. Indeed, the impostor is not at all loath to be seen through before the end - he lifts the mask gently for a moment in the preface of the Vita Aureliani. The perpetrator of a hoax gains double delectation from the act of deceit. Not, therefore, a 'genuine fraud'. In the beginning Dessau declared 'eine Mystifikation liegt vor\ II. There are further consequences. The true nature of the HA being recognized, the notion of several hands in the composition, or long intervals of time, will appear less and less plausible. Finally, a firm corollary. Once it is seen that the HA is not just bad biography, and dishonest, but something diverse in kind, perhaps to be defined as 'mythistoria' (a term which crops up in the HA and nowhere else in ancient literature), many of the canons that are normally honoured in the assessment of historical writing cease to apply. Two examples are pertinent. First, an earnest enquirer setting out to compose biographies of Septimius Severus and his rivals for the power (Pescennius Niger and Clodius Albinus) might have been impelled to consult the copious narration of Cassius Dio. 2 Observe on the contrary that the imperial biographies which this author was compiling were fuller than he needed. He interrupts the exposition of Severus' life and actions with the words 'quoniam longum est minora persequi' (Sev. 17. 5), and proceeds to give a summary of the whole reign, taken from the epitomator Aurelius Victor (as Dessau discerned, and nobody in the sequel has been able to refute). Again, Herodian: shorter, easier, and more attractive than Dio. Herodian could have supplied some facts about Pescennius. No cer­ tain trace, unless it be the casual item that this person was getting on in years. 3 About Pescennius the author formed a conception all his own, which he developed through lavish and coherent fabrications (see further below). Second, the lost books of Ammianus. This work must have furnished useful and abundant information about emperors of the Third Century. Yet there is no sign that the HA drew upon a source of this order. Instead it used Victor and the source of Victor, namely that 2

Use of Dio is credited by several scholars, and is now argued by F. Kolb, Literarische Beziehungen zwischen Cassius Dio, Herodian und der Historia Augusta (1972). Not accessible at the time of writing. 3 HA Pesc. 5. 1, cf. Herodian ii. 7. 5. The passage in the HA, however, purports to render a verdict of Septimius Severus. Comparison of the context (4. 7) with Clod. Alb. 3. 4 indicates Marius Maximus as the source.

14

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

'Kaisergeschichte', the existence of which Enmann established t h r o u g h concordances with other epitomators. Where lies the expla­ nation? C a m e r o n suggests and argues that those books of Ammianus were not available to the writer - because they had not yet seen the light of day. T h e notion is seductive and worth canvassing for it concerns the date of each work. N o n e the less, hesitation is in place. Published and also accessible, that raises t w o questions about the first part of Ammianus' History. It is better to eschew the unverifiable and stand by a plain fact: the author of the H A is not a historian but a romancer. The best source is no concern of his, he is not after facts, they might only encumber or a n n o y . His delight and his practice goes to creative invention, as exhibited in the so-called 'secondary Vitae\ the biographies of princes and pretenders - which are to be regarded as primary in the author's conception. Therefore the very exiguity of the Latin sources available after 217 or 222 was no impediment, rather an incentive. The author employs t h e m (it may be noted) not merely for a factual framework. He takes up a hint and it becomes an inspiration. O n e example may suffice. Victor, registering the brief usurpation of the ironworker Marius, stated that the famous C. Marius of the ancient days had followed the same profession (which no extant source attests). The alert and artful author took note. He developed the theme, with echoes of Sallust. Marius, a 'vir strenuus', delivers a harangue to the troops, beginning w i t h 'scio, commilitones', and he describes the Romans as a 'ferrata gens'.4 Instances of this type have a wider relevance. If one looks in the H A for traces of the historian Ammianus, the thing to go for (it must be repeated) is not any mere reproduction or direct imitation. By con­ trast, reminiscence (which may be vague and inaccurate), or the associations called up by personal names (often casual, remote or devious). That is to say, the familiar 'science' of source-criticism, as applied to historians or copyists, is in abeyance, or aberrance. The poet and the novelist show the way to understanding. 5 III. T o m o v e towards problems of composition. If all that survived of the H A had been the biographies after Severus Alexander down to the end (that is, by chance and convenience, the second volume in the T e u b n e r edition), the task of analysis and evaluation ought not to have strained the resources of modern scholarship, so it may be supposed. 4 Tyr. trig. 8, cf. Victor 33. 9 ff. For the talent here displayed see Emperors and Biography (1971), 251 f.; The Historia Augusta. A Callfor Clarity (1971), 41 f. 5 Not all critics have taken the point.

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

15

The earlier Vitae import manifold complications. Some offer hope of solution, but others continue to baffle, and even the formulation is not easy or unequivocal. Now that after long neglect the literary approach (sources, structure and authorship) comes into its own, the problems have to be faced - with courage in default of full confidence. Analysis of the early Vitae of emperors disclosed a Latin biographi­ cal source, accurate and sober, that was used as far as Caracalla: abridged, supplemented and revised. The biography of the next ruler, Macrinus, shows a sharp change. It draws on a Greek source, Herodian (who is not named), for most of the few facts; and novel features occur, such as a programmatic preface and new fabrications of several types. One will not lightly conceive that this Latin author turned to a Greek source until he had to. I therefore assumed (and have since offered the full argument) that the basic source of nine imperial biographies as extant (from Hadrian to Caracalla, and including L. Verus) was an Ignotus who terminated at the year 217.6 To be sure, standard opinion in the recent time invokes and exploits a known name, Marius Maximus (cos. II223): known as a writer, but only from the citations in the HA, from Ammianus (XXVIII. 4. 14), and from the scholiast on Juvenal iv. 53 (a collocation not without instruction). The compass of his work is deduced from the Caesares of Ausonius: after verse quatrains describing the 'Twelve Caesars' of Suetonius comes a second set which comprises twelve emperors from Nerva to Elagabalus. The second twelve are generally taken to represent the product of the consular biographer. From which it appears that L. Verus was not accorded separate treatment (but the brief rule of Macrinus earns entry, and with him the total tallies). Cameron is not drawn to the Ignotus. He prefers to stand by Maximus, adducing in support arguments various in cogency.7 The matter is intricate, it cannot suitably be debated in this place, the more so because two ingenious notions are now brought into play. Reviv­ ing a century-old conjecture, Cameron denies that Maximus ever wrote a biography of Macrinus: he chose to discard him as a usurper.8 On the other hand, T. D. Barnes discovers an allusion to Ausonius in the phrase Versus extant cuiusdem poetae' in the Vita Macrini (7. 7): the theme is the 'nomen Antoninorum', traced from its inception with Pius down to the 'sordes ultimas', to Elagabalus, who is here 6

Emperors and Biography (1971), 30 ff. The chapter is reprinted from HAC 1966/7 (1968), 131 ff. 7 On this side see now A. R. Birley, Septimius Seuerus (1971), App. 2. 8 Macrinus, however, has his quatrain in the catalogue of the twelve emperors recorded by Ausonius. The reviewer does not discuss this item.

16

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

designated 'Antoninorum ultimus' (7. 8).9 It was only at this stage in the composition of the HA that the author became aware of Maximus, so Barnes suggests; and Maximus was then put to employ, he is the factual source used in the next imperial biography, that of Elagabalus. 10 IV. So far, in compressed statement, the basic source of the 'Nine Vitae\ as they may for convenience be styled. A laudable preoccupa­ tion with facts needing to be established in the period entailed a no less natural dispraisal of the 'secondary Vitae\ which are all but total fiction. In this context they are to be defined as the biographies of two princes and three pretenders.11 It will be of use to keep in mind the position each occupies in the received text.12 Aelius Caesar follows Hadrian, Cassius is inserted after L. Verus. Pescennius Niger and Clodius Albinus interrupt the sequence of Severus and Caracalla, while Geta is appended to his elder brother. Further, another Vita of this type occurs a little later, the biography of Diadumenianus, the son of Macrinus, put after his father and before Elagabalus. But the son of Maximinus is not allocated a separate book: he is subjoined to his parent in the biography which opens the second half of the HA (as here defined according to the standard edition). If proper attention had been devoted to the genesis of the HA, there was a pertinent question to be raised at least if not to be resolved. In the first place (and clear enough) it should not be assumed that each of the five 'secondary Vitae (Aelius to Geta) was in fact written separately in the immediate sequel to the imperial Vita to which it stands as a pendant. The manner of the writing deters - fluent invention in contrast to hasty and messy compilation. Hence a hypothesis. Since a Latin biographical source ran out with the Vita Caracallae (so it appears), since the next biography of an emperor, that of Macrinus, announces a new turn, the composition of the five 'secondary Vitae1 might be assigned without discomfort to the interval between the two. That hypothesis, first briefly indicated in the book, was expounded in detail not long afterwards. At the same time, 9

T. D. Barnes JRS lvii (1967), 70. T. D. Barnes, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 31; HAC 1970 (1972), 53 ff. For Maximus as the source ofElag. 13-17, R. Syme, Hermes xcvi (1968), 500; Emperors and Biography (1971), 118 ff. Barnes suggests that 'this was the first occasion on which the HA employed Maximus, and the references to him in the earlier vitae were added after the Elagabalus was finished' (o.c. 31 f.). In my theory that operation (along with others) fell earlier, between the Caracalla and the Macrinus. 11 The Vita Veri can no longer be relegated to that category. See the arguments of T. D. Barnes, JRS lvii (1967), 65 ff. 12 The Codex Palatinus exhibits a peculiar order more than once between the biographies of Verus and Severus Alexander. Its 'index' is reproduced on p. ix of Hohl's edition of the HA (1927). 10

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

17

however, I came to conceive dubitations, which were not withheld: might not these biographies belong to a later stage, after the Vita Alexandri?13 For two reasons. First, Alexander had a liking for Hadrian's gamepie, the tetrafarmacum, which Marius Maximus mentions in his biography of that emperor (Alex. 30. 6, cf. Hadr. 21. 4, where Maximus is not named). Now in the Vita Aelii Maximus is cited and corrected: the pie in fact had five ingredients, not four, and Hadrian's heir was the culinary innovator (Ael. 5. 4 f ) . The author thus creates a perverse variant or elaboration, faithful to his fashion. This item might therefore be subsequent to the notice in the Vita Alexandri. However, reflection counsels a counter-doubt. In the Vita Aelii the author is in fact referring expressly to the passage in the Vita Hadriani (21. 4). He says 'de quo genere cibi aliter refert Marius Maximus, non pentefarmacum sed tetrafarmacum appellans, ut et nos ipsi in eius vita persecutisumus' (Ael. 5. 5). Citations of Maximus in'secondary Vitae' sometimes furnish a clue to nameless pieces of Maximus in the 'Nine Vitae9 of emperors. For example, Hadrian's alleged expertise in astrol­ ogy (Hadr. 16. 7; Ael. 3. 9). These pieces, like the named citations, were inserted when the 'Nine Vitae' were revised and supplemented, so I assume and argue. u How then does the matter stand? Composing his Alexander and registering Marius Maximus on the tetrafarmacum, the author (it may be) forgot, or rather chose to neglect, an earlier exhibition of virtuos­ ity in the Vita Aelii. The impostor can be guilty of worse. He cites a document from the Bibliotheca Ulpia and then says that he had not been able to find it (Tac. 8. 1; Prob. 7. 1). Second, the deleterious biographer 'Junius Cordus' whom the author conjured up as a whipping-boy (the word goes back to Mommsen), and referred to in five Vitae. 'Cordus' benefits from a stylized entrance in the preface of the Vita Macrini. But he appeared in one of the 'secondary Vitae\ briefly introduced as 'Aelius Cordus' (Clod. Alb. 5. 10), under which name he recurs once later on (Maximin. 12. 7), soon to revert to 'Junius' (27. 7) and remain so (as far as Max. et Balb. 4. 5). A pretty problem. It would be an attractive notion that the Macrinus is anterior to the Clodius Albinus. Something ought to have been added, as relevant though no proof of any thesis. Rather a contribution to uncertainty. The preface of the Vita Macrini is detachable, as was seen by the sagacious Hohl, who left 13 Emperors and Biography (1971), 64; 71; 75. The chapter is reprinted from MAC 1968/9 (\97i)), 285 ft. See also, later in the book, pp. 87; 282. 14 For Maximus as the source of the scandalous items inserted in the Vita Marci, see Emperors and Biography (1971), 128 ff.; 'Marius Maximus Once Again', HAC 1970 (1972), 287 ff. (below 30 ft.).

18

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

a space after it in his edition. The same holds for the 'prologus' (as the author calls it) of the biography of Aelius Caesar, which repeats and expands what was enounced in the epilogue (7. 4 f.), but is introduced by the invocation of the Emperor Diocletian. Therefore added later. In the next of the 'secondary Vitae' Diocletian is put in the body of the text (Avid. 3 . 3 ) - but the piece is also perhaps detachable. As concerns the Macrinus, there is further food for thought. 'Junius Cordus' happens not to occur in the body of that biography or in those of Macrinus' son, of Elagabalus, of Alexander. A third piece for the dossier has recently been produced by Barnes, that acute investigator into the problems that infest this area. It is the pair of references to the careers of the jurists Ulpian and Paul. The statement in the Vita Pescennii (7. 4) is brief and vague. It might derive from the fuller, but complicated, account in the Vita Alexandri (26. 5 f.). Indeed Barnes concludes firmly that it does. In consequence he puts the composition of the 'secondary Vitae9 subsequent to the Vita Alexandri.15 V. However, by ill fortune or good, there is something more to be said about the Vita Pescennii, and a clear sign that on the contrary it is prior in date to Alexander. The author's design is to embellish the rival of Severus and put him on parade as a military saint and fanatic for discipline, after the type and precedent of his Avidius Cassius. This conception lacks proper warrant in the sources as extant. Yet there may be a faint clue. According to Herodian, suitably vague after his fashion, Pescennius won fame in many transactions of signal conse­ quence. Further, the report went that he was clement and able, that he had modelled his life on that of Pertinax.16 The chance might be admitted that the author took a hint from Herodian's mention of Pertinax, although he neglected to develop the notion with any explicit parallels in his fabulations about the career and habits of Pescennius. In the next (and related) biography, that of Clodius Albinus, Herodian happens to stand on named record as a good authority (12. 14), and he is used in one episode (7. 2-8. 1 ff.). Further, Herodian was to be needed almost at once to supply, abridged, the historical core of the Vita Macrini (8. 3-10. 4). Composing his Pescennius, the author reverts to his leading idea after the biography seemed to reach a suitable and explicit conclusion. The theme appealed, and he had to fill up space. A generous exposition 15 T. D. Barnes, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 35 f. In the paper Three Jurists' published in the same volume I chose to waive the question (ib. 315 = Roman Papers (1979), 796). 16 Herodian ii. 1. 5. Pescennius had in fact earned military credit in Dacia c.185 (Dio lxxiii. 8. i).

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

19

follows (10 ff.). In its course the comportment of Pescennius in the field is depicted with w a r m approbation (11. 1 f.). In allocution to the troops Pescennius affirms on oath that he has always behaved like a simple soldier, and always will, with Marius and other great generals ever before his eyes (11. 3). H e would talk only of Hannibal and his peers (11.4). Finally, when proclaimed Emperor, Pescennius rebuked an importunate panegyrist, urging him to write about the deeds of Marius and Hannibal as incentives to emulation: 'nam viventes laudare inrisio est, maxime imperatores, a quibus speratur, qui timentur, qui praestare publice possunt, qui possunt necare, qui proscribere' (11.6). T h e whole piece coheres admirably, and it terminates on a powerful aphorism disallowing laudations of the living, especially emperors, with sound reasons in support. Observe now the Vita Alexandri: 'oratores et poetas non sibi panegyricos dicentes, quod exemplo Nigri Pescenni stultum ducebat, sed aut orationes recitantes aut facta v e t e r u m canentes libenter audivit' (35. 1). Alexander approves the j u d g m e n t of Pescennius. But this is not any Pescennius known to history or a verdict safely consigned and transmitted to posterity. O n l y the fabricated Pescennius of the Vita. All too often the plain logic of argument is baffled and subverted by the author's caprice and perversity. This time the case seems cogent. The Alexander makes a precise allusion to the Pescennius, which is thus proved anterior; and that biography surely carries with it the partner, the Clodius Albinus. Proof, be it confessed, is seldom a term of ready application in study of the H A , and it runs the risk of turning out premature and infelici­ tous. H o w e v e r that may be, on the present showing no valid reason counsels a placing of the five biographies of princes and pretenders after the writing of the Alexander. Between Caracalla and Macrinus, that hypothesis may be allowed therefore to stand, provisionally. The hypothesis assumed that those biographies were composed about the same time, in a run or a cluster. It might not hold for all of them. The interrelation between 'secondary Vitae and 'primary' is a dire i m b r o g l i o , complicated by a revision, or even revisions, perpetrated o n the basic text of the latter category. 1 7 N o r should the Vita of Macrinus' son be left out of the count. O n a first presumption, it would be written at once as sequel or appendix to that of the parent. A doubt may be conceived. The author may have preferred to go on at this point with his narration of the transactions from 217 to 222, for it was all one story, reinforced by the theme of the ' n o m e n A n t o n i n o r u m ' and the 'ingens desiderium' provoked by the m u r d e r of Caracalla. In fact, three murders form a link, compare Macr. 2. 1: 'occiso ergo Antonino Bassiano'; Elag. 1. 4: 'igitur occiso 17

For a list of seven problems see Emperors and Biography (1971), 52.

20

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

Macrino'; Alex. 1. 1: 'interfecto Vario Heliogabalo'. The minor biography may have been postponed until the completion of the Alexander, though it is contemplated in the Macrinus (10. 6). T h e problems of the 'secondary Vitae may have to be gone into once m o r e . T o enter these bad lands and tread again their treacherous soil is not an exhilarating prospect. For present purposes, enough. Given the large and general problem of the H A , the matter is not central or vital. And the true relevance of the biographies of princes and pretenders is of a different and superior order. They furnish a link forwards to the broad tracts of fiction in the second half of the work. By language, technique, and doctrines they foreshadow the mature m a n n e r of the genial impostor. There ensues a visible and verifiable enhancement in invention and audacity. Hence a clear clue to author­ ship - and to the personality of the author. 1 8 VI. In the recent age a wealth of erudition has been expended on the H A . At least on certain aspects, and notably in the hunt for anachronisms. Eager curiosity or assiduous search would often dis­ inter s o m e promising item, only to be disallowed if not demolished by scepticism or c o m m o n sense. And some topics continued to preoc­ cupy, and to aliment discussion that ended in the sands. O n e specimen affords instruction and entertainment. In the exor­ d i u m of the Vita Aureliani the Prefect of the City invites 'Flavius Vopiscus' (for that is the mask n o w donned by the impostor) to share his c o m p a n y , takes him up into the state carriage, namely the carpentum, and embarks on amicable discourse about biographies of e m p e r o r s . T h e carpentum did not fail to detain and captivate the zealous affection of several scholars: is it admissible for the epoch of Diocletian, or is it not? Intent on that high debate, some of them neglected to notice and exploit a signal revelation. The scene is staged at the carnival season, 'Hilaribus, quibus omnia festa et fieri debere scimus et d i d ' (Aur. 1.1). Masks and disguises were worn at this festival, the highest in the land might be travestied - and it was not at all easy to tell the person from the impersonator. 1 9 O n c e it is seen and conceded that the H A was written later than the year 360, for Aurelius Victor is detected in disparate sections of the w o r k , 2 0 furnishing inspiration as well as facts, the arguments based on anachronisms (or on their absence) forfeit validity and value. Especially such as made heavy appeal to administrative terminology. 2 1 18 19 20 21

Not all critics recognize or concede this evolution in a single author. Herodiani. 10.5. A. Chastagnol, HAC 196617 (1968), 53 ff. Similarly in Rev. phil. xli (1967), 85 ff. Thus A. H. M. Jones JTS, NS xx (1969), 320 f.

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

21

By the same token, and by a shift of emphasis, the literary problem regains its rightful primacy. Few of the warriors in the long warfare had asked the proper questions about the genesis of the HA. 22 It is therefore pleasant and welcome if a new and comprehensive hypothesis be put out. Also, to annex a peculiar locution of the HA, 'rarum atque difficile' (Pesc. 1. 1; Tac. 1.1). Even should the notion run into hazard and dispute it may have something to reveal about composition and authorship. A hypothesis of this order has now been formulated by Cameron. The first of the biographies to be written was the Alexander, he opines. After that the author went on to the end of his enterprise, as far as the year 284. Then he turned back to polish off earlier emperors from Hadrian to Elagabalus, adding biographies of princes and pretenders. That is, seventeen in all. At first sight a solution eminently seductive. It is fresh and novel, it takes its origin from a phenomenon observed in the text itself, not from the familiar theories of erudite disputation, from the old cabbage dished up ever again and the stale gobbets. Briefly as follows. The Vita of Severus Alexander carries five references to Marius Maximus — who, however, did not write a biography of that ruler. Five, among which Cameron puts special emphasis on Hadrian's tetrafarmacum as indicating that this Vita was composed before that of Aelius Caesar.23 Cameron concludes that the first design of the author was to produce a continuation of Maximus from Alexander down to the accession of Diocletian, which design completed, this industrious practitioner went back to the earlier period, he adapted Maximus and also supplemented his output with new biographies. This he was able to do 'without much effort after such virtuoso performances as the Tacitus and the Quadrigae tyrannorum . VII. The next reaction is surprise, and a paradox. On this showing, the first of the biographies is Alexander, the last Elagabalus. Yet the two products appear to belong together, in a single, plain, and explicit design: the evil Syrian emperor matched and compensated by the good. As the author says, 'soles quaerere, Constantine maxime, quid sit quod hominem Syrum et alienigenam talem principem fecerit' (Alex. 65. 1). He duly supplies the answer, which is the epilogue of the book. Not only character, education, and training, but the choice of good ministers and wise counsellors (65-8). The one biography takes its point and meaning from the other, and in fact it names Elagabalus nearly thirty times. Both carry the same 22 23

As pointed out at a late date by Hohl, Wiener Studien lxxi C19581). 152. On which see above, 17.

22

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

label, that of 'Aelius Lampridius' (not that it matters); and, despite marked divergences in technique (various types of invention absent from Elagabalus but proliferating in Alexander), no critic has doubted that they are by the same hand. In the detail, sundry points of close contact offer. Let four only be registered. (1) Elagabalus thinks of creating a praefectus for each region of the city. There would be fourteen of them; and had he lived he would have nominated 'omnes turpissimos et ultimae professionis homines' (20. 3). Alexander appoints 'curatores urbis quattuordecim'. They are to be ex-consuls and act in concert with the praefectus urbi (33. 1). (2) The Emperor Philip's measure against male prostitution is referred to: 'tunc, ante Philippum utpote, licebat' (Elag. 32. 7). That is, briefly and casually, with no indication that the measure was abortive. Alexander, however, proposes to adopt the policy later followed by Philip, but gives it up (Alex. 24. 4). His motives are explained, which happen to correspond with the reasons which Aurelius Victor assigns to the failure of Philip's enactment.24 (3) The expression 'fumum vendere' as signifying the traffic in state secrets or governmental favour. Peculiar in this sense to the HA, it occurs once in the Pius (11. 1), five times in the twin biographies (Elag. 10. 3; 15. 1; Alex. 23. 8; 36. 2; 67. 2). The erudite author lifted the phrase from Martial (iv. 5. 7) and wilfully extended its meaning, so it is conjectured. 25 (4) The second part of the epilogue to the Elagabalus mentions the brief reigns of emperors subsequent to Severus Alexander: 'semestris alii et vix annui et bimi' (35. 2). The next biography also carries the theme, in an expanded version: 'aliis semenstribus, aliis annuis, plerisque per biennium, ad summum per triennium imperantibus' (Alex. 64. 1). VIII. To proceed therefore. In order to impugn the new hypothesis it will be expedient to look for signs which show that the seventeen biographies (Hadrian to Elagabalus inclusive) were in fact composed before the Vita Alexandri and the second half of the HA. Fabrications furnish the main clues. In general, one constates a progression in skill and variety, in audacity and in humour, as the author evolves along with his enterprise and creates his 'persona', which he gaily advertises before the end. The rhetoric also improves - observe orations of senators. And, another matter: as the author goes on he acquires an 24 Victor 28. 7. The consequences for the dating of the HA were first drawn by A. Chastagnol, HAC 1964/5 (1966), 54 ff.; Rev. phil. xli (1967), 95 f. 25 W. Goffart, Class. Phil, lxv (1970), 149 f.

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

23

interest in Roman history, a taste for evidence and procedures of verification. That general theme and thesis about the HA has been expounded elsewhere. It remains in this place to select and register some specific items of argument. Seven will do for the rubric. (1) Pescennius on panegyrics. As demonstrated above, Alexander's agreement with the 'exemplum Nigri Pescennii' (Alex, 35. 1) derives from no source in history. It depends on a coherent piece of fiction with the splendid aphorism 'viventes laudare inrisio est' (Pesc. 11. 6). There is something else. In the sequel the author had not forgotten the role of military saint he contrived for Pescennius. He comes out with 'Pescennia Marcellina' as a suitable name for the mother by adoption of Maximus: an emperor who 'semper virtuti militari et severitati studuit' (Max. etBalb. 5. 6). (2) Recurrent names. Characters from the 'Nine Vitae' of emperors turn up as figments later on. Thus Baebius Macer, praefectus urbi in 117 (Hadr. 5. 5), becomes the praefectus praetorio of'259 (Aur. 13. 1). He also supplies one of the ten bogus instructors of Severus Alexander, viz. 'Baebius Macrianus' (Alex. 3. 3). And Catilius Severus, the 'maternus proavus' of Marcus (Marcus 1.9), recurs as a relative of that prince (Alex. 68. 1). By a similar device, Scaurinus, who taught an emperor (Verus 2. 5), acquires a son in the same profession (Alex. 3. 3), as does Serenus Sammonicus (Carac. 4. 4, cf. Getab. 6; Alex. 30. 2), whose son instructs Gordian II and bequeathes the famous library of 62,000 volumes (Gord. 18. 2). (3) Trajan and 'Homullus'. Giving advice to Constantine in the epilogue of the Alexander, the author enlists a maxim about rulers and their friends which the Emperor has read in Marius Maximus, so he now reminds him (65. 4). It is the comment Homullus made on Trajan's observation about Domitian (65. 5). The identity of this person might inspire legitimate curiosity. To judge by the familiar habits of the impostor, 'Homullus' looks like a figment, not an authentic consular of the reign of Trajan.26 On that showing he owes his existence to a homonym who was named earlier in two anecdotes. Homullus administers a rebuke to Pius (Pius 11. 8); and Valerius Homullus is guilty of an ugly imputation against the mother of Marcus (Marcus 6. 9). The person is the eminent M. Valerius Homullus, the consul of 152. N o w Maximus happens to be cited in the near vicinity of the first anecdote; and the second is patently an accretion on the basic text. Both can be claimed for that biographer.27 The references to Maximus 26 27

Emperors and Biography (1971), 97. ib. 38.

24

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

in the Vita Alexandri are not all of one kind. They call for careful assessment. 28 Another piece of dishonesty is revealing and amusing. After relating a lengthy fable about 'Ovinius Camillus', the con­ scientious author reports that the story is not to be found in the Vita Traiani of Marius Maximus - or for that matter in three other biographies of the emperor (48. 6). The three authors are named, and are bogus. (4) Invocations of Constantine. The Vita Elagabali proffers an explicit report about the relations between author and emperor. At an early point it carries a brief reference to Constantine's veneration for Pius and Marcus, where his ancestry is noted, 'Constantios Claudiosque tuos' (2. 4), but it concludes with a full exposition. An epilogue, or rather a double epilogue (34 f.), the second part of which was added later (no need to suppose much later) as the elaboration of an attractive theme. In the first part, addressing Constantine, the author alludes to the nastiness of Elagabalus, virtuously commends the modesty and restraint of his own narration ('cum multa improba reticuerim'), and goes on to mention rulers who bore the 'nomen Antoninorum' (34). In the second he asserts that he is writing under express injunction from the Emperor, albeit reluctant to take on the task (35. 1). He next proceeds to indicate the later extension of his work, with especial prominence for 'auctor tui generis Claudius' (35. 2). But only the truth about the great ancestor, nor will he wish to be accused of adulation (35. 3). Then further remarks about his project, and his veracity

(35.4ff.). By contrast, the lucubrations in Alexander (65-8). They are pre­ sented without introduction, without any explanation of the 'special relationship' that obtains between patron and client or friend. Which of the two passages was composed first, therefore, appears clear enough on a candid and rational estimate - which, however, is not always applicable to the HA. In passing, but pertinent, a brief remark must be interpolated. Constantine is in fact cursorily mentioned at an earlier stage in the HA: in the body of one 'secondary Vita {Clod. Alb. 4. 2) and at the beginning of another {Geta 1.1). Hence perhaps perplexity and some encouragement for the notion that the biographies of this category were composed after the pair Elagabalus and Alexander. But an instant remedy is available - if credit goes to an affirmation from the author in the 'second epilogue' of Elagabalus. That was not the first Vita to be dedicated to Constantine: 'haec sunt de Heliogabalo, cuius vitam . . . tibi offerri voluisti, cum iam aliorum ante tulerimus' {Elag. 35. 1). 28

See now 'Marius Maximus Once Again', HAC 1970 (1972), 287 ff. Below, 30 ff. Further, the context of the sole reference in the Vita Elagabali (11. 6) suggests that it may well be fraudulent.

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

25

The writer's procedure may perhaps be divined. He hit upon the idea of dedications to Diocletian and to Constantine about the time when the five 'secondary Vitae were being composed and the abridged source of the 'Nine Vitae" was augmented and jollified with useful or scandalous particulars: the three invocations of Diocletian in the latter series of biographies (let it be recalled) all occur in notori­ ously 'bad passages', viz. Marcus 19. 12; Verus 11.4; Sev. 20. 4. For the most part the earlier invocations of the two emperors are short and formal. They do not proclaim or insinuate any personal nexus. Active patronage and a kind of dialogue is a subsequent elaboration, a product of the author's developing impudence. He can now impart counsel to Constantine, with the reminder that he had once been under the domination of eunuchs (Alex. 67. I). 29 To recapitulate. The subject is involved and vexatious. But nothing so far emerges to discountenance the theory that the five 'secondary Vitae' belong in the vicinity of the Vita Macrini.30 (5) 'Iudicia principum'. Letters from an emperor bear witness to the virtues of some future ruler (or even pretender), sometimes at several removes in advance. These testimonials occur in the biographies of Avidius Cassius, Pescennius Niger, Clodius Albinus. The second half of the HA exhibits an enormous advance and a master-stroke of constructive talent. Good emperors are linked and interlocked by various artifices in a long sequence extending from Decius and Valerian to Carus, and beyond, to the Tetrarchy. 31 (6) Four programmatic prefaces. The Macrinus is the first imperial Vita to be thus equipped. Good biography and bad are set in contrast, with 'Junius Cordus' as a horrid example. Later on the author grows bold and free, rising to unexpected heights. First, the craft of history comes under gentle mockery. After discourse on biography with the City Prefect, 'Flavius Vopiscus' comes out with the assertion that the classic historians of Rome should all four be arraigned for manifest mendacity. The Prefect concurs, and 'iocando', incites our friend to write as he pleases, for he will be in good company as a liar: 'habiturus mendaciorum comites quos historicae eloquentiae miramur auctores' (Aur. 2. 2). Next, biographers win the primacy over historians. The latter may practise the high style (the four are again named), but the former tell the truth. They write 'non tarn diserte quam vere' (Prob. 2. 7). Finally, sharp (or comic) censure is passed on Marius Maximus, 'homo omnium verbosissimus, qui et mythistoricis se voluminibus 29

Some scholars once maintained that the 'six biographers' were courtiers. It is perhaps worth stating that the present paper was not written with the design and desire of defending that theory. The enquiry brought out more than I expected. 31 Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 135 f.; Emperors and Biography (1971), 215 ff. 30

26

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

implicavit', while the diligence and accuracy of'Trebellius Pollio' is warmly commended (Quadr. tyr. 1. 2 f.). After which, 'Vopiscus' evokes a debate once held with congenial friends on problems and methods in historical scholarship. Coins were produced, and docu­ ments; and the candid author confesses that he had been in error about the usurper Firmus. It is a melancholy thought that after three such exhibitions of bravura a writer regressed to the preface of the Vita Macrini. (7) The Gordiani. At first the author assumed two emperors of the name. Thus 'duo Gordiani' {Macr. 3. 5) and 'duos Gordianos, patrem et filium' (Diad. 6. 3; Elag. 34. 6); and he proposes to write about them (Elag. 34. 6). That is to say, he followed a version (reproduced in Victor and in Eutropius) which conflated the son of the old proconsul with Gordian HI. In fact, that boy was his grandson, by a daughter. Later on, when the author came to narrate those rulers he rounded on his source: 'Gordiani non, ut quidam imperiti scriptores locuntur, duo sed tres fuerunt' (Gord. 2. 1). That source (it is to be presumed) was Aurelius Victor, for the 'scriptorum imperitia' is again shown up. Those ignorant fellows fancied that the boy Gordian was praefectus praetorio (Max. etBalb. 15. 6, cf. Victor 27. 2). 32 IX. So far the reasons which debilitate the theory that in the original design the HA led off with Severus Alexander, that the author went on to the end before turning back and dealing with the earlier history. More might have been said. To sum up. The argumentation is dual and convergent. First, in general, the superior technique of invention and fantasy displayed in the second half of the work. Second, in detail. A pair of heterogeneous items would perhaps suffice for conviction. The Alexander alludes to the verdict of Pescennius Niger on imperial panegyrics; and the author abandons that error about the Gordiani to which he had previously in all innocence succumbed, not once but three times. The new hypothesis was enunciated at the conclusion of a long and ample review. It operates with the express assumption of a single author and a continuous run of composition. That comes as a surprise, for more reasons than one. 33 In his second paragraph the reviewer said 'I suspect, though would not insist, that there is only one author'. In the first, however, stands the phrase 'the SHA were'; and later on one observes 'our authors' and 'they'. An exacting devotee of Quellenfor32 The author does not confess that he had been taken in himself. He is serious for once. By contrast, the avowal about Firmus in Quadr. tyr. 2. 3 is a joke. 33 The reviewer stated that 'the Historia Augusta as we have it was not all written at the same time, . . . and no theory that it was merits serious consideration' (CR xviii (1968), 18, cf. 20).

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

27

schung, taking heart from what in past years has been done to and with the HA, might be impelled to proclaim different strata, intervals of time, or even multiple authorship. . . . It is therefore expedient to insist once again on an axiom. In dealing with the HA the first call is for clarity. By the same token, given the intricacy of the problems and the vicissitudes in the long controversy, with so many theories perishing, no reproach can adhere to a change of opinion in large things or small, and everything is to be gained by prompt avowals. Of such there have been notable instances in the past, for example the desertions from Dessau to Baynes, but not many can be documented from the serried but insecure ranks of conservative critics and historians. Consecrated in common usage, the term 'Scriptores Historiae Augustae' is tenacious of survival. It offers manifest convenience or refuge to the sceptical, the cautious, the crafty. Likewise the assign­ ment of the work to 'the Fourth Century'. That device evades the problem, to sheer perfection. It covers anything from the last quin­ quennium of Diocletian to the five years following the decease of Theodosius; and it subsumes the most extreme and discordant convictions. There are still classical scholars who maintain both the ostensible date (or rather 'dates') of the HA and the reality of'six biographers'. Others more subtle, by employing the term 'scriptores', imply or advocate a plurality of authors without troubling to specify how many they mean between the limits of two and six. To be sure, some sort of case might have been made out for three or four. Nothing of the kind has been essayed in the recent time. On the other hand, nobody seems to have been tempted to go above six. Why not? 'Julius Capitolinus' might be whipped into service. In the first epoch of the controversy he was called to play a high role by Hermann Peter: not only a veteran biographer reverting to his trade after a long efflux of years, but the man who edited the whole collection late in the reign of Constantine. Nor has faith in 'Capitolinus' yet faded out entirely. 34 The nine biographies that bear the label of'Julius Capitolinus' are heterogeneous products. They range from the sober Pius to Clodius Albinus and the unsatisfactory Macrinus, to end with inventive talent on high show in Maximus et Balbinus. In might not seem too late for an alert critic to resolve sundry perplexities by a bold stroke in the 34 At least the fact that 'Capitolinus' alone of the six cites 'Junius Cordus' is regarded as significant and even mentioned as one of the arguments for plural authorship by Momigliano, EHR lxxxiv (1969), 568; Atti Ace. Torino 103 (1968/9), 435. On which, The Historia Augusta. A Callfor Clarity (1971), 62 ff.; 96 ff.; 105 f.

28

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

conservative interest. 'Capitolinus' could be split into two, possibly three. One method of fission would operate with the dedications to Diocletian and Constantine, three of each. Better, source and value. Four rulers can be segregated, whose Vitae derive from the basic source. Namely Pius, Marcus, Verus, Pertinax. Five biographies are then left to be disposed of somehow. But enough. Operations of this kind are only 'portions and parcels of the dreadful past . . . ' A s Dessau demonstrated, the imperial dedications are a patent fraud; and the first four name-labels (it may be argued) were not devised until the work was well under way. The author now decided to multiply his identity, but the labels were attached without care or discrimination. X. Epilogue The appellation 'SHA' brings no luck to any that use it, as witness the performance in this area of the recent Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire (1971). Suspect names and persons were on parade in the contest from the first days. The editors therefore adopt the practice of designating by emphatic stigmata dubious characters from the HA, also from Acta Martyrum and kindred sources. That is proper and useful, being necessary guidance for the reader. The execution betrays a lack of diligence and principles. A number of characters are left out. For example, one looks in vain for 'Gallus Antipater, ancilla honorum et historicorum dehonestamentum' (Claud. 5.4), dear old Turdulus Gallicanus, the author's helpful friend (Prob. 2. 2), and four of the five 'amatores historiarum' with aristocratic nomenclature who conducted a learned and ingenious debate (Quadr. tyr. 2. 2). Again, the treatment of two ladies masquerading under the names of men. While the Gothic princess 'Hunila' is impugned, no doubts attach to the strong woman 'Samso', previously known as 'Vituriga' (15. 7; 12. 3). Curiosity at once asks how the 'six biographers' will fare in PLRE. The result passes hope or fear or human understanding. 'Aelius Lampridius' is presented without the stigmata. Quite a lot is said about his writings and even his beliefs. For example, 'he refers to Christian-' ity more often and in a less hostile spirit than the other biographers'.35 'Lampridius' is assigned to the earlier part of the Fourth Century. 'Vopiscus', however, is damned, though his products find a date. The phrase 'est quidem iam Constantius imperator' (Aur. 44. 4) is taken to indicate the second ruler of that name, not the first. The discrepancy amounts to over thirty years. 35 The remark is superfluous unless it was intended to convey an opinion about the authorship of the HA.

The Composition of the Historia Augusta

29

Of the ostensible 'six' the remaining four are erased without excuse or explanation from the book of life and learning. Bitter is the fate that excludes 'Vulcatius Gallicanus'. Only one biography to his credit, but he alone bears a title of rank: he is 'v(ir) c(larissimus)'. There is no justice anywhere. The innocent reader is in for a hard time, and salubrious lessons. Error and iniquity may prove beneficial. Anyone who wants certain facts about the HA will have to distrust manuals (even if recent and reputable); and he will be well advised to go slow on bibliography and the 'literature of the subject'. Instead, read the text.

Ill Marius Maximus Once Again* I. Source criticism carries a number of hazards. It may be pursued with inhuman rigour, and it may issue in sterility or extravagance. And strange things can happen when the personal knowledge of a writer is not allowed for, or the distinction ignored between a com­ piler and a historian. However, though methods must vary according to the material, one principle stands firm. The first thing is to delimit a source, to establish its character, value and date. Assigning a name and identity may not be helpful or even possible. Indeed, sometimes a disadvantage. One instance is palmary. Plutarch in his biographies of Galba and Otho reproduces a narrative historian who was also used by Cornelius Tacitus. Several known names have been duly canvassed, with abundant occupation for the erudite and the contentious. It is safer and wiser to put up with an Ignotus. The historian, who emerges unsol­ icited from the Greek biographer, is worth estimating for his own sake as a link in Latin historiography. And better, as a clue by contrast to the procedures of Tacitus and the manifestation of authentic genius. In a later age, when the habit of writing annalistic history had perished long since, a nameless author of a different and modest category was required to explain the concordances between the epitomators Aurelius Victor and Eutropius (to say nothing of the Epitome of Pseudo-Victor, the Breviarium of Festus, and the Chronicle ofJerome). That is, the 'Kaisergeschichte' which Enmann established in 1884. The KG was a necessary postulate, and so it remains. Moreover, this summary and scrappy product was employed here and there in the Historia Augusta. Hence an adventitious benefit or curse, since it came into the controversy about the date of that work. The KG offered a haven of refuge for conservative scholars who refused to admit that the HA drew upon Aurelius Victor (writing in 360). That escape is now blocked. The traces of Victor multiply.1 And, in any case, Enmann's assumption that his KG belonged soon after 284 was in* Reprinted from Bonner HAC 1970 (1972), 287 ft. 1 A. Chastagnol, Rev. phil. xli (1967), 85 ff. And, in a parallel exposition, BonnerHAC 1966/7 (1968), 53 ft.

Marius Maximus Once Again

31

valid, deriving as it did from the ostensible date of the HA, not yet challenged but soon to be demolished. It is not necessary to add that the plausible terminus of the KG is 337.2 II. However that may be, analysis of the early Vitae of emperors in the HA entails and imposes another Ignotus, of some compass and superior in quality. Those biographies go back to a work composed not long after the decease of the latest ruler it presented. Further, its literary type. It was not a history of imperial Rome. The phantom of the 'great annalist', on exhibit for a brief season and by one scholar even equip­ ped with a name (viz. Lollius Urbicus), has lapsed to limbo. Instead, a sequence of biographies. That seems now to stand on general agree­ ment, although so many obvious truths about the HA are either slow to percolate or come against obdurate resistance. Marius Maximus (cos. II223) took up the theme of Suetonius and wrote the lives of the Twelve Caesars from Nerva to Elagabalus: the verse quatrains on those rulers composed by Ausonius (his second series of twelve) offer a valid clue. Named thirty-three times in the HA, Maximus furnishes twenty-six fragmenta to the standard collec­ tion of H. Peter (one more comes from the scholiast on Juvenal IV. 53). No surprise therefore that this biographer was an early favourite. He also retained fanciers after the epochal year of Hermann Dessau had diverted study of the HA into other channels; and the recent time has witnessed a notable increment. Names of weight and import can be summoned up. 3 The sudden revival may well excite curiosity. It is something of a paradox, for scholars abode in peace or contention under the spell of the main problem, for such it seemed, namely the date and purpose of the HA, to the neglect of any literary approach; and, fatigued perhaps with old and barren Quellenforschung, they had turned away from the task of analysing the structure and sources of the earlier Vitae. Marius Maximus is a refuge. Also an assumption. The case was not argued, even by Hohl. 4 III. The basic source can be disengaged without undue effort. How far it went, that is the question. Abridged and mangled, it can be traced as far as the Vita Caracallae. After that, a clear sharp break. It is 2

For the whole question of the KG see now T. D. Barnes, Bonner HAC 1968/9 (1970), 13 ff. For the list, Bonner HAC 1966/7 (\96S) J43 = Emperors and Biography (1971), 45. Similarly in 'Not Marius Maximus', Hermes xcvi (1968), 497 (= Roman Papers (1979), 652). 4 Hohl did not formulate his opinion in the clear and systematic fashion one would have expected. There was room for misunderstandings. Hence the need to clarify-and to rectify. See therefore Emperors and Biography (1971), 122 (in the chapter 'More about Maximus'). For a reasoned statement in support of M. M. see now A. R. Birlcy, Septimius Severus (\91\), App. 2. 3

32

Marius Maximus Once Again

advertised by the next biography, that of Macrinus, with its pro­ grammatic preface. That is a novel feature. New types of invention also emerge in this inferior product. Furthermore, for what it may be worth, the author in his preface described his material as 'diversis historicis eruta' (Macr. 1. 1). Compare, at the end, 'de pluribus collecta' (15. 4). He betrays no trace of a biographer who wrote in Latin. The source had run out, the author was reduced to other expedients, notably, for most of the small residue of fact, the Greek historian Herodian (who is not there named). Something of prime value emerges at once. The work, wherever it may have begun, comprised the lives of nine emperors from Hadrian to Caracalla. The total takes in the Vita Veri, which by tradition or oversight had been relegated to the inferior category: that is, the lives of princes and pretenders, mainly fictional.5 Therefore not Marius Maximus. His Twelve Caesars by their total exclude a Vita Veri, but he had a Macrinus, for he terminated with Elagabalus. On this showing, the answer is Ignotus.6 Analysis of the 'Nine Vitae' reveals an accurate and sober biographer. The Suetonian scheme can be discerned in various Vitae, most clearly in that of Antoninus Pius, which has not been much tampered with. Nor is it fanciful to estimate the manner and quality. Like anecdotes and scandal, political doctrine or personal opinions are not much in evidence. Such is the modest postulate. It is no novelty, it need not evoke discomfort; and it relies upon the analysis of an extant document. In fact there is no alternative, unless and until positive reasons are adduced to demonstrate that the basic source of the 'Nine Vitae can be no other than the consular biographer. If Ignotus is not accepted, the gravamen of proof rests with the friends of M. M. The enterprise would not in any way be promising. It entails the assignment of a known name to an anonymous source. IV. To revert to that source. It was abbreviated, brutally. But it has also been supplemented. There are accretions of various kinds. They range from large passages woven into the narrative to small particulars of sporadic annotation. To the former class belong the piece from Eutropius (or from his source) in the Vita Marci and the extract from Victor in the Vita Severi. In this imbroglio the named references to M. M. (thirteen in the 'Nine Vitae") call for special scrutiny. 5

T. D. Barnes JRS lvii (1967), 65 ff. As assumed in Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 34; 92 f; 97; 177. For the full statement, Bonner HAC 1966/7 (1968), 131 ff. = Emperors and Biography (1970), 30 ff. In due justice, and to deprecate the scandal of novelty, it will be recalled that a source of this type was postulated by C. Lecrivain, Etudes sur I'Histoire Auguste (1904), 191 f; 197. But Lecrivain prolonged it, to take in the Vita Macrini. Every reason tells against that extension. 6

Marius Maximus Once Again

33

When the biographer is there cited, the items are easily to be segregated. T h e y look like annotation, and they may interrupt the sequence. 7 Lack of coherence (it is true) is not always the clear sign of a subsequent insertion. The biographical genre proceeds through accumulation of odd details, sometimes repugnant to logical ordering; and the author of the H A is an untidy writer as well as careless in his compiling. N o n e the less, the manner in which M. M. is adduced indicates that he is a subsidiary source. Such is the first impression, and n o t h i n g intervenes to contradict. Support accrues from the practice of other writers in Antiquity - or, albeit per absurdum, from the HA itself. Inventing Junius C o r d u s ' as the archetypal bad biographer, the author cites h i m for a variant or as a suggestion for further reading should a n y o n e have a taste for the trivial. He nowhere implies or pretends that ' C o r d u s ' is his main source. T h e four citations of M. M . in the Vita Hadriani furnish instruction on several counts (2. 10; 12. 4; 20. 3; 25. 4). They are annotation. Further three (or rather all four) are unfriendly in tone. A contrast to the main narration, which is neutral if not amicable. 8 T w o m o r e brief notices, namely the Emperor's proficiency in astrology (16. 7) and the game-pie he invented (21. 4) can be certified for M . M . from the Vita Aelii (3. 9; 5. 5). Further, a reference to M . M . , disclosing a motive, may provide a clue leading to other passages. T h u s from 'favente Plotina' (2. 10) to 'favor Plotinae' (4. 1; 4. 4), and even to 'factio Plotinae' (4. 10). The last of these concludes an insertion, the subject of which is speculation about Trajan's designs for the succession, with appeal to the precedent of Alexander, but also mentioning Neratius Priscus as a potential candidate. 9 T h e r e is much more. T o take three instances. 1. T h e account of Hadrian's movement in the first year of his reign (5. 10; 6. 6 - 7 . 3). It contains several doublets. T w o sources have been contaminated. 2. Hadrian's journey from Britain to Gaul in 122. It is interrupted by a piece of miscellaneous matter, all detrimental to the Emperor (11.3-7). 3. Hadrian's attitude towards professors of the liberal arts and men of letters (15. 1 0 - 1 6 . 12). It falls into two parts, standing in sharp contradiction. T h e first, containing some hostile particulars, ends with Hadrian as an astrologer (16. 7), which is certified for M . M . (Ael. 7 It is hasty and illicit to assume that all citations of M. M. in the HA fall under that condemnation. It is valid for the biographies of the emperors from Hadrian to Caracalla. Not necessarily for the 'secondary Vitae.' And the Vita Alexandri is in a special case: see further below. 8 As emphasized by G. Barbieri, Riv.fil. xxxii (1954), 9. For Hadr. 12. 4 sec R. Symc, JRS liv (1964), 145 f. (Hadrian's attitude towards the citizens of his patria). 9 For the interpretation of this suspect passage see Emperors and Biography (1971), 126 f.

34

Marius Maximus Once Again

3. 9). Inspection will show that the discrepancy is not of a kind to be explained by the capricious nature of an emperor who was 'semper in omnibus varius'. It represents divergent accounts of his actual behaviour. These instances, summarily registered in this place, are highly illuminating. They do not exhaust the count. Indeed, in the view of some scholars, the Vita Hadriani was built up on two sources. For Peter, an abbreviation of the Autobiography of Hadrian, the rest going to M. M.; for Lecrivain, an unknown biographer supplemented by M. M. 10 The second explanation is patently preferable, and it seems inexpugnable. Since the early Vitae are now coming to excite interest again after long neglect, and along with them, inevitably, M. M., to the accompaniment of much perplexity, it would be expedient to have a thorough and comprehensive study of the consular biographer. How that study should proceed is clear enough. It will start from the named citations of M. M. in relation to the composition and structure of the 'Nine Vitae . Next, the passages where his presence may be divined or even proved. V. Brief and selective remarks have been presented about the Vita Hadriani. It is the most difficult and intricate of the biographies. Elsewhere the approach seems easier, but even so the use of M. M. is by no means either uniform or predictable. It may therefore be worth while to cast a glance at another of the biographies in the series, that of Marcus Aurelius. Sundry reasons commend this choice. It brings in of necessity one of the 'secondary Vitae' of princes and pretenders, the biography (if such it can be called) of Avidius Cassius. Hence further problems, and not to be evaded. In the first place, the interrelation between the two. Next, however, wider questions concerning the HA down to Caracalla or even to Severus Alexander. For example, at what stage were the five 'secondary Vitae' composed?11 Can traces be detected of their influence on the main Vitae, when the latter were revised, subse­ quent to the original compilation? There is an entanglement of prob­ lems, and no clear solution. The component parts of the Vita Marci are clear, the structure (if that term is in place) most disconcerting. As follows: 1. A factual account with few insertions. Beginning with the 10

H. Peter, Die Scriptores Historiae Augustae (1892). 124; C. Lecrivain, o. c. 116. In relation to the present problem, those Vitae are the biographies of Aelius Caesar, Avidius Cassius, Pcscennius Niger, Clodius Albinus, Geta. Earlier definitions, deriving from Mommsen, and long perpetuated, included the Vita Veri. 1!

Marius Maximus Once Again

35

ancestry of Marcus, it registers his training and his teachers, then his accession, and the quality of his administration, with valuable and prosaic detail (9. 7 - 1 1 . 10). And it carries the record of the reign as far as the death of Lucius Verus (14. 8). 2. After a pair of sporadic details (15. 1 f.) there follows the conse­ cration of Verus (15. 3 f.), a discreditable anecdote (15. 5 f.), the notice that Avidius Cassius raised rebellion (15. 5), and other remarks (16. 1 f.). T h e n the biography goes on to give an account of the reign after the death of Verus d o w n to that of Marcus himself (16. 3 - 1 8 . 1). It is taken from Eutropius (or from the c o m m o n source of Eutropius and Victor). Subjoined are various comments about Marcus and about C o m m o d u s , passing into scandal about Faustina. At the end comes the invocation of Diocletian (19. 12). At this point, it might seem, the biography of Marcus should terminate. C o m p a r e the brief appendage to the Vita Veri. After his decease, and a scandalous anecdote, Diocletian is invoked. O r better, the Vita Severi. Leaving Severus in Egypt (in the year 200), the author, w i t h the allegation 'quoniam longum est minora persequi', proceeds to add a s u m m a r y of the whole reign from its inception down to the death of the E m p e r o r (17. 5 - 1 9 . 4). This time Aurelius Victor is the source, as is patent and should never have been doubted. However, the author does not n o w terminate the biography. He proceeds with a miscellaneous appendage (19. 5 - 2 4 . 5). In the middle of a verbose disquisition about hereditary succession appeal is made to the name of Diocletian. 1 2 3. With the funeral of Verus (20. 1 ff.) the factual narration now resumes. T h e German War is related (21. 3 - 2 4 . 5), and the proclama­ tion of Avidius Cassius (24. 6 - 2 6 . 13); and, after brief report of other matters, Marcus approaches his end (27. 11), and the Vita divagates, subjoining unfavourable comment on C o m m o d u s (27. 11-28. 12). 4. A miscellaneous appendage (29), beginning with an anecdote about the lovers of Faustina and including detrimental criticism of Marcus, for example 'dederunt illi vitio quod fictus fuisset nee tarn simplex q u a m videretur' (29. 6). VI. Such, on compressed summary, is the unlovely product. The accuracy of the information in the first and third sections is patent. Sundry accretions are not here registered, but one will observe in passing the anecdote about Valerius Homullus, w h o asserted that the 12 The place and context of the three invocations of Diocletian in the 'Nine Vitae are of plain and incontestable significance. No consolation for any who may fancy that the basic source might belong in the time of that emperor. These invocations are in fact the sole 'evidence' for that notion. For an argument that the Ignotus might be a fourth-century writer see A. Momigliano, EHRlxxxiv (,1969), 567.

36

Marius Maximus Once Again

m o t h e r of Marcus was praying to the gods for the death of Pius (6. 8 f.). A story about the same person had occurred in the Vita Pii (11. 8), coming not long after the solitary mention of M. M . in that

biography (11.3). M a x i m u s is cited twice in the biography of Marcus. First, after the date and place of Marcus' birth there is inserted a notice about the ultimate and fabulous origin of the family (1. 6). 13 Second, after recording the displeasure of Marcus with the people of Antioch (they had been zealous in the cause of Avidius Cassius), and hisgravissimum edictum against them, the text proceeds with a sentence that looks like an insertion: 'seditiosos autem eos et oratio Marci indicat indita a Mario M a x i m o , qua ille usus est apud amicos' (25. 10). 14 Further, a third passage can with confidence be reclaimed for M. M. In the context of the year 169, after the marriage of Verus' widow and before the departure of the Emperor for the war in the North, the Vita records the fact that the Bucolici in Egypt were defeated by Avidius Cassius (21. 2). That event occurred three years later, in 172. In the biography of the pretender the same item recurs, verbally almost identical d o w n to the w o r d retunsi (Avid. 6. 7). It is there attributed to M . M . A small and casual item, but highly significant. It is an addition to the main narration, shoved in without regard for relevance or for c h r o n o l o g y . Therefore M . M . is not the basic source in this section. A n attempt may n o w be made to discover some more M . M . in the Vita Marci. At a vital point the names of Avidius Cassius and Faustina interlock. It will be expedient to begin with the various allegations against that lady. T h e y occur in five passages. 1. In the chapter of the second section which concludes with the invocation of Diocletian. The subject, as expressly announced, is the illegitimacy of C o m m o d u s (19. 1), and it is introduced by zfabella. Faustina, becoming enamoured of a gladiator w h o m she had seen, was cured of her infatuation, on advice from Chaldaeans, by bathing in the blood of a gladiator. This was done before she conceived the child, hence C o m m o d u s ' addiction to gladiatorial pursuits (19. 2 ff.). That fabella, however, is irrelevant to the ostensible theme (and is perhaps best to be dismissed as one of the author's inventions). The theme itself is n o w b r o u g h t in as follows: multi autem ferunt Commodum omnino ex adultero natum, si quidem Faustinam satis constet apud Caietam condiciones sibi et nauticas et gladiatorias elegisse. (19. 7) 13 That origin happens to crop up, abridged and unintelligible, in Eutropius viii. 9. 1. That is, by the channel of Enmann's KG. 14 This item.is not registered in the Vita Avidii. Maximus introduced speeches, an innovation on the Suetonian model. They are noted in Pert. 2. 8; 15. 8. In the second instance the author makes explicit statement: 'quam ego inseri ob nimiam longitudinem nolui.'

Marius Maximus Once Again

37

Fishermen and gladiators at Caieta. The fishermen (it is important to note) occur in Victor, with a suitable comment, 'quia nudi plerumque agunt, flagitiis aptiores' (16. 2). But not a word about amours with gladiators. N o r is there anything in the Vita Commodi. In fact, the only hint of the story elsewhere is in the verse quatrain of Ausonius where C o m m o d u s , 'pugnis maculosus harenae', is described as 'criminibus fassus matris adulterium'. That is significant, for Ausonius' second list of Caesars (it is generally held) reflects the Twelve Caesars of M . M . Whence therefore does the passage in the Vita Marci derive? The answer is clear. From Maximus himself, or from the source of Victor: that is, E n m a n n ' s KG, other particulars in which go back to M . M . 1 5 2. After measures of Marcus restricting pantomimes is inserted the notice: c de amatis pantomimis ab uxore fuit sermo, ut superius diximus' (23. 7). The author in fact had not said anything about those a m o u r s previously. 3. H o n o u r s decreed for Faustina after her decease are interrupted by the c o m m e n t 'laudata eadem, cum impudicitiae fama graviter laborasset. quae Antoninus vel nesciit vel dissimulavit' (26. 5). 4. In the appendix Marcus incurs blame because he promoted the lovers of Faustina: a certain Tertullus is named, and four others (29. 1). I 6 There follows the anecdote about the actor in the mime who m a d e play with the phrase 'ter Tullus' (29. 2). 5. Introducing the proclamation of Avidius Cassius, the author inserts a motive: ut quidam dicunt, Faustina volente, quae de mariti valetudine desperaret. alii dicunt ementita morte Antonini Cassium imperatorem se appellasse, cum divum Marcum appellasset. (24. 6 f.) This passage has a close parallel in the Vita of the pretender {Avid. 7. 1-4) and is relevant to the interrelation between the two biographies (see further below). T h e five items present c o m m o n features. Compare the report of t w o other imputations. First, Faustina committed adultery with Verus - and made away with him through poisoned oysters {Verus 10. 1). Second, Verus was poisoned by Marcus, by use of a different tech­ nique {Verus 1 1 . 2 , cf. 10. 2 and Marcus 15. 5). The second fable is registered by Victor, w h o is moved to indignation: 'haec in tanto viro credere nisi animi ad scelus proni non queunt' (16. 5). In two instances the epitomator transmits vestigial remnants of scandal about Marcus and about Faustina. His ultimate source is presumably M. M., by way 15 E. Hohl, Klio xxvii (1934), 156; BursiansJahresberichte cclvi (1937), 144. In Hohl's estimate the KG was not much more than an abridgement of Maximus. 16 For identities, H.-G. Pflaum, Bonner HAC 196819 (1970), 224 ff.

38

Marius Maximus Once Again

of the KG. 1 7 It is therefore legitimate to credit M . M . with the five passages inserted in the Vita Marci, and also with the poisoned oysters in the Vita Veri. Like the t w o citations of M . M . by name, they are patent accretions on the basic source. M a x i m u s (it is perhaps superfluous to observe) had no monopoly of nasty imputations about the Emperor and his consort. They go back to contemporary gossip, to the innate malice of high society. Cassius D i o is instructive. For example, he reports a story about the poisoning of Verus (LXXI. 3. 1). More significant, the complicity of Faustina in the matter of Avidius Cassius (LXXI. 23. 3, cf. 29. 1). This is more than mere scandal: it is an interpretation not devoid of plausibility. 18 VII. N e x t , the biography of Avidius Cassius, a sorry product. The factual kernel is contained in the section which relates his proclamation and its failure, concluding with what happened to his family and relatives (6. 5 - 9 . 4). Along with a piece of the author's own comments (8. 2 - 6 ) it exhibits close concordances with the narration in the Vita Marci (24. 5 - 2 6 . 13) on which (or on its source) it is based. 19 In the introduction to this section of the Vita Avidii M . M. is cited twice: for the popularity of Avidius in the East and especially at Antioch (6. 5 f.), and for the affair of the Bucolici (6. 7). O n the second item follows his proclamation. The motives are then stated: ut quidam dicunt, Faustina volente quae valetudini Marci iam diffidebat et timebat ne infantes filios tueri sola non posset atque aliquis exsisteret qui capta statione regia infantes de medio tolleret. alii autem dicunt hanc artem adhibuisse militibus et provincialibus Cassium contra Marci amorem, ut sibi posset consentiri quod diceret Marcum diem suum obisse. nam et divum eum appellasse dicitur. (7. 1 ff.) T h e kinship with the passage from the Vita Marci (24. 6 f., quoted above) needs no emphasis. It is much longer and more explicit. The additional explanation it offers concerning Faustina is far from idle, namely her apprehensions about her children. What then is the relationship between the two passages? Perhaps the second is an expansion of the first. O r they may represent independent versions of the same original text, the one abbreviated. And which text? In any event, the ultimate source of the allegation against Faustina is disclosed later on in the biography. T h e author brings up extracts from letters >

17 The scandalous items (it is worth noting) were omitted by Eutropius and by the Epitome. The sources of the latter work are a notorious problem. In one instance, so it can be argued, namely the anecdote about Nerva and Junius Mauricus (12. 5), it derives directly from Marius Maximus. See Emperors and Biography (1971), 103. 18 As adumbrated in Emperors and Biography (1971), 129. 19 H. Peter, o.c. 83 f; C. Lecrivain, ox. 247 f.

Marius Maximus Once Again

39

designed to prove against Maximus the total innocence of the Empress: 'cum dicat Maximus infamari earn cupiens'. The context is fictitious, it is true (bogus letters), but the statement about the prejudice exhibited by Maximus can be used to support the derivation of the two versions cited above. When not sheer fiction, the 'secondary Vitae' draw on the biographies of emperors or on their sources. The account which the biographer furnishes of Avidius' usurpation is based (it is here assumed) on that in the Vita Marci. But it is preceded by two citations of M. M. (6. 6 f.); and after its conclusion the author, before proceed­ ing to quote from letters, gives a hint for further reading: 'si quis autem omnem hanc historiam scire desiderat, legat Mari Maximi secundum librum de vita Marci' (9. 5). It is therefore expedient to look for traces of M. M. As has been suggested above, the fuller version of Faustina's complicity (noting her anxiety about the fate of her children) might represent an indepen­ dent use of Maximus. But there is a piece of a different order. The Vita Marci puts on record the liberal treatment accorded to Alexandria, the daughter of the pretender, and her husband Druncianus (i.e. Dryantianus). They were 'commendati amitae marito' (26. 12, cf. Avid. 9. 4). That is, to the husband of Dryantianus' aunt: the identities can be established.20 The Vita of Avidius, however, can produce something not in the Vita Marci, namely an allusion to their subsequent involvement in a law suit (9. 4). A case concerning Dryantianus happens to stand on independent testimony. 21 This item was therefore taken either from M. M. or from the basic source of the Vita Marci. So far the biography of the pretender, which comes into a larger question. The composition of the 'Nine Vitae is a nexus of problemsabbreviation and expansion, additions of different types. More revi­ sions than one have probably to be allowed for subsequent to the act of compilation. Hence M. M. may have been used for supplement on separate occasions. The problems are intricate, unenviable the attempt to sort them all out, and condemned to frustration.22 And another question is in­ volved, namely the stage at which the author set himself to write the 'secondary Vitae' (see further below). Several signs in the 'Nine Vitae' 20 They belong to a notable Lycian family. Ti. Claudius Dryantianus (PIR2 C 859) is the son of the consular Ti. Claudius Agrippinus (776), and his father's sister is Claudia Helena (1097). For the stemma, PIR2 Vol. ii, facing p. 166. 21 Cod. Just. ix. 8. 6 praef. But the circumstances (it should be noted) appear to be different. However, that is irrelevant to the present enquiry. 22 For a list of the problems, with suitable brief comment, see Bonner MAC 7966/7(1968), 152 = Emperors and Biography (1971), 52.

40

Marius Maximus Once Again

betray influences from the 'secondary Vitae P Maximus becomes relevant. For example, the anonymous notice about Avidius' victory over the Bucolici, out of place where it stands in the Marcus (21. 2), might have been slipped in from the Avidius (25. 10) on a late revision. Again, the shorter version of the complicity of Faustina might be an abridgement of the account in the Vita Avidii. VIII. The quest for Maximus has so far been conducted on and from the internal evidence of the HA. It is time to adduce the only other piece of testimony that names the consular biographer (apart from the scholiast on Juvenal IV. 53). The historian Ammianus, condemning the lazy and frivolous aristocracy, asserts that they read no books save Juvenal and Marius Maximus (XXVIII. 4. 14). Like the satirist, who had been forgotten for long ages, the biographer was a recent discovery, so it may be conjectured. Further, though Maximus could not fail to transmit much accurate information about the emperors, he was prone to malice, he reported scandal and trivialities. It is not idle to speculate about his methods and his quality. He showed up the shady side of Antonine virtue and splendour. Marcus might appear above reproach, but he was vulnerable through his wife. Marcus covered up her delinquencies, and it could be sug­ gested that he was a hypocrite {Marcus 26. 5; 29. 6). Finally, Maximus traced the decline of a dynasty, first to Commodus and then down to the last ruler to carry its name. As Ausonius remarks of Elagabalus, 'Antoninorum nomina falsa gerens'. The theme ultimus Antoninorum recurs in the HA, several times.24 The notable and revealing instance is the reference to the 'versus cuiusdam poetae' (Macr. 7. 7.). That is, Ausonius.25 This biographer is not only certified by named citations. He is to be regarded as the 'second source' of the Vita Hadriani. Moreover, a number of other items in the 'Nine Vitae\ patent accretions on the basic source, are for the most part detrimental in character. Examples have been adduced from the Vita Marci. The basic source as disclosed by analysis was a sober and prosaic product, eschewing comment and anecdote. Too dull for the author of the HA. He delights in scandal and fiction, his true bent and predilec­ tions emerge in the biographies which a modern convention styles 'secondary'. Hence the appeal of M. M., welcome aid to supplement and enliven. That argument might appear circular. No matter, since it is based 23 24 25

Bonner HAC 1968/9 (1970), 302 f. = Emperors and Biography (1971), 68 f. Emperors and Biography (1971), 80; 83. T. D. Barnes JRS lvii (1967), 70.

Marius Maximus Once Again

41

ultimately on the structure of the 'Nine Vitae\ and it can stand as a true explanation until something better turns up. Inspection of the structure discloses the lineaments of a biographer who terminated with Caracalla. What plea might avail to assert and commend M. M. as the basic source? There is only one way out. To state it may suffice, as an amiable paradox: the author (or an assistant, for that it is a permissible but not essential hypothesis), compiling M. M., carefully expunged everything that was trivial, picturesque, or scandalous. In the sequel, he put it all back, or at least introduced a selection, sometimes certifying by the name and sometimes not. 26 The notion would be ingenious - and much ingenuity has been expended in defence of traditional assumptions in the long con­ troversy about the HA. However, this notion would run into trouble, notably on any assessment of the Vita Hadriani, where the problem transcends small insertions or casual annotation. Therefore to be deprecated. A further refinement might suggest itself to some subtle advocate of the consular biographer. Namely that the author, who is dishonest as well as crafty, went in for a deliberate piece of deception in this instance. He scattered references to M. M. here and there in order to fool the reader and convey the guarantee that M. M. was not his main source. IX. The impostor is capable of anything. None the less, before em­ barking on the remoter excursions into the unverifiable, it would be necessary to assess by character and distribution the actual citations of M. M. and take some account also of those passages where on various criteria (both structure and content) his presence may be surmised. There are problems enough to vex and detain a serious enquirer. They involve not only the biographies of emperors as far as Caracalla but the sequel to Severus Alexander and the 'secondary Vitae . A catalogue may be subjoined, brief and summary but alarming in some of its implications. 1. It is not certain that each and all of the citations of Maximus-are genuine; and a general dubitation has been expressed by some scholars. 27 One example is instructive. Addressing Constantine, the author of the Vita Alexandri reminds the Emperor of something he knows from his reading of Maximus: namely what Homullus said to Trajan about emperors and their friends (Alex. 65. 4). The context is 26 As happens elsewhere in controversy concerning the HA, this type of argument would be only a defence. 27 K. Honn, Quellenuntersuchungen zu den Viten des Heliogabalus und des Severus Alexander int Corpus der S. H. A. (1911), 47; J. Schwartz, Bonner MAC 1963 (1964), 162.

42

Marius Maximus Once Again

fictitious, the item along with the Homullus of Trajan's time appears a figment.28 It recalls the anecdotes about the historical Valerius Homullus (cos. 152) in the biographies of Pius and Marcus (Pius 11. 8; Marcus 6. 8 f.), which are both to be presumed insertions from M. M. (he is cited for the second story). The one name, it may be, evoked the other in the author's mind when he was composing the address to Constantine in the biography of Alexander. However that may be, there is no call to impugn or dismiss any of the other references to M. M,. unless cogent proof of fraudulence is brought up. 2. The employment of M. M. is not uniform. As has been shown, the Vita Hadriani is in a special case. Elsewhere in the 'Nine Vitae M. M. is cited for sporadic annotation; and his name is absent from the biographies of Verus, Didius Julianus, and Caracalla. But he can be detected in five additional passages in the Vita Marci. And there is more in the Pertinax than meets the eye. Maximus, it appears, was not reluctant to insinuate odd particulars that subverted the portrayal of the plain blunt man, who became a 'good emperor'. 29 3. Items from M. M. may have been added on different occasions to the 'Nine Vitae' before those biographies reached their present untidy condition. Attention has been drawn to the nameless and extraneous reference to Avidius' defeat of the Bucolici (Marcus 21. 2). 4. The stage in composition at which M. M. first came to the notice of the author. The Vita Macrini shows no trace of him. But it offers a clue, namely the verses there mentioned of an anonymous poet who described the rulers who bore the name Antoninus down to Elagabalus (7. 7, cf. above). Ausonius is detected. About the time of his consul­ ship in 379, Ausonius was developing an interest in the history of the past, as is evident in his Gratiarum Actio and demonstrated by his edition of the Fasti Consulares. Perhaps the Twelve Caesars of Ausonius put the author on the track of the poet's source of inspiration, namely M. M. The notion is attractive at first sight but dubious and not to be considered in isolation. An earlier biography, the Vita Hadriani, con­ stitutes a difficulty, for the two sources there appear to be closely interwoven. The author may have begun with that technique - but he gave it up in the next biography, that of Pius. 5. The solitary reference in the Vita Elagabali. Alluding to iocularia made up by the prince for the vintage festival ('quae ipse composuerat, et Graeca maxime'), the author continues 'horum pleraque Marius Maximus dicit in vita ipsius Heliogabali' (11. 6). The 28 2y

Emperors and Biography (1971), 97. Emperors and Biography (1971), 131 f.

Marius Maximus Once Again

43

author, however, has stated that the practice of such merriment, 'multa in dominos iocularia et audientibus dominis', was an innovation introduced by Elagabalus: 'ferunt multi ab ipso primum repertum'. T h a t is not at all likely. The context being suspect, a doubt must obtain about the authenticity of the reference to M . M. 3 0 6. A source in the Vita Elagabali. N o w comes a surprise and a paradox. This biography is peculiar in more ways than one. It eschews various fabrications on show in the Vita which precedes, that of Macrinus; and it carries a coherent stretch of historical narration. The passage takes its inception late in the year 221 and terminates with the massacre in which Elagabalus perished on March 13, 2 2 2 ( 1 3 . 1 - 1 7 . 2). It is certified by names of persons and by details of Roman t o p o g r a p h y ; and its quality has never been called in question. The source is another matter. Why not the consular biographer? 31 The propensity to scandal which commended him to the H A is no cause for denying to an eye witness the accurate report of notable transactions. Indeed, and further, it may be claimed that M. M . is the main source of that biography. 3 2 If that is so, it will be salutary to reflect that M . M . is not cited as an authority for the piece of excellent narration where, it may be sup­ posed, he was in fact the source, but merely by the way, in a trivial matter, which happens to be under suspicion. 7. T h e Vita Alexandri. T h e consular biographer is named five times, in reference to previous rulers. a. Constantine is invited to remember what he had read (65. 4, discussed above). b. T h e story about the horoscope of Julia Domna, 'ut Marius M a x i m u s dixit in vita Severi' (5.4). Compare Sev. 3. 9 (nameless). c. T h e practice of an emperor's sending a freedman with a latus clavus to a Guard Prefect when he is being replaced, 'ut in multorum vita Marius Maximus dixit' (21. 4). The citation may be merely a vague corroboration, not the reflection of any definite facts which the author recalled from M . M. 3 3 30 The whole passage 11. 2-7 is to be presumed an invention. It interrupts the basic source: 11. 1 describes bad appointments to official posts and 12. 1 proceeds to exemplify them (with two persons named). Further, opening with a vintage scene, it has Elagabalus quote 'erubuit, res salva est' (i.e., Terence, Adelphi 643). 31 As suggested in passing in Hermes xevi (1968), 500, n. 2. For the explicit argument, Emperors and Biography (1971), 118 ff. 32 T. D. Barnes, Bonner HAC 1968/9 (1970), 30. Also in an analysis of the Vita to appear in the next volume (= 1970 (1972), 53 ff.). 33 For item and context see A. Chastagnol, Recherches sur VHistoire Auguste (1970), 39 ff. He suggests that there was confusion in the author's mind between adlectio to the Senate and the grant of omamenta consularia (ib. 61).

44

Marius Maximus Once Again d. Hadrian's game-pie (30. 6). Compare Hadr. 21. 4, certified by

Ael. 5. 5. e. T h e long story about the senator 'Ovinius Camillus'. Said to appertain not to Alexander but to Trajan, for such, so the author affirms, is the standard opinion. But, he continues, 'neque in vita eius id Marius Maximus ita exposuit neque Fabius Marcellinus neque Aurelius Verus neque Statius Valens, qui omnem eius vitam in litteras miserunt' (48. 6). Since the whole piece is fictitious (including the other three biographers), the author, while making w h a t happens to be of necessity a true statement about the Vita Traiani of M . M . , stands convicted of contriving an erudite decep­ tion, as is his habit elsewhere. This item might be used to support hesitations about other references to M . M . (not many, however). 8. M a x i m u s in the 'secondary Vitae' . A distinction should here be d r a w n . Whereas in the biographies of emperors down to Caracalla the references to M . M . look like subsequent insertions, that is not every­ w h e r e obvious in the others, which are not compilations but free compositions. Similarly in the Vita Alexandri: most of them belong to the narrative exposition (note especially 48. 6 and 65. 4). Compare also Elag. 1 1 . 6 (discussed above). 9. T h e 'secondary Vitae : at what stage were they composed? This is an important and neglected topic. It was easy and fallacious to suppose that each was written in the order and place where they now stand, after the imperial biographies to which they are pendants. Brief reflec­ tion will dispel that assumption. Rather subsequent composition in a r o w . T w o alternatives are open. T h e Vita Caracallae marks an end of compiling a single Latin source, and the preface of Macrinus announces a new turn in the H A , explicitly. At this juncture or interval might therefore be placed the writing of the lives of the five princes or pretenders (Aelius Caesar to Geta). Such, in abeyance of other proposals, is the hypothesis that has recently been put forward. 3 4 T h e hypothesis is easy and even attractive. It demands careful scrutiny. Instead, those 'secondary Vitae9 might fall a little later, after the writing of the Vita Alexandri. Indications should be looked for, even if not conclusive. First, 'Cordus' the bogus biographer. He is accorded a full and stylized entrance in the preface of the Vita Macrini, as 'Junius C o r d u s ' which in the sequel is his standard designation, m a n y times. In the biography of Clodius Albinus, however, he was 'Aelius C o r d u s ' (5. 10); and as such he occurs once again later on (Maximin. 12. 7). There is therefore an indication that the invention of 34

HAC 1968/9 (1970), 302 = Emperors and Biography (1971), 68 (and cf. above, 16 ff.).

Marius Maximus Once Again

45

'Junius C o r d u s ' in the preface of the Vita Macrini is anterior to the 'Aelius C o r d u s ' in the biography of Clodius Albinus. H o w so? The author, going back to compose the secondary Vitae, had temporarily forgotten the nomenclature he assigned to his figment. 35 Second, the notices about Paul and Ulpian as Prefects of the Guard. T h e passage in the Vita Pescennii (7. 4) might derive from the Alexander (26.6). 36 These items deserve serious attention. M. M. comes into the debate. First and in general, the notion that the author of the HA did not b e c o m e aware of M . M . before he wrote the Macrinus (or the Elagabalus). But that is highly dubious, as has been indicated. Second, a specific point. The Vita Alexandri duly assigns the famous game-pie to Hadrian (30. 6). But, in the first of the 'secondary Vitae\ the biography of Hadrian's heir, that prince is extolled as the true inventor. Further (it is stated) not a dish of four ingredients but in fact of five. M a x i m u s is then confuted: 'de quo genere cibi aliter refert Marius M a x i m u s , non pentefarmacum sed tetrafarmacum appellans, ut et nos ipsi in eius vita persecuti sumus' (AeL 5. 5). T h e author, it is clear, is up to one of his tricks: wilful and perverse variants. T h e elaboration might therefore appear to be subsequent to the simple notice in the Vita Alexandri. Even if not regarded as conclu­ sive (the author is capricious, and he might have forgotten his inven­ tion in the Vita Aelii), the phenomenon ought not to be neglected. 37 It will be well to be on the alert for other signs or hints. However that m a y be, this topic (the precise point at which the biographies of princes and pretenders were composed) is of subsidiary interest. X . M a x i m u s demands a full and exacting investigation. It is necessary to rebut traditional assumptions or premature certitudes. The task will entail ingenuity as well as industry, for the matter is intricate, being entangled with so many problems of the H A . The time has come to examine again the early Vitae, and the season is propitious. Preoccupa­ tion with the date and purpose of the work may now be expected to u n d e r g o some abatement, yielding place at last to the literary assess­ m e n t of a literary product. The author comes first: personality and e n v i r o n m e n t , habits and methods. 35 36 37

HAC 1968/9 (1970, 305 f. = Emperors and Biography (1971), 75. Thus T. D. Barnes, HAC 196819 (1970), 35 {. HAC 1968/9 (1970), 295 = Emperors and Biography (1971), 64.

IV The Son of the Emperor Macrinus* I. O n one aspect the reign of Macrinus is a brief interlude in the story of the Severan dynasty. Antoninus Caracalla was assassinated on April 8, 217. A year had hardly elapsed when chance and the potency of his name and m e m o r y led to the proclamation of the boy Elagabalus, alleged to be his son (at Emesa on May 16, 218). The rapid and dramatic actions engross attention and dominate the narrations that survive, to the obscuration of sundry other matters; and modern accounts tend to conform. However, those narrations have another use. T h e y illustrate the methods of historians, and their quality. O f what Cassius Dio wrote from personal knowledge, this portion is the most instructive, so it has been affirmed. 1 Dio was at Rome, his text happens to be almost intact, and it reveals, along with many facts and names, the judgements provoked in a senator by a distasteful p h e n o m e n o n : the first knight to seize the power, and he of lowly extraction. As for the fluent and superficial Herodian, who here ex­ hibits most of his k n o w n defects, there is no call to expatiate in this place. T h e enquiry concerns the Historia Augusta. T h e preface of the Vita Macrini opens on the theme of emperors, princes, and usurpers w h o did not reign or live for long. There was not m u c h to report about them. N o n e the less, the author will be at pains to publish the fruits of diligent research: 'ex diversis historicis eruta in lucem proferemus'. And to be sure only 'digna memoratu', for the neglect of which he goes on to castigate 'Junius Cordus', the archetype of the frivolous biographer. After the noble professions, the product m a y come as a surprise - at least to any w h o lack familiarity with the habits of the genial impostor. Fiction almost total. With rare excep­ tions, the facts are confined to a single passage dealing with the insurrection at Emesa and the end of Macrinus (8. 3 - 1 0 . 4). It is a drastic abbreviation of Herodian, whose name is not disclosed in the Vita. N o Greek writer had hitherto been used in any of the biographies of e m p e r o r s , so it is generally held. And other features make the Macrinus a cardinal or crucial point in the structure and composition of the H A . * Reprinted from Phoenix xxvi (1972), 275 ff. 1 F. Millar, A Study of Cassius Dio (Oxford 1964), 160.

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

47

A sequence of Latin biographies, it is clear, was the basic source employed for the Vitae from Hadrian to Caracalla. For discretion, their author may be styled Ignotus.2 A number of scholars prefer to invoke a known name, that of Marius Maximus (cos. II, 223), who wrote the lives of the twelve rulers from Nerva to Elagabalus.3 It would be a relief to waive the problems that bedevil this section of the HA, but something will have to be said about a matter often neglected, the biographies of princes and pretenders. To wit, those of Aelius Caesar, Avidius Cassius, Pescennius Niger, Clodius Albinus, Geta. There is no reason to suppose that they were composed as they now stand, suitably subjoined to sundry 'primary Vitae'. Hence the hypothesis has been advanced that the five 'secondary Vitae fall between the Caracalla and the Macrinus. But not without hesitation expressed and the notion broached that they might all belong later, after the biography of Severus Alexander.4 For several sporadic reasons. One item was the game-pie of Hadrian, the tetrafarmacum, so designated on the authority of Marius Maximus in the Vita Alexandri (30. 6). Likewise in the VitaAelii(5. 5). In the latter passage the author, referring to that appellation which he had adopted in the Vita Hadriani (21. 4, where Maximus is not named), asserts that the pie was really a pentefarmacum, and the credit for inventing the dish belongs to Aelius Caesar. The author thus corrects Maximus. It is one of his typical and fraudulent elaborations. Therefore the Aelius might seem posterior to the Alexander. On the other hand, however, the author, when composing the Alexander and wishing to cite Marius Maximus as an authority, may have chosen to ignore his previous invention. Furthermore, there was a contrary sign about the 'secondary Vitae' that ought to have been discerned, adduced, and exploited. Alexander thought that panegyrics of emperors were silly. He was moved by the precedent of Pescennius: 'quod exemplo Nigri Pescennii stultum ducebat' (Alex. 35. 1). The Vita of that pretender has a lengthy development and coherent argu­ ment which culminates in his aphorism 'nam viventes laudare inrisio est' (11. 6). The reference in the Alexander is clear and explicit. Not to any verdict of the historical Pescennius. Only the author's fabrication in a fictional biography. Therefore, though the term 'proof is not of easy application when the HA is in cause, the Pescennius is proved 2 As briefly assumed in Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 43; 92; 177. For the full argument, Emperors and Biography (1971) 30 ff. The chapter is reprinted from HAC 1966/7 (1968), 131 ff. 3 See A. R. Birley, Septimius Severus (1971), App. 2; A. D. E. Cameron JRS lxi (1971), 262 ff. (reviewing Ammianus and the Historia Augusta). 4 Emperors and Biography (1971), 64; 71; 75. The chapter is reprinted from HAC 1968/9 (1970), 285 ff. Observe also later in the book pp. 87; 282.

48

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

anterior to the Alexander. And with it goes its partner, the biography of Clodius Albinus. 5 II. There is a sixth biography of this inferior class. Subjoined to Macrinus is his son Diadumenianus, whom the HA calls 'Diadumenus', as do the Latin epitomators. The product is generally dismissed as valueless, for history at least. Not without reason. The author himself gives the show away: there will be nothing worth saying, except that the prince was an 'Antoninus' (Macr. 10. 6, cf. Diad. 1.1). Indeed, otherwise he would have been lumped in with his parent (Diad. 6. 1). That should suffice. None the less, this verbose conglomerate of redundant fictions carries some relevance to the methods of the author, his habits, and his purpose. There are sundry perplexities.6 First of all, the rank and titulature of Macrinus' son. Cassius Dio must be the point of departure.7 On receipt of Macrinus' first dispatch (so he states) the Senate voted that the son be made a patrician and bear the titles of princeps iuventutis and 'Caesar' (lxxviii. 17. 1). The nomination as Caesar cannot be correct, as emerges a little later: it was learned at Rome that Diadumenianus had been proclaimed Caesar and Antoninus, ostensibly by the troops, in fact by instigation of his father (19. 1). Finally, the prince was made an emperor when Macrinus on the news from Emesa came to Apamea (34. 2). That is, soon after May 16, 218. Then, at a later point in his narrative, Dio has two references to these matters. First, he reverts to the occasion when the first dispatch was read out in the Senate (37. 5). Second, a letter is mentioned (a joint letter), in which Macrinus referred to his son as both Caesar and emperor, but omitted the title of 'Antoninus' (37. 6). Excellent in so many ways, Dio's account of the reign is confused and marred by defects of structure. Also, he is guilty of a lapse of memory, as can happen all the more easily when a writer is narrating the history of his own times, not copying a source. He first antedated the conferment of the title 'Caesar'. Then in the sequel he gave no indication of the interval of time that ensued before the prince was in fact proclaimed Caesar. He was at Zeugma at the time, as is revealed in a casual statement at the end (40. 1). Whether before or after the 5 See further 'The Composition of the Historia Augusta. Recent Theories', JRS lxii (1972), 123 ff. (above, 12 ff.). 6 For the history, see above all H. v. Pctnkovits, P-W xviii, 539 ff.; Klio xxxi (1938), 103 ff. The study of H.J. Bassett, Macrinus and Diadumenianus (1920), is obsolete on various counts. For the coins, H. Mattingly, B. M. Coins, Rom. Emp. V (1950), ccxiii ff. For a rehabilitation of Macrinus (necessary but irrelevant to the theme of the present paper), H. Mattingly, Studies Presented to David M. Robinson (1953), 962 ff. 7 Dio's references to the son of Macrinus are as follows: lxxviii. 17. 1, 19. 1, 20. 1, 20. 3, 34. 2, 37. 5 f., 40. 1,40. 5; 80. 1.4.

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

49

parent's campaign in Mesopotamia, that is a question - and those operations continue to baffle precision of dating. 8 For present purposes it is enough to keep separate the two stages in the elevation of Diadumenianus. First, 'Caesar' and 'Antoninus', then full association in the imperial power in the last days. That is necessary for the evaluation of the other sources. All that Herodian contributes is a single sentence in epilogue on his father's end: with him perished his son called Diadumenianus, w h o m he had appointed Caesar. 9 Herodian, it will be noted, has Macrinus b o t h captured and killed at Chalcedon, which he had reached in his flight to the west. According to Dio, however, Macrinus was taken thence to Syria and there executed, whereas his son had been apprehended, by sad irony, precisely at Zeugma (40. 1 f.). In Dio's account it is not clear that both were put to death at the same time and place. Certain brief statements in the Latin epitomators cause most of the trouble: Aurelius Victor, Eutropius, the Epitome of Pseudo-Victor. T h e y go back to a work which was itself a summary, namely that 'Kaisergeschichte' which Enmann established through concordances in language and content - and, most telling, by the reproduction of the same errors. Hence the original version can often be divined. In this instance, pretty scrappy. At the same time, discrepancies are signifi­ cant. While Eutropius is curt, prosaic, and impersonal, Victor has pretensions to style and is not loath to parade his views of education, morality, and government. Further, the Epitome, in various ways enigmatic, has drawn on sources other than Enmann's KG. T o u c h i n g Diadumenianus, the salient points are as follows. O f father and son together Eutropius states Tacti imperatores' (8. 21), the Epitome 'ab exercitu imperatores creati' (22). Victor, however, has the father proclaimed emperor by the legions, and the son Caesar (22. 1). Further, Victor mentions the son's season of life and the significance of the n a m e 'Antoninus:' 'eo quod ingens amissi principis desiderium erat adolescentem Antoninum vocavere' (22. 2). Again, only Victor alleges cruelty (in both): 'horum nihil praeter saevos atque inciviles animos interim reperimus' (22. 3). III. Dessau long ago detected a piece of Aurelius Victor which the author of the H A , fatigued by the task of compiling a source too ample 8 P. Salama, REA lxvi (1964), 334 ff. Herodian puts the Parthian War immediately after the accession of Macrinus (4. 14. 3, cf. Macr. 2. 2). Thus Petrikovits, o. c. (above, n. 6), 540), but others prefer the autumn, e.g., Millar, o.c. (above, n. 1) 165). Sec also the annotation of C. R. Whittaker in his edition of Herodian (1964), 1. 464 f. 9 Herodian v. 4. 12: ovvaigedevrog avid) KO.1 TOV jiaidog ov r\v Ttoifjoac, Kaioaoa, Atadov^EVLavbv KaXotfievov.

50

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

for his needs, inserted in the Vita Severi (17. 5-19. 4). Recent investiga­ tions discover traces of Victor in diverse sections of the work. 10 Moreover, brief comments of Victor serve as inspiration or guiding ideas, sometimes producing lengthy elaborations. Now Victor, allud­ ing to the aftermath of Antoninus Caracalla, employs the phrase 'ingens desiderium', which might be his own, not taken from his source, the KG. However that may be, it appealed to the author of the HA. He reproduces the phrase itself, twice, and three times in periphrasis. n With this incentive he embarked on tedious divagations about the potency of the nomen Antoninorum. He puts emphasis on Elagabalus as 'ultimus Antoninorum'; and to the authentic six who bore the name he adds two more (viz. L. Verus and Geta). Hence the list of eight Antonini in annotation on a bogus prophecy (Macr. 3. 3ff.). 1 2

Victor or the KG: the vicissitudes of the question are not devoid of instruction and entertainment. When the KG was assumed to have been written shortly after 284 it enjoyed high favour with scholars of the conservative persuasion, for it seemed to offer an escape from the distasteful consequence of conceding Victor: namely a date for the HA subsequent to 360. The bolt-hole is now blocked. The KG, clearly later than 312, was presumably composed not long after 337.13 The employment of Victor being clear, there is a tendency to belittle his source or even reject it - and some deny the very existence of the KG. Better, the innocuous assumption that the author had both texts on his desk. Signs of the KG are not lacking. For example, Eutropius and the Epitome offer something not in Victor, namely Macrinus and his son proclaimed joint 'imperatores' at the outset. This notion, ignoring the earlier title of 'Caesar' for the son, crops up in different places in the HA. Thus, and highly significant, Carac. 8. 10: 'cum filio factus in castris imperator'. Observe also Elag. 1. 4; 2. 3. In the biography of Macrinus the son is without delay associated in the power: 'filio Diadumeno in participatum adscito' (5. 1). And selections are quoted from the dispatch which the two 'imperatores' (6. 2) sent to the Senate. In one extract, where Macrinus alone speaks, he says, 'Diadumenum filium meum vobis notum et imperio miles donavit et nomine, Antoninum videlicet appellans' (6. 6). The nomen Antoninum thus suitably adheres from the outset (cf. 2. 5; 3. 8). 10

A. Chastagnol, HAC 1966/7 (1968), 53 ff. Similarly in Rev. Phil, xli (1967), 85 ff. Diad. 6. 10; Elag. 3. 1: 'ingens desiderium'; Macr. 3. 9: 'tantum desiderium nominis hums'; Diad. 1. 2: 'ingens maeror'; Carac. 8. 10: 'multum Antoninus desideratus est'. Elsewhere in the HA the word desiderium occurs only in Avid. 7. 3; Maximin. 11.1. 12 For the tedious play with the nomen Antoninorum in the HA see Emperors and Biography (1971), 80 ff. Lighting upon the attractive notion, the author introduced it in earlier passages. 13 As shown by T. D. Barnes, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 13 ff. 11

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

51

IV. Absent from Aurelius Victor, the notion of joint rulers should indicate dependance on the KG. Again, Victor knew that Diadumenianus was a Caesar (22. 1). In the Vita Macrini this fact only emerges at a late stage, and it clearly does not come from Victor. At the end of the piece of abridged Herodian, after recording the killing of Macrinus and his son 'in vico quodam Bithyniae', the author has inserted annotation (10. 4): sciendum praeterea quod Caesar fuisse dicitur, non Augustus, Diadumenus puer, quern plerique pari fuisse cum patris imperio tradiderunt. T h e item is noteworthy on three counts. First, criticism of those writers w h o reported that the prince was an 'Augustus,' sharing the s u p r e m e p o w e r on equal terms with his parent. The word plerique need not connote more than one. The author is alluding to the version w h i c h he accepted and developed without doubt or hesitation earlier in the Vita. That is, from the KG: it is here irrelevant that Diadumenianus was in fact proclaimed Augustus towards the end (at Apamea), as Dio alone of extant writers has recorded. Second, the basis of the criticism. Patently the sentence in Herodian w h i c h states that the prince had been appointed Caesar (viz. v. 4. 12). T h a t sentence is referred to a second time, with mention of Herodian's n a m e , in the Vita Diadumeni (2. 5). In this place the testimony of the historian appears to be disallowed - and it is discarded in the sequel. Naturally enough. It contradicts the author's whole theme, as announced in the opening words of this biography, namely Diadumenianus proclaimed emperor, along with his parent, by the a r m y . Therefore, when citing Herodian, the author n o w adds censure. Herodian had ignored the particulars about the prince as e m p e r o r and an Antoninus which the author had just been relating: 'Herodianus Graecus scriptor haec praeteriens'. T h i r d , and not a little peculiar. In these two passages the son of Macrinus is described as 'puer'. That, it is to be presumed, reproduces the Jtatg of Herodian. Eutropius and the Epitome have nothing about the age of the prince, whereas Victor styled him 'adolescens'. N o w the Vita Macrini so far had furnished no indication whatsoever, no hint of surprise or scandal. T h e simultaneous proclamation as emperor would convey to a reader in any age the impression that the action was not a total anomaly. Yet such it would have been - and no promising debut for a n e w and insecure ruler. His son was a small boy, being only eight years old in the m o n t h of April, 217. Cassius Dio registers his age and also his birthday. 1 4 14 Dio lxxviii 34. 2; 20. 1. The portraiture on coins offers no close indication of the boy's age, which by oversight seems not to be registered in B. M. Coins, Rom. Emp. V (1950).

52

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

V. The revealing item of annotation on Diadumenianus in the Vita Macrini (10. 4), which has been discussed above, occurs in a disturbed context: it follows the killing of the prince (10. 3), which, however, is again reported in the next sentence (10. 5), after which the author, indicating a future project, candidly avows that, apart from the Antonine name, 'non enim aliquid in eius vita erit quod dicatur' (10. 6). The passage (10. 4-6) looks like a subsequent addition - but not perhaps made after any great interval of time. The rest of the Vita down to its conclusion with the invocation of Diocletian (11. 1-15. 4) may suitably be described as an appendage. It carries few facts. Among the fabrications are three pieces of verse allegedly translated from the Greek, Macrinus being the author of one of them, and a blended quotation from Virgil in which 'egregius forma iuvenis' (Aen. vi. 861) is applied to his son. The poem of Macrinus earned only mockery (11.7). Later on some compensation is vouchsafed: 'fecit iambos, qui non extant; iucundissimi autem fuisse dicuntur' (14. 4). The disappearance of those delightful products evokes an explanation all too plausible: 'perierunt in eo tumultu quo ipse occisus est, quando et omnia eius a militibus pervastata sunt' Macrinus is pilloried for arrogance and cruelty in a long section (12. 1-11), notably harsh punishments visited on the soldiers. That theme had proved attractive, but adduced rather for praise, in the portrayal of Avidius Cassius and Pescennius Niger. In this instance the author drew inspiration from his meagre Latin sources. Aurelius Victor registered the 'saevos atque inciviles animos' of both father and son (22. 3). - It is one of the procedures of the author that when a biography seemed to reach a proper or even explicit conclusion with the decease of its subject he prolongs it with miscellaneous information, deriving sometimes from a different source or sources - and generally of dubious quality, or pure fable. Messy composition, or the need to fill up space. The phenomenon is manifest in the Caracalla.15 Perhaps the compilation of the basic source had proved too drastic. As for 'secon­ dary Vitae\ observe those of Pescennius Niger and Clodius Albinus. The former is especially notable, for its main theme (military excel­ lence and discipline) is taken up again and expounded in lavish fictions. In the appendage of the Macrinus his son is twice called 'puer' (14. 1 f.). That reflects the discovery introduced from the sentence in Herodian. In the Vita Diadumeni he is 'puer' no fewer than seven times. For example, 'filium suum, tunc puerum' (1. 3). And the ingenious author goes on to supply a vivid description of his arresting beauty: 15

W. Reusch, Klio, Beiheft xxiv (1931), 53 ff.

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

53

'puer fuit o m n i u m speciosissimus, statura longiuscula, crine flavo, nigris oculis, naso deducto' etc. 16 But, by inadvertence, the notion slips in that he was no longer a boy, Observe the passage which states 'ubi adolevit' (4. 4). T h a t is not all. In this biography the author twice styles his boy e m p e r o r a 'puerulus' (2. 2; 6. 1). That happens to correspond to his actual age. T h e author is perhaps writing better than he knew. O r rather, had he not meanwhile become aware of fresh sources of information? VI. At some time after the author had reached the end of his abridging of Herodian he observed the word haig and with it acquired the notion that the son of Macrinus was only a boy, so it may be conjectured (cf. above). Furthermore, it has been assumed so far in this enquiry that, apart from Herodian, the sole source employed in the Vita Macrini was the KG, with or without Victor (who might have furnished a detail, or rather a comment). Certain features not likely to h a v e been reported in the KG may counsel a doubt. Macrinus is said to have adopted the titles 'pius' and 'felix' (7. 2; 5, cf., but aberrant, 11.2). T h e author betrays no awareness of the fact that those titles had been borne by Caracalla. And they happen to occur on some of the inscriptions of Macrinus, but not on any coin. 17 Again, in the appendage it is stated that Macrinus was 'in iure non incallidus' (13. 1). In support of which (it is alleged) he decided to declare invalid 'omnia rescripta veterum principum', it being criminal to respect the authority of rulers like C o m m o d u s and Caracalla - and indeed Trajan never paid any attention to libelli addressed to him. T h e w h o l e conception is a chimera. N o n e the less, some may object that Cassius Dio has a reference, albeit saying little, to the juristic attainments of this emperor (LXXVIII. 11. 2). Further, in his first dispatch to the Senate, Macrinus arrogated to himself the titles of 'pius' and 'felix' (16. 2). T h e suspicion has been entertained more than once that the H A has recourse to Cassius Dio, and the topic is n o w the subject of a detailed investigation. 1 8 At first sight, something of a paradox. For Septimius Severus at least, the Latin biography which the author compiled was t o o full for his requirements, as he avows; 'quoniam longum est minora persequi' (Sev. 17. 5). He therefore turned to Aurelius Victor. N o r does he seem to have been at great pains to seek additional 16

Diad. 3.2, quoted in full and without warning in B. M. Coins, Rom. Emp. V. (1950), ccxiii. e.g./LS 463-5. 18 F. Kolb, Literarische Beziehungen zwischen Cassius Dio, Herodian und der Historia Augusta (1972). 17

54

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

information about the rivals of Severus. When Latin sources failed, Herodian sufficed: shorter and more attractive than the long narra­ tions of Dio. There are general and initial grounds for dubitation. When facts of history are in question, it is not at all easy to establish derivation and dependence. There is a limit to the variations (both selection and language) with which facts can be consigned. Mere coincidences may mean nothing. Personal comment, errors or fabrications, that is another matter and safer guidance. Before admitting Cassius Dio it would be desirable to give some thought to a Latin writer of the time who dealt with the same transactions. VII. For the Vita Macrini the author had not adopted a Latin biography as his basic source. That is clear. None the less, whether or no Marius Maximus had served that function down to the Caracalla, his name cannot be left out of the reckoning. There is the full and admirable account of the last months of Elagabalus, carrying many names and facts: from the consular biographer, so it is argued.19 Further, he supplied the framework of that Vita.20 It will not be appropriate in this place to do more than allude to the imbroglio of problems concerning the use of Maximus in the HA. Yet one thing may be said in passing. The citations of Maximus in the 'Nine Vitae' of emperors (Hadrian to Caracalla) look like additional notes inserted on a revision after the original compilation (hasty and drastic) of the basic source. That is not clearly the case everywhere in the five biographies of princes and pretenders.21 Therefore it will be suitable to bear in mind the theory that the writing of those 'secondary Vitae" falls between the Caracalla and the Macrinus. On that theory, the author was already familiar with Marius Maximus when he came to compose the biography of Macrinus. Touching which, a further point. In that Vita the author refers to the 'versus cuiusdam poetae' which explained that the name 'Antoninus' began with Pius and ended with Elagabalus - ' Antoninorum ultimus' (6. 7). The poet, it should seem, is none other than Ausonius.22 Now Ausonius in his Caesares, after the Suetonian twelve, produced a second sequence of rulers, Nerva to Elagabalus inclusive. The cata­ logue, be it noted, includes Macrinus but omits L. Verus. These 'Twelve Caesars' correspond, it is generally held, to the biographical 19

Emperors and Biography (1971), 121 ff. For a brief hint earlier, Hermes xevi (1968), 500. T. D. Barnes, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 31. He provides the full statement in HAC 1970 (1972), 53 ff. 21 As suggested in the paper 'Marius Maximus Once More', HAC 1970 (1972), 287 ff. (above 30 ff.). 22 T. D. Barnes, JRS lvii (1967), 70. 20

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

55

output of Marius Maximus. Perhaps a recent discovery during the renascence of Latin letters in the second half of the Fourth Century. It has always seemed an enigma that the HA did not turn to the consular biographer and employ him as its basic source for the reign of Macrinus. Various explanations are proffered. For example, an old hypothesis has recently been revived: Maximus never wrote a separate biography of Macrinus, he regarded him as a usurper, as only an episode in the story of Elagabalus.23 That will not take one very far. At the least Maximus would supply accurate detail about the age, origin, and career of Macrinus - and precise revelations about his inadequacies of policy and performance. No trace of such particulars in the HA, not even the fact that he came from Caesarea in Mauretania.24 Further­ more, the quatrain describing Macrinus in Ausonius would presum­ ably have to be disallowed, on one plea or another. Perhaps the truest explanation lay on the surface, obvious and escaping notice. Various arguments about the HA labour under an assumption that the author was writing as a historian. That is to say, he had recourse to the best sources available. One example will do, appeal to the lost books of Ammianus Marcellinus, which would have furnished attractive details about emperors after Herodian ran out (in the year 238): not yet published, since the HA does not seem to have exploited them, so it is opined.25 The axiom is a misconception. The author's bent and predilections are not those of a historian, or a serious enquirer. For example, he could have ascertained without effort a number of facts about Avidius Cassius or Pescennius Niger. He did not need them, or want them. The 'secondary Vitae\ being almost total fiction, and hence generally neglected by scholars, provide the clue to his idiosyncrasy. By tech­ nique and quality the Macrinus bears a close resemblance to the biographies in that category. And not fortuitous. If, on a theory which has not yet been refuted or discarded, the author hadjust been engaged on that form of creative composition, the Macrinus was a congenial sequel, as indeed the first words of its preface indicate. Why now compile and abridge yet another Latin biography? He had had enough of tedious occupations, unworthy of his talents. Fatigue and impati­ ence are evident in the 'Nine Vitae* of emperors. To conclude this rubric. It may be supposed without discomfort that the author glanced at the Vita Macrini of Marius Maximus, or remembered something from a cursory reading. Hence items not 23 24 25

A. D. E. Cameron JRS lxi (1971), 264. As stated by Dio, lxxviii. 11.1. And no doubt by Maximus. A. D. E. Cameron, o. c. (above, n. 23), 257.

56

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

likely to have been registered in the KG.26 Further, having discovered that the son of Macrinus was a 'puer', he went on to call him a 'puerulus' (Diad. 2. 2; 6. 1). The preface of the Macrinus promised facts dug up from 'diversi historici'; and, at the end, addressing the Emperor Diocletian, the author has 'de plurimis collecta' (15. 4). By paradox, he appears to be telling the truth: Herodian, the KG, probably Victor, Marius Maximus. To be sure, none of them is named anywhere in the biography. Aurelius Victor was not only a writer butpraefectus urbi in the year 389. An alert reader might have detected him in the guise of 'Aurelii Victoris cui Pinio cognomen erat' (4. 2).27 This person came out with odious remarks in the Senate, vilifying the origin and the variegated antecedents of the new ruler. About Marius Maximus the author is equivocal. In the Elagabalus, where (so it is plausibly argued) Maximus furnished the basic structure, he is cited once, but not for any fact. Only for a fabrication. In the course of a passage which breaks the sequence of the narration (11. 2-7), and includes a quotation from Terence, comes the assertion that Elagabalus composed iocularia at the vintage festival, with the remark: 'horum pleraque Marius Maximus dicit in vita ipsius Heliogabali'(11.6). This looks like a double fabrication. For a more subtle essay in fraudulence observe the fable about 'Ovinius Camillus' related in the Alexander. The conscientious author firmly asseverates that it is not to be found in the Vita Traiani of Marius Maximus (48. 6). VIII. So far so good. An investigation not bearing on questions of any great historical moment, merely the structure and sources of the HA, once again - and in one of its less exhilarating portions. The sequel and epilogue, it must be confessed, will be found to conform. The Vita Elagabali is now in cause. After the preface it leads off with the statement (deriving from the KG) that Diadumenianus was at the outset invested 'pari potestate imperii' with his father (1. 4). Then, a little lower down, their joint rule is registered: 'a Macrino, qui saevissime cum filio luxurioso et crudeli exercuit imperium' (2. 3). No sign, therefore, of the author's discovery that the son was only a 'puer' - and even a 'puerulus', as twice in the Vita Diadumeni. According to that biography, the prince was put to death 'non suo nomine' but because 26 The search for which should be attended with vigilance. For example, coins were struck at Antioch in the prince's name, which happens to be true, but not 'statim' {Diad. 2. 6). And observe what follows: for himself, Macrinus refrained 'usque ad iussum senatus'. 27 There is no evidence that the historical Aurelius Victor bore this cognomen. The author had a friend called 'Pinianus' {Aur. 1. 9, on Hohl's conjecture). For contemporary Piniani, Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 193.

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

57

of his parent's harsh rule : 'ob incivilem patris atque asperum principatum' (8.2). But, so the author has ascertained, he was guilty of cruelty beyond his years (8.3); and letters from him are cited to show h o w the boy would have turned out had he lived, 'quam asper futurus i u v e n i s ' ( 8 . 9). Aurelius Victor, it will again be recalled, stigmatized 'saevos atque inciviles animos' in both father and son; 28 and for Victor the latter is an 'adolescens'. In the sentence from the Elagabalus quoted above the son shares the o p p r o b r i u m of the inhuman parent, but he is profligate as well — 'luxuriosus et crudelis'. Worse is to follow. In another passage Elagabalus himself after his arrival in R o m e makes a savage attack on the memory of both: 'insecutus est famam Macrini crudeliter, sed multo magis Diadumeni' (8. 4). N o w Elagabalus in fact sent a dispatch from Antioch after the battle (which took place on June 8, 218) answering charges made by Macrinus; and, to counter aspersions cast on his o w n youth, he alleged that the son of Macrinus was only five years old. Dio reports the missive (79. 1. 2 ff.). The fact is w o r t h registering, though it permits n o conclusions about the sources of the Vita Elagabali. T o continue with this passage. Elagabalus goes on to disallow an opinion that the prince had mended his ways and become a model of virtue and valour: 'quod ex luxuriosissimo extitisse vir fortissimus, gravissimus, severissimus diceretur' (8. 4). The prince, it follows, had reached years of manhood. T h a t is not all. Elagabalus compelled several writers to publish u n s a v o u r y details about his habits and his vices (8. 5): coegit denique scriptores nonnullos nefanda, immo potius impia de eiusdem victu et luxuria disputare, ut in vita eius. T h e text is in a disturbed condition. The remedy of Hohl is here adopted, which makes sense though it entails a lacuna at the end. The reference is to a biography of Diadumenianus, as is indicated by the w o r d luxuria and by eius carrying on from eiusdem. Who then was its author? There is a choice of four. First, supply diximus. N o such statement occurs in the Vita Diadumeni. H o w e v e r , the author is not above giving a false reference - or had he perhaps not yet composed that biography, which he was proposing to insert before the Elagabalus? Second, the name of Marius Maximus, although he did not write a life of the prince. Perhaps the author was careless and confused in his formulation, having really intended an allusion to the Vita Macrini of The word incivilis recurs in Diad. 8. 2 (quoted above). Elsewhere only in Aur. 21.5.

58

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

that biographer. Better, sheer delight. He was capable of making questionable play with the name of Maximus, as witness Elag. 11.6 and Alex. 48. 6 (discussed above). Third, an unknown biographer, and spurious. There happens to be no character of this type in the Elagabalus: a marked contrast to its sequel and pendant, the Alexander. No comment, however. Fourth, the deleterious biographer 'Junius Cordus'. He was ac­ corded a handsome introduction in the preface to the Vita Macrini, yet his name is absent from that biography and from the three that follow. This conjecture would provide him with a suitable occupation, namely a Vita Diadumeni, for he had undertaken 'eorum imperatorum vitas edere quos obscuriores videbat' (Macr. 1.3). Decision is baffled - and in any event it would not affect the main issue. As has been shown, three passages in the Vita Elagabali exhibit the son of Macrinus as an indubitable adult. How should the disturb­ ing phenomenon be assessed? From time to time scholars have been impelled to look for traces of plural authorship in the HA, even though faith may fade in the existence of the six ostensible biographers; and various arguments have been put forward. Fresh pleas will no doubt be welcome. Might not the signal discrepancy about the age of Macrinus' son be taken to imply the work of different hands in this section of the HA? The biographies of Diadumenianus and of Elagabalus bear the same superscription, namely 'Aelius Lampridius'. That of Macrinus purports to be by 'Julius Capitolinus' - who, however, proposes to deal also with his son (10. 6); and the author of that Vita thinks that he has written the Macrinus (Diad. 6. 1). An imbroglio which may safely be resigned to those who believe in 'Julius Capitolinus', or for that matter, in 'Junius Cordus'. A plain fact dispels further vexation. The four biographies at the end of the first half of the HA (Macrinus to Alexander) are patently by the same hand. Their name-labels are not only a fraud, they were carelessly attached. The discrepancy subsists. Perhaps not so flagrant that it cannot be explained by the haste and inadvertence of the author, or by sheer perversity and wilful deceit. Examples abound. Thus, having called Macrinus' son 'luxuriosus et crudelis' (Elag. 2. 3), he denounces allega­ tions to his discredit as 'nefanda, immo potius impia' (8.5). Pescennius Niger, introduced as 'libidinis effrenatae ad omne genus cupiditatuni', becomes a model of chastity and restraint (Pesc. 1. 4; 6. 6). Again, it was the author's design to portray Severus Alexander as a youthful ruler, not only wise already and mature in judgement but endowed with martial physique and addicted to military pastimes. Once only is

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

59

he off guard, calling him a 'puer' {Alex. 14. 7). Alexander was in fact twelve or thirteen on his accession. IX. Such being the manner and habits of the author, the question were perhaps best given up. Yet there may be room for a hypothesis about the order of composition. Since the Vita Elagabali assumes Diadumenianus to be an equal partner in the imperial power from the beginning, and a grown man, it might have been written before the revelation that he was only a boy. If that were so, the author had chosen to go on at first with the narration of linked events, proceeding from 'igitur occiso Macrino' (Elag. 1. 4) and continuing to 'interfecto Vario Heliogabalo' (Alex. 1. 1) and the reign of Severus Alexander. The biographies of the two ostensible sons of Caracalla form a kind of unit, being a study in contrasts. On that showing, after he completed Alexander, the author turned back and filled up space by supplement­ ing Macrinus and composing Diadumenus.29 The device of the namelabels may have been invented about this time, or not much earlier. It was an oversight to inscribe the Vita Diadumeni with 'Aelius Lampridius', but perhaps to be understood if that label had shortly before been attached to the biographies of Elagabalus and Alexander.30 To support a hypothesis of this order it would be desirable to discover items that betray influences from the Vita Alexandri. Bogus names in the HA are a clue to many things. The Vita Diadumeni exhibits six of them towards the end. In the appendage of the Macrinus the author spread himself on the topic of the emperor's harsh actions. The Vita Diadumeni is con­ cordant, documenting the precocious cruelty of the boy prince (8. 3). A letter to the parent is quoted where he is taken to task for displaying clemency towards malcontents, among them a 'dux Armeniae' and a 'legatus Asiae atque Arabiae' (8.5). Also a missive from the boy to his mother, urging drastic steps to forestall a conspiracy: 'age igitur ut Arabianus et Tuscus et Gellius ad palum deligentur' (9. 1). The names have not failed to excite curiosity. Though 'Tuscus' offers no hold, 'Arabianus' looked promising. Might he not be identi­ cal with Domitius Aristaeus Arabianus, legate of Tineius Sacerdos the proconsul of Asia about the year 208?31 And the authenticity of 'Gellius' is seriously canvassed. Perhaps none other than that Gellius 29

And, be it supposed, not omitting a forward reference to the Vita Elagabali (Diad. 9. 6). 'Lampridius' may therefore take his name from 'Lampridia', the mother of Pescennius Niger (Pesc. 1.3): that is, not the reverse process. 31 PIR2 D 134. The editor says 'nescio num idem sit Arabianus', but avows 'in epistula sane absurde ficta'. 30

60

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

Maximus (the son of Caracalla's doctor), the commander of the legio IVScythica, who made a proclamation in Syria in 219.32 Some of the names in the HA which are declared dubious or bogus, on the basis of known facts (or more often rather the known practices of the author), might belong, it is true, to authentic characters of history, being taken from some source no longer extant. That is a safe recourse and by its nature an inexpugnable position, so it might appear. 33 There is a better approach, commended by the inventive fancy of the author. The name 'Arabianus' might have been suggested by the 'legatus Asiae atque Arabiae' (in 8. 5, a non-existent function). Otherwise, that scoundrel 'Septimius Arabianus', who provoked Severus Alexander to make appeal to the god of Gaza and quote a tag from Cicero: 'O Marna, O Iuppiter, O di immortales, Arabianus non solum vivit, verum etiam in senatum venit' (17. 4). 'Gellius' might also be a reminiscence from that Vita, for it reproduced the epigram of Martial about a lady called 'Gellia'.34 Nor should the whole fictitious context of the three names be left out of account. About the letter sent to Macrinus the author states that some authorities held it to be the work of the boy's tutor 'Caelianus', an African rhetor (8. 9). 35 Further, the documents (he says) did harm to Diadumenianus, being divulged by the perfidy of a notarius and read out to the troops by a cubicularius. Such was the version of the historian 'Lollius Urbicus' (9. 2). That person owes his name to the general in Britain who had been mentioned previously in the HA (Pius 5. 4). For the full measure let 'Nonia Celsa' be added, who receives a happy letter from her husband Macrinus (7. 5). The cognomen 'Celsus' is a strong favourite, 'Nonius Murcus' (Clod. Alb. 2. 3) a patent figment, and doubts will adhere to 'Nonius Gracchus' (Sev. 13. 3). X. To resume. There is no compulsion (it will be seen) to believe that the names 'Arabianus' and 'Gellius' must reflect items in the Vita Alexandri. The treatment of the son of Macrinus in the Elagabalus is another matter. Though Elagabalus' denigrations may be dismissed as plain fiction (8. 4 f.), the prince is none the less regarded as a colleague of his father, as an emperor, as adult and responsible (1. 4; 2. 3). Which 32 PIR2 G 123, with the note 'vide num idem sit Gellius Maximus', n. 130. Further, 'he may well be identical', as (discussing the doctor) V. Nutton, CQ2 xxi (1971), 262. 33 And Marius Maximus would register Gellius Maximus in his Vita Elagabali. 34 Alex. 38.2, reproducing Martial V. 29. 35 Variant fictions relate a sojourn of Macrinus in Africa: either banished there, and practising rhetoric, or after retirement from the gladiatorial profession (Macr. 5. 1 and 5). The name 'Caelianus' offers no clue.

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

61

represents the erroneous view transmitted by the KG. And no sign as yet of any awareness that he was a 'puer', or even 'puerulus'. Therefore a case could still be made out for the priority of the Elagabalus. Hence the Diadumenus (and also the appendage to the Macrinus) was written later, that is, after the termination of the Alexander.36 That was a welcome point for an author to have reached, and convenient for him to pause, to go back and supplement or revise. How much, who can tell? In this paper it is assumed (as it has elsewhere been argued) that two operations, namely the composition of five 'secondary Vitae1 and the revision (after the original compiling and abridging) of the 'Nine Vitae of emperors, both belong to an earlier stage, before the writing of the Macrinus?1 It will be suitable to observe in passing that careful scrutiny should go to the epilogue of the Vita Elagabali (34 f.): an important passage where the author explains his activities and indicates his future pro­ gramme, with invocation of the Emperor Constantine. The epilogue falls into two parts, the writing of which may (or may not) have been separated by an interval of time. In the second part the author, after alluding to the thirteen years' reign of Severus Alexander, briefly notes that a number of later rulers were 'semestres alii et vix annui et bimi' (35. 2). That notion recurs, in a slightly expanded formulation, in the Vita Alexandria. I). 38 In the case of parallel passages in one and the same author it is by no means easy to decide whether priority belongs to the shorter version or to the longer. In this instance doubt is the safer counsel. It will be pertinent to recall the two references to the careers of thejurists Ulpian and Paul, the first simple but vague (Pesc. 7. 4), the second precise, but involved (Alex. 26. 5 f.). The first, it has been suggested, depends upon the second. Hence the Pescennius was composed after the Alexander.39 There was some cause to suspend judgement. 40 And a fresh argument now supervenes in the contrary sense, as indicated earlier in this paper: Severus Alexander alluded to the aphorism of Pescennius Niger deriding imperial panegyrics (Alex. 35. 1, cf. Pesc. 11.6). However that may be, no rule or dogma obtains. Each case must be estimated on its own merits. A writer may abridge his previous 36 Along with the appendage to the Macrinus (11-15) may be included the preceding section (10. 4-6), which contains the important piece of annotation based on Herodian (10. 4). 37 For a list of the different operations carried out in this portion of the HA, see Emperors and Biography (1971), 52. 38 For the bipartite epilogue of the Vita Elagabali, see 'The Composition of the Historia Augusta. Recent Theories' JRS Ixii (1972), 123 ff. (above 12 ff.). 39 T. D. Barnes, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 35 f. 40 But not to disallow the inference. The question was waived, deliberately, in the paper T h r e e Jurists' (in the same volume), 315 (=RP (1979), 796).

62

The Son of the Emperor Macrinus

version or expand it. For what it may be worth, expansion is more congenial to the author of the HA - at least when he turned aside from compiling and suo tantum ingenio utebatur. If a piece of historical writing were under discussion the argument about structure and composition which has here been expounded might claim to be persuasive or even cogent. Doubt and hesitation should not be suppressed. This author defies normal processes of logic. He is a rogue scholar, capricious and perverse, exploiting tech­ niques of erudition for parody and mockery, and delighting in decep­ tion, even if silly or pointless. The enquiry appears to terminate en queue de poisson. Why not? Its scope was not announced as ambitious or promising any signal conse­ quences. There are the large problems of the HA, some still in debate or sharp dispute, others not yet properly formulated and understood, others again clamouring to be redeemed from long neglect and desuetude. By contrast, the boy emperor is a small concern, of that class quorum scientia nulli reiprodest, so some might object, echoing the rebuke administered to 'Junius Cordus', with appeal to the duties of historiografi (Gord. 21. 4). However, the small or trivial things contri­ bute to the large design, rendering intelligible the true nature of the HA; and it is not easy to resist the manifold seductions of an impostor who took in the world of learning for long years and was able to pass himself off as a collection of biographers writing at various times in the epoch of Diocletian and Constantine.

V The Ancestry of Constantine* I. The approach The emperors who came out of Illyricum were not under any compul­ sion to publish their obscure origins; the panegyrists duly complied; and in the sequel ignorance was overlaid by governmental fraud and by disinterested fiction. No trace survives of any historian or biographer writing in Latin for more than a century after Marius Maximus (cos. II, 223). It was (and it is) difficult to ascertain the age, extraction and earlier occupations of certain emperors. Some were brief in duration, narrowly escaping oblivion. Even the rulers in the Tetrarchy and the founder of a long dynasty are infested with doubts and perplexities. Flavius Constantius had been a Caesar for twelve years before his short term as Augustus (305/6), but the name of his father stands nowhere on authentic record, and his own age admits only a wide conjecture. As for the son, estimates of the year of his birth range between the limits of 272 and 288. * Constantine saw the light of day at Naissus in the Dardanian country, as a sober and accurate source reveals: namely the Origo Imperatoris Constantini, otherwise the Anonymus Valesianus.1 At first sight the item looks promising, but it tells less than some have fancied. A primordial distinction obtains between birthplace and patria. The service of the state in a world empire conveys a man a long distance from the town or region of his origin; and an official is normally accompanied by his wife. Helena, the wife of Constantius, or rather his concubine, came from Drepanum in Bithynia and is said to have exercised the profession of barmaid. 3 However, no profit will accrue from speculating about the reason or accident that brought Helena to Naissus, a city of strategic importance on the imperial highway that linked Aquileia to Byzantium. The search for the patria of Constantius Caesar therefore entails a different approach. As Aurelius Victor with truth and propriety * Reprinted from Bonner HAC 1911 (1974), 237 ff. 1 For the variants, A. Piganiol, Historia i (1950), 86. Seeck had argued for 288, the new PLRE (1971) suggests 'perhaps 272'. The vicinity of 280 would be more plausible. 2 Anon. Val. 2. 2: 'natus Helena matre vilissima in oppido Naisso atque eductus'. 3 For Flavia Julia Helena see Seeck in P-W vii. 2820 ff.; PIR2 F 426 a (in the Add. to Vol. iii); PLRE (1971), s.'v.

64

The Ancestry of Constantine

observes in an often quoted passage, the Tetrarchs derived from Illyricum, each and all (Caes. 39. 26). For Constantius that notion will not take one very far: Illyricum in the conception of the Romans embraced the whole mass from the Adriatic to the Danube and even to the Pontus. Nor has the excellent Anonymus Valesianus anything to offer on this count. There remains as sole valid the testimony ofjulian, who was the grandson of Constantius. It tends to be ignored or passed over in favour of spurious details and fabricated names emanating from a source of ostensibly earlier date. That is, the Historia Augusta. Julian alludes to his origin in three passages of the Misopogon. First of all, he states that the family is Thracian; and Thracians are described as his fellow citizens.4 In Greek writers of the imperial age the terms 'Thrace' and 'Thracian', it is pertinent to remark, normally transcend provincial boundaries and stretch as far as the bank of the Danube, taking in territories of Moesia. That is relevant, by the way, to the homeland of the Emperor Maximinus, whom Herodian styles a shepherd boy from the Thracians of the furthest interior.5 Next, a clear statement from Julian, though likewise not couched in administrative language. The family, he says, goes back to 'the Moesians, right on the bank of the Danube, between the Pannonians and the Thracians. 6 II. Dacia Ripensis The testimony ofjulian is welcome and useful, for it indicates an area that can be defined with some precision. For brevity and convenience the term 'Dacia Ripensis' will here be adopted, though it did not emerge until 271 (or a little later). The region extending along the Danube below the Iron Gates as far as a point between Oescus and Novae was 'Moesia et Treballia', the territory administered by an equestrian official in the early days of the province Moesia; and in the geographer Ptolemy Ratiaria is defined as a town of the Moesi, Oescus of the Treballi. 7 The Treballi were a Thracian tribe on early record, the Moesi a later aggregation. When the province was divided by Domitian, the western part went to Moesia Superior, the eastern (the Treballian land) to Moesia Inferior. In 271 Aurelian, evacuating Trajan's Dacia, created his Nova Dacia south of the river. As a result, and perhaps at once, the old unity was restored under the name of Dacia Ripensis. The other new 4

Julian, Misopogon 367 c; 350 d. Herodian vi. 8. 1. Julian, Misopogon 348 c. 7 ILS 1349; Ptolemy iii. 9. 4; 10. 10.

5

6

The Ancestry of Constantine

65

province, Dacia Mediterranea, comprised Dardania (the territories of Naissus, Scupi, and Ulpianum), which was separated from Moesia Superior, and a piece of Thrace (Serdica and Pautalia).8 It is therefore in no way surprising that Julian should be able to describe his family both as Moesian and as Thracian - the latter in wilful depreciation, as crude and rustic but manly in contrast to frivolous and effeminate Antiochenes. By the same token, Moesia Superior above the Iron Gates is ruled out, for it was never reckoned Thracian. Nor, for that matter, was Dardania. The grandfather ofJulian may have shared with other emperors an origin from 'Moesia et TrebalhV. First, Aurelian. Of the epitomators, Aurelius Victor has nothing to offer on this rubric, but Eutropius supplies Dacia Ripensis (IX. 3. 1). The statement in the Epitome of Pseudo-Victor (composed shortly after 395) is vague and un­ satisfactory: Aurelian's parent had been a colonus of the senator Aurelius 'inter Daciam et Macedoniam' (35. 1). If the item referred to the time of Aurelian's birth, it could be taken to connote Moesia Superior; if, however, it reflects conditions obtaining after Diocletian, Dardania is indicated, for that emperor, so it appears, disjoined Dardania from Dacia Mediterranea. The Historia Augusta imports confusion by its predilection for variants and by the familiar device of simulated erudition: 'ortus, ut plures loquuntur, Sirmii, familia obscuriore, ut nonnulli, Dacia ripensi. ego autem legisse me memini auctorem qui eum Moesia genitum praedicaret' (Aur. 3. 1 f.). In a later place this emperor is labelled a 'homo Pannonius' (24. 3). Some scholars opt for Sirmium, in Pannonia Inferior.9 In this imbroglio it would be easier and safer to follow the sober Eutropius. Second, Galerius. Here the discrepancy of evidence is sharp and enigmatic. Eutropius puts him not far from Serdica, in Dacia Mediterranea (IX. 22. 1), at which city he in fact died (Anon. ValA.9). But the Epitome registers Romulianum, on the bank of the Danube in Dacia Ripensis, as the place of both birth and burial (40. 16).10 Third, Licinius, the friend and ally of Galerius. Eutropius has 'Dacia' (X. 4. 1), the Anon. Val. 'Nova Dacia' (5. 13). Those terms cover a wide area, from the bank of the Danube to the border of Macedonia. The author of the Historia Augusta alertly subjoins comment to his disquisition on Aurelian. Men of unknown provenience and of 8

H. Vetters, Dacia Ripensis (1950), 6 ff. M. Besnier, Histoire romaine (1937), 231; H. Mattingly in CAH xii (1939, 297): 'perhaps a native of Sirmium'. 10 On Romulianum see further Emperors and Biography (1971), 226. 9

The Ancestry of Constantine

66

humble station are in the habit of faking a local origin 'ut dent posteritati de locorum splendore fulgorem'. The thing that matters about great emperors, however, it not 'ubi quisque sit genitus, sed qualis in re publica fuerit' (Aur. 3. 3). The injunction is salutary. None the less, despite uncertainty and fraud, an enquiry can usefully serve more purposes than one. Dacia Ripensis deserves a brief word. Its Roman civilization went back a long way, first of all to camps of auxiliary regiments. Next, stations of legions. Oescus is early; and Ratiaria may have housed a legion at some time or other. Trajan after the conquest of Dacia established colonies of veterans at both places. From this region issued, so it may be argued, the first of the soldier emperors: Maximinus, whom some style, 'the Thracian'.11 It was a dynamic zone. Sirmium is the counterpart, which was made a colony under the Flavian emperors. Sirmium is the patria of Decius, of Probus, of Maximianus. The other portion of Nova Dacia cannot stand in comparison with Ripensis. Serdica, it is true, acquired rank and importance; but the first person of note to issue from the Dardanian country is Nicetes of Remesiana. In common parlance the great military emperors from Decius or Claudius onwards are styled 'Illyrian'. The term is inadequate, on various counts. Illyria is both vague and restricted: it cannot be extended far inland from the Adriatic or cover more than a portion of what the Romans understood by Illyricum. Whereas Illyrian' denotes language, hence loosely and illicitly some sort of racial identity. No commodious appellation can answer all objections; but the least harm will ensue if those rulers are called Danubian - or even Balkan. Better perhaps the former, since facts enough are to hand about Sirmium and about Ripensis. III. Thefraud of the year 310 In the course of 307, to cement the alliance with old Maximianus, Constantine took to wife his daughter Fausta. The marriage is hailed as 'caelestes nuptiae'. For the orator who celebrated the happy event it took no effort or alertness to forecast progeniture and a dynasty that should endure through the ages: 'imperatores semper Herculii' (Pan.lat.Vll.2.5). Three years pass, there is an abrupt change and a complete reversal. Constantine cast off the parent of his wife, who was killed, or graci­ ously permitted to choose the manner of his end. Constantine there11

For the argument, R. Syme, o.c. 185 ff.

The Ancestry of Constantine

67

fore stood in need of a new source of legitimacy. It was produced without delay. The orator at Treveri discloses a secret hitherto shared only by devoted friends in the inner counsels of the prince. Constantine was in fact a descendant of the Emperor Claudius: 'quod plerique adhuc fortasse nesciunt, sed qui te amant plurimum sciunt. ab illo enim divo Claudio manat in te avita cognatio' (VI. 2. 1 f.). The orator draws the consequences. The son of Constantius is the third ruler in the line: 'post duos familiae tuae principes tertius imperator' (2. 4.). Therefore it is not chance or choice that awards him the supreme power, but the prerogative of birth: 'non fortuita hominum consensio, non repentinus aliquis favoris eventus te principem fecit, imperium nascendo meruisti' (3. 1). The opportune discovery reflects the historical situation in the year 310. That was seen by Dessau, who declared the axiom that no other assertion of the faked ancestry can antedate that year. Further, the Vita Claudii in the Historia Augusta, which extols that ancestry, cannot have been written, as it purports to be, under the Tetrarchy, when Constantius was Caesar (i.e., before May 1, 305).12 Dissent arose, with a variety of pleas or defensive arguments, and it endures to this day, at least in some areas of the controversy around the date and purpose of the Historia Augusta. However that may be, it is worth observing that none of the recent historians of Constantine conceives a doubt or calls into question the nexus between historical transactions and political fraud in the year 310.13 There was also a religious aspect: the vision of'Apollo Urns' (21. 4). The reign of Claudius, all too brief (268-70), was crowned with the glory of warfare against the Goths, as the panegyrist duly testifies: 'qui Romani imperii solutam et perditam disciplinam primus reformavit, immanesque Gothorum copias Ponti faucibus et Histri ore proruptas terra marique delevit, utinam diuturnior hominum quam maturior deorum comes' (2.2). 14 That was not so long ago, but forty years may seem a long tract of time in an epoch of rapid and momentous change. How plausible might the relationship appear, should any be disposed to raise a doubt? The panegyrist speaks of'avita cognatio' (2. 2), and he seems to imply that Constantius was a son of Claudius. And on inscriptions Constantine is duly styled 'divi Claudi nepos'. Otherwise assevera­ tions tend to be vague, avoiding names. That was tutius reverentiusque for official propriety - and for men of letters. And variant versions 12

H. Dessau, Hermes xxiv (1889), 340 ff. Observe the firm and economical statement of N. H. Baynes in CAH xii (1939), 680. Compare, for the brief reign accorded to Claudius, the rhetorical development in HA Claud. 2. 13 14

68

The Ancestry of Constantine 15

became current. Eutropius states that Constantius Caesar was 'per filiam nepos Claudi' (IX. 22. 1). That is to say, Claudius had an anonymous daughter who married the father of Constantius. That being so, praise must be accorded to the solution of the Anon. Vol. who transferred the matter one stage further into the realm of the unverifiable, stating that Constantius was a grandnephew of Claudius: 'nepos ex fratre' (1. 2). It was left for the inventive genius of a later writer to furnish some names in corroboration of that version. It is further a question how strong an emphasis Constantine himself put upon the dynastic legitimation that was published for the first time in 310. On the coinage it happens not to be attested before 313.16 The loyal Lactantius, writing about 317, ignored it, and Eusebius, who was not inclined to neglect or suppress any kind of dishonesty that enhanced the excellence of Constantine. However, the fable was official, perpetuated by the ruler, even though no longer essential, his own prestige having grown with time, success and omnipotence. Julian, the nephew of Constantine, in fact bore the name 'Flavius Claudius Julianus'. Though ferocious in detestation of his murderous uncle, he saw no occasion or advantage in issuing a contradiction. In the two panegyrical orations to the address of his cousin the Emperor Constantius Julian introduces praise of the ancestral Claudius.17 That was expedient and necessary. And Claudius has his due place in the Caesares among the good emperors: the gods, admiring his greatness of soul, awarded the empire to his descendants, for they thought it right that the family of such a patriot should hold the power for as long as possible. 18 IV. Fictions about Claudius From the outset the memory of Claudius benefited from the obvious contrast with Gallienus, in whose reign 'sive incuria rerum sive quadam inclinatione fatorum omnibus fere membris truncata erat res publica' (Pan. lat. VIII. 10. 2). Aurelian had every reason to assert continuity, and issues of coins commemorating 'Divus Claudius' went on later under Probus. 19 Furthermore, it has been suspected and argued that a victory over the Goths in 268 was transferred from Gallienus to his successor.20 That might have occurred in the near sequel. 15

For the variants, H. Dessau, o.c. 343 f.; J. Moreau J AC ii (1959), 159. RIC vi (1967), 111. 17 18 Julian 6 d-7 a; 51 c. Julian, Caesares 313 d. 19 P. Damerau, 'Kaiser Claudius ii. Goticus', Klio, Beiheft xxxiii (1934), 81 ff.; RIC v. 1 (1927), 202 f. 20 As argued by A. Alfoldi in CAH xii (1939), 149; 189; 721 ff. 16

The Ancestry of Constantine

69

T h e Latin sources for the middle of the third century, meagre and miserable in so many ways, are uniform in their hostility to Gallienus. As Aurelius Victor avers, the enormities of this prince will be on show as long as civilized life endures: ' d u m urbes erunt' (33. 29). Towards Claudius such is their benevolence that it covers his brother Quintillus. Victor omitted this short-lived ruler, but the curt Eutropius states that he was 'unicae moderationis vir et civilitatis, aequandus fratri vel praeponendus' (IX. 12). 21 The epitomators drew on an Ignotus, w h o , it can be contended, was writing not long after the decease of Constantine. 2 2 That is, the 'Kaisergeschichte' postulated by E n m a n n in 1884 (who, however, put it shortly after 284, being influenced by the not yet impugned date of the Historia Augusta). The K G was used by the Historia Augusta - but not as often as was once believed by conservative scholars. Recent studies detect more and m o r e traces of Victor. 2 3 T w o pieces of bold invention are variously instructive. First, the plot against Gallienus in the camp outside Mediolanum, with a significant discrepancy between Greek and Latin sources. Zosimus states that Claudius had a hand in it (I. 40. 2). Victor, however, affirms that Gallienus when close to death nominated Claudius as his succes­ sor (33. 28); and the Historia Augusta denied expressly any complicity of the exemplary Claudius (Gall. 14. 2; Claud. 1. 3). The Epitome furnishes 'corroborative details': Claudius was on duty at Ticinum at the time, and the imperial vestments were brought to him by a man called 'Gallonius Basilius' (34. 2). Second, the end of Claudius. According to Eutropius, he died of the plague (IX. 11. 2); and the Historia Augusta has the same version (Claud. 12. 1). But Victor comes out with a circumstantial narration: the E m p e r o r carried out a ritual devotio offering up his life in battle for the salvation of the state (34. 1 ff.). The Epitome has the same story, but w i t h an added refinement: it mentions by name the senior senator at the time, Pomponius Bassus (34. 3). Further, the historian Ammianus carries t w o allusions to the transaction (XVI. 10. 3; X X X I . 5. 7). 24 T h e t w o fables occur in Victor and in the Epitome. It may be assumed without discomfort that they derive from the KG - and further, that they did not originate before the year 310. Neither is in 21

cf. HA Claud. 12. 3: 'vir sanctus et sui fratris, ut vcre dixerim, frater, delatum sibi omnium iudicio suscepit imperium non hereditarium sed mcrito virtutum.' 22 That was the date assumed by Seeck long ago. Observe also Alfoldi in CAM xii (1939), 191: 'the lost biographical history of the emperors, of the middle of the fourth century'. For the detailed proof, T. D. Barnes, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 20. 23 A. Chastagnol, Rev. phil. xli (1967), 85 ff. Victor, it may be added is a source not merely of facts or opinions: he furnished inspiration (R. Syme, o.c. 212; 238; 252). 24 It is also reflected in what Julian says about the jueyodoipvxia and the patriotism of Claudius (Caesares 313 d).

70

The Ancestry of Constantine

Eutropius, who also used the KG. As for the Historia Augusta, it follows the exculpatory version of Claudius' accession, but ignores the devotio. That is most peculiar, given the panegyrical character of the Vita Claudii. Where can the explanation lie? Surely not scepticism but inadvertence. As is otherwise all too manifest, the author was writing in a hurry. Moreover, the main source of the facts in this Vita is a Greek historian. 25 It carries a consular date (11.3), which elsewhere is a clue to the History of Dexippus; and Dexippus is cited for the decease ofQuintillus(12.6). V. Why Claudius? What Constantine needed to discover and publish was an imperial ancestor of excellent repute and glorious in war. Why not then Aurelian or Probus? Both were great soldiers, but cruelty marred the fame of Aurelian, and Probus was remembered for his harshness.26 And each met his end by violence: Aurelian succumbed to a conspiracy of the generals at Perinthus, while Probus was killed by his own troops, and in his own patria. Aurelian held the power for five years, Probus for six. Too much was known about them. Better, some ruler of brief tenure such as Tacitus, whose reign of six or seven months could be described as a kind of interregnum between Aurelian and Probus. No evil was reported of Tacitus, and nothing much else. His memory was dim and evanescent. Eusebius left him out, passing directly from Aurelian to Probus; and Julian in his Caesares failed to notice a ruler soon to be acclaimed as exemplary. It was Aurelius Victor who, following the KG in a total misconception of the interregni species, produced an emperor actually chosen by the Senate and eager to restore its auth­ ority and prerogatives. 27 The Historia Augusta went on to a notorious embellishment and inflation. By contrast, Claudius offered a double advantage: a short reign of two years but carrying the renown of a great war. And he may (or may not) have come from the same region as the family of Constantius . . . That is not all. The faked ancestry was promulgated for the first time in Gaul. Now it was remembered that the loyal city of Augustodunum, being under siege (in 269), sent to the Emperor an urgent message for help. Eumenius affirms it in the oration delivered there in 298. He says 'Romani principis auxilium' (IX. 4. 1). In 312, 25 P. Damerau, o.c. 8 ff. The Latin source can be detected only in Claud. 3. 2-4 (cf. Eutropius ix. 11. 2;Epit. 34. 4) and in portions of 12. 2-5 (cf. Eutropius ix. 11. 2\\2\Epit. 34. 5). That is, the KG, not Victor, who omitted Quintillus. 26 Julian, Caesares 314 c. 27 The nature of the error was first detected by E. Groag, P-W v, 1349.

The Ancestry of Constantine

71

however, an orator addressing Constantine at Treveri can evoke 'divum Claudium parentem tuum' (V. 2. 5; 4. 2), and Claudius is styled 'ille rei publicae restitutor' (4. 3). In 298 Eumenius and others were not aware of any potency in the name, or any relevance to Constantius Caesar. VI. The origin ojClaudius There is no sign that any Latin source employed by the Historia Augusta had anything to say about the origin and family of Claudius, or for that matter, of M. Claudius Tacitus.28 The biographies of Aurelian and Probus introduce the rubric at once, as is proper, after the preface. In the Vita Claudii the family tree is postponed until after the decease of the ruler. It figures as an appendage (13. 1-4), to be followed by a selection of documents conveying iudicia principum (14—17). That is a suspicious feature. Nor does any confidence accrue from an earlier piece of fantasy suggesting an origin either from Dalmatia or from Dardania. To quote it is enough. In comment on Claudius' war the author states: 'equitum Dalmatarum ingens extitit virtus, quod originem ex ea provincia Claudius videbatur ostendere, quamvis alii Dardanum et ab Ilo Troianorum (auctore) atque ab ipso Dardano sanguinem dicerent trahere'(11.9). Both themes recur towards the end of the biography. A letter of Valerian begins 'Claudium Illyricianae gentis virum' (14. 2). A second missive from the same emperor alleges that Claudius has been appointed 'dux totius Illyrici' (15. 2). Again, Decius instructs 'Messala' the governor of Achaea to assign to Claudius (for an expedi­ tion to Thermopylae) 200 soldiers 'ex regione Dardanica' (16. 2); and Gallienus tells 'Venustus' to furnish various gifts of plate and vest­ ments, suitably including 'singiliones Dalmatenses decern, clamydem Dardanicam mantuelem unam, paenulam Illyricianam unam, bardocucullum unum' (17. 6). The bardocucullus was notoriously a Dalmatian garment. Dardania, it may be noted, occurs nowhere else in the Historia Augusta, except for a factual item in the Vita Marci (21.7). The geneaology itself may now be briefly registered (13. 2 ff.). Claudius had another brother besides Quintillus, namely 'Crispus'. Also sisters, one of whom, 'Constantina', married a tribunus Assyriorum: she died young. 'Crispus' had a daughter, 'Claudia': Constantius Caesar was the fruit of her marriage with 'Eutropio, 28

For Tacitus the HA contributes the fable of a cenotaph at Interamna (Tac. 15.1) which has seduced local patriots.

72

The Ancestry of Constantine

nobilissimo gentis Dardanae viro'. That is to say, Constantius was a grandnephew of Claudius. The author rounds off his exposition with a modest avowal of nescience: 'de avis nobis parum compertum. varia enim plerique prodiderunt'. What then emerges? If a historian were in cause, some might be tempted to sort out or 'combine' the various particulars, with Claudius as Dalmatian, Constantius Dardanian (his parent was an aristocrat from that region). Illicit, for the author is not a historian but a cheerful impostor, delighting in the parody of erudition and the parade of variants. He was at some pains to render plausible a Claudian ancestry for Constantius Caesar, displaying no little urbanitas, a word which in his idiom meant craft and guile.29 It is unfortunate that in the recent time, when the true character of the Historia Augusta has become evident, innocence or inadvertence can accord credit to choice pieces of bravura like the images of animae sanctiores in the domestic chapel of Severus Alexander or the solicitude of the Emperor Tacitus for the text and memory of,the historian Cornelius Tacitus. Items less picturesque deposit a residue: priscae vestigiafraudis. Though the aristocratic 'Eutropius' is allowed to lapse, Constantius is labelled 'a Dardanian nobleman', or, more modestly, 'a native of Dardania'. 30 Or it can be stated 'er war illyrischen Blutes'.31 Again, in reference to Claudius, it has been stated that he was presumably Dardanian, otherwise the link with Constantius would never have been invented. 32 That argument rests upon the presupposition that Constantius in fact came from Dardania (which no valid evidence attests). The CAH, Vol. XII (1939), offered no opinion about Claudius; but the essential repertorium of prosopography, PLRE (1971), making a bold choice between fictional alternatives, discards Dardania and affirms that Claudius was 'an Illyrian from Dalmatia': it cites Claud, 11. 9; 14. 2. The matter calls for care and circumspection. Some source or other might have indicated either Dalmatia or Dardania. It would have to be Greek rather than Latin, to judge by the paucity of the information that the epitomators and the Historia Augusta were able to extract from the KG. The name of the contemporary historian Dexippus occurs, who was drawn upon in the Vita Claudii. So far the enquiry has endeavoured to keep separate the local origin 29

HA Tac. \S.4-Prob. 16.5. H. Mattingly in CAH xii (1939), 328; A. H. M. Jones, Constantine and the Conversion of Europe (1948), 1. 31 J. Vogt, Constantin der Grosse (1949), 104, cf. 141. 32 P. Damerau, o.c. 41. 30

The Ancestry of Constantine

73

o f Constantius from that of Claudius; and it was averred at the outset that the proper approach was to start with the unimpeachable testimony of the grandson of Constantius, which establishes Dacia Ripensis. A disturbing possibility arises. Julian did not disavow the Claudian ancestry, he refers to it several times. Is Julian alluding to it in the precise and personal statement about his family in the Misopogon? T h a t notion cannot be excluded. It entails, however, the consequence that Julian was better informed about remote Claudius, who was born c, 214, than about Constantius. 3 3 If for discretion the uncertainty be conceded, the matter stands thus. Ripensis was the homeland of an emperor: either Constantius or Claudius - and possibly both. VII. The technique of the Historia Augusta T h e author was not devoid of exact information about some of the Tetrarchs. For example, he introduces Galerius as 'Maximianus Caesar' - and that at wide intervals in the work, namely in the first of the 'secondary Vitae" and towards the end (Ael. 2. 2; Car. 9. 3). N o t all m o d e r n scholars are alert to this item of nomenclature. 3 4 Again, he registers Severus and Alexander among the defeated rivals of Constantine (Elag. 35. 6). Some editors have deleted the name of Alexander: wrongly, the person is patently Domitius Alexander, the usurper in Africa. Further, Constantius is assigned a governorship of Dalmatia (Car. 17. 6). T h e detail might be invented, for the context is fictitious, namely the intention of Carus to kill his son and adopt Constantius in his place. But, a surprise, the governorship happens to be attested by the Anon. Val.35 However that may be, no credit will go to the allegation that Licinius tried to pass himself off as a descendant of the E m p e r o r Philip (Gord. 34. 5). T h e first four of the 'six biographers' purport to be writing under Diocletian and under Constantine. In the main series of the biographies of emperors, dedications to Diocletian occur in three passages, viz. in the Vitae of Marcus, Verus, and Severus (each grafted o n t o the basic source). That emperor is also invoked at the end of the Vita Macrini. T h e first imperial biography dedicated to Constantine 33

For the age of Claudius, PIR2 A 1626. Maximianus Caesar and the old Augustus Maximianus are amalgamated in the Index to the Oxford text of the Pan. lat. (1964). 35 Anon. Val. 1. 2; 'protector primum, hide tribunus, postea praeses Dalmatiarum fuit.' Note also CIL iii. 9860 (from the polje of Grahovo). Both authors have the same version of the relationship between Constantius and Claudius. The Anon. Val. was written in the second half of the Fourth Century. Its use by the HA cannot be excluded. 34

74

The Ancestry of Constantine

suitably alludes to the Claudian ancestry (Elag. 2. 4; 35. 2 f), but the rest ignore it.36 In the later part the author writes under the successive masks of 'Trebellius Pollio' and 'Flavius Vopiscus' - and adopts an earlier point in time. He eschews all mention of Constantine, and he brings in frequent references to Constantius as Caesar. He keeps up the pre­ tence, consistent all through to the end, with one exception, and it seems wilful rather than careless. 'Vopiscus' cannot resist the tempta­ tion of reporting what his father was told by Diocletian after his abdication - 'iam privatus' (Aur. 43. 2); and, after an alleged prophecy about the descendants of Claudius, he states 'est quidem iam Constantius imperator' (44. 4). That is to say, the writer here places himself between May 1, 305 and the death of Constantius in July of the next year. As for 'Pollio', after two early references to Constantius Caesar and his ancestry (Gall. 7. 1; 14. 3), he furnishes a lavish and variegated exposition in the Vita Claudii, composed, so he says, with great care 'intuitu Constanti Caesaris' (1. 1), and with strict veracity, guaranteed by 'et tua conscientia et vita mea' (3. 1); and he indignantly repels the suspicion of adulation (3. 7; 8. 2).37 The propinquity between the two rulers is unobtrusively slipped in with the appellation 'Flavius Claudius' (7. 8, cf. Aur. 17. 2); and there is a reference to Constantius as the 'nepos futurus' (9. 9), supported by several verse oracles (10). Then, for precise proof, the genealogy (13. 1-4). As has been indicated, to have Constantius the son or the grandson of Claudius presented certain difficulties; and further there is no sign that Constantine was imprudent enough, or anxious enough, to publish supplementary evidence for authentication. Indirect descent was in fact a better device. That was the version of the Anon. Val.: Constantius a grandnephew. It was selected by the author of the Historia Augusta, wisely. Furthermore, he added corroboration, viz. 'Crispus', the brother of Claudius, whose daughter married 'Eutropius', the Dardanian nobleman. A bold invention. Also clever, for both names crop up later in the dynasty. Crispus was the eldest son of Constantine; and Eutropia, the half-sister of Constantine (still extant in 350), by her name recalled the mother of Theodora, the wife of Constantius.

36 Constantine happens to be invoked in one of the 'secondary Vitae (Clod. Alb. 4. 2). Those biographies may have been composed later than the Elag. (and the Alex.). For this problem, Emperors and Biography (1971), 64; 75; 86. 37 As likewise at an earlier stage, 'ne malivolis adulator videar esse' (Elag. 35. 3).

The Ancestry ofConstantine

75

VIII. Fabricated links Neatly taking a hint from what Aurelius Victor said about the Tetrarchs (39. 26), the Historia Augusta comes out with a list of generals trained in the school of Probus (Prob. 22. 3). Eleven names, of which the last six appear bogus. Among the genuine are three future emperors: Carus, Diocletian, and Constantius. But not Maximianus and Galerius, although the former came from Sirmium and was thus a fellow citizen of Probus. As has been shown, Sirmium and the territory of Dacia Ripensis each claim several of the Danubian emperors. It might further be surmised that there were in fact unrecorded ties of blood, marriage, or local affinity in certain potent groups such as the generals who made the plot against Gallienus in 268 (Claudius and Aurelian were in it), or those who contrived the murder of Aurelian in 275. The Historia Augusta slipped in to fill the gap. With an exhibition of talent not always conceded or even recognized, the author created a variety of coherent links between emperor and emperor, in a long series from Decius to Carus and beyond, to the Tetrarchy. A notable device is the commendation of future rulers through iudicia principum, sometimes at several removes. It had been employed at an early stage in some of the 'secondary Vitae\38 The author makes play with personal names all through. In this instance he was helped by the ignorance prevailing about the nomen­ clature of a number of rulers. Like his Latin sources, he discloses no awareness of the family names of L. Domitius Aurelianus and M. Claudius Tacitus; and he cannot furnish a named wife for any emperor from Claudius to Carinus. By intruding common and unobtrusive dynastic names the Historia Augusta forges a nexus linking Claudius, Aurelian, Probus, and Constantius. Probus was a relative of Claudius, but the author prefers to leave that open, for it is in only one of the Greek writers; but still, he remembers having read in ephemeride that Probus was buried by his sister 'Claudia' (Prob. 3. 3 f.). The document in question is no doubt the memoir composed by 'Turdulus Gallicanus', his elderly friend, 'vir honestissimus et sincerissimus' (2. 2). Claudius, twice styled 'Flavius Claudius' (Claud. 7. 8; Aur. 17. 2), appears in one place as 'Valerius' (Claud. 18. 4). Now Aurelius Probus (Prob. 6. 2) figures once as 'Aurelius Valerius Probus' (11. 5); and, it may be noted, he rescues from captivity among the Quadi the noble youth 'Valerius Flaccinus', a relative of the Emperor Valerian (5. 2). 38

Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 135 £.; Emperors and Biography (1971), 65f.;208ff.

76

The Ancestry of Constantine

Further, 'Flavius Claudius' indites a missive to 'Valerianus Aurelianus' (Aur. 17. 2). 39 N o w Constantius by his full style is Flavius Valerius Constantius; and 'Valerius', several pieces of evidence accruing, is now admitted to the nomenclature of Claudius, who stands as M. Aurelius Valerius Claudius in PIR2 A 1626. What then follows? Fictions apart, nobody is in a position to deny that some of these rulers may in fact have been related. Further one cannot go. Nothing can be got from names like 'Aurelius' and 'Valerius', even where genuine: the latter also occurs in the nomen­ clature of Diocletian and of Galerius. The author in his total ignorance can even produce 'Aurelius Tacitus' (Aur. 41. 4). This performer showed more skill when he conjured up 'Crispus' and 'Eutropius'. Another name in the family of Constantine was 'Dalmatius', borne in succession by his half-brother and by the son, Dalmatius Caesar. To explain the phenomenon, the conjecture has been put forward that the unascertained parent of Constantius was a Flavius Dalmatius. 40 It is strange that the name failed to attract the ingenious author of the Historia Augusta. It had appeal in another quarter. Whereas the Historia Augusta invented the centurion 'Maximus' as father for Probus, the Epitome has 'Dalmatius', labelled a 'hortorum studiosus' (37. 1). The item reveals somebody's fancy of forging a link of propinquity between the two families. Nor are the horticultural tastes of this 'Dalmatius' any mystery. They reflect the beneficent operations for which Probus earned honour in the Latin sources: he planted vineyards on the Mons Alma (near Sirmium) and on the Mons Aureus in the province of Moesia Superior.41 Fabrications about emperors independent of the Historia Augusta (the Epitome was composed in the same season), or anterior to it, are worth registering, such as the ritual devotio enacted by Claudius: surely subsequent to 310. The Epitome presents peculiar features, and aberra­ tions. The name 'Gallonius Basilius' in a fictitious episode (34. 2) should arouse disquiet.42 Likewise a senator suitably called 'Aurelius' the parent of Aurelian was his colonus (35. 1). This opuscule also has an absurd fable about Claudius: he was the illegitimate son of a Gordian, 39 The word Valeriana was deleted by Hohl in his edition (1927). A later hand corrected the Cod. Pal. to Valerio. 40 A. Piganiol, L'Empereur Constantin (1932), 32. 41 In all three epitomators, in the Chronicle ofjerome, and in HA Prob. 18. 2. Inspection shows that Victor is not the source of the HA. 42 The name is not impugned in PIR2 G 49 or in PLRE. The only other Gallonius registered in the latter work is the fictitious 'Gallonius Avitus' of Quadr. tyr. 15. 6. But it has five Basilii.

The Ancestry of Constantine

11

so 'plerique putant' (34. 2). Whether the second Gordian or the third, the author was not perhaps clear in his mind. 43 IX. The Vita Claudii This biography invites brief appraisal on several counts. Though the structure is defective (as is normal when the writer had no model to follow), the total effect comes out clearly. It is reinforced by declama­ tion, adopting the language and the tricks of panegyrists, similar in this respect to the Vita Probi, but more exuberant, though Probus acquires handsome praise and can be held superior even to Claudius (Tac. 16. 6). The biographies of Aurelian, Tacitus, and Probus carry orations (or missives) both of those emperors and of senators: in the Vita Claudii there are two dispatches of the ruler, very brief (7. 2—5; 8. 4 - 9 . 2). Nor does the author indulge in any of the constitu­ tional fantasies attributed to other 'good emperors', viz. a renovated censorship (Val, 7. 2 ff.) or a restoration of prerogatives to the Senate, carried out twice at no long interval (Tac. 18. 2 f.; 19. 2; Prob. 13. 1). But a novel device intervenes, to be repeated in the sequel: the elabo­ rate schedules of supplies, weapons, clothing, money, and sundry equipment. The Vita offers the longest of them (14. 2-5). Very little is said about the personal habits of Claudius (13. 5), omina imperii are absent, likewise astrology and dreams. But auspicia Claudiana are mentioned (9. 9; 11. 3), to recur once later on (Aur. 17. 5); and several verse prophecies are quoted, two of them from oracles not employed before - and enigmatic, namely 'Commagenis' and 'in Apennino' (10. 1; 4). Lines of Virgil emitted in oracular form here make their last appearance - and their first after a long interval (since Alex. 14. 5). Further, the author's interest in the curious and the exotic is revealed by a story about Moses, in relation to the span of human life and the brief reign of Claudius (2. 4). The treatment seems mildly humorous. 44 Jokes do not occur, there is only one pun, one bogus authority, both in the same context where the author derides 'Gallus Antipater, ancilla honorum et historicorum dehonestamentum' (5. 4). The label is Sallustian. It also appealed to Ammianus (XXVI. 6. 16). The Vita Claudii of 'Trebellius Pollio' permits useful comparisons of technique and resources with both earlier and later parts of the Historia Augusta. The author had a penchant for variegation, often perverse. It 43 P. Damerau opts for Gordian ii (o.c. 41 f )■ Perhaps rather Gordian iii, cf. Emperors and Biography (1971), 232. Unlike Victor and Eutropius, who conflate, the Epitome happens to distinguish the two (27. 1). 44 For the legend, J. Geffcken, Hermes lv (1920), 294; R. Syme, o. c. 25.

78

The Ancestry ofConstantine

was needed when he came to deal with the soldier emperors. And there is a visible enhancement of audacity. It was for a time the fashion to explain resemblances between 'Pollio' and ' Vopiscus' by a defensive argument: the latter imitated the former. That device seems to have lapsed. X. Epilogue From the beginning this biography occupied a frontal position in the controversy about the authorship, purpose and date of the Historia Augusta. Dessau in 1889 exposed the genealogical fraud. So in fact did Klebs in the same year, but he shrank from the consequences.45 They were drawn by Dessau, sharp and clear. The biographer 'Pollio' who purports to be writing when Constantius is Caesar (i.e., before May 1, 305) is condemned by his foreknowledge of the great secret disclosed in 310. Nor was it conceivable that any writer under the Tetrarchy should proclaim that one of the two Caesars had an emperor for ancestor and was himself the destined progenitor of a line of Augusti. Mommsen at once raised objection, and with various pleas.46 The Claudian ancestry, he opined, might already have been known to the friends of the family; indeed, the Vita might have been composed with the express purpose of giving it publicity. Further, he went on to deny that the ancestry was invented in 310 precisely because Cons tan tine needed a new legitimation after the suppression of Maximianus Herculius. The authority of Mommsen continues to be invoked by scholars of a conservative persuasion, or at least tendency. The scrupulous author of a subtle and sceptical enquiry into the whole problem concludes that in this instance Mommsen's remarks remain decisive.47 The same critic admits the possibility that 'the tradition' was circulated a few years before 310; and a further 'possibility of a later editing of the Historia Augusta during the time of Constantine'. Finally, he avows his impression that 'the use of Claudius Gothicus in the Historia Augusta smacks of the age ofConstantine.' 48 In estimating the Historia Augusta many uncertainties have to be affirmed. And all sorts of possibilities might be canvassed, with no end in sight. For example, if the Vita Claudii, or the significant portions of 45

E. Klebs, Hist. Zeitschr. NFXXV (1889), 229 ff. Th. Mommsen, Hermes xxv (1890), 254 = Ges. Schr. vii (1909), 326. 47 A. Momigliano, Secondo contribute agli studi classici (1960), 119, n. 24: 'Mommsen's remarks, Hermes xxv.254, n. 1 = Ges. Schriften, vii. 326, n. 2, remain decisive.' 48 A. Momigliano, o.c. 120. That scholar also discusses the faked ancestry in reference to Elag. 35. 3 in EHR lxxxiv (1969), 566 ff. (review of Ammianus and the Historia Augusta). On which, see The Historia Augusta. A Callfor Clarity (1971), 57 ff. 46

The Ancestry of Constantine

79

it, were composed in the reign of Constantine, alternatives of some interest emerge: dynastic names were faked either by the Emperor or by a contemporary. It is better to abide by the probable. It is not probable that the fraud was invented under the Tetrarchy, in the lifetime of Constantius (Mommsen and Klebs for reasons of convenience ordained that the Vita was composed towards the end of the period 293-305). Further, as concerns the alternative possibility, inspection of the Vita shows that it coheres, after its own fashion. The remodelling would have had to be drastic. For that reason, or rather perhaps for others, one recent scholar boldly affirms a conviction that the biography was composed beyond doubt in the time of Constantine. 49 Not a true and integral conservative. Others in this late season cling like Klebs to the osten­ sible date (it should be 'dates') of the Historia Augusta and the plural authorship. 50 It will be suitable to terminate (and that none too soon) with a quotation from the poet whom the Historia Augusta cherished and exploited in wondrous ways: Nox ruit, Aenea, nosfando ducimus horas. 49

E. Manni, L'impero di Gallieno (1949), 98. Not changed in the second edition (1970). Thus H. Bardon, Le Crepuscule des Chars. Scenes et visages de I'Histoire Auguste (1964). Further, S. Timpanaro in Studi distoriografia antica in memoria di Leonardo Ferrero (1971), 129. After stating his full agreement with Momigliano's position, he continues 'caso mai, proprio in base agli argomenti stessi di Momigliano, sarei ancor piu decisamente favorevole alia datazione tradizionale e alia pluralita di autori'. This verdict of Timpanaro is quoted with approbation by Momigliano, EHR lxxxviii (1973), 114. From which, the reader can hardly fail to infer that Momigliano himself now believes in the 'traditional date and the plural authorship' of the HA. 50

VI Astrology in the Historia Augusta* I. Introduction B I O G R A P H I E S of the R o m a n emperors abound in signs, wonders, and predictions: some reported at the time, others suitably recalled in the sequel, or invented. T h e work of Suetonius bears ample witness, and it may be assumed that the consular Marius Maximus duly conformed to his model. N o r would the author of the Historia Augusta neglect this necessary and seductive feature. After reproducing what he found in the sources he went on to develop a congenial vein of fraud and fiction. Astrology has an especial place and rank. The adepts of this science w e r e feared and favoured by emperors, curbed or banished from time to time, and never held lightly. As an enemy of the mathematici pertinently remarks, 'genus h o m i n u m potentibus infidum, sperantibus fallax, quod in civitate nostra et vetabitur semper et retinebitur'. 1 O n a proper analysis of the Historia Augusta, items without n u m b e r that stand unquestioned in handbooks of imperial history and literature are shown to be fraudulent inventions. Unremitting scrutiny of the biographies can still augment the total. It may therefore be w o r t h the effort to bring together all the explicit references to the ars of the Chaldeans and examine them one by one for source and veracity. 2 Their content and their distribution should prove variously instructive. T h e enquiry has a bearing on the methods of the impostor - and might even have something to tell about his tastes and predilections.

II.

Chaldaei

T h a t native designation tended in c o m m o n usage to be replaced by mathematici, so Gellius states (I. 9. 6). And it suffered a degradation of a * Reprinted from BonnerHAC 1972/4 (1976), 291 ff. 1 Tacitus, Hist. i. 22. 1. 2 Reference will be made to the ample and erudite study of F. H. Cramer, Astrology in Roman Law and Politics, Mem. Am. Phil. Soc. Vol. 37 (Philadelphia, 1954). Where the Historia Augusta is concerned, the author suffers from failings all too common.

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

81

different kind, being extended to cover the general class of seers, diviners and magicians. A careful historian like Tacitus observes the distinction. For example, the first time he employs the word, when introducing the case of Libo Drusus: 'Chaldaeorum promissa, m a g o r u m sacra' (Ann. II. 27. 2). And observe, in the sequel to the affair, 'facta de mathematicis magisque Italia depellendis senatus consulta' (32. 3). T w o of the five instances in the Historia Augusta have nothing to do w i t h astrology. It will be expedient to segregate them. The first is of s o m e interest, being relevant to structure and sources in one of the early biographies. A bad section of the Vita Marci, ending with an invocation of Diocletian (and grafted onto the basic source), opens with the report that C o m m o d u s was illegitimate and goes on to zfabella which how­ ever carries no proof of the assertion: Marcus, wishing to cure Faustina o f an infatuation (purely visual) for a gladiator, consulted the Chaldaei w h o enjoined that the gladiator be killed, that the Empress bathe in his blood (19. 2 ff.). Further d o w n recurs the allegation of illegitimacy, for ('multi autem ferunt') Faustina went in for amours with fishermen and gladiators at Caieta (19. 7). Like sundry other pieces of defamation (clear accretions on the source), this one may be attributed without discomfort to the consular biographer Marius Maximus, who repro­ duced and enhanced the malicious gossip current in high society. 3 M a x i m u s may also be the author of the gruesome fabella about the blood of a gladiator. Perhaps not. Second, Elagabalus when intending to make war on the M a r c o m a n n i learned that Marcus 'per Chaldaeos et magos' had been able to secure the permanent loyalty of that people (9. 1). Whatever m a y be reported or surmised about operations of that emperor (cf. Marcus 13. 1), the statement about Elagabalus looks fictitious. III. The references to astrology Hadr.

2. 4 16. 7 16. 10

Ael.

3. 8

T h e prediction made to Hadrian in Moesia - and previously by his great-uncle Hadrian's expertise, he could forecast the events of each year Favour shown to astrologers and other scholars, scientists, artists Hadrian knew the horoscope of Ceionius Commodus

3 For the deleterious items about Faustina (and also about Marcus) imported into the text from Marius Maximus see Emperors and Biography (1971), 128 ff.; HAC 1970 (1972), 287 ff. The latter paper (above, 30 ff.) has observations about the structure of the Vita as a whole.

82

Astrology in the Historia Augusta 3. 9 4. 5

Hadrian's expertise, according to Marius Maximus C o m m e n t from a 'litteratus' on the horoscope of Ceionius

Comm.

1.4

Pert. Sev.

1.3

T h e erroneous prediction of astrologers about the twin brother of C o m m o d u s The father of Pertinax has recourse to a 'Chaldaeus' Severus consults an astrologer in 'quadam civitate Africana' Severus learns about the horoscope of Julia D o m n a Severus indicted for consulting 'vel vates vel Chaldaeos' Severus punishes those w h o consulted Chaldaeans 'de sua salute' Severus' skill at 'mathesis' Severus knows the 'genitura' of Geta The horoscope of Julia D o m n a

2.8 3.9 4.3 15.5

9.6 2.6f. 3. 1

Pesc. Geta. Diad.

5.1;4

Alex.

5.4 27.5 44.4 62.2

Gord.

20. 1 f.

Claud.

2. 4

Quad. tyr.

7. 4 8. 3

IV.

The astrologers' declarations about the horoscope of Macrinus' son T h e horoscope of Julia D o m n a , according to Marius Maximus Skilled himself at 'mathesis', Alexander encourages its public practice Salaries for 'mathematici' and others T h e prediction of the astrologer 'Thrasybulus', Alexander's close friend Gordian consults an astrologer about his son's horoscope T h e span of human life, according to the 'doctissimi mathematicorum' 'Mathematici' in Egypt Jewish, Samaritan, and Christian priests are all astrologers

Hadrian

T h e factual account of Hadrian's early life and career takes him as far as the second military tribunate, in Moesia Inferior. He was there told by an astrologer about his imperial destiny - which he had previously

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

83

learned 'a patruo magno Aelio Hadriano peritia caelestium callente' (2.4). The notice raises serious questions of source and authenticity. The rest of the chapter contains heterogeneous and mainly anecdotal material. For example, the story about the malice of Servianus, the husband of Hadrian's sister (2. 6), and the report about relations with the pages of the imperial court (2. 7). And there is a sors Vergiliana, that typical device of the ingenious author (2. 8). Then another oracle, 'ex fano Niceforii Iovis', reported on the authority of the writer 'Apollonius Syrus Platonicus' (2. 9). No other evidence attests oracles emanating from the famous temple at Antioch; and this 'Apollonius' looks like a figment. Finally, the marriage of Hadrian, which was effected 'favente Plotina, Traiano leviter, ut Marius Maximus dicit, volente' (2. 10). When Marius Maximus is cited in the Historia Augusta further traces can sometimes be detected in the vicinity. The two items (that is, the astrologer in Moesia supplemented by the great-uncle's predic­ tion) might go back to the Autobiography, by the channel of Maximus, it is true. Otherwise they will have to be regarded as inventive products, either of Maximus or of the author himself. Next, a passage describing Hadrian's literary tastes concludes by asserting his skill in the art of astrology. So exact was it that on the first day ofJanuary he would set down in writing all that was to happen to him until the year's end - and this Hadrian did in his last year, but only 'usque ad illam horam qua est mortuus' (16. 7). The same particular in closely similar language recurs in the Vita Aelii (3. 9). It is there attributed to Marius Maximus. There is something else. The second notice follows immediately on remarks about L. Ceionius Commodus, otherwise L. Aelius Caesar, the destined successor. He was in such poor health that Hadrian at once repented of the adoption and might have discarded this heir, for he had other persons in mind, had he (Hadrian) lived long enough (3.7). Further, 'as scrupulous biographers of Hadrian affirm', Hadrian knew the genitura of Ceionius Commodus and, distrusting his capacity for government, only adopted him for personal reasons 'ut suae satisfaceret voluptati'; and, 'as some say', because of a secret oath that bound him (3.8). Then follow the words asserting Hadrian's expertise 'fuisse enim Hadrianum peritum matheseos Marius Maximus . . . demonstrat' (3. 9). Either Marius Maximus is himself the authority for Hadrian's familiarity with the horoscope of Ceionius or it is an elaboration of the clever author. He reverts to the theme a little later. After the death of Ceionius, one of Hadrian's scholarly friends tried to console him by

84

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

impugning the horoscope: 'quid? si non recte constellatio eius collecta est, quern credimus esse victurum? (4. 5). This story, by the way, implies a horoscope that promised to Ceionius a longer span of life than he in fact enjoyed. After mentioning Hadrian's bitter reply, the author repeats the notion that the Emperor towards the end of his life intended to find a substitute for Ceionius (4. 6); and he affirms that the decease of the prince seconded Hadrian's design (4. 7). From this farrago it is a relief to turn aside and conclude the rubric with an innocuous item from the Vita Hadriani. The Emperor extended his favour to all manner of scholars, artists and the like. Astrologers are on the list (16. 10). The context appears sound. The basic source of the Vitae of the nine rulers from Hadrian to Caracalla (including L. Verus) was a sober and accurate author of biographies writing not long after 217, so it has been contended; and for conveni­ ence and discretion he may be styled Ignotus.4 Now the main trend of the Vita Hadriani is benevolent towards the Emperor, or at least neutral, whereas the four pieces of annotation citing Marius Maximus by name import unfriendly insinuations.5 Furthermore, where he is cited elsewhere in the 'Nine Vitae, the items look like additions. That is not the case in the largely fictional biography of Alexander (five citations), or in the 'secondary Vitae of princes and pretenders.6 V. Fiction and Fraud Hadrian was notoriously 'omnium curiositatum explorator'. No point therefore in denying to this polymath an interest in astrology, even if the attestation happens to be suspect. The 'Chaldaeorum ars' stood high in prestige and authority. When a person of the intellectual quality of Tiberius Caesar was a fervent addict, even the sceptical Tacitus might wonder, but did not succumb (Ann. VI. 21 f ) . Hadrian in the Autobiography may have said something about predictions of his destiny. Why not? There was the precedent of Caesar Augustus. None the less, Maximus' report of his portentous expertise (Hadr. 16. 7, certified by Ael. 3. 9) should be dismissed as an extravagant invention. The suspicion therefore arises that Maximus magnified this aspect of Hadrian. For what it is worth it may be noted 4 HAC 1966/7 (1968), 131 ff. = Emperors and Biography (1971), 30 ff. For arguments in favour of Marius Maximus as the basic source (he was an old favourite) see now A. Birley, Septimius Severus (197?), App. ii; A. D. E. Cameron JRS Ixi (1971), 262 ff. 5 HA Hadr. 3. 10; 12. 4; 20. 3; 25. 4. For the structure of this Vita see Emperors and Biography (1971), 113ff.;126ff. 6 The distinction (a valuable clue) has not always been recognized. For example, not in the paper 'Not Marius Maximus', Hermes xciv (1968), 494 ff. See further HAC 1970 (1972), 287 ff. (above, 30 ff.). The single citation in the Elagabalus (11.6) looks bogus. It occurs in a fictional context (11. 2-7) which interrupts the narration.

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

85

that astrology has no place in the account of Cassius Dio, which though abridged shows a propensity to the anecdotal. Furthermore, it is not safe to assume that Hadrian was himself a devout believer in the science of the stars. An unobjectionable passage in the Vita states 'in summa familiaritate Epictetum et Heliodorum philosophos . . . habuit' (16. 10). The latter, namely Avidius Heliodorus, was a promi­ nent Epicurean. 7 The epoch of Trajan and Hadrian discloses the scepti­ cal along with the credulous. The same passage, alluding to the ruler's favour shown to scholars, adds 'eminente Favorino'. This man, a sophist, and not in all ways an attractive character, issued a refutation of astrology in a potent sequence of arguments: Gellius heard the lecture and took it down. 8 Even that later age which gave birth to the Augustan History was not devoid of rationalism. A sagacious proconsul of Africa who was a known expert in medical science made an effort to convince the young Augustine that astrology was nonsense. To no avail.9 Another matter concerning the predilections of Hadrian may suit­ ably be recalled in this place. Scholars and romancers tend to make much of his zeal for exotic cults, sometimes to plain extravagance.10 By contrast, a curt statement in the Vita: 'sacra Romana diligentissime curavit, peregrina contempsit' (22. 10). It is embedded in a sober chapter replete with valuable details. The verdict is of some interest if it reflects the unknown biographer, not the late compiler and a prejudice about 'good emperors'. To return to horoscopes. That of Hadrian himself has been pre­ served. It was compiled by Antigonus of Nicaea (date unattested).11 Another of his horoscopes has been claimed for the young Pedanius Fuscus, the son of Hadrian's niece Julia and Cn. Pedanius Fuscus (cos. 118).12 The parents fade out, with no mention in Dio or in the Historia Augusta- or in some modern textbooks, although the consul of 118 was the next ruler of Rome if anything happened to Hadrian.13 Surmise is baffled. The innocuous explanation would be a pestilence in the early years of the reign. The Vita Hadriani in a confused passage notices the son: Hadrian hated Fuscus 'quod imperium praesagiis et ostentis agitatus speraret' (23. 3). But it discloses no awareness of his identity, or his fate. 7

PIR2 A 1405. To be recovered from Gellius xiv. 1, cf. Cramer, o. c. 197 f. 9 Augustine, Conf. iv. 3. 10 W. Weber in CAH xi (1936), 321: 'one ponders vainly why he did not point the way to domination to the new religion of the Christians.' 11 CCAG vi. 97 ff., cf. Cramer, o. c. 164 ff. 12 CCAG viii. 2. 85 f, cf. Cramer, o. c. 176 ff. 13 Not anywhere in C 4 H x i (1936). 8

86

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

According to Dio, Fuscus perished along with his nonagenarian grandfather Julius Servianus after Hadrian, passing over the next of kin, adopted Ceionius Commodus. 14 Whereas Dio gives the youth's age as eighteen, the horoscope records a man of twenty-five.15 Along with personal ambitions and political forecasts, horoscopes and predictions were no doubt in active play during the turbid intrigues that enveloped the last years of Hadrian's life. Something of which may well have percolated to Marius Maximus - who in any case would not be averse from speculating about this congenial theme. None the less, it cannot be assumed certain that this biographer is responsible for the first of the two stories about the genitura of Ceionius in the Vita Aelii, after which he is cited by name. Rather perhaps the author of the Historia Augusta, ingeniously producing a specimen of the astrological expertise which Maximus attributed to Hadrian. One of his habits is to take up and develop a hint or a topic he found in his sources. In any event the second story, namely the comment of the 'litteratus' on the 'constellatio' of Ceionius, is presumably his own invention. The scholarly author had a proper affection for 'litterati' (cf. Macr. 13. 5; Alex. 3. 4; 16. 3; Tac. 4. 4). Astrology in relation to Hadrian continues to engage attention, notably among those who shun the discipline of carefully assessing the sources of the Historia Augusta or ignore the miserable quality of the 'secondary Vitae\ The genitura of Ceionius Commodus in the Vita Aelii seldom forfeits appeal. One signal performance seems to attest audacity rather than innocence. Carcopino supposed that Ceionius (born in 101) was in fact the son of Hadrian, the fruit of adultery with the lady (her name has not been preserved) who after divorce, or the decease of her husband, married in succession Avidius Nigrinus and Vettulenus Civica. Carcopino adduced the 'Verus' in the name of Hadrian's heir (according to the Historia Augusta), and he made especial play with 'filium meum Verum' in the famous letter addressed to Servianus (Quadr. tyr. 8.8): Servianus would be in possession of the family secret. Further, the genitura which Hadrian knew (AeL 3. 8) could denote birth and parentage, so he argued. 16 It will suffice to state that only the Historia Augusta assigned the cognomen 'Verus' to the nomenclature of the heir - and it is wrong; 14 Dio lxix. 17. 2. The Historia Augusta, however, puts the catastrophe of Servianus before the adoption (Hadr. 23. 8, cf. 10). That version is preferred by W. Weber in CAHxi (1936), 322. 15 Cramer adopts the figure given by the horoscope. He also suggests that the catastrophe of Servianus and Fuscus occurred early in 138 (o. c. 178). Which is not probable. The adoption of Ceionius Commodus took place towards the end of 136; and he died on Jan. 1, 138. 16 J. Carcopino, REA li (1949), 304 f. The whole article (262 ff.) is republished in Passion et politique sous les Cesars (1958), 143 ff.

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

87

andgenitura means what it means elsewhere in the work (ten times), as also in Suetonius (six times). Pure speculation, untainted by 'evidence', and not supported or subverted by argumentation, would be a safer recourse. If a bastard be required for Hadrian, the fantasy of the ingenious historian might have been lured towards the youth Annius Verus who along with the son of Ceionius was adopted by the second designated successor, under injunction from Hadrian in the last months of his life. VI. Septimius Severus At an early stage in his career as a senator Severus consulted 'in quadam civitate Africana', an astrologer, who at first was distrustful and said 'tuam non alienam pone genituram'. Being reassured, the expert went on to announce everything that in fact came to pass (2.8). This item need not detain. The occasion is vague, the motif may be a folk story. Next, something of a different order. Being in search of a second wife during his tenure of the province Lugdunensis, Severus gave attention to horoscopes, 'ipse quoque matheseos peritissimus'. When he learned that there was a girl in Syria whose genitura showed her the bride of a king fut regi iungeretur'), he sought her hand in marriage and obtained it through the intervention of friends (3. 9). That is how Severus came to marry Julia Domna. The story recurs in the Geta (3. 1), also in the biography of Severus Alexander, where Marius Maximus is cited as the authority (4. 4).17 A little further on comes the proconsulate of Sicily (in 189/90). About this time Severus was indicted for high treason, 'quasi de imperio vel vates vel Chaldaeos consuluisset', but the Prefects of the Guard dismissed the case. Their motive is alleged: 'iam Commodo in odium veniente' (4. 3). At first sight there would seem no good reason for casting doubt on the incident. 18 None the less, one might wonder whether it is not an invention designed to corroborate the imperial ambitions of Severus, as implied by the story about how he selected his wife. To proceed. When in Syria at the time of the Parthian War Severus put to death many people 'quasi Chaldaeos aut vates de sua salute consuluissent'. He suspected above all anybody who might seem 'idoneus imperio' (15. 5). Further, Severus went on to deny that he had ordered the executions, notably in one named instance: 'quod de Laeto praecipue Marius Maximus dicit' (15.6). 17 18

This significant reference was missed by PIR2] 663. A. Birley, Septimius Severus (1971), 127.

88

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

Finally, in two of the 'secondary Vitae . To a prophecy about the end of Pescennius Niger is appended the notice 'quod quidam dicunt ipsum Severum de mathesi qua callebat dixisse' (Pesc. 9. 6). The word quidam does not exclude Maximus. Next, the Vita Getae. It has not only the horoscope of Julia Domna (3. 1). It states that Severus knew the genitura of his younger son, being skilled in this matter, 'ut plerique Afrorum'. The allegation is supported by a remark made by the Emperor to Juvenalis, the Guard Prefect, expressing his surprise that Geta would become a 'divus', for he discerned 'nihil imperiale' in the horoscope (2. 6f.). The anecdote is a piece of clever fiction: Juvenalis is a historical character, already on record in the Historia Augusta, and the author himself may be African by origin. Moreover, it has a structural function: it is clearly intended to lead on to the murderous witticism he invents for Caracalla: 'sit divus dum non sit vivus' (2. 8). From experience or conviction, Septimius Severus put heavy emphasis on the dreams, portents and predictions that foretold his destiny and conducted him to the supreme power. They were registered in his Autobiography, and the loyal Cassius Dio wrote a monograph dedi­ cated to this felicitous theme. 19 Herodian alludes to the whole matter, in brief dry comment. 20 The rubric about dreams (it is clear) was varied and extensive, and worth investigation. Either coincidence or discrepancy is to be expected in the particulars transmitted by Dio and by the Historia Augusta. That work carries five dreams. 21 Two of them are probably the author's own inventions. In the first, Severus dreams that his successor will be an Antoninus (Sev. 10. 4, cf. Geta. 1. 3). The second, in a suspect passage, is connected with the false allegation that he died at the age of eighty-nine (22. 1, cf. Pesc. 5.1). For the rest, both sources have the she-wolf and the remarkable dream that disclosed the provinces of the Empire chanting in unison. No conclusion emerges. In passing, the words somnio and somnium in the Historia Augusta. There are eleven instances, six of them in reference to Septimius Severus. 22 In the sequel the author hardly ever used the device for fictional purposes. As concerns astrology, the Emperor knew by his own mastery of the science that he would not come back from Britain. Thus Dio, who subjoins a description of the star-studded ceiling of the imperial hall of 19

20 Dio lxxiii. 23. 1. Herodian ii. 9. 2 f. SevA. 8; 3. 4; 3. 5; 10. 4 (cf. Geta. 1. 3); 22. 1. Dio also registers five dreams (lxxv. 3. 1 ff.), two of them coincident with those in the Historia Augusta. 22 Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 189. 21

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

89

audience, where the part representing the moment of his birth was kept concealed.23 And one may add the Septizodium he constructed. The central and acute problem is the genitura of Julia Domna. It is generally accorded credence.24 And the legend may further be enhanced by styling the lady a 'princesse d'Emese'. 25 Cassius Dio, however, averred that her origins were modest.26 Hesitance is enjoined, or rather scepticism and denial. It should stagger the best disciplined of credulities to believe that Severus who, whatever the force of his ambition, was crafty and alert to the times in which he lived, would court the hazard of seeking a bride whose known and verifiable horoscope declared that she was destined to marry a king. His own survival would be predictably brief. The legend, it follows, is subsequent to Severus' seizure of the power in 193. It may then have been advertised by Severus himself, or put into circulation by zealous adherents (or idle gossip). In any event, the sole extant evidence derives from Marius Maximus. Which might give pause. Dio (that is to say, his epitomators) ignores the story, despite his propensity to the recording of omens and prophecies. The consular biographer was also responsible for the assertion that Hadrian could foretell the course of events from the first day of each year (Hadr. 16. 7, certified by Ael. 3. 9). The valid suspicion therefore arises that, influenced by what engrossed attention or belief in his own time, Maximus transferred the theme to an earlier ruler and embel­ lished it by ingenious conjecture or inventions. Predictions about Hadrian or his own experience are in question. The Historia Augusta in a suspect passage registers the forecast made by the great-uncle, 'peritia caelestium callente' (Hadr. 2. 4). One of the 'secondary Vitae has 'ipsum Severum de mathesi qua callebat' (Pesc. 9. 6). These happen to be the solitary occurrences of the verb calleo in the Historia Augusta. Not enough, however, for any valid conclusion. The basic source of the 'Nine Vitae\ so it appears, was not much concerned with astrology or with anecdotes. Astrology is absent from the biographies of Pius and Didius Julianus, which exhibit few accre­ tions. Elsewhere the preponderance of references to that topic reflects the subsidiary source, Marius Maximus, in his assertions about 23

Diolxxvii. 11. 1 f.,cf.J.Guey, Bull. soc. nat. ant. France, 1956, 33 ff. A. Birley, o. c. 118: 'her horoscope apparently foretold'; 123: 'he had surely learned Julia's horoscope in Syria' (that is when legate of iv Scythica). It is further suggested that she was given the name 'Domna' because of her 'genitura' (ib. 297). 25 J. Gage, Basileia. Les Cesars, les wis d'orient, et les 'mages' (1968), 221. That scholar, by the way, accords full credence (and a large role) to 'Ulpius Crinitus', who adopted Aurelian (Aur. 10. 2, etc.). 26 Dio lxxix. 24. 1: EKdiyuoriKov yevovgEJTL jueya dgdeioa. 24

90

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

Hadrian and Severus. As will be demonstrated, when the author of the Historia Augusta writes in his own person later on, he tends to neglect astrology, or even towards the end discard a theme of obvious appeal for fictional elaborations. VII. The other items A clear result has emerged: two-thirds of the passages in the Historia Augusta concern two rulers, Hadrian and Severus. The rest may now be put under brief inspection. In the introduction to the life of Commodus is registered the early decease of his twin brother Antoninus, 'quern parem astrorum cursu Commodo mathematici promittebant' (1. 4). Perhaps speculation or invention, but there is no valid reason for denying this item to the source. In the hour when Pertinax saw the lighr^of day, a black horse climbed up onto the roof of the house, stayed there a while, fell off, and died. His father thereupon went to a 'Chaldaeus', who foretold 'futura ingentia' (1.3). Perhaps from Marius Maximus, who, so it has been claimed, produced the version that the father of Pertinax was a freedman (1. I). 27 Dio merely stated that Pertinax was of obscure origin (LXXIII. 3. 1). The discrepancy is not total: Dio may have chosen to tone down the facts, being moved by a prepossession in favour of a 'good emperor'. Be that as it may, the item is not sufficient t( establish Maximus as the source of the whole biography. On the day that Macrinus' son was born, the mathematici exclaimed that his genitura indicated that he would be an emperor's son and himself an emperor (Diad. 5. 1). Further, it was identical, 'et ea hora et signis', with that of Antoninus Pius; but, they said, he would not enjoy his station for long (5. 4). Plain fiction, the author's own. The birth of Severus Alexander was attended by many omens, predictions are mentioned, also 'haruspices', 'coniectores', and a 'vates' (5. 1 ff.; 13. 1-14. 4). But no astrologers occur there. However, Alexander himself was an expert in the science of the stars, he instructed mathematici to give public teaching (27. 5), and he furnished state endowment (44. 4). These particulars, modest at first sight, deserve no more credit than those startling inventions about Jews and Christians such as Alexander's domestic chapel with its collection of 'animae sanctiores' (29. 2) or the appellation 'archisynagogus' (28. 7) which some scholars have been reluctant to discard. In corroboration of the prince's tastes is added his close friendship with the astrologer 'Thrasybulus', who forecast the manner of his end (62. 2). This person 27

W. Seston, HAC 1964/5 (1966), 218.

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

91

might derive (imperfect memory or wilful perversion of the name) from the famous Thrasyllus, whom the author found in Suetonius.28 From this point onwards, in the second half of the Historia Augusta (reckoning by bulk and the Teubner edition), astrology makes only rare and isolated appearances. First, when Gordian consulted a mathematicus about the genitura of his son, he was told that father and son would both become emperors (20. 1). Gordian laughed, but the astrologer displayed the 'constellatio', and further foretold the day of their death, the manner of it, and the locality (20. 2 f.). Second, when descanting upon the brief span accorded to the Emperor Claudius, the author mentions the term of human life according to the 'doctissimi mathematicorum', namely 120 years. Those experts add that only Moses lived longer, who complained when 125 that he was too young to die, but was reassured, 'ab incerto numine': no man ever after would exceed that limit (2. 4). The fable illustrates the author's curious erudition - and a gentle sense of humour. Third, Egypt. In preface to the Letter of Hadrian, the author includes mathematici in a list of the denizens of that country, motley and mainly deleterious (Quadr. tyr. 7. 4). Then, in the body of the Letter, with comic vituperation of Egypt and the religions she harbours: 'nemo illic archisynagogus Iudaeorum, nemo Samarites, nemo Christianorum presbyter non mathematicus, non haruspex, non alyptes' (8. 2 f.). Egyptian astrologers, that was no novelty; and the author might have drawn inspiration from the digression in Ammianus where Alexandria is celebrated as the especial home of the science 'quae fatorum vias ostendit' (XXII. 16. 17). However that may be, zealous preoccupation with the disclosures about religion which the docu­ ment furnishes has tended to obscure its literary excellence. By paradox the high tribute comes indirectly, from those who hold it genuine, as reflecting the style of the Emperor himself.29 Or genuine in parts, the allusions to Christianity being prudently segregated on grounds of anachronism. 30 After the Vita Alexandri the use of astrology as a fictional device thus 28 Suetonius, Tib. 14. 4, etc. An enigmatic item about astrologers in Sidonius may be registered: 'licet . . . Vertacum Thrasybulum Saturninum sollicitus evolvas' (Epp. viii. 11. 10). Duly noted by Stein in P-W vi A, 577. In any event, the anecdote in the Vita Alexandri is a fiction. Neither Vertacus nor Saturninus occurs in PIR1. The name of the former is probably Celtic. Saturninus (common and indistinctive name) might be identical with the medical man, the disciple of Sextus Empiricus (Diogenes Laertius ix. 116). 29 H. Bardon, Les Empereurs et les lettres latines (1940), 400. 30 J. Carcopino, o.c. 304 f.

92

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

declines sharply. Of the first four of the six biographers, 'Julius Capitolinus' goes on to compose three fairly long Vitae. But he has only the prediction made to old Gordian. Then there is 'Trebellius Pollio' with astrologers in the context of the fable about Moses; and the inventive talent of 'Flavius Vopiscus' is confined to the bare mention of mathematici in Egypt.

VIII. The vocabulary Brief and cursory inspection might yield something or other. From first to last the literature of imperial Rome carries, as was to be expected, abundant references to astrology. A chapter of Tertullian is instructive for terminology (De. idol. I. 9), and two treatises survive, viz. those of Censorinus (written in 238) and of Firmicus Maternus (c. 337). The Historia Augusta has the following terms: mathematicus (12), mathesis (5), genitura (11), Chaldaeus (5), astrologus (2), constellatio (2). Comparison with Suetonius, the model of the Historia Augusta, is of some utility. He has mathematicus (12), genitura (6), Chaldaeus (2), astrologus (1). The coincidence in the use of the standard terms mathematicus and genitura comes out clearly. Suetonius has genesis twice (Vesp. 15; Dom. 10. 3): in Petronius and Juvenal, but not in the Historia Augusta. Also the technical thema (Divus Aug. 94. 12). But not mathesis, which is a later formation. Neither writer favours astrologus (attested for Ennius and then in Cicero and in Lucretius). And neither furnishes examples oiastrologia (from Varro and Cicero onwards); genethliaci (meaning Chaldaei, in Varro and noted by Gellius XIV. 1. 1); horoscopus for the first time in Manilius II. 829); climacter (the elder Pliny, NH VII. 161, but compare the Greek form in the letter of Augustus to Gaius Caesar quoted by Gellius XV. 7. 3); climactericus (Pliny, Epp. II. 20. 3); nativitqs (first in Tertullian, De idol I. 9). Writers with pretentions to style keep away from indistinctive language or technical terms. It is no surprise that Tacitus eschews astrologus, astrologia, genitura, genesis. The two pieces about Tiberius Caesar exhibit the historian's mature manner, and his skill at avoidances. In the first, the comments on the astrologers who foretold that Tiberius, going away to Campania and to Capreae, would never see Rome again (Ann. IV. 58. 2 f.). The second is the Emperor's forecast about the consul Sulpicius Galba: 'et tu, Galba, quandoque degustabis imperium'. To which is subjoined his knowledge of the 'Chaldaeorum ars', with the name of his familiar at Rhodes, the great

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

93

Thrasyllus (VI. 20. 2), the test to which he put Thrasyllus (21), and the digression on predestination (22). The word mathematicus had occurred three times in the Historiae, but in the Annales it is restricted to the prosaic report of two decrees of the Roman Senate (II. 32. 3; XII. 52. 3). Instead, the solid and more decorative Chaldaeus is on impressive show (eight times), with 'Chaldaeorum ars' employed to specify astrology (VI. 20. 2; XVI. 22). And ars itself suffices (VI. 22. 4), most splendidly in the 'breve confinium artis et falsi' (IV. 58. 3). Again, sors nascendi (IV. 20. 3) will serve for a horoscope, or genitalis hora and ortus (XVI. 14. 2). Further, the plural of sidus (four times), for example 'positus siderum' (VI. 21. 2). But stellae occurs only once, in the astrological context as Vagae stellae' (VI. 22. 2). And he has no instance ofsigna. Neither Suetonius nor the Historia Augusta employs sidera, but the latter has 'astrorum cursu' in the reference (which appears nonfictional) to the twin brother of Commodus (Comm. 1. 4). Prose specimens of astra (it is mostly poetical, and is avoided by Tacitus) deserve attention. Observe in Vitruvius 'astrorum cursus' (I. 10. 1) and 'astrorum periti' (IX. 5. 1). A periphrasis is an elegant device for designating those who know the ways of the stars. Thus Cicero, 'Chaldaei cognitione astrorum . . . antecellunt' (De div. I. 91). The alert and artful Tacitus has 'periti caelestium' in a stylish piece (IV. 58. 2). It is an unexpected pleasure to come upon in the Historia Augusta 'peritia caelestium callens' as the label for Hadrian's great-uncle (Hadr. 2. 4). As has been pointed out above, the Historia Augusta has only one other instance of the verb calleo: it occurs in one of the 'secondary Vitae in an allegation about the expertise of Severus, prefixed with 'quod quidam dicunt' (Pesc. 9. 6). As concerns the first passage, there are some grounds for suspecting the presence of Marius Maximus. 31 Style leads on to questions of language. This criterion has not been on high exhibit in the long controversy about the authorship and date of the Historia Augusta. For a clear reason. It was conducted in the main by students of history, with keen zest in the hunt for anachronisms, an exuberance of erudition - and some of the same tired topics ever recurrent. The word-fanciers have been largely in abeyance. A paradox, given the untold wealth and variety of the Historia Augusta - apart from the existence of a lexicon. At the same time, for historical purposes (it must be confessed), scant prospects 31 If transmitted by Maximus, the great-uncle derives either from the Autobiography or from his own inventive fantasy. Similarly some doubt might be conceived about 'atavus Maryllinus, qui primus in sua familia senator populi Romani fuit' (Hadr. 1.2). The item is inserted after the mention of Hadrian's mother, sister and wife. Compare Tacitus (1958), 603: 'if correct and correctly transmitted'.

94

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

offer of discriminating between the linguistic usage of the two epochs, that of Diocletian and Constantine and that of Theodosius, given the dearth of pagan texts in the former period. Not but that inspection of certain phenomena can prove instructive. For example, items belonging to the vocabulary of the common soldier - which, however, might have been current for a long term before their first recorded emergence.32 Better, the terms of extrane­ ous origin drungus (Prob. 19. 2) and carrago (Gall. 13. 9; Claud. 6. 6; 8. 2; Aur. 11. 6). Ammianus avoided the former, and he admits the latter with the significant comment: 'carraginem quam ita ipsi appellant' (XXXI. 7. 7). Surely neologisms, and felt as such towards the end of the Fourth Century. 33 Astrology is on frequent attestation through long ages in writers both pagan and Christian. Two of the terms may now be put under scrutiny. First, mathesis. The word makes a sporadic appearance in Tertullian (De idol. I. 9). Absent from the astrological writer Censorinus, it next crops up in Firmicus Maternus (c. 337) and Julius Valerius (c. 340). Then Rufinus, Prudentius, Augustine, Orosius, etc. Further, once each time in scholia on Virgil, Horace, Lucan, and Juvenal. That is important. Sundry indications put the author of the Historia Augusta in close propinquity to scholiasts, as was ascertained many years ago. The work has mathesis five times, viz. Hadr. 16. 7; Ael. 3. 9; Sep. 3. 9; Pesc. 9. 6; Alex. 27. 5. Of the emperors, Hadrian and Severus account for two references each, Alexander for one. In three passages the ruler is accorded the title 'matheseos peritus'. The term lapses after the Vita Alexandri - which at first sight might be an enticement for those who advocate a plurality of biographers. Second, constellatio, a rare word. It is first attested in Julius Valerius (1. 3), and in Firmicus Maternus (I. 2. 6), then in Ammianus (XX. 11. 32; XXIX. 2. 27) and several times in Augustine. The Historia Augusta has the word in two places, separated by a wide interval: in Ael. 4. 5 and Gord. 20. 2. Those biographies carry as labels 'Aelius Spartianus' and 'Julius Capitolinus'. IX. Authorship In this late season credit is still accorded to statements that the Historia Augusta makes about itself. Which is paradoxical, for the thing is a patent fraud. It bears the labels of six authors - which, however, were Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 19 ff. J. Straub, Studien zur Historia Augusta (1952), 19 ff.

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

95

first invented and attached after the work was well under way. 3 4 Some scholars in recent years refer to 'the plurality of authors'. When e m p l o y e d without qualification or further definition, the phrase can only be interpreted as meaning the named and notorious six biographers. 3 5 O t h e r s of a conservative or sceptical persuasion speak of'the author or authors of the Historia Augusta'. That is discreet. And, if more authors than one are taken into consideration, the total number (some­ w h e r e between t w o and six) is neatly and deftly evaded. As often in the controversy about the Historia Augusta, the first call is for clarity of statement and intent. N o comprehensive declaration in defence of any of the 'conserva­ tive' attitudes (they vary) has been put out in the recent time. 3 6 Instead, sporadic or isolated pieces of argumentation. For example, the basic source of the early series of biographies (down to Caracalla), so it is opined, might be a writer of the Fourth Century (epoch not specified, t h o u g h pertinent to the nature and date of the Historia Augusta) - or even one of the ostensible six, so it has been suggested by one of the experts. 3 7 F r o m time to time a sign is detected that might point to more authors than one, or to a single author with definite characteristics e m e r g e n t in one delimited portion of the Historia Augusta. For example, the discovery is announced (as a novelty) that of all the six only 'Julius Capitolinus' cites the biographer 'Junius Cordus', it being held irrelevant to the argument whether 'Cordus' existed or not. 3 8 If the a r g u m e n t were to be taken seriously, there are entertaining conse­ quences. 'Capitolinus' is as heterogeneous as the Historia Augusta itself. H e composed nine biographies. They range from the Vita Marci (its factual basis and authentic sources can be defined), to Clodius Albinus(one of the 'secondary Vitae') and to Maximus etBalbinus, when the varied resources of the romancer are lavishly on show. 34 Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 179 ff; HAC 1968/9 (1970), 305 = Emperors and Biography (1971), 74. 35 Thus, presumably, S. Timpanaro in Studi di storiografia in memoria di Leonardo Ferrero (1971), 129. After mentioning arguments of Momigliano he states 'sarei ancor piu favorevole alia datazione tradizionale e alia pluralita di autori.' Timpanaro's words have been quoted with approval by Momigliano himself in EHR lxxxviii (1973), 114. 36 Apart from the book of H. Bardon, Le crepuscule des Cesars. Scenes et visages de VHistoire A uguste (1964). 37 A. Momigliano, EHR Ixxxiv (1969), 567; Atti Ac. Torino 103 (1968/9), 434 f. 38 A. Momigliano, EHR Ixxxiv (1969), 568; Atti Ac. Torino 103 (1968/9), 435. For criticism of this notion see R. Syme, The Historia Augusta. A Callfor Clarity (1971), 62 ff; 96 ff. Momigliano stated that 'the principle of one imaginary main source for one imaginary SHA is not applied to the other five cases.' Now 'Cordus' is mentioned in Vitae attributed to 'Capitolinus', in five of the nine with that label. In none of them is he cited or treated as the 'main source'. He is mostly held up as a dreadful example of frivolity by the virtuous author.

96

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

If pleas of this kind are to be admitted, it is just and equitable to adduce another individual trait in 'Capitolinus'. The nine biographies labelled with his name offer only one reference to astrology, viz. the horoscope submitted to Gordian (Gord. 20. 1 ff.). Again and further, in support of a biographer's idiosyncrasy, 'Aelius Spartianus'. This fellow has the large part in the references to astrology, in relation precisely to Hadrian and to Severus. They occur, with one exception (Alex. 5. 4), in the biographies of the two emperors, and in three 'secondary Vitae' (those of Aelius Caesar, of Pescennius Niger and of Geta). No other biographer evinces much interest, apart from 'Aelius Lampridius', the author of the Vita Alexandri: four items, one of them being the horoscope of Julia Domna (5.4). It is expedient that those facts be put on record for the benefit of such future enquirers as may adopt a 'plurality of authors', whether left vague, or employing the name labels, or defined according to different and diverse sections of the Historia Augusta. X. The author Variegation in the Historia Augusta reflects in the first place the author's sources and the developments they inspired, notably Marius Maximus in the earlier portion, whom he exploited to enliven the basic source. Further, his own propensity, often perverse, for variety and experimentation, with a growing and verifiable audacity of inven­ tion. Some of his devices fade out, such as dreams. Not one of them subsequent to Alex. 14. 1. There are no 'omina imperii' or portents of death subsequent to the Vita Taciti; and oracles employing verses from Virgil make their last appearance in the Vita Claudii. The latter inven­ tion is replaced by a pair of predictions made by 'haruspices', with a comment in mockery (Tac. 15. 4; Prob. 24. 3). By a parallel enhance­ ment of technique, new devices come in, like the elaborate schedules of supplies and equipment, for the first time in the Vita Claudii (14; 17). The fictional portions illustrate aspects of life, letters, and manners in the author's own time. They also permit deductions about his tastes and his character. A recognizable personality emerges. Negative indications have a say. Of some cogency, since it has often been assumed that the Historia Augusta was written with an express design of political and religious propaganda. The case of astrology is significant. One might have expected a lively and sustained interest in the science of the stars. It turns out not to be so. Items about Hadrian and Severus have the preponderance, for a manifest reason. And if Alexander lends his favour and support to the 'mathematici' and

Astrology in the Historia Augusta

97

enjoys the friendship of 'Thrasybulus', that is but a small part in the delineation of an ideal prince. Omens and predictions abound, as is traditional and proper in imperial biography. But dreams vanish from the second part of the work, and visions are confined to the apparition of Apollonius of Tyana (Aur. 24. 3 ff) and the 'umbra' of Tacitus' mother (Tac. 17. 4). The items concerning the religion of the Roman State do little more than attest the antiquarian predilections of the author. Nor is he moved by the cults so lavishly practised and advertised by members of the high aristocracy in the last days. It is only the dreadful Syrian who is 'tauroboliatus' (Elag. 7. 1). Christianity is not among the main preoccupations of the Historia Augusta. 39 The references to the new faith now dominant are sporadic - and they call for delicate treatment. They should not be assessed in isolation from the Jewish items (which tend to be neglected).40 Taken together, they may suggest an unobtrusive plea for toleration, it is true. How far earnest, that is a question. More revelatory perhaps is the common factor of erudition and humour, with no serious purpose or any religious fervour, unless it be a normal devotion to Rome, to the Roman Senate and to the good emperors who maintained that tradition. 39 40

A. Momigliano, Secondo contribute alia storia degli studi dassici (I960), 130 f. For the Jewish items, see The Historia Augusta. A Callfor Clarity (1971), 65 ff.

VII Bogus Authors* SCHOLARS and commentators on classical texts were not above faking their authorities. It could be done with impunity. How verify? As the sagacious Quintilian points out, 'inveniri qui numquam fuere non possunt' (I. 8. 21). By the same token, it may not be easy or even possible to demonstrate that any single suspect author never existed. The annals of literature are incomplete, indubitable authors can be detected whose names are lost, others have a solitary attestation. Caution is therefore prescribed. In isolated instances one should hesi­ tate before pronouncing unless there is a valid reason or an overriding argument. It is another matter when a plethora of unique authorities exudes from some composition of patent fraudulence such as the Parallela Minora of Pseudo-Plutarch or the Historia Augusta.1 Forgery, imposture, or hoax: it is desirable to reach and formulate isome conception of the HA as a whole. The process has suffered various retardations. Not so long ago an erudite (and influential) enquiry waived at the outset the question whether the HA made appeal to non-existent sources.2 That limitation was a paradox, and a bar to total comprehension. The HA carries a mass of variegated fabrications, with spurious characters of every rank and class and profession from 'Ablavius' to 'Zosimio'. And, relevant for present purposes, there are allusions to writings that never were, beginning with a 'pulcherrima oratio' of Hadrian's heir 'quae hodieque legitur' (Ael. 4. 7) and passing by the Georgica and the Milesiae composed by the rival of Septimius Severus {Clod. Alb. 11. 1 f.) to reach a climax with the exorbitant productivity of an old emperor in boyhood and adolescence (Gord. 3. 2 f.). Criticism is thrown in, with comment on non-existent works, verses are quoted either anonymous or attributed to historical characters such as the Emperor Macrinus, and a poet is conjured up, 'Aurelius Apollinaris', who celebrated a ruler in iambics (Car. 11.2). * Reprinted from Bonner HAC 1972/4 (1976), 311 ff. 1 For the former work, F. Jacoby, Abh. zur gr. Geschichtsschreibung (1956), 359 ff. From the HA, however, Jacoby accepted six authors, namely 'Callicrates' to 'Claudius Eusthenius' (FGrH 213-8), and printed copious Latin extracts. 2 A. Momigliano, Secondo contribute alia storia degli studi classici (1960), 110: 'I avoid on purpose the question whether the H.A. claims to have used literary sources that never existed.' (The paper was originally published in 1954.)

Bogus Authors

99

S o m e thirty-five historians and biographers nowhere else on record happen to be cited in the H A . 3 They fall into line and fill out the picture of a genial impostor w h o avows the tastes and training of a grammaticus. That is to say, a teacher of the classics. Most of them are seen at once for what they are, being shown up, like other bogus characters, by the shape of a name, by the context in which they occur, by their conformity with the k n o w n habits and predilections of their creator. T h e accumulation reveals and condemns. Furthermore, given the nature of the H A as a whole, sound method (or better, common sense) tells w h a t is to be done. It cannot remain in doubt where the onus probandi lies in any single instance. T h e treatment accorded those figments by scholars in the recent age (since 1889, the epochal year) will prove variously instructive. Some have accepted the lot. Motives may be discerned or surmised. In the first place, the reluctance of veterans (and of veteratores) to admit the alarming truths established by young Dessau, then deference to authority, the reverence for tradition - or, more simply, a distaste for taking pains. 'Audentis Fortuna iuvat, piger ipse sibi obstat'. 4 And credulity persists. Others essay a selection, decreeing which are authentic, according to the dictates of fancy or on criteria not valid even had they been made explicit. Hence ample cause for melancholy, or for quiet merriment. H o w ­ ever, from charity - or in the interests of economy - the names of the n u m e r o u s company may be suppressed. 5 But it is equitable (and it m a y be of use) to evoke for brief mention the new Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, the first volume of which appeared in 1971. The enterprise was long and arduous, the achievement is laudable. N o b o d y w h o has had to organise names and facts and dates will be disposed to underestimate the virtue of the editors. Errors, inadvertence, omission, these human failings are all to be expected, and they should be taken cheerfully. Therefore corrections and sup­ plements accrue at once. 6 At the same time, PLRE is liable to censure for confusion in the guiding principles it proposed, or for lack of consequence. For example, it singles out 'persons known only from sources of doubtful reliability', and it equips rejected characters with over-emphatic stigmata, viz. asterisk and dagger both before and after 3 For the list, H. Peter, HRR ii (1906), clxxxviiii ff. with 129 ff. (the fragmenta). 'Helius" Maurus' (Seu. 20. 1) occurs in the second section of the work (on p. 120), but not in the first. See also Schanz-Hosius, Gesch. der. r. Lit. iii3 (1922), 87 f. - which, however, omits 'Callicrates', 'Theoclius', 'Nicomachus' (Aur. 4. 2; 6. 3; 27. 6). 4 The subject of the present paper makes it suitable to quote Aen. x. 284 with the fiked phrase added for supplement, as Seneca, Epp. 94. 28. 5 For some of the names, see R. Syme, Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 96 f. 6 For ample measure, T. D. Barnes, Phoenix xxvi (1972), 140 ff.

100

Bogus Authors

the name. However, in the body of such sources, distinctions can be drawn on other criteria. The execution is not consistent. Nineteen suspect authors adorn the latest portion of the HA, where the author bears the successive masks of 'Trebellius Pollio' and 'Flavius Vopiscus'. Two of them, viz. 'Caelestinus' (Val. 8. 1) and 'Aurelius Festivus', alleged freedman of the Emperor (Domitius) Aurelianus (Quadr. tyr. 6. 1), benefit from entries without the stigmata. And two of the most attractive are left out. An 'atrox fortuna' banishes the historian 'Gallus Antipater' who is equipped with the Sallustian tag 'ancilla honorum et historicorum dehonestamentum' (Claud. 5. 4) and that dear old man 'Turdulus Gallicanus', to whose ephemeris the author avows a candid and amicable debt (Prob. 2. 2). There is another sign of inadvertence, or something worse. A different class of the bogus comes into the count, namely those who carry the labels of the ostensible 'six biographers' who purport to be writing at various times under Diocletian and under Constantine. Only two of them earn admittance to PLRE, and they are highly heterogeneous. First 'Aelius Lampridius', designated as a writer in the early part of the Fourth Century. Emphasis is laid upon his attitude in matters of religious import, as being notable and distinctive. To what purpose if not to imply a real person or insinuate a doctrine about the authorship of the HA (that is, plural), which doctrine is nowhere made explicit in the work? Second, 'Flavius Vopiscus', whose contribution (though his existence is here put under doubt) gets assigned to a later date. Not to the time of Constantine's parent, but to that of Constantius II (i.e. 337-60). This is done with appeal to Aur. 44. 5: 'est quidem iam Constantius imperator'. An aberrant notion. To sum up, PLRE is shown to be defective and misleading. The study of the HA continues to be dogged and bogged by retardatory scholarship. But enough. It remains to indicate, on short statement, the relevance and value of the bogus authors to the general theme. (1) Definitions. There are sundry marginal, equivocal or disputed items. First, 'Asclepiodotus' (Aur. 44. 3): that is Julius Asclepiodotus, the Guard Prefect of the Caesar Constantius. He is enrolled on the canonical list of HA authors, that of Hermann Peter in HRR. By an oversight. 'Asclepiodotus' is not cited as a writer but as the narrator of an anecdote told to 'Celsinus'. Neither 'Celsinus' nor the anecdote is in any danger of being authentic. Second, 'Gargilius' (Alex. 37. 9). In a list of six exemplary biographers (four of them non-existent) he recurs as 'Gargilius Martialis' (Prob. 2. 7). Such is in fact the name borne by a writer on

Bogus Authors

101

agriculture, to be identified with the equestrian officer from Auzia in Mauretania who fell in combat with rebel tribesmen in the year 260 (ILS 2767, cf. PIR2 G 82). The homonym should not deceive, the biographer is patently a 'Schwindelautor', yet the item has its modest use - at least for those who surmise that the author of the HA came from Africa. Third, 'Julius Atherianus'. An extract about the Gallic ruler Victorinus is quoted from a book of his (Tyr. trig. 6. 5). Macrobius mentions an antiquarian writer called Julius Haterianus (III. 8. 2), who also crops up five times in the Virgilian Scholia Veronensia. Dessau therefore proposed to emend the cognomen. 7 PLRE however prints 'Aetherianus' without adding comment or justification. It is preferable to abide by the text (which is Hohl's procedure) - and also to leave 'Atherianus' in the same category as the quotation. It may be recalled in passing that one of the devices of the HA is to modify the form of some genuine name. Fourth, 'Dagellius Fuscus' (Tyr. Trig. 25. 2). Following Dessau, Hohl in his text accepted 'Arellius', because of the alleged consular 'Arellius Fuscus' {Tyr. trig. 21. 3; Aur. 40. 4), who derives, it may be supposed, from the Augustan rhetor of that name by the channel of a lost work of Suetonius. A faint chance suggests 'Vagellius', a rare name, but a character in history and also a rhetor mocked by Juvenal (XVI. 23). 8 'Dagellius' had better stand. It is no bar that the name is nowhere attested - and it may well be a wilful deformation. Fifth, 'Apollonius Syrus Platonicus'. This person reported an oracular response vouchsafed to Hadrian 'ex fano Niceforii Iovis' (Hadr. 2. 9). The famous temple at Antioch is not elsewhere on record for that kind of operation, the sponsor deserves no more credit than does the oracle, even though there be perhaps a hint of the sage of Tyana, a character familiar to the author (Alex. 29.; Aur. 24. 3-9). And this is a 'bad passage' of the Vita Hadriani. The preceding item carries a sors Vergiliana.9 However that may be, since 'Apollonius' is a philosopher, strict method may deny him access to the rubric of historians and biographers. For similar reasons, and for manifest convenience, the Emperor Aurelian will be excluded, for all that he was admitted as an author by Peter in his HRR, since the Prefect of the City, in amicable discourse with 'Flavius Vopiscus', asserted the existence of his writings: 'ephemeridas illius viri scriptas habemus' {Aur. 1.6).10 ' 7

Accepted by R. Syme, o. c. 185. R. Syme, o. c. 168. R. Syme, Emperors and Biography (1971), 72; 271. 10 H. Peter, HRR ii (1906), ccii. He also admits old Gordian as an author, without qualms (clxxviiii). 8

9

102

Bogus Authors

(2) The case of 'Onesimus'. He emerges close to the end in Quadrigae Tyrannorum as an authority on the usurpers Proculus and Bonosus (13. 1; 14. 4), and he is cited four times in the next book (Car. 4. 1;7. 3; 16. 1; 17. 6). The name of a certain Onasimos seldom fails to be put on showT, not without the assumption that the 'Onesimus' of the HA is authentic, or a least the pious hope. That is, Onasimos the son of Apsines, whom the Suda registers as an historian and sophist in the epoch of Constantine, from Cyprus or from Sparta.11 Hence it has been admitted that 'Onesimus' is 'possibly genuine'.12 That tenuous concession deserved to be cancelled promptly and for a good reason: recourse to text and context. 13 Not merely the fraudulence of the items - 'Onesimus' is labelled 'scriptor vitae Probi' (Quadr. tyr. 14. 4, cf. Car. 4. 1). Now the author in the preface to his Probus had deplored a grievous dearth of knowledge. 'Probum principem . . . scriptorum inopia iam paene nescimus' (1. 3). He therefore went to documents, materially aided in the task by the ephemeris of his friend 'Turdulus Gallicanus' (2. 2). The biographer 'Onesimus', it is clear, was an afterthought, and the source of the inspiration can perhaps be divined (see below). (3) The total. The rubric in the HRR of H. Peter comprises thirty-five names. As has been shown, one has to be dropped: 'Asclepiodotus' was not cited as a writer. But compensation accrues. There and elsewhere in the sequel the 'Acholius' of the HA has an entry as one person, for example in PIR2 A 36. A clear case of inadvertence. There are two of them. First, the 'Acholius' adduced in the Vita Alexandri (14. 6; 48. 7) is in fact enrolled among the 'historicos eius temporis' (64. 1). Second, 'Acholius' the magister admissionum under Valerian, from whose books of acta the author quotes with lavish detail the account of memorable transactions of the crown council held in the Thermae at Byzantium (Aur. 12. 4). The total can therefore stand. (4) Distribution. It is well worth the effort to look for the earliest emergence of each type of fabrication and trace the subsequent developments (which are often artful elaborations). Of the bogus authorities the first occurs, as was to be expected, in one of the largely fictional biographies of princes and pretenders. The Vita of Avidius Cassius presents 'Aemilium Parthenianum, qui adfectatores tyrannidis iam inde a veteribus historiae tradidit' (5. 1). Next in that 11 On whom, W. Stegcmann, P-W xviiii, 406 f. Like that scholar, Jacoby holds 'Onesimus' identical (FGrH 216). 12 R. Syme, Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 203, cf. 96. 13 The Historia Augusta. A Call for Clarity (1971), 54.

Bogus Authors

103

category, 'Aelius Cordus' (Clod. Alb. 5. 10). In the biographies of emperors (the nine from Hadrian to Caracalla inclusive) 'Helius Maurus' is the first (Sev. 20. 1), introducing two chapters all the author's own. The preface appended to the Vita Macrini introduces 'Junius Cordus' (1. 3), and none of the biographies in the sequel lacks at least one specimen of this device, with the solitary exception of the Elagabalus. Which is highly peculiar, given the character of this product, and in marked contrast to the Vita Alexandria its partner and complement, which has no fewer than eight of them (with a cluster of six in 48. 6 f.). In passing, however, the chance will be observed that some fictitious biographer lurks in the lacuna (in Hohl's arrangement of a disturbed passage) following on remarks about the son of Macrinus: 'ut in vita e i u s [ . . : (Bag. 8. 5). 14 (5) Recurrences. It is a suspicious feature that out of this welter of authorities few are named more than once anywhere. Rari nantes in gurgite vasto. Three of the biographers of Severus Alexander happen to reiterate in that Vita, viz. 'Acholius' (14. 6; 48. 7; 64. 1), 'Encolpius' (17. 1; 48. 7), 'Septimius', or rather 'Septiminus' (17. 2; 48. 7).15 Nor, despite all his alertness to arts of fiction, has the author been often enticed by the novelist's contrivance for insinuating authenticity and imitating life, namely to have the same character or writer come into different books, as exemplified in classic fashion by Balzac. Two biographers from the Vita Alexandria 'Gargilius' (37. 9) and 'Fabius Marcellinus' (48. 6) recur among the six who are catalogued in the preface of the Vita Probi (2. 7). Then, nearing the end of the work, 'Onesimus' crops up, who is put to use in the last two books (cf. above). For a long space the author (it appears) had forgotten or neglected the device he hit upon at an early stage and exploited to splendid effect. That is, 'Junius Cordus', the archetype of the bad biographer - and intended, so Mommsen declared, to serve as a 'whipping-boy'. (6) 'Cordus'. This creature is mentioned no fewer than twenty-four times. He first appears (in the received order of the biographies) as 'Aelius Cordus' (Clod. Alb. 5. 10), he becomes 'Junius Cordus' (Macr. 1. 3), to revert for once to 'Aelius Cordus' (Maximin. 12. 7), after having been absent from the next three biographies. For the rest, 'Junius Cordus' (six times), 'Junius' (once), 'Cordus' (fourteen times). The citations of'Cordus' are peculiar in more ways than one. First, 14 15

R. Syme, Phoenix xxvi (1972), 286 (discussing the son of Macrinus). Above, 57 f. In any event, one person and recurrent: not noticed by R. Syme, o.c. 203.

104

Bogus Authors

the discrepancy about his gentilicium: often disposed of by styling him 'Aelius Junius Cordus' (as in PIR2 A 198). On the contrary, it reveals something - a lapse of memory about the nomenclature of an invented character, as can happen to novelists. Hence intricate problems about the relation in order of composition between several Vitae, a subject which may be waived in this place.16 Second, and most enigmatic at first sight. 'Junius Cordus' benefits from a full length presentation in the preface to the Vita Macrini, an honour accorded to none of the others. Yet he is not cited in that biography or in any of the three that follow (those of Macrinus' son, of Elagabalus, of Alexander) - unless, to be sure, his name occurred in the lacuna in Elag. 8. 5 (briefly noted above). The allegation that 'Cordus' wrote a Vita Diadumeni would provide suitable occupation for a biographer who elected as his subject 'eorum imperatorum vitas edere quos obscuriores videbat' (Macr. 1.3). However that may be, a partial explanation offers. The preface of the Vita Macrini is separate and detachable, as Hohl in fact indicates by the spacing in his edition. Hence this delightful piece was perhaps an insertion on second thoughts. Third, and of less consequence than might be fancied, 'Cordus' finds a mention only in Vitae that purport to have been written by 'Julius Capitolinus'. To be precise, in five of the nine biographies to which that name label was attached - and a motley collection they are. 17 The phenomenon may, or may not, furnish an incitement to speculations about authorship and authenticity. There are still scholars who credit the existence of'Junius Cordus' or stand by the dogma that the HA is what it professes to be, a plural product - with or without the hypothesis of collaboration. No such collaboration is in fact asserted by any one of the ostensible 'six biographers'.18 Fourth, and obvious from reading of the text. It is nowhere rep­ resented or even implied that 'Cordus' is the main source of any biography, however fictional, in which he happens to be cited.19 His is a different function. He is brought in on the side for condign flagella­ tion. If the reader wants trivial or frivolous details, he is told where to go, more than once {Clod. Alb. 5. 10; Maximin. 29. 10; 31. 4; Gord. 21. 3). None the less, as the work proceeds, the author does slip 16 See further Emperors and Biography (1971), 75; 87; HAC 1970 (1972), 301 f. (above, 44 f); Phoenix xxvi (1972), 287 f. (above, 59), 17 viz. Clod. Alb., Macr., Maximin., Gord., Max. et Balb. (in which 'Cordus' occurs). The others are Pius, Marc, Verus, Pert. 18 In view of current misconceptions one has to go on repeating this affirmation of a plain fact. 19 The contrary has been affirmed by Momigliano, EHR lxxxiv (1969), 568: 'Why should pseudo-Capitolinus have been accorded the privilege of the exclusive use of pseudo-Cordus? The principle of one imaginary main source of one imaginary S.H. A. is not applied to the other five cases.'

Bogus Authors

105

into the habit of citing 'Cordus' for ostensible facts of historic value such as a senatus consultum (Gord. 12. 1), the precise age of Gordian's grandson (22. 2), a consultation of the Sibylline Books (26. 2). H o w ­ ever that may be, shortly before taking leave o f ' C o r d u s ' he issues a reminder: 'non enim nobis talia dicenda sunt quae Junius Cordus ridicule ac stulte composuit de voluptatibus domesticis ceterisque infimis rebus'. And he follows it up by administering a dignified rebuke, with appeal to high principles: 'si quidem ea debeant in historia poni ab historiografis quae aut fugienda sint aut sequenda' (Gord. 2 1 . 4). (7) T h e source and inspiration of the names. As with other bogus characters in the H A , types and categories can be established. Brief statement will suffice for guidance. In general either the unobtrusive or the u n c o m m o n are exploited, as each conveying in contrasted fashion some guarantee of authenticity. For the former, gentilicia of dynasties offer, equipped with colourless cognomina, for example 'Aelius Sabinus' (Maximin. 32. 1) or 'Aurelius Verus' (Alex. 48. 6). For the latter, rare cognomina, as with 'Fabius Ceryllianus' (Car. 4. 3) and 'Fulvius Asprianus' (17. 7). 20 Some names may be pure inventions, like 'Dagellius' (Tyr. trig. 25. 2) - i f the text is correct. A n d h u m o u r has its say. Observe 'Maeonius Astyanax' (Tyr. trig. 12. 1), a delicious creation of literary fantasy, w h o m PLRE is emboldened to label 'almost certainly fictitious'. And there is a small and devious j o k e behind T u r d u l u s Gallicanus' (Prob. 2. 1): the lark, n o t the thrush, was notoriously the Gallic bird. T h e n names lifted from earlier biographies. Thus 'Lollius Urbicus' (Diad. 9. 2) reproduces the general in Britain (Pius. 5. 4). Again, classical literature is drawn upon. 'Suetonius Optatianus' indites a copious biography of an ephemeral emperor (Tac. 11. 7); and 'Junius C o r d u s ' himself might emanate from the 'Cordus' in the fourth line of the first p o e m of Junius Juvenalis. Characters from the author's own time may also be suspected. ' N i c o m a c h u s ' translates a letter of Zenobia dictated in the language of the Syrians (Aur. 27. 6). Who but Nicomachus Flavianus, the paladin of the old faith, w h o translated the biography of Apollonius, the sage of Tyana? N o r is it wholly fanciful to surmise a hint of Ammianus, the soldier turned historian, in 'Fabius Marcellinus' (Alex. 48. 6; Prob. 2. 7) and 'Valerius Marcellinus' (Max. etBalb. 4. 5). 21 Even 'Acholius' (two persons, cf. above) might reflect some contemporary person. 22 20

Ceryllianus occurs in CIL vi 16574, Asprianus in CIL x 9845; xii 2633. ThusJ. Straub, Studien zurHistoria Augusta (1952), 154. There is an Acholius in Symmachus, Rel. 38. 2. Probably identical with the Vicariusoi Asia on the distich at Sardis, cf. B. Malcus, Opusc. Ath. vii (1967), 187. 21

22

106

Bogus Authors

Finally, as combining the themes of inspiration and date, ' O n e s i m u s ' the alleged biographer of Probus comes into play once again. T h e name was taken from Suetonius' life of the Emperor Galba (so it has been suggested), where is quoted the verse from a comic poet: 'Onesimus venit a villa'. 23 The author was familiar with that biography, as is demonstrated by his 'Memmia, Sulpicii consularis viri filia, Catuli neptis' {Alex. 20. 3), w h o derives, by modification of the n a m e , from ' M u m m i a Achaica, neptis Catuli' {Galba 3.4), the wife of a Sulpicius Galba. A better explanation is now to hand. 'Onesimus' spread himself on the bibulous habits of the usurper Bonosus, w h o drank and drank, to no visible or deleterious effects, remaining ever 'securus et sobrius' {Quadr. tyr. 14. 4). An acute investigator points out that the two names occur in conjunction in a contemporary writer, none other than J e r o m e . He mentions Onesimus, the young friend of the waterdrinking m o n k Bonosus. 2 4 T h e multifarious inventions in nomenclature are an alluring theme, and often hazardous. Many of the reminiscences and associations that inspired this author's creations are sunk forever in the subterranean stream of an imagination like that of a poet: where Alph the sacred river ran through caverns measureless to man down to a sunless sea. Further, some that have been dredged up might seem either too r e m o t e or too good to be true, at least on first inspection. For example, the salubrious admonition about 'Africanus' subjoined by the E m p e r o r Hadrian when sending some drinking cups from Egypt to his brother-in-law Servianus: 'caveas tamen ne his Africanus noster indulgenter utatur' {Quadr. tyr. 8. 10). What the author had retained in his mind was a vivid and dramatic incident from Ammianus Marcellinus, so it has been argued with a sense of conviction. 25 That is, the c o m p o r t m e n t , fatal in the outcome, of the guests when Africanus the governor of Pannonia Inferior held a banquet: 'poculis amplioribus madefacti' (XV. 3. 7). T h e theme of potation, not on high show in the H A since the exploits of Maximinus, comes in amply towards the end in the b o o k of the Four Usurpers. N o t only the fabulous Bonosus, ' a m p h o r a non h o m o ' (for so they pronounced his epitaph), but Firmus in E g y p t w h o vanquished a 'notissimus potator' called 'Burburus' (4.4). 23

Suetonius, Galba 13, cf. H. W. Bird, Hermes xcix (1971), 134. Jerome, Epp. iii. 4, cf. A. Chastagnol, Recherch.es sur VHistoire Auguste (1970), 72 ff. Of Bonosus Jerome says 'de latere Domini aquam bibit.' 25 R. Syme, o.c. 66 f., cf. 70 for the other two echoes of Ammianus, Book xv, in Quadr. tyr. 24

Bogus Authors

107

(8) Some peculiar phenomena. In the multitude of spurious authorities scant attempt has been made to equip them with recogniz­ able identities, save for 'Junius Cordus' - about w h o m the more that is said the less plausible he becomes. Most of them are bare names. Only t w o emerge as persons in a meagre embodiment. 'Turdulus Gallicanus' was an elderly friend of the author, a 'homo sincerissimus et honestiss i m u s ' (Prob. 2. 2); and he adverts upon the morals of'Onesimus', who had published grave imputations about Carinus, although vulnerable himself on that chapter - 'ipse quoque male usus genio sexus sui' (Car. 16. 1). Had he written more, he might have gone on in this vein, to build up 'Onesimus' (already mentioned six times) as a second and m o r e lively ' C o r d u s ' . Many signs in the last books show our friend g r o w i n g ever bolder and better. T o differentiate, titles of office or rank might have helped from time to time, as in the case of the second 'Acholius' (AMY. \2. 4). Their use is sparing. O r again, labels of origin or nationality. There is a singular dearth. For parallel, observe the 'six biographers,' assumed by some scholars to be courtiers of Diocletian and Constantine. 2 6 Only one flaunts a title, namely 'Vulcatius Gallicanus', w h o is styled 'vir clarissimus'. And only one is endowed with a city of origin, 'Flavius Vopiscus Syracusius'. Why from Syracuse? N o answer. There are all too m a n y things in the H A that one should never hope to penetrate or be challenged to explain. 27 Similarly, of all the 'thirty-five' only one parades a local origin. This specimen ought to have engaged the curiosity of erudite enquirers. (9) 'Callicrates Tyrius'. Described as 'Graecorum longe doctissimus scriptor' (AUY. 4. 2). He enumerated the omens that announced an imperial destiny for the infant Aurelian. Why 'Tyrius'? A ready answer avails. T h e author was proposing to retail omens of a suitably purple character. A little further down occur a 'palliolum purpureum' (4. 5), a white calf with purple spots (4. 7), roses turning to that colour in the maternal garden when Aurelian saw the light of day (5. 1). T h e n , in his adult life, a 'pallium purpureum' providentially falling on his shoulders at Antioch (5.3). T h e r e may be something else. Observe the precise point at which 'Callicrates Tyrius' is introduced in the exposition. It is his assertion that Aurelian's mother was 'sacerdos Solis' in the natal village (4. 2). 26 H. Peter, Die Scriptores Historiae Augusta (1892), 7 ff.; and in HRR ii (1906) his list has the superscription 'aulici scriptores'. 27 The pertinent warning was uttered by Dessau in his second paper, Hermes xxvii (1892), 605. Like most in Dessau, still valid.

108

Bogus Authors

N o w 'Sol' and 'Tyrius' are juxtaposed in the first oration of Dido, lnec tarn aversus equos Tyria Sol iungit ab urbe' (Aen. I. 568). In this late season there is no call to expatiate on the manner in which the H A exploits the Aeneid. Dessau long ago drew attention to the erudite fantasy which produced oracles at various sites emitting Virgilian verses. 2 8 A notable elaboration on the known habit of con­ sulting the sacred book in order to elicit by happy chance a suitable sors Vergiliana.29 O t h e r quotations or echoes are also registered by Hohl in his edition. T h e choice and incidence is worth nothing. Next to the pageant of R o m a n heroes towards the end of Book VI, the books relating to Dido (I and IV) enjoy a preference. Neither phenomenon is a surprise. As concerns the impact of the Carthaginian queen, in schoolroom or study, it is superfluous to call up for testimony the bishop of Hippo or overburden the hypothesis that the author of the H A was an African. 30 Hence one more reminiscence for the rubric, to which two other items can n o w be added. First, for Book VIII: the decennial festival of Gallienus carries an echo of the triumph of Caesar Augustus on the Shield of Aeneas. 3 1 Second, for Book IV, that remarkable passage w h e r e the author, developing his talents and extending his historical perspective, traces the vicissitudes of the imperial city all the way from R o m u l u s d o w n to Carus and Carinus. O f N u m a he says: 'frementem bellis et gravidam triumphis civitatem religione munivit' {Car. 2. 3). O b s e r v e Jupiter disclosing Rome's destiny and a future ruler, sed fore qui gravidam imperiis belloque frementem Italiam regeret, genus alto a sanguine Teucri. (IV. 229 f.) ' B o g u s authors' might terminate with propriety a series of nine agones exhibited at B o n n that began in 1965 with 'bogus names'. The circle c o m i n g full, the time is ripe to render thanks to Fortuna and take leave of that friend w h o never failed to offer consolation and delight in the b r o w n years of life. Extremum hunc, Arethusa. That may n o w be the w o r d , or claudite iam rivos. After long sojourn in the garden and copious draughts from the refreshing fountains, a gentle admonition intrudes: tempus abire tibi est, ne potum largius aequo rideat ac pulset lasciva decentius aetas. 28

H. Dessau, o.c. 582 ff. The reference to the sortes in the long article on Virgil in P-W is curt and defective (viii A. 1468). It ignored Dessau. On the sortes see now Y. de Kisch, MEFR lxxxii (1970), 321 ff. 30 On which, R. Syme, o.c. 200 f.; E. Birley, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 79 ff. 31 Gall. 8.4, from Aen. viii. 717, cf. R. Syme, o.c. 40. 29

VIII Propaganda in the Historia Augusta* 1. It is one sign of a tired or condemned topic that the exposition should have to lead off with the history of the problem. Another, and cognate, is the burden of bibliography. When the date of the Historia Augusta comes up once again, the annalistic record of erudite endeavour may well induce fatigue or aversion. The recent investiga­ tion of D r Johne opens with a complete survey, equipped with all the names and references. 1 His treatment is lucid and judicious. It will be an economical guide for any w h o wish to be up to date without painful effort, or hope to avoid entanglement in obsolescent doctrines. T h e survey can serve another purpose. A glance at the progress (if progress is the word) of the controversy that started in the year 1889 will impel to various reflections about the history of classical scholar­ ship. Some of them melancholy, and there is much paradox. It was not until late in the Nineteenth Century that the true nature of the HA was discovered, and the pioneer demonstration encountered hostility from the outset. H e r m a n n Dessau declared that the HA was a total fraud: n o t six biographers writing at different times under Diocletian and Constantine, but a single author, in the time of Theodosius. Dessau's argumentation was clear, candid and temperate. But the shock was too sharp. It provoked alarm among the magnates. Some stood obdurate, such as Klebs and Peter; and Mommsen, while m a k i n g certain concessions in the face of plain facts, excogitated an elaborate structure of defence: four successive groups of biographies c r o w n e d by t w o editors, the first in the late years of Constantine, the second Theodosian. Appeal to Mommsen's eminent authority was frequent in the sequel, although not always accompanied by explicit citation of his theory in its detail and in its corollaries. Dessau was content to issue a firm rejoinder in 1892. The years passed, and the nadir of his fortunes was reached a quarter of a century after the y o u n g man's audacious act. It is marked by the curt and

* Reprinted from Latomus xxxvii (1978), 173 ff. 1 K.-P. Johne, Kaiserbiographie und Senatsaristokratie. Untersuchungen zur Datierung und sozialen Herkunft der Historia Augusta (Berlin 1976), 206 pp.

110

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

grudging treatment accorded by two standard manuals of German scholarship in 1913 and 1914.2 In the meantime, however, another young scholar arose to vindi­ cate Dessau, namely Hohl, with a powerful contribution in 1911, followed by other papers (in 1914, 1915, 1920). A new turn came in 1926, with a bold and original theory. Baynes was happy to avow a general allegiance to Dessau. As he said, 'it is of course unnecessary for me to waste words on his proof that the biographies cannot have been written at the time when they purport to have been composed'. 3 But the HA was written, so Baynes argued, a little earlier than Dessau assumed: under Julian (361-3). He put emphasis on the Vita of Severus Alexander as a foreshadowing of that ruler; and he concluded that the HA was a work of propaganda, written in the interests ofJulian and of paganism. The theory was seductive. It was eagerly embraced, and various names can be cited. Hohl lent enthusiastic support, than whom none more redoubtable. A lull then obtained for a season, though not from total acquies­ cence, and in the end the theory of Baynes faded out. No refutation assailed it, and there were no conspicuous recantations. The obvious asserted its tardy rights against all erudition and ingenuity: cryptopaganism does not accord with the reign of the Apostate. Thus Chastagnol in the second of his surveys (published in 1970) was able to affirm 'mil ne se refere plus, a l'heure actuelle, a l'intenable position de N . H. Baynes'. 4 Those words would not have been inappropriate many years earlier. Powerful advocates of the late dating had entered in the field long since. Dessau in a brief valedictory statement (in 1918) commended the last decade of the Fourth Century. 5 Further, the year 394 acquired value as a terminus post quern, the year in which the pagan cause went down in ruin at the Battle of the Frigidus. Hartke and Alfoldi both argued that the HA was composed in the aftermath of that event. Furthermore, a later date, by a decade or even more, seemed not to be excluded. Thus Straub and Mazzarino, following the lead given long ago by Otto Seeck. A number of the miscellaneous items that had been adduced to demonstrate anachronism or the impact of contemporaneous transac2

E. Diehl in P-W viii (1913), 2051 ff.; Schanz-Hosius, Gesch. derr. Litt. iv.i2 (1914), 51 ff. In the second work Dessau's name is absent from the rubric 'Littcratur zur Hist. Aug.' (52-6), and it first crops up in a footnote (56, n. 2). 3 N . H. Baynes, The Historia Augusta. Its Date and Purpose (1926), 21. 4 A. Chastagnol, Recherchessur I'Histoire Auguste (Bonn 1970), 4. 5 H. Dessau, Woch.jurkl. Phil 1918, 353.

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

111

tions were by the nature of the case hazardous or vulnerable. Caution was requisite. It was enjoined by the significant paper of Momigliano, published in 1954.6 The approach was sceptical (that was useful, salutary, astringent), the tendency conservative. Hence encourage­ ment to the old habits of conformity, and comfort to epigonous adversaries of Dessau.7 And some supposed that the critic had proved more than was in his intention. The attitude has persisted. None the less, the late dating went on to win voice and volume. It has been defended, or rather taken for granted, by a large number of scholars in the last twenty years. Such, on summary statement, are the vicissitudes that ran through nearly ninety years of controversy. The ancient Dessau comes back as friend and guide in 'questa selva selvaggia ed aspra e forte'. As in several other fields or thickets of classical studies, a question might arise about misdirection of the labour force . . . For the requirements of a long tract of imperial history, from 117 to 284, the prime task was to segregate fact from fiction. Necessary, but narrow. If a date could be established for the HA, not by years but by decades, the dubious document could surely be exploited to cast light upon its own epoch. The debate has been conducted and directed in the main by historians. Preoccupation with the date of the HA was made manifest by titles or sub-titles. Thus Dessau's first paper, 'Zeit und Personlichkeit', or the book of Baynes with Date and Purpose, Drjohne now conforms with Untersuchungen zur Datiemng und sozialen Herkunft der Historia Augusta. He wastes no words on denying plural authorship or a succession of editors. 8 Nor is he concerned with composition and structure, with the sources of the early Vitae, or with the literary approach. II. Apart from language and style, the principal criteria for establish­ ing the date of a piece of writing are its use of another author, allusions to contemporary events, anachronisms. Appetite sharpened by the long parade and prolegomena (pp. 11-45), the reader will ask, like Gallienus at the decennial festival, 'ecquid habemus in prandio? ecquae voluptates paratae sunt?' Before bringing on his theme, the author has to clear the stage. On various grounds Mazzarino and Straub advocated a date subsequent to 6 Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes xvii (1954), 22 ff. Reprinted with three appendices in Secondo contributo alia storia degli studi classici (1960), 105 ff. 7 Observe the firm statement 'it can be said that De Sanctis' article in 1896 succeeded in exploding the majority of Dessau's and Seeck's original arguments' (Secondo contributo, 114). The article appeared in Rivista di storia antica i (1896), 90 ff. 8 On which see the exhaustive account of P. White, JRS lvii (1967), 115 ff.

112

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

the year 405. The question of usury was one of their main arguments. Drjohnejoins issue (pp. 47 ff). Passages in the Vita of Severus Alexander gave the impulsion. That prince lent money at 4 per cent, or, from benevolence, with no interest demanded (Alex. 21. 2). Further, first of all he forbids any lending of money by senators; but subsequently he permitted them to take 6 per cent (26. 2). N o w a law promulgated in 397 laid it down that senators should not practice usury at all; but another, of 405, conceded 6 per cent (C. Th. II.33.3; 4). The parallel with the HA is striking and seductive. Straub assumed, and stated more than once that the author of the HA knew that legislation - and reflected it. Hence 405 as a terminus post quern.9 Drjohne embarks on a long investigation into imperial enactments that condemned usury, or condoned it (pp. 50 ff.). He concludes with negation. Even if the statement in the Vita Alexandri is an invention, it still cannot be used to prove the year 405 as the terminus. The cardinal objection is the plain fact that the laws in question were ordained at Constantinople, not at Rome: the sources of imperial authority were now separate. Since a lucid and adequate statement was furnished by Cameron, there is no point in saying anything more in this place.l0 On this rubric, however, it must be pointed out that Drjohne has been betrayed by inadvertence. Trivial at first sight, an item in the Vita Alexandri concerns one of the earlier biographies and acquires prime importance if the HA is studied as a whole. Severus Alexander adopted interest at 4 per cent as a general rule (Alex. 21. 2). This is regarded as 'durchaus glaubhaft' (p. 53). On the contrary, such being the fictional character of this Vita, no statement however plausible can command credence unless it is elsewhere set beyond doubt. Even then, the plausible may not happen to be authentic (that is, taken from a historical source). Dr Johne appeals for support to a passage in the biography of Antoninus Pius, which has 4 per cent as the normal tariff (Pius 2. 8). That Vita, so he affirms, is regarded as the most reliable in the whole collection, and it is not impaired by any additions to the basic source'durch keinerlei Zusatze entstellt' (p. 52). Inspection fails to confirm that optimistic verdict. The Vita Pii has not been as much tampered with as other biographies in the series of the earlier emperors (those of Hadrian or Severus, for example). But 9 J. Straub, Heidnische Geschichtsapologetik in der christlichen Spatantike (1963), 1 ff.; also in Regeneratio (1972), 304 ff. (translated reprint of an Italian paper delivered at Padua in 1963). The impulsion came from S. Mazzarino, Aspetti sociali del quarto secolo (1951), 352 ff. 10 A. D. E. Cameron, JRS lv (1965), 242 f.

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

113

there are a number of patent accretions on the source which the author of the HA was abridging (and also from time to time supplementing); and the outline of an imperial biography on the Suetonian model can easily be disengaged. n Most of the accretions interrupt the account of the life and career of Antoninus Pius before he became emperor. Among them are sundry 'omina imperii', as recent investigations make clear.12 The passage about usury occurs in this portion of the Vita, and it must be considered dubious.13 III. Arguments based on laws and institutions, on civilian or military posts, have been on frequent exhibit. There was an eager search for anachronisms that might demolish the 'traditional date' (or rather dates) of the HA, or even furnish a precise terminus. Some of them were clear enough, such as 'Ragonius Clams', styled 'praefectus Illyrici et Galliarum' (Tyr. trig. 18. 5): regional prefectures did not emerge until the late years of Constantine. Elsewhere sundry confident conclusions could not fail to provoke doubt and dispute. A recurrent item is the state carriage, the 'carpentum' assigned to the City Prefect (Aur. 1.1). With appeal to statements of Symmachus, Alfoldi argued that the 'carpentum' was not introduced until 382.14 Warm support came from Chastagnol, more than once. 15 Chastagnol also put emphasis on the title 'vir illustris': not known for the prefect before 368. Dr Johne concurs on both points (pp. 137 f.; 144). Without wishing to debilitate that thesis, one may observe in passing that official posts or titles can turn out to have existed well before their assumed earliest attestation. For example inscriptions recently discovered show a praefectus uehiculorum under Vespasian, a procurator summarum rationum under Hadrian.16 Another question of method intervenes. The Vitae have often been subjected to the kind of questioning that would be appropriate and remunerative in a piece of historical writing. Whereas the HA is not just incompetent history or bad biography but something peculiar and indeed unique. However that may be, a large number of the anachronisms now " R. Syme, HAC 1966/7 (1968), 137 ff. = Emperors and Biography (1971), 36 ft. 12 A. Balland, Melanges Boyance (1974), 39 f.; T. Pekary, HAC 1968/9 (1970) 161 f. 13 HA Pius 2. 8 f: 'idem fenus trientarium, hoc est minimis usuris, exercuit ut patrimonio suo plurimos adiuuaret. fuit quaestor liberalis, praetor splendidus, consul cum Catilio Scuero.' 14 A. Alfoldi, Klio xxxii (1938), 251 ff. 15 A. Chastagnol, HAC 1963 (1964), 60 f.; Recherches sur VHistoire Auguste (1970), 27 f. 16 For the former, W. Eck, Chiron v (1975), 363 ff., adducing an inscription from Apri; for the latter, S. Demougin, ZPE xii (1976), 135 ff.

114

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

forfeit utility, once it is recognized that the use of Aurelius Victor puts the HA subsequent to 360. Dessau detected a piece of Victor in the Vita Seueri (17. 5-19. 4). Dessau's contention has never been refuted. The only remedy was to suppose either a common source or later editing.17 It avails no longer. More and ever more traces of Victor have been discovered in diverse portions of the work. 18 Nor is it a mere question of small or sporadic details. The HA often draws inspiration from the epitomator for sustained tracts of inven­ tion, Victor's mistakes or his individual fancies being a clear clue. For example, the usurper Marius, an ironsmith by profession, whom Victor alleges a descendant of the great C. Marius: the HA produces a Sallustian oration embellished with metallic metaphors (Tyr. trig. 8. 8 ff.). Again, Victor assumed that the Senate had acquired the authority to choose an emperor after the death of Aurelian- 'legendi ius principis' (36. 1). Hence the rich romance of the Vita Taciti. IV. The path now open for his proposed dating (the decade 394-404), the author proceeds to discuss several themes that illustrate attitudes and preoccupations in the HA - and may lead towards determining the purposes of that work. First of all, the social milieu of the ostensible biographers (pp. 66 ff.). Through dedications or invocations of the rulers they assert that they are in a position to furnish authentic information. 'Lampridius' can remind Constantine that he has been under the domination of court eunuchs {Alex. 67. 1); and the grand­ father of 'Vopiscus' was a friend and companion of Diocletian {Car. 14. Iff.). The author of the HA (so Dr Johne argues) should be regarded as the spokesman of an aristocratic group. Not one of them, but a person who wrote what he was instructed to write, 'in Auftrag' (p. 69); and the product can stand as a document for 'die Ideologic der herrschenden Kreise im spatantiken Rom' (p. 71). The second theme bears the arresting title 'Das Senatorenblut' (pp. 72 ff.). It is quite simple: emperors assessed and judged according as they killed or did not kill senators. From the outset Caesar exhibits clemency; and after a time emerges the oath that no senator shall be put to death save after trial before the Senate. Vespasian may have been the first to publish that profession.19 Mercy or savagery in emperors, the criterion must have been given sharp emphasis by Marius Maximus, the consular biographer, as DrJ. is aware (p. 76); and no other writer in those times could have avoided. 17 18 19

cf. Momigliano, Secondo contribute (1960), 117 f. As demonstrated by Chastagnol, Rev. phil. xli (1967), 85 ff.; HAC 1966/7 (1968), 53 ff. Thus A. R. Birley, CR xii (1962), 197 ff.

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

115

T h e r e was a model. Suetonius reported ten men of consular rank w h o m Domitian brought to destruction (Dom. 10). N o w the HA carries a catalogue of the victims of Septimius Severus, no fewer than forty-one names (Sev. 13). Hence occupation and delight for students of prosopography, even if a number of these senators were bogus: precisely h o w many, it is not agreed among scholars. 20 In epilogue on the list the biographer exclaims that the killer is worshipped in Africa - ' a b Afris ut deus habetur' (13. 8). Perhaps a hit at Aurelius Victor, w h o in laudation of 'gens nostra' added 'uelut Seuerum ipsum, quo praeclarior in re publica fuit nemo' (20. 6). Victor toned d o w n the harshness of Severus. Also that of Aurelian (35. 12). It is instructive to observe a similar technique employed in the H A . T h e author rebukes Aurelian for needless cruelty (Aur. 21. 5 ff). B u t Aurelian he regards as a 'bonus princeps' (40. 2), and Aurelian is introduced as 'severissimus imperator' (1. 5). That epithet conveys merit, and 'severitas' glosses over harsh or cruel conduct in persons praised for the enforcement of military discipline, such as Avidius Cassius - for w h o m 'Avidius Severus' is invented as a parent (Avid. 1. I). 2 1 Similarly the excellent Timesitheus is 'feared and loved' in the a r m y (Gord. 2 8 . 4 ) . V. N e x t , and m o r e significant, 'Principes mundi' (pp. 91 ff.). The Senate of the proud Republic confronted the envoys of Pyrrhus like an assembly of kings. The HA by its choice of terminology equates the imperial Senate with the emperors themselves. In his first dispatch to the Senate Probus leads off with two clever phrases, speaking like a senator: 'recte atque ordine, p. c ' and 'vestra dementia'. He continues, addressing them as 'qui et estis mundi principes et semper fuistis et in vestris posteris eritis' (Prob. 11. 2). This is language appropriate to the rulers. Thus in reference to the Tetrarchy, 'quattuor sane principes m u n d i ' (Car. 18. 4). A passage is also adduced (it is a dispatch from the armies) where the Senate is addressed as 'sancti et venerabiles domini' (Aur. 41. 2). That formula, as D r Johne shows by annotation, appertains to the rulers of the world. Further, the demeanour of the ideal prince. Severus Alexander comports himself'quasi unus e senatoribus' (Alex. 4. 3); and he is made to say 'uenerandi patres et uos ipsi magnifici unum me de uobis esse censete' (11.4). T h a t sort of thing was not new. The Emperor is in fact a member of the Senate. T h u s Claudius Caesar (at least on one interpretation) 20

See G. Alfoldy, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 1 ff. The HA has seueritas twenty-eight times, seuerus (or various forms, including the adverb), thirty-four times. 21

116

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

affirms: 'quando ex Luguduno habere nos nostri ordinis uiros non paenitet' (ILS 212). For Pliny, Trajan is 'one of us' (Pan. 2. 4); and Julian says of the Senate 'in quo nos quoque ipsos esse numeramus' (C. Th. IX. 2. 1). The ruler must be ciuilis, or, in the language of the late age, communis. The Senate's enhancement rises to its culmination with the Emperor Tacitus who is portrayed as an elderly senator of scholarly habits. He was elected, according to Victor, after an interregnum of six months during which the high assembly and the armies competed 'pudore ac modestia' (35. 9 ff.). Victor fancied that this ruler was not merely invested with authority by the Senate but chosen by the Senate.22 In fact he was the choice of the army, in absence, so Zonaras states (XII. 28). The HA plunges into exuberant fabulation, with a number of orations extolling the restoration of the Senate's dignity. Corrobora­ tive evidence is supplied in a documentary appendix: dispatches sent to the great cities in the Roman dominion, and a pair of private letters from senators (ending with a quotation from Terence). Dr Johne, by the way, seems not to have looked into this noteworthy transaction with sufficient scepticism. He cites Victor and affirms that the senatorial aristocracy was certainly glad 'ein Mitglied aus seinen Reihen auf den Thron erheben zu konnen' (p. 100). And, he says, there were probably signs of a senatorial reaction against 'das Soldatenkaisertum'. No such signs can be detected in authentic history - either now or in the next reign, which vouchsafed a second restora­ tion of the Senate's authority (Prob. 13. 1). However, the Vita Taciti serves his purpose very well. He goes on to other themes of predilection in the HA (pp. 162 if.). Thus hostility to hereditary monarchy, to boy emperors, to eunuchs and bureaucrats. These engaging topics were in no way novel (and no one of them can with safety be adduced to establish a close dating for the HA). Some occurred already in the sources. Aurelius Victor exemplifies detestation of minor bureaucrats. Relating how the Gallic usurper Victorinus seduced the wife of an actuarius, he diverges into a savage and explicit denunciation of that class: 'nequam uenale callidum seditiosum habendi cupidum atque ad patrandas fraudes uelandasque quasi ab natura factum' etc. (33. 13). And eunuchs were fair game all the time: no necessity to invoke Eutropius at Constantinople in 395 and 396. The evil of sons succeeding fathers in the purple was a common­ place since Commodus - though omitted through inadvertence by the 22 Victor 36. 1: 'senatus . . . imperatorem creat, cunctis fere laetioribus quod militari ferocia legendi ius principis proceres recepissent.'

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

117

author when Avidius Cassius denounces the parent of Commodus. And he does not have to be consistent. He acclaims one of the Tetrarchs, Constantius Caesar, as progenitor of a line, 'Augustos multos de se daturum' (Claud. 10. 7). Boy princes are arraigned by 'Maecius Faltonius Nicomachus' in an oration, of general validity. As long ago as 6 BC men of sombre understanding might well have said 'dii auertant principes pueros' (Tac. 6. 1). Rather than discover the deliberate and enjoined exposition of a political doctrine, one is tempted to pay tribute to the talent of a writer who is ever on the alert for facts or fancies to exploit and expand. VI. A more remunerative theme now comes in, the City Prefecture, in which the HA shows a keen interest. First of all, the praefecti named in the work. Dr Johne goes through them in detail (pp. 106 ff.); he appends a list which comprises all praefecti known from other sources between 117 and 238, and also includes, subsequent to the latter date, Nummius Albinus and Junius Tiberianus (pp. 114 ff.). The HA items amount to sixteen characters of history. One of them, here registered as 'Nummius Ceionius Albinus' is the Albinus attested as cos. II in 263, the Nummius Albinus Prefect of the City in 256 and again in 261. Only the HA calls him 'Ceionius Albinus' (Aur. 9. 2). It is not certain that 'Ceionius' already adhered to Nummii Albini. A small point perhaps, but linked to something else: a 'Ceionius Albinus' among the victims of Severus (Sev. 11. 3). He is held authentic in PIR2 C 600. Three dubious or spurious praefecti are noted and omitted: (1) Salviusjulianus (cos. 148). His prefecture is recorded only by the insertion in the first sentence of the biography of Didius Julianus. He is there styled the proauus of the Emperor, which is patently erroneous: probably an uncle. Most scholars in the present age reject his pre­ fecture (also the second consulate there alleged).23 (2) Probus, alleged son-in-law of Septimius Severus, who offered him the post (Sev. 8. 1). A noteworthy piece of fraudulence in one of the 'better Vitae\ (3) Aelius Cesettianus (Tac. 1.2). All characters in this Vita, except emperors, are bogus. But there is also Vectius Sabinus (Max. et Balb. 2. 1), whom the list admits with a query. This person, introduced as a consular orator 'ex familia Ulpiorum', clamours to be discharged. He is clearly the 'Sabinus' appointed in the sequel when 'Pinarius Valens' was made praefectus praetorio (4. 4). Annotation is requisite to avoid confusion 23 Admitted as conceivably historical by G. W. Bowersock, Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire (1969), 80; T. D. Barnes, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 47.

118

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

with authentic Sabini.24 First, Sabinus, a city Prefect (unidentifiable), was killed in the spring of 238 (Herodian VII. 7. 4, whence Maximin. 15. 1). Second, Sabinus attested as cos. II in 240. He might be identical with 'Vectius Sabinus', so some scholars supposed. Better, C. Appius Octavius Suetrius Sabinus (cos. 214). There is welcome confirmation. An inscription now certifies him as the 'consul iterum' of 240 (AE 1971, 431: Beroea). Therefore 'Vectius Sabinus' goes where he belongs - with 'Fabius Sabinus', styled 'Cato temporis sui', one of the counsellors of a virtuous prince (Alex. 68. 1). What then is the significance of the authentic characters? They are taken to indicate a strongly senatorial point of view. Indeed-, the plea might be supported by allusion to Tacitus in contrast to Suetonius (the biographer names only two praefecti, viz. L. Piso and Vespasian's brother). None the less a certain dubitation will intrude on two counts. First, the early names. Aurelius Fulvus and Annius Verus (as Dr Johne knows and states) come from the basic source that supplied the ancestry of the Antonine rulers. Second, Prefects of the City tend to be mentioned (demotion or promotion) where there is a political crisis. Thus Baebius Macer at the beginning of Hadrian's reign, Catilius Severus at the end; and a number of them came on show in the fateful years 193 and 238, and were named in the source followed by the HA. There are none between 211 and 238. A pity. A sustained interest might have brought in several - or have had congenial recourse to invention. Aware that the jurist Ulpian might not seem plausible as the sole counsellor of Severus Alexander, and perhaps guiltily aware that Ulpian had perished quite early in the reign, the ingenious author called up seven illustrious senators, from 'Fabius Sabinus' to 'Quintilius Marcellus' (Alex. 68. 1 ff.). Light and help may often come from one of the fabrications. Dr Johne now turns his attention to the usurper 'Censorinus' whom Stein was moved to denounce as 'plane fictus tarn insolente quam absurde' (PIR2 C 656). Who would not happily concur? After an anthology of derisory opinions, Dr Johne deals with the career of Censorinus at some length (pp. 122-8). 25 In descending order it begins 'bis consul, bis praefectus praetorii, ter praefectus urbi, quarto pro consule, tertio consularis' etc. (Tyr. trig. 33. 1). The investigator adduces and analyses several careers of the magnates in the second half of the Fourth Century, and he is able to show a similar order of posts (though not so many iterations). cf. Emperors and Biography (1971), 176 f. See also his exposition in HAC 197214 (1976), 131 ff.

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

119

For example, in ascending order, Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, 'consularis Lusitaniae, proconsule Achaiae, praefectus urbi, legatus a senatu missus V, praefectus praetorio II Italiae et Illyrici, consul ordinarius designatus' (ILS 1259). T h e fabrication can therefore be made to disclose its period. The ingenious impostor may well have seen and recalled inscriptions at R o m e . O n e may cite a parallel. Dedications celebrate the great Petronius Probus as 'litterarum et eloquentiae lumen', or the like (ILS 1265). They may have inspired the author to portray old Gordian as the e m b o d i m e n t of both Antonine and contemporary culture, in a h a r m o n i o u s blend. T h e absurd 'Censorinus' has his uses. Casual and minor items also contribute. T h e importance of the City Prefecture is shown by the contrasted behaviour of good and of bad emperors. Thus Elagabalus compelling his praefectus urbicus (the expression is unique) to attend drinking parties (Elag. 20. 2). Again, Elagabalus intended to degrade the office by putting a praefectus urbi in charge of each of the fourteen regions of R o m e - and he would have selected the vilest of men (20. 3). B u t the good Syrian prince, w h o went on with the project, had consular curatores, as adjutants to the Prefect of the City (Alex. 33. 1). Finally, the ineffable Carinus appointed a minor official: 'unum ex cancellariis suis fecit, quo foedius nee cogitari potuit aliquando nee d i d ' (Car. 16. 3). For balance, however, it will be noted that Carinus chose as praefectus praetorio another type of dreadful bureaucrat, 'unum ex his notariis quern stuprorum et libidinum conscium semper atque adiutorem habuerat' (16. 5). Cancellarii and notarii recall Aurelius Victor on actuarii (cf. above). VII. T o continue with the Prefecture. Losing honour as power shifted to the military zones and to strategic cities, Rome nevertheless regained rank and prestige in the course of the Fourth Century. The City Prefecture benefited, extending its previous authority and annexing n e w attributes. Above all, the praefectus has charge of public buildings and of the food supply (the praefectus annonae became his subordinate). T h e office came close to a monopoly of the high aristocracy. Chastagnol's figures for the period 290-423 show the predominance of certain groups (p. 121). Thus thirteen praefecti from the AniciiPetronii, twelve from the Aradii-Valerii, eleven from the Ceionii, eight from the Symmachi-Nicomachi. In the H A , predilection and preoccupation stands out clearly. As in other aspects, the fictional biography of Tacitus is rich and revealing, an emperor omitted from the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius and

120

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

ignored by Julian in his Caesars - but offering fourteen pages of Teubner text. Dispatches to Carthage and to Treveri announcing the revival of the Senate's authority state that all appeals from everywhere now go to the praefectus urbi (18. 3; 5); and a letter from 'Autronius Tiberianus' to his father confirms the glad tidings: 'redierunt ad praefectum urbi appellationes omnium potestatum et dignitatum' (19. 2). After which, it is a small thing that another senator should exhort his uncle to come back from Baiae and Puteoli since 'principes facimus, possumus et prohibere' (19. 5). Second, the proliferation of aristocratic nomenclature. Dessau pounced upon it. The opposition, it is true, contended that personages of the late epoch might have had ancestors illustrious under Constantine. However, most of the names in question occur in biographies by 'Pollio' and 'Vopiscus' who profess to be writing earlier, under the Tetrarchy. 26 N o need to wonder where Dr Johne stands. He mentions 'Toxotius', 'Ragonius Celsus', 'Faltonius Probus', 'Clodius Celsinus' (p. 138). At this point he brings in the oracle about the descendants of the Emperor Probus, destined each and all to reach the highest honours - but 'adhuc neminem vidimus' (Prob. 24. 3). The artful author devised a joke, which not all scholars have seen. The allusion is clear: to Petronius Probus, consul in 371 (Mommsen concurred), or better, so most now believe, to the joint consulship of his sons in 395. Third, an episode exhibiting a character in history. At the festival of the Hilaria the Prefect Junius Tiberianus took up the author into his state carriage and engaged him in amicable discourse about biography and history (Aur. 1. 1 ff.). A problem of dates and identities has vexed earnest enquirers: 291/2 or 303/4, since a Junius Tiberianus was prefect on each occasion, whereas the festival (March 25) fits only the months occupied by the former.27 Since fiction not history is in cause, the problem does not exist. 'Vopiscus' did not care. The episode can serve various purposes. Thus the dating of the HA, because of the notorious 'carpentum' of the praefectus urbi. Dr Johne enlists it to illustrate a larger theme, the social milieu. The author is putting himself under the patronage of a Prefect of the City (p. 144). Indeed, it may seem strange that 'Vopiscus' did not dedicate his biographies to Junius Tiberianus. Instead, a certain Tinianus' (or 26 That is, apart from the inadvertence of Diocletian iam priuatus in conversation with the father of'Vopiscus' (Aur. 43. 2): supported in the next chapter by 'est quidem iam Constantius imperator'(44. 5). 27 For the detail, A. Chastagnol, Les Fastes de la prefecture de Rome au Bas-Empire (1962), 17 ff; 40 f.

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

121

perhaps 'Pionius', for the text is disturbed) happens to be addressed (Aur. 1.9). O t h e r friends of 'Vopiscus', it should be added, find a mention w h e n five history-fanciers promote an elegant and erudite debate (Quadr. tyr. 3. 6). O n e of them is 'Ceionius Iulianus'. The Ceionii, by the w a y , came in at an early stage when the author (this time 'Capitolinus'), expounding Clodius Albinus, whose father is called 'Ceionius Postumus', commends the Emperor Constantine for favour s h o w n to that noble house, 'per te aucta et augenda' (Clod. Alb. 4. 1 f.). 'Ceionius Albinus' is relevant, an alleged victim of Septimius Severus. VIII. T h e author writes from a Roman point of view (pp. 148 ff.). Hence noble ancestry for good emperors or other approved persons, with unfriendly comment on humble origin or alien extraction. Hadrian was born at R o m e . Only the HA states it (Hadr. 1.3), which D r J o h n e regards as highly significant (p. 150). Yet the item merely indicates the basic source, and is to be presumed correct (with birthday and the year). Other writers give Italica, which was his patria - an inadvertence or confusion that persists in some quarters. Avidius Cassius is duly accorded descent from the Cassii of the Republic; and another virtuous usurper becomes the ancestor of the Ceionii. T h e Syrian prince drew up a genealogical table taking him back to the Metelli (Alex. 44. 3); and his wife is 'Memmia, Sulpicii consularis viri filia, Catuli neptis' (20. 3), an item that derives from ' M u m m i a m Achaicam, neptem Catuli' (Suetonius, Galba 3.4). T h e prime piece is old Gordian, with descent from the Gracchi in the paternal line, from Trajan through his mother (Gord. 2. 2). Some m e m b e r s of his family are equipped with Antonine nomenclature. T h u s his wife's father, 'Annius Severus', and his daughter, 'Maecia Faustina': his o w n parent was 'Maecius Marullus'. F r o m time to time a prospect may beckon that a name in the HA was w r o n g l y impugned. By coincidence, two heterogeneous Maecii have recently cropped up. An inscription found at Corinth disclosed Maecius Faustinus, a rhetor about the middle of the second century. H o p e s rose, but perhaps premature. 2 8 And there is now a youthful uir darissimus, by name of Maecius Marullus. 2 9 What then follows? 'Maecius' is a name of charm and predilection for the author, as witness, before all, 'Maecius Faltonius Nicomachus' (Tac. 6. 1). T h e 'Maecius Marullus' w h o transmitted the Gracchan blood to Antonius Gordianus is best explained by Furius Maecius 28 Corinth viii. 3. 264, whence AE 1968, 475. Maecius Faustinus is supposed the paternal grandfather of Antonius Gordianus by J. H. Oliver, AJP lxxxix (1968), 345 ff. 29 AE 1971, 72 (near Zagarolo): a verse epitaph.

122

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

Gracchus, praefectus urbi in 376: the man who destroyed a shrine of Mithras. 30 For the supreme value of an origin from Rome itself, Dr Johne attaches importance to the inventions concerning the Emperor Carus. After scholarly dubitation about ostensible evidence (Illyricum, Africa, Mediolanum), Carus is reclaimed for the imperial city, a letter of his being quoted to demonstrate him 'Romanum, id est Roma oriundum' (Car. 5. 3). Compare an earlier fiction: Pescennius Niger ordained that nobody should hold any office in a province 'nisi Romae Romanus, hoc est oriundus urbe' (Pesc. 7. 5). The exclusive pride thus manifested is taken to prove that the biographies were composed at Rome and not, as some scholars were disposed to believe, in Gaul - scholars who were largely influenced by the favour which the HA extends to the Gallic emperors in the time of Gallienus (cf. especially Tyr. trig. 5. 7). The origin of the writer himself is another matter. Sporadic indica­ tions might suggest Africa. That is 'problematisch', as Dr Johne observes (p. 155). Quite so, given the nature of the evidence. It permits only 'rational speculation' (otherwise 'the higher guess­ work'). When authors are put to the question, all allowance must be made for mimesis, both literary and social. The time is not long past when people took comfort in the conviction that Cornelius Tacitus must be a 'Roman of Rome', or even a scion of the old patriciate. IX. From Rome the enquiry takes an easy but more hazardous turn to Kaiserrezidenzen (pp. 156 ff.). On the accession of the Emperor Tacitus the Senate not only sent the missives to Carthage and Treveri, which are reproduced. Seven other cities were awarded the compliment, viz. Antioch, Aquileia, Mediolanum, Alexandria, Thessalonica, Corinth, Athens (18. 6). The principle of selection remains enigmatic - and one might call up for comparison the list in Ausonius, the Ordo nobilium urbium.31 The name of Constantinople is avoided all through. No surprise. The author was normally alert, he did not wish to undermine his pretences. Only Byzantium therefore. But dispraisal of Constantine's new capital was at once detected by Dessau: there are no old families left at Byzantium, so the author declares (Gall. 6. 9). Further, a contemporary witness is brought into play. Claudian in his invective against Eutropius derides the conscript fathers in the city of Constantine: 'falsi complete sedilia padres', and he styles them 30

As argued in HAC 1964/5 (1966), 268 = Emperors and Biography (1971), 12. Ausonius has twenty, from 'aurea Roma' to Burdigala. After Rome came Constantinople, Carthage, Antioch, Alexandria, Treveri, etc. 31

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

123

'Byzantinos proceres Graiosque Quirites'. 3 2 Taking the hint and pursuing that line, D r Johne puts under sharp inspection the treatment which the H A metes out to various cities which, to the detriment of R o m e , acquired fame through being chosen as residences by the emperors (pp. 162 ff.). First of all, Nicomedia. There subsisted no reason for ill-feeling since that city had declined in importance. N o n e the less, with Vitae dedicated to Diocletian in the earlier portion of the HA, and fairly frequent mention by 'Pollio' and by 'Vopiscus', it is perhaps strange that his capital should earn only t w o entries. N e x t Antioch, roughly handled on various counts. Hadrian detested the city (Hadr. 14. 1), which no other source avers; and so did Marcus Aurelius, refusing at first to pay a visit after the rebellion of Avidius Cassius (Marcus 25. 9). Again, Severus Alexander has to suffer affront. Antiochenes congregating with Egyptians and Alexandrians at a c o m m o n festival (its nature is not specified) assail him with the term 'archisynagogus' (Alex, 28. 7). The disrespectful conduct of Antioch (it will be recalled) was enlisted by Baynes in support of his thesis, with appeal to Julian's Misopogon. N o t mere frivolity but luxury and vice, that was the constant theme. The biography of Avidius Cassius duly spreads itself on the evil behaviour of the legions in Syria, with the inevitable evocation of Daphne, the suburb of Antioch (5. 5 ff.). Grave doubt must intervene. The author is merely serving up ancient and perennial commonplaces. They are taken for granted by Tacitus w h e n , neat and brief, he refers to the unmilitary soldiers in Syria as 'nitidi et quaestuosi' (Ann. XIII. 35. 1). T h e n Sirmium is arraigned. In the biography of Aurelian the author, before mentioning his origin from Dacia Ripensis (which happens to be correct), cites or invents variants, as is his fashion. He comes out with the statement that Aurelian was born 'ut plures l o q u u n t u r , Sirmii, familia obscuriore' (Aur. 3. 1). A deliberate depreciation of Sirmium, so D r Johne suggests (p. 168). Further, the lowly origin of Aurelian has to be covered up through adoption by the great 'Ulpius Crinitus', a descendant of Trajan. N o w Sirmium (as D r J o h n e concedes) was in fact the patria of the excellent Probus. But Probus, it is helpfully alleged, was 'nobiliore matre quam patre' (Prob. 3. 1). T h a t is done to hint at a kinship with Claudius: he had a sister called'Claudia'(3.4). These emperors, however, come out well in the H A because of their valiant exploits in the service of Rome. Nevertheless, in both instances, so Dr Johne will have it, 'verfallt Sirmium wie Constantinopel einer gewissen Geringschatzung' (p. 170). 32

Claudian, In Eutropium i. 470; ii. 136.

124

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

Then there is the case of Treveri (p. 171): mentioned only twice, though the HA carries brief biographies of eight Gallic usurpers, some of them being treated in a friendly fashion. One of the references is an invention, namely a mint at Treveri which produced coins of Victoria, the mother of Victorinus, alleged to be an Augusta: 'quorum hodieque forma exstat apud Treveros' (Tyr. trig. 31. 3). This item is introduced to cast discredit on Treveri, since the HA detests the regiment of women, let alone foreigners: 'omnis iam consumptus est pudor' (30.1). Finally Mediolanum, mentioned nine times (pp. 172 ff). Let one item suffice. The paternal grandfather of Didius Julianus is styled 'Insubris', which, to be sure, is no compliment to that city. But the item is surely erudite rather than offensive, deriving from Cicero, In Pisonem: the 'Insuber quidam', grandfather of L. Piso. Nor need much be made of Rome in preference to Mediolanum as a patria for the Emperor Carus (cf. above). A certain hesitation will be felt before accepting this conscious and consistent design of casting discredit on sundry imperial cities. In epilogue, a page is added on Ravenna (p. 176). That city has nine entries, but all of a neutral kind, and in purely historical transac­ tions. Now Honorius went to Ravenna in 402 and established himself there in 404, when (so Dr Johne states) Ravenna became patently the Kaiserrezidenz of the Western Empire. In consequence he is moved to make a conjecture, but not without due warning, 'in aller gebotenen Vorsicht': the HA was composed before the year 404. Arguments of his type proceed from assumptions that cannot be verified. Naissus, absent from the HA, can be brought in as a deterrent, for double employ. Naissus was an imperial residence. It was also the birthplace (though not the patria) of Constantine. All things have been seen so far in the controversy about the HA, but no critic suggests that Naissus was left out deliberately by a writer hostile to cities associated with Constantine. On the other hand, Naissus was the site of the great battle in which Claudius defeated the Goths in 269 (the name is only in Zosimus I. 45. 1). The Vita Claudii invokes Constantius Caesar and duly produces a pedigree that links him to Claudius. The Battle of Naissus would have come in very nicely, had not the impostor been inadver­ tent and capricious. Furthermore, he lacks interest in Danubian and Balkan place names. No mention of Siscia, Mursa, Singidunum, Viminacium, Serdica. X. A conclusion about the date is briefly stated at the end (pp. 177-80). Dr Johne repeats his refusal to follow Straub and go beyond 404. The

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

125

'covert polemics' against the city of Constantine (and also the negative inference about Ravenna) encourage him to set the HA in the vicinity of Claudian, whose poems fall in the period 394-404. He also adduces sundry items which, appearing to reflect events and persons between 392 and 394, have persuaded other scholars to adopt 394 as a terminus post quern: Chastagnol, it will be recalled, has argued firmly for 394-8. 3 3 Those limits are attractive. Still, it is all to the good that no narrow dating is here advocated. Caution was to be prescribed in admitting the impact of dramatic events between 392 and 3 9 4 - yet they seem to accumulate and converge. 34 A writer who puts emphasis on 395 as a convenient annus mirabilis will not quarrel with an estimate that allows a forward margin of a number of years.35 In this book the political purpose of the HA engrosses the larger part. The HA vindicates Roman tradition and the dignity of the Senate. That is clear and obvious. Further, its author's interest in Prefects of Rome renders it probable that he wrote under 'express commission' ('in Auftrag') from a praefectus urbi or an aristocratic group (p. 179). That is a firm statement. It cannot escape a gentle admonition: a Prefect of the City in the carnival season encouraged the author to go forward without fear on paths of mendacity (Aur. 2. 2). A common frailty of the academic mind demands that a piece of writing should have a serious purpose. While integral faith still held, the 'six biographers' could be regarded as a coterie of courtiers evincing a fervent devotion to Diocletian and to Constantine. More recently, they have been identified as defenders of the landed proprietors in the western provinces, especially in Gaul, towards the end of the Third Century. 36 The fraud being exposed, more exciting prospects opened. The author was a pagan, he therefore wrote on the side of the old faith and the high aristocracy, both now on the defensive. That explanation carried a wide appeal. Hohl at one time viewed it with sympathy. Furthermore, marked hostility to Christianity was detected by Alfoldi, hostility also by Straub, but masked or palliated by a plea for religious toleration. 37 It is expedient to inspect the named references to Christians by their 33

A. Chastagnol, Historia iv (1955), 182; HAC 1963 (1964), 63, cf. 66. Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 79: in express comment on an earlier opinion (of 1965), namely that 'it is hazardous to bring the HA into immediate relation with any historical transactions'. 35 ib. 220, cf. HAC 1964/5(1966), 272 = Emperors and Biography (1971), 16. 36 E. M. Schtajerman, Die Krise der Sklavenhalterordnung im Westen des romischen Reiches (1964). 'Nondum vidi'. 37 Notably in Heidnische Geschichtsapologetik in der christlichen Spatantike (1963) 34

126

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

type and distribution. Eleven in all, six of them in the biography of Severus Alexander by 'Lampridius'. Some scholars discover a less friendly note later on when the author is 'Vopiscus', hence an incentive to believe in diversity of authorship. 38 On that rubric, reversion to Dessau will cut the matter short. His brief interpretation of two passages may suffice.39 When Aurelian rebukes senators for behaving as though in a church of the Christians, it is the Senate that incurs censure (Aur. 20. 5); and it is Egyptians who take the brunt when the universal hypocrisy that infects their country is denounced (Quadr. tyr. 8. 2 ff.). Christianity, it is clear, was not among the main preoccupations of the HA. 40 How Jews are treated in the HA should be rated a useful parallel. That is, humour or malice combined with erudition and a taste for the exotic. Jews were under injunction to eat the flesh of ostriches, so Elagabalus had ascertained; Moses, 'ut Iudaeorum libri locuntur', raised complaint that death should supervene at the age of a hundred and ten; and the Gallic strong woman, 'Vituriga', changes her name to 'Samso'. 41 The author discloses no sympathy for the cults that were practised with fervour by many of the nobility in the second half of the Fourth Century. On the contrary. His sole reference to Mithras occurs in a story about Commodus; and only the dreadful and degenerate Syrian submits to the ritual of the 'taurobolium'. 42 Again, no interest in Platonism, in theosophy, in astral religions. The large debt that the fictions owe to the nomenclature of noble­ men has been taken as a sign of admiration, and an allegiance. Other factors contributed. The author is a word-fancier, delighting in the shape and aroma of personal names, literary or exotic no less than aristocratic; a scholar communes with the 'famous nations of the dead', and he may acquire an affinity; and the narrator in historical novels tends to put himself in proximity to persons of birth and rank. There is also a strand of gentle humour, as in the portrayal of old Gordian (himself depicted as a man of letters). And the author makes a mock of the ambitious and fabricated genealogies paraded by noble­ men in his own time. Septimius Severus in an oration shows up the Ceionian pedigree of his rival as a patent fraud (Clod. Alb. 12. 8). 38 Thus Momigliano, o. c. 131, n. 41. Also, more confidently, W. H. C. Frend, JTS xxv (1974), 345. Observe further the Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire (1971): 'Lampridius' is taken for a real person; and 'he refers to Christianity more often and in a less hostile spirit than the other biographers'. 39 H. Dessau, Hermes xxvh (1892), 587. 40 Thus Momigliano, o. c. 130 f; A. D. E. Cameron JRS lv (1965), 248. 41 HA Bag. 28. 4; Claud. 2. 4; Quadr. tyr. 12. 3. 42 HA Comm.9. 6; Bag. 7. 1.

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

127

This author declares no religious belief save devotion to Rome, the 'res publica', the Senate, the good rulers after the Antonine fashion. T h a t profession depends upon a long tradition which was not exempt from equivocation in any age. Several of the early Caesars wrote autobiographies. Their apologia was personal, not a defence of the imperial system. 4 3 Some of them, such as Tiberius, disliked propaganda - and they saw that it would not convince men of understanding. Instead, it was left to the educated class to evolve suitable pleas or formulations. They emerged at an early date, along with adulation and subservience to power. Senators, it is no paradox, created an 'imperial ideology'. The first known actio gratiarum of a consul (in 14) no doubt contained many anticipations of

Pliny.44

T h e H A conforms. Composing biographies of emperors in the sequel of Suetonius and in emulation of Marius Maximus (and with the ambition to excel in scandal), the author, whatever his purpose and personality, could not help reproducing the doctrines consecrated about rulers and government. O n e of his devices is to embellish usurpers, since they might have turned into good emperors. N o n e the less, the presentation can be dubious or subversive. If his team of four pretenders, the Quadrigae tyrannorum, imparts a lesson, it is the folly of usurpation - and the comedy. X I . In the beginning Dessau saw no Tendenz\ and Hohl in his latest paper, in 1958, quietly declined to go into 'den nebulosen Fragenkomplex " P r o p a g a n d a " und " T e n d e n z " \ 4 5 The term 'propaganda' has been put to zealous employ in the recent age. Caesar's Bellum Gallicum came under heavy fire, more than once. Yet the apologia of the proconsul deserves a more delicate appraisal. 46 With Sallust, the inde­ pendence and honour of a historian is in cause. It was a common view that Sallust composed his first monograph with a precise intent, to defend the m e m o r y of the Dictator; and the notion was even promul­ gated that Sallust wrote under commission from Caesar's heir. 47 Several sharp questions have to be asked. If the HA is propaganda, to w h o m was it directed, and what sort of message. If to an emperor, H a r t k e had the answer. Theodosius is being requested to show under43

cf. the discussion provoked by M. Durry's paper in Histoire et Historiens dans I'Antiquite (Fondation Hardt, 1958), 236 ff. 44 Ovid, Ex Ponto, iv. 4. 39 f. (Sex. Pompeius). 45 E. Hohl, Wiener Studien lxxi (1958), 152. The paper is in fact posthumous. Hohl may have been weakening in his allegiance to the cause of Baynes. 46 J. H. Collins, ANRWi. 1 (1972), 962. 47 A. Rosenberg, Einleitung und Quellenkunde zur r. Geschichte (1921), 174 f.

128

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

standing and clemency towards the leaders of defeated paganism.48 At the other extreme, a number of scholars incautiously used the term ' Volksbuch'; and Baynes described the HA as 'propaganda directed to a popular audience'. 49 The product, though often trivial and vulgar, exhibits great sophistication. Not only curious erudition and preciosity but impres­ sive rhetoric, as exemplified in senatorial orations like that of 'Vectius Sabinus' (Max. et Balb. 2. 2 ff.). Therefore an educated audience. Alternatives might then offer. First, neutrals in the upper order, or even Christians, in the attempt to win sympathy and toleration for the old faith. This explanation has a certain seduction. Let it be added, however, that if Jerome knew and read the HA the appeal resided in the fiction, not in the doctrine.50 Second, the pagan magnates themselves. They are incited to main­ tain their eminent traditions. Nothing aggressive appears to be recom­ mended, therefore the HA could only be a kind of rearguard action. These notions all entail a conscious political design. The terms 'Falschung' and 'forgery' so often applied to the HA lend support. 'Sed haec quae robustioris nequitiae sunt omittamus.' Better, 'imposture'. Finally, authorship. At an early stage Seeck proposed a young aristocrat; and the 'circle of Symmachus' has duly been enlisted. Indeed, for Hartke the author was none other than the son of Nicomachus Flavianus, writing in haste in the last months of 394.51 Chastagnol for a time kept a residual tenderness for this idea.52 One might not wholly reject a decayed nobleman with a fancy or passion for scholarship, a denizen of that Bohemian world which Ammianus depicted and derided. The erudition of this author has proved a valuable clue. His abode is in the vicinity of scholiasts.53 But he is patently a rogue scholar, perverse, delighting in deception, and not reluctant to be found out towards the end. Comedy, it is true, may convey lessons, and frivolity can be assumed as a disguise. In this instance, however, the frivolity 48

W. Hartke, Klio, Beiheft xlv (1940), 167 f. Baynes, o.c. 57. The term 'Volksbuch' appears to have been introduced by E. Groag, Woch.jur kl. Phil 1904, 795. 50 That Jerome in the preface to his Vita Hilarionis copied the HA {Prob. 1.2), and not the reverse, was suggested by A. D. E. Cameron, JRS lv (1965), 245. For traces ofjeromc in the HA see now A. Chastagnol, Recherches sur I'Histoire Auguste (1970), 12 ff. 51 W. Hartke, o. c. 167 f. But he later abandoned the identification, Romische Kinderkaiser (1951), 413. 52 A. Chastagnol, HAC 1963 (1964), 50, cf. 66 f He then said 'il s'agit bien d'une oeuvre de propagande' (ib. 66). 53 As established by E. Hohl, Hermes lv (1920), 302; 308. Followed by Straub, Studien zurHistoria Augusta (1952), 11; cf. 97 f. None the less, Hohl at the same time affirmed that the HA 'stellt sich bewusst in den Dienst der heidnischen Tendenz' (ib. 310). 49

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

129

appears genuine, and the plethora of invention is central: not sub­ sidiary, not merely due to a dearth of historical evidence. A literary personality emerges, marvellous but no longer a total mystery; and this man takes rank with impostors in other ages. 54 If that is so, theories based upon a political motive and design b e c o m e vulnerable - and not necessary. Mommsen's famous 'cui b o n o ' will get a response, and it can recede at last. Another question adherent to the 'unsolved problem' can also be answered. The HA presupposes a reading public. It is there, a result of the great renascence of classical learning. The milieu includes people w h o m Ammianus observed with distaste, noblemen whose sole occupation was the perusal ofJuvenal and Marius Maximus (XXVIII. 4. 14). T h e r e is also a pair of corollaries. The H A is a child of its own t i m e albeit illegitimate, so it has been said. 55 It can therefore be used to illustrate life and letters in the age of Ammianus, of Symmachus, of J e r o m e - precisely through the manifold fabrications, 'simulacra modis miris'. N o such audience can be found, no such biographer even remotely surmised in the days of Diocletian and Constantine: let alone a whole school of them. XII. Since the H A is not only a literary product but wilfully enig­ matic, another approach would be to determine the genre through examination of structure, sources, composition and authorship. 5 6 D r J o h n e , like most investigators, begins with the date. T o his long and substantial survey he appends a table of names, registering past and present positions, under seven headings (p. 46). T h e table is not as helpful as it promises. The author confines himself to names mentioned in the text of his prolegomena, although the notes furnish a full and remarkable documentation. However, the list omits t w o supporters of Baynes w h o occurred there (viz. Lambrechts and Seston). N e x t , the rubric of those w h o advocate a dating between 380 and 400. It comprises no fewer than nineteen names of the living. If the limits 3 9 0 - 4 0 0 had been adopted, the present position would stand out m o r e clearly. O n the other side, M o m m s e n ' s complicated explanation claims five fairly recent adherents. But only one name stands under the heading of 'echt', that of Momigliano: which may not be quite correct. Given the 54

For a recent unmasking, H. R. Trevor-Roper, A Hidden Life. The Enigma of Sir Edmund Backhouse (1976). As the author observes, 'even fantasies reveal something of the person who devises them' (ib. 278); and further, 'he belongs recognisably to his own age' (298). 55 By Hohl, Hermes lv (1920), 310. 56 That the literary approach had been neglected by historians was deplored by Hohl in his last paper, Wiener Studien lxxi (1958), 152.

130

Propaganda in the Historia Augusta

preponderance which the late dating here acquires, it would have been easy and equitable to subjoin several discordant names, even if only by annotation: there is ample space on the page.57 The 'traditional date' (for so it is termed) and the plural authorship still have friends and fanciers.58 One device seems not to have been tried, namely retention of the ostensible dates of the biographies, but with a single author writing through long years. Ea sola species supererat. Perhaps it will yet be invoked, if data from the computer have to be accepted.59 So much careful detail being provided to expound the history of the problem, it might be ungracious to ask for one thing more - for instruction and also for entertainment. That is, an indication some­ where about conversions, recantations, lapses from faith. The list would not have to be very long - that fact itself prompts various reflections. In erudite controversy, clarity of statement or intent is requisite, not least with the Historia Augusta.

57 Thus G. Corradi, Nuoua Rivista Storica xlvii (1963), 194; A. Bellezza, Massimino il Trace (1964), 211. According to S. d'Elia, Dessau's thesis of the single author, 'per quanto ancora sostenuta sembra difficilmente accettabile' (Boll, di studi latini iii (1973), 73). 58 Observe the emphatic pronouncement of S. Timpanaro. Appealing to Momigliano's arguments he affirms 'sarei ancor piu decisivamente favorevole alia datazione tradizionale e alia pluralita di autori' (Studi de storiografia antica in memoria di Leonardo Ferrero (1971), 129). Quoted by Momigliano in EHR lxxxviii (1973), 114. 59 Computer analysis of the style and syntax of the HA has been carried out by Dr R. J. Ireland and Mr I. Marriott at University College London. It may be expected to provide evidence on the question of single or multiple authorship. ADDENDUM: see I. Marriott, JRS lxix (1979), 65 ff.

IX The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta* I. In the beginning Romulus marked out the bounds of his city. In a later age the first to enlarge them was Sulla the Dictator. Not inappropriate, in view of the ancient forms and rituals he was anxious to revive. 'Scaevos iste Romulus', thus is he denounced in the harangue of the consul Lepidus.l How often the pomerium was extended in the sequel, that is a question. It goes beyond mere antiquarism, it involves conflicts of testimony, it discloses sundry ambiguities. There are also peculiar silences in the record. The operation was neither elaborate nor spectacular. Hence liable to escape notice, like the Augurium Salutis, unless an author had a keen interest in sacerdotal enquiries. Such was Cornelius Tacitus, for long years one of the quindecimviri sacris faciundis. The historian, duly recording that ceremony when it was enacted by Claudius Caesar in 49, shows awareness of a previous celebration twenty-five years earlier.2 By contrast, Suetonius, albeit dedicated to all manner of scholarly pursuits. Not one of his biographies carries even a hint of the pomerium of Rome. II. An entertaining parallel offers, namely Janus. Since the days of King Numa, the Gates of War had been closed once only until the action of Caesar Augustus - and then three times in the course of the reign. The first closure, in 29 BC, engrossed emphasis; the second, after the ostensible conquest of north-western Spain in 25, turned out to be premature; and the date of the third has failed to be registered. Decreed by the Senate towards the end of 11 BC, it was not then carried out, according to Cassius Dio. 3 The years 8 or 7 are plausible, after the end of the great wars of conquest in Illyricum and Germany. The Gates of War were unbarred again (it may be conjectured) half a dozen years * Reprinted from Bonner HAC 1975/6 (1978), 217 ff. 1 Sallust, Hist. 1.55.5. 2 Ann. xii. 23. 1: 'quinque et viginti annis intermissum'. Some modern editions print Ritter's emendation, septuaginta for viginti, because of Dio's notice under 29 BC (li. 20. 4). Not licit. Tacitus may (or may not) have decided that the ceremony did not suit his narration of the year 24. 3 Dio liv. 36. 2. Various reasons may be adduced to explain the omission of the third closure subsequently.

132

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

later when the young prince Gaius Caesar went out in pomp to wage ostensible war in the eastern lands.4 In this late season none should be at pains to adduce (and disallow) an allegation of Orosius: Janus shut for the third time in 2 BC, and so abiding for a dozen years, an epoch of'quietissimum otium'. 5 That year is Orosius' date for the Nativity, necessitating peace among the nations. As Mommsen said, 'fraus tarn pia quam absurda'.6 However, Orosius in another place supplies a fact. Janus, he says, was opened 'sene Augusto' and not closed before Vespasian. He is quoting Tacitus, a precious fragment. No other evidence is extant for Vespasian.7 The fragment has another use. It indicates that Tacitus, when com­ posing the Historiae, did not know that Nero had closed Janus. Suetonius reports it, after the pageantry in the second half of 66 when Tiridates arrived in Rome. 8 The text of the Annates breaks off before this point in the year. If Suetonius is correct, it follows that Nero had boldly anticipated the actual ceremony: coins with the date 64/5 carry the legend 'Ianum clusit' etc.9 Closed by Vespasian after his triumph (in 71), the Gates were opened after a year. No subsequent closure was known to Orosius, so he confesses, during the long interval before they were opened by Gordian III when he set out on his Persian campaign (in 242). For this he cites Eutropius. 10 The Historia Augusta also has the notice.11 But for Eutropius and Orosius, doubts might have been conceived: the previous sentence carries a consultation of the Sibylline Books on the authority of none other than 'Junius Cordus'. Which may serve as a warning to students of the HA. 12 III. And now, on brief statement, some of the problems adhering to the pomerium.13 For present purposes, the prime evidence comes from Tacitus, with a digression on the new demarcation made by Claudius 4 Observe especially the excursus (or rather insertion) in Ovid, A A i. 177 ff. On which, 5 cf. further History in Ovid (1978), Ch. i. Orosius vi. 22. 1 f. 6 In his edition of the Res Gestae (1883), 51. On the Orosius passage see also Danuhian Papers (1971), 38 f. 7 Orosius vii. 3. 7, cf. 9; 19. 4. The phrase 'sene Augusto' supports 1 BC: the Princeps became 8 officially a senex two years previously. Suetonius, Nero 13. 9 cf. C. H. V. Sutherland, Coinage in Roman Imperial Policy (1951), 166 f. Better, perhaps, an 10 error of Suetonius. Orosius vii. 19. 4: from Eutropius ix. 2. 2. 11 HA Gord. 26. 3. 12 They might have doubts about the portent in Comm. 16. 4: 'lanus geminus sua sponte apertus est'. The only other reference to Janus in the HA. 13 See especially D. Detlefsen, Hermes xxi (1886), 497 ff.; Platner-Ashby, A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome (1929), 329 ff; J. H. Oliver, Mem. Am. Ac. Rome x (1932), 145 ff.; M. Labrousse, Melanges liv (1937), 165 ff.; A. v. Blumenthal, P-W xxi (1952), 1867 ff; M. T. Griffin J K S Hi (1962), 109 f

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

133

Caesar in the year 49, and from Aulus Gellius, who furnishes a full exposition, deriving from 'the augurs of the Roman People who had written books De auspiciis'.14 Concordant about Sulla, they both asseverate that an increase of Rome's dominion carried the right to enlarge the bounds of the city. A 'mos priscus', so Tacitus adds, and although great nations have been subjugated, none of the conquerors exercised the right save Sulla and Augustus. 1 5 T h e n a m e of Augustus imports perplexity. What of Caesar the Dictator? Cassius Dio records his action, in emulation of Sulla; and it recurs in the funeral oration delivered by Marcus Antonius. 1 6 Further, a letter of Cicero in July of 45 BC has a casual reference to the promul­ gation of a law 'de urbe augenda'. 1 7 N o w Cassius Dio might be in error, taking a project for a fact. But that line of escape is blocked. The solid testimony of Gellius intervenes: when Caesar extended the pomerium he left out the Aventine. Explaining the reason in the context, Gellius quotes words of Messalla the Augur. 1 8 That is, M . Valerius Messalla, the consul of 53 BC, w h o m they called 'Rufus'. After commanding cavalry in the Bellum Africum, this man of many vicissitudes went into retirement and devoted his leisure to writing about family history and Roman antiquities. 1 9 The author of De auspiciis should have known what he was talking about - and the pomerium deserves a place in the religious policy of the Dictator. 2 0 Caesar's enlargement tends to win acceptance. 21 It was perhaps incomplete at his death. Better, in view of the positive testimony of Messalla, it was disallowed in the sequel, on some plea or other, or simply neglected. Which leads the enquiry towards Caesar Augustus. And Dio crops u p once again. Under 8 BC, so that historian states, the pomerium was extended. 2 2 T h e date itself is plausible enough, falling at the end of w i d e conquests in central Europe - and not far (it may be conjectured) from the third closing of Janus. Further, though not perhaps of strict 14

Tacitus, Ann. xii. 23. 2-24. 2; Gellius xiii. 14. Ann. xii. 23. 2: 'nee tamen duces Romani, quamquam magnis nationibus subactis, usurpaverant nisi L. Sulla et divus Augustus.' 16 Dio xliii. 50. 1; xliv. 49. 2. Dio was alert to the significance of the pomerium, cf. the numerous instances in Boissevain's Index. 17 Ad. An. xiii. 20. 1, cf. 33a 1; 35. 1. 18 Gellius xiii. 14. 2. 19 An augur for fifty-five years (Macrobius i. 9. 14). That is, inducted when a youth by Sulla. 20 Neglected, so it appears, in the elaborate work of S. Weinstock, Divus lulius (1971). At least, no trace of the pomerium in the indexes - and Messalla occurs only once (a reference to Defamiliis). 21 Thus, e.g., D. Detlefsen, o.c. 513; M. Labrousse, o.c. 168; M. T. Griffin, o.c. 109. J. H. Oliver argued for Augustus instead (o.c. 150), while A. v. Blumenthal appears inconclusive 22 (o.c. 1873 f ) . D i o l v . 6 . 6. 15

134

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

relevance, the boundary of Italy was in fact modified by this ruler, being taken forward in Istria from the river Formio to the Arsia.23 IV. To indict for error Cornelius Tacitus as well as Cassius Dio is a novel experience, but not to be declined. The negatory evidence is powerful. The Res Gestae keep silent about a transaction that lent itself so obviously to exploitation by the new Romulus. The document, it is true, also omits the Augurium Salutis, which Dio attests at the time when Janus was closed, in 29 BC.24 That ceremony was hardly comparable. Moreover, the Lex de imperio Vespasiani, with citation of Claudius Caesar, but naming no other precedent, confers permission on the new ruler: 'utique ei fines pomerii proferre promovere . . . liceat'.25 Augustus therefore lapses, however enigmatic his forbearance may appear. Or rather, not so enigmatic. He liked ancient precedents, when they suited him. He also liked to be unique. That entailed discarding the two dictators. No loss, the one continuing in evil fame, the other not required any more, save in the role of a divine parent. How then explain the error of Cornelius Tacitus, a historian of uncommon accuracy as well as diligence? Inspection of the context will help, and will even lead to an attractive solution. The pomerium in Tacitus is introduced as the culmination of a heterogeneous sequence of public business. It runs from the prosecution of Lollia Paullina (Claudius Caesar in his oration expatiated on her ancestry) down to the Augurium Salutis, which supplies a neat transition.26 The source, it is clear, is the rubric of the Roman Senate.27 Material and inspiration from the scholar emperor can be detected a number of times in these books. Indeed, Tacitus had drawn upon speeches or writings of Claudius before he came to narrate the reign. Among the signs is abnormal erudition, with particulars either unique or discrepant from the standard versions. The total is impressive.28 N o w Tacitus in the digression on the pomerium notes that the Forum Romanum and the Capitolium were incorporated by Titus Tatius, so it was believed ('credidere').29 Tatius is the Sabine figment who narrowly escaped being enrolled in the list of the Kings of Rome. The notice is recondite - and it furnishes a clue that commentators have 23

Pliny, NH iii. 127; Strabo vii, p. 314. See further below, p. 135 (on Seneca, De brevitate

vitae\3.H). 24

25 26 Dio li. 20. 4. ILS 244. Ann. xii. 22. 2-23. 1. Tacitus (1958), 705. A number of scholars arc reluctant to concede extensive use of the Acta Senatus for Claudius - or for Tiberius. 28 Tacitus {\95S), App.40f. 29 Ann. xii. 24. 1. 27

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

135

missed. 30 Claudius Caesar was never reluctant to obtrude the Sabine contribution to early Rome, or his own ancestry.31 The imperial pedant, who delivered lectures to the Roman Senate on the alphabet, the annals of medicine and the history of Etruria, could not have spared them the sacred circuit of the city. In official pronouncements when precedents were adduced the name of Caesar the Dictator tended to be left out. Thus no mention of Caesar's augmentation of the Roman Senate: Claudius alleged that the intake of municipal worthies was a 'novus mos' due to Augustus and Tiberius. 32 Similarly, Caesar is absent from the Tacitean digression on the history of the quaestorship, which discloses some Claudian stigmata. 33 The Emperor, it follows, suppressed Julius Caesar and inserted Caesar Augustus instead. The historian, whose habit it was to make a mock of erudition, but who respected and exploited the scholarship of Claudius Caesar, saw no malice, although alert elsewhere to omissions in speeches (Claudius Caesar discreetly passed over, he is careful to note, the fact that Lollia Paullina had once been married to Caligula). So far Caesar and Caesar Augustus. Cursory mention may now be made of a passage in Seneca which appears to disallow both of them and also impair the claim of Claudius Caesar. Seneca is not speaking in his own person, he is deriding specimens of idle erudition brought up by a pedant in the course of antiquarian lectures. Among them is an allegation about the enlargement of the pomerium: not justified, this man said, unless the boundary of Italy had been advanced.34 The point and validity of the argument has been variously estimated.35 Eight boundary stones attest the Claudian demarcation.36 There are also four cippi of Vespasian, with the first half of the year 75 for date.37 For this extension, no written testimony has survived. Young Cornelius Tacitus might have witnessed the solemnity, being presum­ ably then at Rome since he put the dramatic date of his Dialogus in the sixth year of Vespasian. 30

And the passage is not cited in the detailed article of K. Glaser, P-W iv A, 2741. Ann. xi. 24. 1: 'maiores mei, quorum antiquissimus Clausus, origine Sabina.' /LS212. 33 Ann. xi. 22, cf. Tacitus (1958), 704 f. 34 Seneca, De brevitate vitae 13. 8: 'Sullam ultimum Romanorum protulisse pomerium, quod numquam provinciali, sed Italico agro adquisito proferre moris apud antiquos fuit.' For the interpretation of the passage and its context, see M. T. Griffin, JRS Hi (1962), 109 ff.; Seneca (1976), 401 ff. 35 Much was made of it by D. Detlefsen, o.c. 516 ff. See also, for the relevance to Gallia Cisalpina, M. T. Griffin, o.c. 110. There is a temptation to concur in the verdict of Seneca: 'alia deinceps innumerabilia, quae aut ferta sunt mendaciis, aut similia.' 36 e.g./LS 213. 37 e.g./LS 248. 31

32

136

The P o m e r i u m in the Historia Augusta

As has been seen, there are not only gaps and discrepancies in the evidence. T h e deficient commemoration of certain ceremonies comes as a surprise. Some of the Caesars seem guilty of inadvertence: no coins, for example, for the Ludi Saeculares of Claudius. Why did they d o these things, if not for fame and advertisement? T h e dubious validity of certain precedents is all too manifest. 38 Antiquarians made discoveries (or inventions) about the remote past w h i c h were duly exploited by governmental fraud. A 'mos priscus' was not far to seek. Special pleas were available for the asking, or variant computations of an anniversary, as witness the Ludi Saeculares. For sacred law, as for the law of the constitution (often the same thing), Caesar Augustus had the best experts on call.39 Rituals might be celebrated or not, as policy or fancy dictated. Some opportunities seem to have been missed. For Janus or for the pomerium, b o t h Trajan and Severus had adequate conquests to their credit. V. W h e n discussing reputable evidence it is a good thing to keep off the Historia Augusta for as long as possible. A passage about the pomerium in the Vita of Aurelianus can n o w be put under scrutiny. First of all comes a brief notice about the walls of Rome. As follows: cum videret posse fieri ut aliquid tale iterum, quale sub Gallieno evenerat, proveniret, adhibito consilio senatus muros urbis Romae dilatavit. {Am. 21.9) A careful analysis of this biography indicates that the main Latin source is E n m a n n ' s 'Kaisergeschichte', as it is called. 40 Irrespective of the H A , the K G is a necessary postulate to account for concordances b e t w e e n sundry epitomators. 4 1 In this context Aurelius Victor and the Epitome of Pseudo-Victor are very close in language: Victor, De Caes. 35. 7 Epitome 35. 6 ac ne umquam, quae per Gallienum hie muris validioribus et laxioribus evenerant, acciderent, muris urbem urbem saepsit. quam validissimis laxiore ambitu circumsaepsit. T h e next item in each writer is the provision of pork for the populace of R o m e . T h e Epitome, it will be noted, presents a simpler version. Victor, like 38

Thus, for Janus, see K. Latte, R. Religionsgeschichte (1960), 132 f.; R. M. Ogilvie in his commentary (1965) on Livy i. 19. 1. 39 Notably the subservient Ateius Capito (Ann. iii. 75): he interpreted the oracle when the Princeps celebrated the Ludi Saeculares (Zosimus ii. 4). 40 W. H. Fisher JRS xix (1929), 125 ff. 41 See now T. D. Barnes, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 13 ff. He dates the KG shortly after 337.

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

137

the H A , carries a reference to what had happened in the days of Gallienus. In this instance Victor rather than the KG might be the source of the H A . Support for that view will in fact emerge in the sequel. O n the walls of R o m e , the H A is curt indeed, but it adds a remark that reflects its o w n predilections: the Senate was consulted. Next, it goes on to furnish a digression on Aurelian's action: nee tamen pomerio addidit eo tempore, sed postea. pomerio autem neminem principum licet addere nisi eum qui agri barbarici aliqua parte Romanam rem p. locupletaverit. addidit autem Augustus, addidit Traianus, addidit Nero, sub quo Pontus Polemoniacus et Alpes Cottiae Romano nomini sunt tributae. (21.10 f) T h e passage is palpably the author's own work. N o t hitherto accorded proper attention, it will prove variously instructive. 42 First, questions of fact. Here, as so often elsewhere, failure to recognize the habits and fancies of the author or correctly assess his operations is a source of delusion. With trust in the impostor, several scholars have believed that Aurelian enlarged the sacred precinct. 43 As concerns the other emperors, what might be the value and basis of the assertions? Augustus, that was a natural assumption, for he was in his o w n person a second Romulus. It is illicit to enlist the HA in support of those earlier authors w h o assign to Caesar Augustus an extension of the pomerium. Again, Trajan. N o t perhaps a problem, so high was the imperial repute enjoyed by this heroic figure in late Antiquity. He equals Augustus, or rather surpasses him. 4 4 Nero is another matter. At first sight an anomaly, a paradox. N o t but that scholarly enquiries have been prepared to admit Nero or Trajan, or even both. 4 5 T o be sure, Trajan by his conquest of Dacia had a full and proper justification. In that season pride of empire was aroused and expan­ sive; and antiquarian zeal might have been impelled to hope, or idle curiosity to speculate. N o r indeed, had he cared for such things, w o u l d N e r o have been debarred by the trivial nature of his acquisi­ tions as registered by the H A , namely the vassal kingdoms ruled over 42

Fisher stated that 'this excursus on the pomerium is probably an addition made by the Vita. It is not important' (o.c. 142). 43 Thus, L. Homo, Essai surle regnede Vempereur Aurelien (1904), 305 f.; M. Besnier, L'Empire romain des Vavenement des Severes au concile de Nicee (1937), 252 f. Also, apparently, A. v. Blumenthal, o.c. 1875; M. Labrousse, o.c. 170, cf. 194. Disbelief is implied in the curt statement ofGroag, P - W v , 1407. 44 On which see Emperors and Biography (1971), Ch. vi. 45 Both were accepted by Detlefsen, o.c. 520; Trajan by Homo, o.c. 305, cf. 226 f.; and by Besnier, o.c. 252. As for Blumenthal, he admits Nero but denies Trajan, with an illicit argument: 'Vopiscus hat also Traianus und Claudius verwechselt' (o.c. 1875).

138

The P o m e r i u m in the Historia Augusta

by P o l e m o and by Cottius. O n that count, Vespasian had not much m o r e to show. For all that one can tell, N e r o might have extended the pomerium about the time when he closed Janus; and Trajan might not have neglected the city boundary. But enough. As the author says, 'levia persequimur, cum maiora dicenda sint' (Quadr. tyr. 4. 4). Second, and m o r e important, the light thrown by the digression on the m e t h o d s and predilections of our friend. In this Vita he makes lavish play with the Sibylline Books (18 ff). Observe also in this context the statement 'amburbium celebratum, ambarvalia promissa' (20. 3). T h e former ceremony, a lustration of the city bounds, is mysterious indeed, and abstruse: the word amburbium occurs in no other author, save in the scholiast Servius. 46 Introduced not long after, the digression on the pomerium (21. 10 f ) fits in nicely. M o r e o v e r , the author was soon to offer an extended piece of expertise w h e n discussing and supporting the alleged interregnum of six m o n t h s after the decease of Aurelian (Tac. I). 4 7 He goes back to the aftermath of the death of Romulus and makes appeal to the practices of R o m e under the Republic. Indeed, like a conscientious scholar, he admits a possible objection, Video mihi posse obici curules magistratus apud maiores nostros quadriennium non fuisse' (1.5). T h e author is referring to the Livian 'solitudo magistratuum' during the years 375-371 BC. 4 8 He goes on to conjure up a type of argument not unfamiliar in the annals of erudite controversy: it is nowhere recorded (he says) that no interreges were appointed in that period (1.6). T h i r d , the source. T h e passage is his o w n invention, but it includes a fact, namely Nero's annexation of Pontus Polemoniacus and the Cottian Alps. Whence derived, that is a question which opens enter­ taining perspectives. VI. T h e item has a long and curious history, far transcending its importance in imperial annals. In 64 or 65 Polemo was persuaded to renounce his kingdom: four of the cities are shown by coins to adopt an era beginning in 64/5. 4 9 This prince, it may be advisable to recall, is Julius P o l e m o , the third husband of the beautiful Berenice, not an Antonius Polemo. 5 0 T h e territory was added to Galatia, but the Alpes 46

Servius on Ed. iii. 77, cf. Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 189. The error occurs both in Victor and in the Epitome (35. 12; 35. 10), presumably from the KG. But the HA seems to owe its inspiration to Victor, cf. Emperors and Biography (1971), 238. 48 Livy vi. 35. 10 (a period of five years). 49 D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor (1950), 1417 f; PIR2 J 472. 50 PIR2 J 472. M. Antonius Polemo was dynast of Olba, attested by coins of uncertain date (PIR2 A 864). There is a danger of confusion, for example PIR2 J 472, adduces Olba, with a query. The Cilician territory given to Polemo in 42 (Dio. lx. 8. 2) probably lay in the western parts of Tracheia: cf. a fragmentary inscr. from Laertes with the name ofjulius Polemo adduced by E. W. Gray in CR2 xxii (1972), 400 f. 47

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

139

Cottiae became a procuratorial province on the death of M. Julius C o t t i u s . J e r o m e in his Chronicle registers 65 as the date. 51 W h e n Tacitus was writing the Historiae, he was aware of the annexation of Pontus Polemoniacus, but he fails to mention it in the Annales.52 H e also omits the Cottian Alps. Tacitus may have kept Pontus in reserve for a subsequent chapter dealing with eastern affairs. A similar inference would hardly hold for the Cottian Alps. M o r e o v e r , he had been careful to note the grant of Latin rights to the small region of the Alpes Maritimae in 63. 5 3 For writers in late Antiquity, Suetonius is the ultimate source of the notice about the t w o kingdoms. The biographer adverts with severity on the foreign policy of Nero: no will or wish to augment or extend the E m p i r e , N e r o was even ready to withdraw the legions from Britain, and he merely annexed Pontus through permission of P o l e m o , the Alps when Cottius died. 54 T h e double notice was transmitted (there can hardly be a doubt) t h r o u g h the channel of Enmann's 'Kaisergeschichte'. It occurs in all the epitomators. First Eutropius. He passes a verdict of condemnation on N e r o , 'qui R o m a n u m imperium et deformavit et minuit' (VII. 14. 1). Therefore he duly reports the disasters in Britain and in Armenia. 5 5 Then follow the kingdoms of Polemo and Cottius, in a formulation very close to that of Suetonius: 'duae tamen sub eo provinciae factae sunt, Pontus Polemoniacus concedente rege P o l e m o n e et Alpes Cottiae Cottio rege defuncto' (VII. 14. 5). N e x t , Victor and the Epitome of Pseudo-Victor. In a fairly full treatment of N e r o they omit all mention of the disasters abroad, but they repeat the notice about the t w o annexations. Those passages, w h i c h contain an intricate problem, will be quoted below. Finally, clinching the K G as the source of the three epitomators, Jerome in his Chronicle, t h o u g h he records only the second of the two kingdoms. 5 6 VII. In the writers that go back to the KG, discrepancies are n o t e w o r t h y as well as items of concordance. They select, curtail or o m i t , often at random, principles and methods not being much in evidence. An attempt has recently been made to discover and define 51

Jerome, Chron. p. 184 H. Hist, iii.47. 1. Ann. xv. 32, The omission of the two kingdoms is among the items indicating that the Annates were not completed by their author, cf. Tacitus (1958), 742 f. Add perhaps Nero's closing ofjanus (above, p. 132). 54 Suetonius, Nero 18: 'Ponti modo regnum concedente Polemone, item Alpium defuncto Cottio in provinciae formam redegit.' 55 Going back to another place in the Suetonian biography (39. 1). 56 For Jerome's use of the KG, see R. Helm, Rh. Mus. lxxvi (1927), 138 ff.; 254 ff.; T. D. Barnes, o.c. 21; 29 f. It was also drawn on by Festus. 52

53

140

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

the idiosyncrasies of certain epitomators. 57 For Eutropius and for Pseudo-Victor, not much seems to emerge.58 But Aurelius Victor (it was clear) is recognizable as a distinct literary personality, with his care for style (the manner is markedly Sallustian), his affection for polite letters, his constant obtrusion of moral and political sermonizing. Profit can also accrue from errors or misconceptions. Some were inherited from the KG, as is shown by their presence in more than one of the three epitomators. 59 Others are the peculiar property of Victor, and sometimes due to his taking an independent line.60 The KG itself was used by the Historia Augusta. That is demon­ strated by particulars it carries not vouched for in Victor or in Eutropius. Further, the KG is detected as the main Latin source behind the Vita of Severus Alexander as well as that of Aurelian.61 For a long time the KG served as the mainstay of conservative critics, who, clinging to the ostensible date (or rather dates) of the HA, denied the discovery made by Dessau: namely a piece of Victor embodied with little change in the Vita Severi (17. 2-19. 4). Even those who appear disposed, albeit reluctantly, to concede this one instance, have refused to go further: they make appeal to the non-extant common source. 62 That time has now passed, the defence is not only turned but broken and dispersed. More and more traces of Victor become manifest in different parts of the work. 63 There is something else. From time to time the author takes up an item peculiar to Victor as a source of inspiration for further and fictional developments. One specimen may suffice, his full, bold and vivid portrayal of the usurper Marius. 64 According to Victor, and 57

W. den Boer, Some Minor Historians (1972). In fact, the Epitome is not accorded a separate chapter and identity: instead, Festus. The author concludes: 'pessimism, impartiality, and optimism - these three words suffice to express the salient characteristics of each of our three writers, Victor, Eutropius and Festus' (o.c. 223). 59 For specimens, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 310 = Roman Papers (1979), 791. 60 The notorious instance is the Emperor Didius Iulianus held identical with the jurist Salvius Iulianus (19. 1 ff.). Even the HA could not swallow that, but it preserves a vestigial remnant (Sev. 17. 5, cf. Victor 20. 2). 61 T. D. Barnes, o.c. 34 ff. Den Boer is insistent to play down the KG (o.c. 21). There is no proof, he says, 'that Aurelius Victor summarized any earlier author' (o.c. 20). Further, 'the compilers of abridged Roman histories relied chiefly on oral traditions and their own memories' (o.c. 110). 62 Referring to that piece of Victor, Momigliano came out with the pronouncement that 'in other cases the Historia Augusta and Aurelius Victor undoubtedly depend on a common source' (Secondo contributo (1960), 117: the article first appeared in 1954). 63 As established by A. Chastagnol, HAC 1964/5 (1966), 54 ff.; Rev. Phil, xli (1967), 95 ff. On which, the use of Victor 'in more than one passage' has been admitted by Momigliano, in EHR lxxxiv (1969), 569. The number and distribution of the passages was worth registering. 64 HA Tyr. trig. 8, cf. remarks in Emperors and Biography (1971), 251 f.; The Historia Augusta. A Call for Clarity (1971), 41 f. 58

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

141

Victor alone, Marius was an ironsmith - and that was the trade also pursued by the plebeian military hero of the Republic. 65 The genial i m p o s t o r develops that theme. Omitting the name of C. Marius and proceeding by allusion, he duly equips the usurper with a Sallustian oration - and with suitable metallic metaphors. The valiant patriot proclaims that he will demonstrate to all Alemannia, to all Germania and the adjacent nations, that the Populus Romanus is in truth a 'ferrata gens'. VII. K G or Victor, that question comes up when the Historia Augusta, explaining the pomerium of Rome, adduces Nero's annexa­ tion of the t w o vassal kingdoms. Both Nero and Trajan extended the b o u n d s of the city, it is asserted. N o w both emperors are brought together in the chapters on N e r o in Victor and in Pseudo-Victor (but n o t in Eutropius): an approbatory dictum of Trajan is cited. The two passages must be set in confrontation. Victor, DeCaes. 5. 1-4 Eo modo L. Domitius (nam id certe nomen Neroni, patre Domitio, erat) imperator factus est. Qui cum longe adolescens dominatum parem annis vitrico gessisset, quinquen­ nium tamen tantus fuit, augenda urbe maxime, uti merito Traianus saepius testaretur procul differre cunctos principes Neronis quin­ quennio; quo etiam Pontum in ius provinciae Polemonis permissu re­ degit, cuius gratia Polemoniacus Pontus appellatur, itemque Cottias Alpes Cottio rege mortuo. Quare satis compertum est neque aevum impedimento virtuti esse; earn facile mutari corrupto per licentiam ingenio, omissamque adolescentiae quasi legem perniciosius repeti. Namque eo dedecore reliquum vitae egit, uti pigeat pudeatque memorare huiuscemodi quempiam, nedum rectorem gentium, fuisse.

Epitome 5. 1-5 Domitius Nero, patre Domitio Ahenobarbo genitus, matre Agrippina, imperavit annos tredecim. Iste quinquennio tolerabilis visus. Unde quidam prodidere Traianum solitum dicere procul distare cunctos principes Neronis quinquennio. Hie in urbe amphitheatrum et lavacra construxit. Pontum in ius provinciae Polemonis reguli permissu redegit, a quo Polemoniacus Pontus appel­ latur, itemque Cottias Alpes Cottio rege mortuo. Eo namque dedecore reliquum vitae egit, ut pudeat memorare huiuscemodi quemquam.

T h e problem is notorious, and it continues to evoke debate out of all p r o p o r t i o n to any value for history. However, the digression on the Victor 33. 11 (reporting the matter as 'ioculariter dictum').

142

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

pomerium in the HA encourages (if it does not entail) at least a glance in passing. For present purposes extreme brevity is enjoined. Four pre­ liminary remarks may help to clear the ground and delimit the enquiry. (1) Both writers state an initial good period, a quinquennium during which Nero was 'tantus' (Victor), or 'tolerabilis' (Pseudo-Victor), and the two passages terminate with his later declension for the rest of his life, in phraseology almost identical. (2) Both put the annexation of the two kingdoms within Nero's 'good period'. The fact that the date happens to be known (64 or 65) and to fall towards the end of the reign is irrelevant, and should be kept out of the discussion.66 There is no sign that the epitomators, or their common source, were aware of the date of this minor transaction. (3) The quinquennium that Trajan had in mind might not be identical with that so clearly indicated by the texts. (4) Due allowance must be made for error or confusion in an epitome deriving from a lost compilation, itself not faultless. Trouble can be caused either by abridgement or by addition. These admonitions portend a bleak or barren sequel. However, to proceed. If we had only the version of the Epitome, no problem. Trajan's statement, introduced by the word unde follows upon, and must apply to, the first five years in the reign of the young prince. Shorter, simpler and plainer than Victor, the Epitome appears to offer a more faithful rendering of the common source. So far so good. Victor imports complications. To introduce and corroborate the favourable verdict of Trajan, he inserts the phrase 'augenda urbe maxime'. Hence the hypothesis that Trajan was refer­ ring to the buildings with which Nero embellished the city of Rome. 67 Not unattractive at first sight, and several scholars subscribe to it. That is not all. To Trajan's verdict, to the words 'Neronis quinquennio', is attached the notice about the annexation of Polemo's Pontus and the Cottian Alps - 'quo etiam Pontum', etc. In the Epitome that item comes later, separated by a reference to Nero's construc­ tions: 'hie in urbe amphitheatrum et lavacra construxit'. Thus the Epitome assigns no reason for the verdict of Trajan, whereas Aurelius Victor offers two: embellishment of Rome and augmentation of the Roman dominion. IX. An alarming hazard now emerges. The Historia Augusta, as has 66 That fact debilitates the argument used by several scholars about 'the Quinquennium Neronis'. 67 For the verb augeo in that sense, cf. Epit. 1. 8: 'auxit ornavitque Romam multis aedificiis1 (Augustus); Victor 21. 4: 'aucta urbs magno accessu viae novae' (Caracalla).

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

143

been shown, naming Trajan and Nero as enlargers ofthe pomerium, subjoins to Nero the notice about the kingdoms of Polemo and Cottius. The author's notion may derive from a cursory reading of Victor, he might have been influenced by the phrase 'augenda urbe' which occurs in the context of the annexation. The verb augeo is appropriate when an extension of the pomerium is registered. It is applied to the boundaries of the Empire, as in the formula on the cippi, 'auctis p. R. finibus'; and Tacitus uses it for the sacred precinct itself: 'pomerium urbis auxit Caesar'.68 Messalla the Augur, quoted by Gellius, had been content with the standard and less stylish verb - 'omnes qui pomerium protulerunt'. 69 Not only is the precinct augmented, but the city itself. Observe Caesar's law 'de urbe augenda'. 70 Next, the word civitas. It can mean an urbs, but also urbs Roma in a concrete sense. Eutropius, for example, has 'Aventinum montem civitati adiecit' (Ancus Marcius).71 Finally, the Roman state, the civitas, acquires increment. Thus Livy in com­ ment on the enlargement carried out by Servius Tullius, 'aucta civitate magnitudine urbis'; 72 and Gellius states 'habebat autem ius proferendi pomerii qui populum Romanum agro de hostibus capto auxerat'.73 The author of the HA, by the way, employs an unusual verb: 'eum qui agri barbarici aliqua parte Romanam rem p. locupletaverit'. In his usage elsewhere it denotes the enrichment of a person.74 This fellow is a word-fancier as well as agrammaticus. He is devoted to preciosity and to curiosa of every kind; and some of his choice specimens are not only rare but unique. 75 To conclude this rubric. There is a chance that the HA misin­ terpreted Victor. Misconceptions of a similar type are not far to seek. According to the HA, the jurist Paul was a Prefect of the Guard (Pesc. 7. 4; Alex. 26. 5). Accepted by some, but not at all likely. The HA also implies that he was a colleague of Ulpian (Alex. 27. 2). Still less likely. What might be the source of the notion? It comes (one may conjecture) from a hurried perusal of Victor who in a brief (and perhaps garbled) 68

ILS 213 and 248; Tacitus, Ann. xii. 23. 2. Gellius xiii. 14. 6, with three other instances in that chapter. Note also Livy. i. 49. 4 and 5; Seneca, De brevitate vitae 13.8; ILS 244. 70 Cicero, Ad. Att. xiii. 20. 1. 71 Eutropius i. 25. 72 Livy. i. 45. 1. The two ablatives are clumsy. R. M. Ogilvie suggests as possible 'aucta et civitate et magnitudine urbis'. Compare also i. 21. 6: 'ita duo deinceps reges, alius alia via, ille bello hie pace, civitatem auxerunt'. However, in his text (OCT, 1974) Ogilvie opts for 'aucta magnitudine urbis' in i. 45. 1. 73 Gellius xiii. 14.3. 74 HA Pius 10. 6; Marcus 3. 9; Aur. 10. 2. The word does not occur in Sallust or Tacitus. 75 Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 112; 186. For the vocabulary of the Avidius Cassius see B. Baldwin, Klio lviii (1976), 101. 69

144

The P o m e r i u m in the Historia Augusta

passage happens to have Paul in the context of Ulpian, the latter alleged to be Guard Prefect under Elagabalus and continued in office by his successor (24. 6). What is there said about Ulpian is plainly false; and, apart from the H A , no evidence attests a prefecture for Paul. 76 B u t stay - it is far from certain that the H A has misunderstood Victor. This epitomator uses the phrase 'augenda urbe'. The examples quoted above show what that should refer to. Victor had in mind and intention something more than an embellishment of the city of Rome; and, to make the meaning clear, he inserted a reference to the two kingdoms. This disquisition took its exordium from an erudite digression in the Historia Augusta: h o w and where the author got the notion that both N e r o and Trajan extended the pomerium (Aur. 21. 10 f ) . Since he adduced Pontus Polemoniacus and the Alpes Cottiae, a straight line led to the three epitomators and to their c o m m o n source; and further, to the question of his o w n source, viz. Aurelius Victor. T h e theme illustrates the caprice of documentation through the ages, and it brings in fraud as well as confusion and errors. Brief scrutiny of a similar matter, the closures of Janus, furnished a parallel, on several counts. T h e value and significance of those ceremonies also came into question, also the behaviour and motives of emperors, some of w h o m appear to have neglected obvious occasions for advertising the reign of peace in the world or their enlargement of the Roman domain. Epilogue Trajan's verdict on N e r o has overshadowed and obscured an item of close relevance, the pomerium.71 Which may inspire reflections, some of t h e m disturbing. 7 8 T h e debate goes on. 7 9 T h e present enquiry could not quite evade the familiar and tedious p r o b l e m . A pity to augment the bulk of writing and the grievous b u r d e n of bibliography. Yet one might try to clarify and curtail. B o t h epitomators register a quinquennium in which Nero could earn praise (albeit muted in the Epitome, with 'tolerabilis'). They take it for the first five years of the reign. That is clear. But Aurelius Victor saw that Trajan's verdict called for elucidation - and well he might. He 76

HAC 1968/9 (1970), 313 = Roman Papers (1979), 794; Emperors and Biography (1971), 142. The HA is either ignored or discounted. ThusJ. G. C. Anderson: 'nor can the words refer to the extension of the pomerium which Vopiscus falsely attributes to Nero' {JRS i (1911), 176). 78 Also a warning to non-readers of the Historia Augusta. 79 F. A. Lepper JRS xlvii (1957), 95 ff.; O. Murray, Historia xiv (1965), 41 ff.; J. G. F. Hind, ib. xx (1971), 488 ff.; M. K. Thornton, ibxxii (1973), 570ff.;J. G. F. Hind, ib. xxiv (1975), 629 f.; M. T. Griffin, Seneca (1976), 424 f. 77

The Pomerium in the Historia Augusta

145

added it, in double measure. If the additions be disallowed and dis­ carded, a tolerable solution remains. The initial five years of Nero were in fact a period of good government, as is shown by the narration of Cornelius Tacitus (no credit to the person of Nero, however). N o t that it matters. The question concerns source criticism, the m e t h o d s and habits of epitomators. It reveals nothing about Nero. As concerns Trajan, merely the residuum of an anecdote transmitted to late Antiquity by the KG, and dubious at that, the ultimate source (it is to be presumed) being Marius Maximus in his Vita Traiani: not a conscientious biographer. N o n e the less, a doubt subsists. T o have Trajan praising Nero for excellence in government is worse than paradox. T o divine what Trajan could have meant, if he ever spoke in laudation of Nero, recourse m i g h t perhaps be made to a different approach, proceeding a priori, and frankly so. 8 0 Let it be asked what the t w o rulers had in common. A prompt answer avails: great buildings and lavish spectacles. Anyone might praise N e r o ' s constructions. quid Nerone peius? quid thermis melius Neronianis? T h u s Martial. 8 1 W h y not Trajan? Therefore, be it supposed, the E m p e r o r had a response to flatterers w h o extolled his public magnifi­ cence. It was modest, and ironical: all the Caesars taken together ('cuncti') could not come near five years of Nero. 8 2

80

As suggested in Emperors and Biography (1971), 109 f. Martial vii. 34. 4 f. 82 That is, 'a quinquennium' of Nero, not the standard modern term, viz. 'The Quinquennium Neronis'. For the supreme fate enjoyed by both emperors in late Antiquity see now A. and E. Alfoldi, Die Kontorniaten-Medaillons, Teil i. Katalog (1976). By total of Contorniates, either surpasses 'cuncti principes'. Nero has 106 items, Trajan 149-and Divus Augustus only thirteen. 81

X The End of the Marcomanni I. Apart from warfare and migrations, the peoples of Germany engage interest on various counts. The bare names can prove instruc­ tive, as they emerge for the first time, as they vanish in the sequel, a tribe having been destroyed, dispersed, or absorbed. A prime instance is the Sugambri. They earned notoriety through the defeat they inflicted on Marcus Lollius in 17 BC. The gravity of the incident was exaggerated - perhaps at the time, and beyond doubt w h e n Lollius made a political mistake eighteen years later. The 'disas­ ter of Lollius' is even assigned as the reason for Augustus' departure to Gaul in the course of the next year - although the Sugambri mean­ while came to terms and gave hostages. 1 R o m a n poets put out an instant response. Thus Propertius in 16 BC suggests, a m o n g suitable themes, 4ille paludosos memoret servire S u g a m b r o s ' (IV. 6. 77). And Horace, inciting Iullus Antonius to c o m p o s e , acclaims the joyous prospect of a triumph, at some length (Odes IV. 2. 33 ff.). Three years later, among the manifestations of the peace that Caesar Augustus has imposed throughout the world are the submissive Sugambri, te caede gaudentes Sygambri compositis venerantur armis. (14. 51 f) N o surprise therefore that a name so convenient for terminating the hexameter should occur in Ovid and in the Consolatio ad Liviam. Martial has it, and Juvenal; finally Claudian (no fewer than nine times) and even some later writers. It is strange that the Sugambri failed to attract adepts of classical learning like the Latin panegyrists and the author of the Historia Augusta. Long obsolence was no bar. In his campaign of 8 BC Tiberius finished off the Sugambri by a double procedure - massacre and transplantation. But there subsisted a prose tradition about this people, of some relevance to the study of sources in writers of Late Antiquity. It derives from a pair of notices in Suetonius. In the first, the Sugambri surrender, they are taken across * Reprinted from Bonner HAC 1977/8 (1980), 255 ff. 1 Thus Dio, liv. 20. 6, but not Velleius ii. 97. Dio registers the incident under 16 lie, whereas the previous year is given by Obsequens 71.

The End of the Marcomanni

147

to Gaul and established near the Rhine (Divus Aug. 21. 1); in the second, in similar language, 40,000 Germans are thus transplanted (Tib. 9. 2). What epitomators retained can furnish instruction. Nothing at all in Aurelius Victor (he is very curt on both Augustus and Tiberius), but the Epitome of Pseudo-Victor has 'Sigambros in Galliam transtulit' (1. 7). Eutropius presents a problem. Registering the German war of Drusus, he proceeds to the 'bellum Pannonicum' of Tiberius. That is to say, the conquest of Illyricum conducted by Tiberius from 12 to 9 BC, the first stage of which is styled 'Pannonico (bello)' by Suetonius (Tib. 9. 1). But, in Eutropius one reads 'Pannonicum, quo bello XL captivorum milia ex Germania transtulit et supra ripam Rheni in Gallia conlocavit' (VII. 9. 2). The reference is patent - the Sugambri trans­ planted by Tiberius in 8 BC. At the end, Orosius. He used Eutropius, but he also went back to earlier sources, Suetonius among them. After noting Tiberius' con­ quest of the Pannonians, he duly proceeds to the Germans, 'a quibus quadraginta milia captivorum victor abduxit' (VI. 21. 24). But Orosius now goes astray. Adducing by name Suetonius (Tib. 16. 1), he identifies that German war with Tiberius' suppression of the great Pannonian Revolt from AD 6 to 9. To sum up. Eutropius and Orosius attach the 40,000 (Sugambrian) captives each to a different Pannonian war. The error of Orosius is not without value. It is relevant to other confusions that may be proved or surmised in what he retails about sundry campaigns in the time of Augustus. So far the Sugambri, 'excisi aut in Gallias traiecti'. Thus the histo­ rian Tacitus, reporting or rather inventing, the utterance of a Roman general in Britain when he threatens to wipe out the recalcitrant tribesmen of South Wales.2 II. The argument may now proceed to investigate briefly the vicis­ situdes of the Marcomanni. 3 A portion of the Suebi, and often sub­ sumed under that appellation, the Marcomanni first came within the ambit of Roman notice and Roman action during the epoch of the Augustan wars, with their migration to Bohemia, with the kingdom built up by Maroboduus. Their earliest attestation happens to stand in the Res Gestae: a king of the 'Suebi Marcomani' (his name is lost) took 2 Ann. xii. 39. 2. A gentler version occurred among the arguments for 'plura consilio quam vi' attributed to Tiberius Caesar in Ann. ii. 26. 3: 'sic Sugambros in deditionem acceptos'. Sugambri are not mentioned in the Germania. 3 For the Marcomanni and Quadi see L. Schmidt, Die Westgermanen i2 (1938), 153 ff.; Franke, P-W xiv, 1609 ff.; P. Goessler, P-W xxiv, 623 ff.

148

The End of the Marcomanni

refuge with Caesar Augustus, no doubt a failed rival of Maroboduus (RG 32). N e x t , to be sure, Velleius Paterculus; but the Marcomanni are ignored by Pliny and by certain other writers. Domitian's operations against Suebi and Sarmatae in 89 and in 92 bring in the name, though not as often as might be expected. Statius in 93 celebrates the termination of the wars on the Danube with emphasis on the E m p e r o r ' s august clemency, quae modo Marcomanos post horrida bella vagosque Sauromatas Latio non est dignata triumpho. (Silvae III. 3. 170 f.) Further, an episode of the campaign of 89 is revealed by the inscription of Velius Rufus, set up several years later. When tribune commanding cohors XIII urbana he led an expeditionary corps across Dacia, 'bello M a r c o m m a n n o r u m Q u a d o r u m Sarmatarum'. 4 T h e Germania of Tacitus names the Marcomanni three times, con­ j o i n e d with the Quadi (42 f ) , the latter people here on their earliest emergence in the literary record. O f the rulers of the two nations Tacitus observes 'vis et potentia regibus ex auctoritate Romana: raro armis nostris, saepius pecunia iuvantur, nee minus valent' (42. 2). A peculiar statement, this normal subservience to the Roman power, in view of the recent disturbances on the middle Danube, which Tacitus was soon to put on emphasis in the exordium of the Historiae: 'coortae in nos Sarmatarum ac Sueborum gentes' (2. 1). Inadvertence or obso­ lete information can be detected elsewhere in the Germania.5 Furthermore, the nascent historian failed to mention the vassal k i n g d o m , styled the regnum Vannianum. Its origin is known, it was established in AD 19: 'inter flumina M a r u m et Cusum', with for first ruler Vannius of the Quadi (Ann. II. 63. 6). The people appear later in Tacitus under the name of'Suebi' (Hist. III. 5. 1; Ann. XII. 29. 1). Pliny had registered this principality when indicating the western limit of the Sarmatae Iazyges: 'a Maro sive Duria est a Suebis regnoque Vanniano dirimens eos' (NH IV. 81). He nowhere names either M a r c o m a n n i or Quadi: they are subsumed under Suebi. However, the Iazyges are a valuable item. N o t named by the author of the Germania Sarmatians occur in the context, but only because the tribe of the Cotini pays them tribute (43. 1). B u t enough. This is not the place for going into the problems 4 ILS 9200 (Heliopolis), cf. 2127: a centurion of the cohort decorated by Domitian 'ob bellum Germanicum'. Further, the inscription of Bruttius Praesens shows decorations earned when he was tribune in / Minervia, 'o]b bellum Marcomannicum' (IRT 545: Lepcis, late Hadrianic). Editors of Tacitus, by the way, should perhaps cease from printing the form 'Marcomani', given the epigraphic evidence and the usage of most prose authors. 5 Tacitus (1958), 128.

The End of the Marcomanni

149

adherent to the regnum Vannianum: its extent and its fate (absorbed, one assumes, by the Quadi), or the rivers of Moravia.6 III. The Marcomanni are the head and front of the German War that occupied so much of the reign of Marcus Aurelius. After the year 180, however, their name fades out almost totally from the memorials of literature for the space of more than two centuries (Greek authors as well as Latin). 7 Not but that there was frequent recurrence of warfare on the middle Danube, ascertained by other sources of information.8 But that is not the subject of the present limited enquiry. The Quadi, first coming on show as an adjunct to the Marcomanni, go on to usurp primacy. That emerges from heterogeneous notices. First, Zosimus in his solitary reference to the Marcomanni has them dragged by Scythians (i.e. Goths) into an invasion of the Roman dominions during the reign of Valerian (I. 29. 2). The same episode may (or may not) be alluded to by Eutropius - Pannonia devas­ tated by Quadi and Sarmatians under Gallienus (IX. 8. 2). Next, and better, the Gallic panegyrist speaking in 297 or 298 acclaims among successes of the Tetrarchy 'Quadi Carpi totiens profligati' (Pan. lat. VIII. 10. 4). Victor, however, has 'praeterea caesi Marcomanni Carporumque natio translata omnis in nostrum solum' (39. 43). 9 Finally, the negative testimony of Ammianus Marcellinus. N o campaigns against Marcomanni in his narration. Only Quadi, as notably in the great war conducted by Valentinian in 374. In Ammianus the name of the Marcomanni crops up three times only. Twice in allusion to the war of Marcus Aurelius (XXII. 5. 5; XXIX. 6. 1), and the third reference is of a general nature. After narrating the passage of the Goths into Thrace in 376 he speaks of disturbances among the nations all the way from Bohemia to the Black Sea: 'per omne quidquid ad Pontum a Marcomannis praetenditur et Quadis'(XXXI. 4. 2). The historic name occurs not unsuitably in another author writing in the middle nineties of the Fourth Century .Jerome in 396, condoling 6 For full discussion see J. Klose, Roms Klientel - Randstaaten am Rhein undan derDonau (1934), 95 ff.; B. Saria, P-W viii A, 338 ff.; V. Ondrouch, Limes Romanus Konferenz Nitra (1959), 63 ff. 7 Dio has Caracalla disrupt an alliance between Marcomanni and Vandals (lxxvii. 20. 3); and there is a single reference in Zosimus (i. 29. 2). Nothing in Herodian (who eschews proper names). 8 For the later campaigns, E. Swoboda, Carmmtum* (1964), 60 ff; A. Mocsy, P-W Supp. ix, 562 ff.; Pannonia and Upper Moesia (1974), 202 ff; 272 ff. For the chronology of Danubian wars between 293 and 301, T. D. Barnes, Phoenix xxx (1976), 186 ff Diocletian's action against the Carpi belongs to 296. Under 299 the Fasti Hydatiani have 'victi Marcomanni' (Chron. min. i. 230). Further, under 310, Vic(torias) Marcomannas' in the Calendar of Philocalus (CIL i2, p. 323). 9 cf. Ammianus xxviii. 1. 5; 'orto a posteritate Carporum quos antiquis excitos sedibus Diocletianus transtulit in Pannoniam'.

150

The End of the Marcomanni

w i t h Heliodorus on the death of a dear friend, passes from recent calamities that befell men of rank to the general disasters assailing the lands between Constantinople and the Julian Alps in the previous t w e n t y years or more: 'horret animus temporum nostrorum ruinas prosequi' {Epp. LX. 16). The catalogue terminates with 'Dalmatiam cunctasque Pannonias Gothus Sarmata Quadus Alanus Huni, Vandali Marcomanni vastant trahunt rapiunt.' In close sequel and relevance the poet Claudian may be quoted. The second b o o k of his diatribe In Rufinum (published in 397) offers a similar survey of ravaged lands between Adria and Pontus. As else­ w h e r e , Claudian eschews Marcomanni and Quadi. The invaders w h o got as far as Dalmatia are Goths, Geticis Europa catervis ludibrio praedaeque datur frondentis ad usque Dalmatiae fines. (In Rufinum II. 36 ff) O n the basis of these two passages, some scholars take the M a r c o m a n n i on a long foray to the coast of Dalmatia, and even to Salonae. 1 0 T h e specific incrimination of this people appears to be premature. IV. A strange hazard preserves a historic notice, of a different order, precise and precious. It occurs in the Vita Ambrosii composed by Paulinus (ch. 26). In 396, on request from Fritigil, the converted wife of a king of the Marcomanni, the bishop of Milan sent her an 'epistulam praeclaram in m o d u m catechismi'. The sagacious prelate t o o k the opportunity to suggest that she incline her husband towards paths, of peace. And so, 'mulier suasit viro ut cum populo suo se R o m a n i s traderet'. Fritigil herself went on pilgrimage to Milan, but her patron was no longer among the living. 11 A transference of Marcomanni to Roman territory is confirmed by a n u m b e r of their regiments on record in the Notitia Dignitatum, including one in Pannonia Superior and one in Noricum Ripense. Earlier transplantations will not be neglected. 12 O n e of them happens to be registered in an unlikely source and context, the Epitome of Pseudo-Victor, which was written about this time, not long after the death of Theodosius. 1 3 10 Thus R. Remondon, La Crise de I'empire romain (1964), 217; J. J. Wilkes, Dalmatia (1969), 419; A. D. E. Cameron, Claudian (1970), 381. 1 ' Ambrose died on April 4, 397. 12 For the detail, L. Schmidt, o.c. 185; and especially D. van Berchem in Carnuntina (ed. E. Swoboda, 1956), 12 ff, assigning to Gallienus the establishment of Marcomanni in Pannonia. 13 Theodosius died on Jan. 16, 395.

The End of the Marcomanni

151

Nearly one half of the author's concise statement about Gallienus is taken up by an anecdote about that emperor's uxorious behaviour: 'amori diverso pellicum deditus Saloninae coniugis et concubinae quam per pactionem, concessa parte superioris Pannoniae a patre, Marcomannorum rege, matrimonii specie susceperat, Pipam nomine' (33. 1). The item is valuable, through relevance to the methods and habits of three epitomators - and to their source. Eutropius left it out (no surprise), but it appealed to Aurelius Victor: 'expositus Saloninae coniugi atque amori flagitioso filiae Attali, Germanorum regis, Pipae nomine' (33. 8). Victor makes much of the matter, alleging portentous consequences of the amour. As he affirms, 'qua causa etiam civiles motus longe atrociores orti\ And he goes on to invoke in support an act of usurpation in Gaul - 'namque primus omnium Postumus', etc. Victor produces the name of Pipa's parent, Attalus: but no Marcomanni, no settlement in Pannonia Superior. Acquaintance with the Caesares of Aurelius Victor cannot be refused to the author of the Epitome. In this instance, however, as in some others, he has a remarkable detail not present in Victor: Marcomanni established in Pannonia. Their story about Pipa goes back to a common source. It is that 'Kaisergeschichte' divined long ago by Enmann from resemblances between the epitomators - and also discoverable in Festus and in the Chronicle ofjerome. Some in these days play down the KG, some seem disposed to deny its existence. Yet it remains, a postulate, but unavoidable: the only way to explain the facts. Otto Seeck assumed without argument that the KG was composed soon after 337. His verdict has recently received strong confirmation.14 In the KG is to be discovered the origin of the tradition hostile to Gallienus which the Latin writers eagerly embraced and transmittedGallienus, the ruler whose enormities will be remembered to the end of civilized time: 'dum urbes erunt', so Victor exclaims (33. 29). Pipa the princess is a delight for fanciers of nomenclature. The name lacks attestation elsewhere - save, appropriately, Pipa the wife of a man at Syracuse and mistress of a criminal proconsul.15 That 'Pipa' should pop up in the pages of Cicero is not altogether reassuring. And one might wonder about 'Attalus', her royal parent. Adepts of Germanic nomenclature come out with the notion that the name might in fact be ' Athala'.16 The effort is superfluous. Names that 14 T. D. Barnes, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 19 ff. For doubts amounting to negation, W. den Boer, Some Minor Roman Historians (1972), 20 f., cf. 98. 15 Cicero, In Verrem iii. 77 f.; v. 81. 16 cf. PIR2 A 1328: "Attalus (vel potius Athala, cf. Schonfeld, Worterb. d. altgerm. Personenn. s. v.).' Better Celtic, cf. 'Attalus, Donni f.' (CIL iii. 5029: near Virunum).

152

The End of the Marcomanni

at first sight are Greek or Roman by their shape occur among the northern barbarians, and various explanations offer. Thus Carvilius, one of the kings of a British tribe in the narrative of Caesar (BGV. 22. 1). Hostile to Gallienus, the KG transmitted fabrications reflecting credit on the Constantinian dynasty. Notably concerning Claudius, the archegete in the line of the Danubian emperors - Claudius whom Constantine in the year 310, requiring a new source of legitimation, produced as ancestor, a potent secret previously known only to his intimate friends (Pan. lat. VI. 2). Claudius was embellished in various ways. Gallienus on his death­ bed had the insignia imperii sent to Claudius, then at Ticinum. Thus Victor (33. 27). The Epitome adds corroborative detail: the envoy 'Gallonius Basilius' took to Ticinum the 'indumenta regia' (34. 2). The name 'Basilius' speaks for itself. Compare another item in the Epitome. It discloses as the parent of Probus a certain 'Dalmatius', who is suitably styled a horticulturalist (37. 2). The artifice is patent. The name occurs in the family of Constantine, hence a link with another Danubian ruler. It is useful and entertaining to discover fictitious persons emerging in the KG, well before their proliferation in the Historia Augusta. That is, unless these two figments belong to the author of the Epitome, writing in the same season. No reciprocal influences have in fact been detected. However, 'Gallonius Avitus' can be adduced as parallel to 'Gallonius Basilius'. Aurelian instructed him to make provision for Gothic princesses at Perinthus, among them 'Hunila', the bride destined for Bonosus (Quadr. tyr. 16. 6). The Historia Augusta could not miss 'Pipa', that savoury morsel. With a lacuna before and after stands the fragment 'quamvis perdite dilexit, Piparam nomine, barbaram regis filiam' (Gall. 21. 4). As for the form Pipara, if not a scribal error, it may be a deliberate perversion (that happens to other names in the HA, as witness 'Diabolenus' or even a joke, inspired by piper and the hot sauce called piperatum. Observe in Petronius 'piper non homo' (Sat. 44. 6); and amusement would be evoked by the name of the soldier 'L. Piperacius L. f. Stell. Optatus domo Taurinus' (CIL XIII. 8080: Bonn). The initial phrase in the truncated sentence was preceded by a reference to Gallienus' devotion to Salonina, it will be presumed: she is named before the German princess both in Victor and in the Epitome. What may have come after 'barbaram regis filiam' in the text need not matter. In any event, hardly a reference to the establishment of Marcomanni in Pannonia Superior: the HA was following Victor in this place, so it can with some confidence be maintained, and that item

The End of the Marcomanni

153

is not in Victor. A little lower down the author reverts to the theme of Pipa, like Victor precisely, in the context of the Gallic usurper who made his proclamation 'cum Gallienus luxuriae et popinis vacaret et amore barbarae mulieris consenesceret' (Tyr. trig. 3. 4). Inspection, keener than was practised in the past, now detects more and more traces of that epitomator, in widely diverse sections of the work. 17 VI. So far the Historia Augusta has been segregated from the enquiry into the history of the Marcomanni, for more reasons than one. The two lists of nations involved in the War of Marcus might invite scrutiny. 18 The first occurs in the passage lifted, as Dessau saw, from Eutropius. It comprises four names: Marcomanni, Sarmatae, Quadi, Vandali (Marcus 17. 3), as in Eutropius, except for Marcomanni in the place of Suebi (VIII. 13. 1). The second offers no fewer than seventeen (22. 1). The author was making a special effort. Several of the names excite comment, before all the enigmatic Victuali, who had already been brought on in another passage (14. 1). They are otherwise found in two authors only. Eutropius, writing in 370, states that the Victuali along with Taifali and Tervingi now inhabit Trajan's Dacia (VIII. 9. 2); and they occur in a sporadic notice in Ammianus' account of operations against Quadi and Sarmatians in 358, when some of the Sarmatians escaped 'ad Victohalos discretos longius' (XVII. 12. 19). It is peculiar indeed that the author of the HA in the first of his two references, introducing briefly the expedition of Marcus and Verus, should choose to name this people in front of the Marcomanni 'Victualis et Marcomannis cuncta turbantibus' (14. 1). There is a chance that the remote Victuali emerged into sudden notoriety in the nineties of the Fourth Century. 19 Better, perhaps, exotic erudition or sheer perversity. Enquiry into themes of predilection in the Historia Augusta seldom has to wait long for fraud and fabrication. Subsequent to the German War of Marcus Aurelius, Marcomanni come up again in two passages. First, a fantasy attributed to Elagabalus. He wished to fight the Marcomanni, and he had ascertained how Marcus operated through magic and incantations: 'dictum est a quibusdam per Chaldaeos et magos Antoninum Marcum id egisse ut Marcomanni p. R. semper devoti essent atque amici, idque factum carminibus et consecratione' (Elag. 9. 1). The source of this notion is clear. The Vita Marci reported rituals ordained by the Emperor at the outset of his war: 'tantus autem timor belli Marcomannici fuit ut undique 17

A. Chastagnol, Rev. phil. xli (1967), 85 ff.; HAC 1966/7 (1968), 85 ff. L. Schmidt, o.c. 163. 19 Or a little earlier. Note for example that Greuthungi first appear in a war in 367 (Ammianus xxvii. 5. 6): the HA has them in campaigns a century earlier (Claud. 6. 2; Prob. 18. 2). 18

154

The End of the Marcomanni

sacerdotes Antoninus acciverit, peregrinos ritus impleverit' (13. 1). If the mention of 'Chaldaei et magi' is enough to arouse suspicion, the context condemns. Elagabalus had also learned that his helium Marcomannicum would be terminated by an Antoninus, whereas, so the author with indignation exclaims, the Syrian prince was a spurious Antoninus - 'cum hie Varius et Elagabalus et ludibrium publicum diceretur, nomen autem Antonini pollueret, in quod invaserat' (Elag. 9. 2). The nomen Antoninorum is a favourite theme, inordinately exploited; and the author took from Marius Maximus the notion of the ultimus Antoninorum, the defiler of the consecrated name.20 Patent fiction therefore.21 For the understanding of this passage, no help comes from evidence for hostilities on the frontier of Upper Germany; 22 and none from the chance that Elagabalus actually set forth on an expedition to the North. Not but that a certain casual fact should be kept in view: officers of a Guard Cohort, at some time between June of 221 and March of 222, repaid the vows they had made 'proficiscentes sacris expeditionibus'. 23 Indeed, military laurels or a refuge with the armies of the northern frontier (they had so far been loyal) might seem a remedy against the growing menace from his cousin Alexander, whom he had been persuaded to adopt in the summer of 221 through the arts of Maesa and Sohaemias-and of some counsellors who leave no traces. VII. Second, the long and exuberant account of Aurelian's operations against Marcomanni who had invaded Italy (Aur. 18-21). It is embel­ lished with picturesque details. Ancient rituals, it is alleged, were celebrated, such as an amburbium, with a prospect of ambarvalia also (20. 3). Furthermore, the Emperor enjoined a consultation of the Sibylline Books, but he had to rebuke senators for sloth and delinquence - they were behaving 'quasi in Christianorum ecclesia, non in templo deorum omnium' (20. 5). Whereas, in truth, 'nee indecorum est diis iuvantibus vincere' (20. 7). The presentation in the HA, it may be noted in passing, has been adduced by a number of scholars as a sign that the HA writes in deliberate hostility to the new faith - or, another matter, as encourage­ ment to credit plural authorship, since the attitude of 'Vopiscus' towards Christianity appeared to stand in sharp contrast to that of 'Lampridius', the more sympathetic author of the Vita Alexandria 20

Emperors and Biography (1971), 79 f.; T. D. Barnes, HAC 1970 (1972), 53 ff. HAC 1972/4 (1976), 292 (above, 81). 22 As expounded by T. Bechert, Epigraphische Studien viii (1969), 53 ff. 23 ILS 474: adduced by T. D. Barnes with the remark that it 'could be relevant' (o.c. 70). 24 Thus Momigliano, Secondo contribute alia storia degli studi classici (1960), 105 ff. In the Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire (1971) 'Lampridius' becomes a distinct personage on these grounds. 21

The End of the Marcomanni

155

They had forgotten a gentle admonition from Hermann Dessau many years ago. 25 As concerns Marcomanni, it was at once apparent that the invaders of Italy were in fact Juthungi and Alamanni.26 Why then Marcomanni? and was 'Vopiscus' perhaps writing under the influence of some contemporary transactions? The answer might elicit a clue valuable for the dating of the HA. One scholar in a long and careful exposition recently brought up the invasion of Radagaesus in 405 - but failed to impose conviction.27 VII. An easy explanation offers. The author was impelled without effort towards a name renowned in history, in the history he had narrated in the Vita Marci. Compare his use of the Quadi, though of lesser fame, in a minor piece of invention. 'Valerius Flaccinus', taken prisoner by the Quadi, was rescued by Probus who thereby earned honour and an oration from the Emperor Valerian, a kinsman of that young nobleman (Prob. 5. 2 ff.). None the less, a temptation might subsist, to surmise some contem­ poraneous relevance in the fictions about the Marcomanni. That is, not warfare and invasions but the episode of Queen Fritigil in 396 and the transference of the Marcomanni. The Epitome, it will be recalled, when reproducing the story about Pipa, who is styled not merely German (as in Victor's version) but Marcomannic, specified a settle­ ment of that people in Pannonia Superior. The detail might not derive from the unfriendly source (the KG). At least, such an action was perhaps creditable to Gallienus, as was the transplantation of the Carpi to other rulers (cf. Victor 39. 43). The temptation should be resisted - and in any case the Marcomanni are not needed, their better employment being to illustrate the habits of the impostor. To support a dating of the HA, it is hazardous to invoke arguments of this type, the admonition stands.28 Yet, on the other hand, enough signs avail, notably the impact of sundry events between 392 and 394.29 They appear to converge and put the writing of the Historia Augusta not long subsequent to that season.30 25

H. Dessau, Hermes xxvii (1892), 587. E. Groag, P-W v, 1370 ff. See further A. Alfoldi, Studien zur Geschichte der Weltkrise des 3. Jahrhunderts nach Christus (1967), 179 ff. 27 G. Alfoldy, HAC 1964/5(1966), 1 ff. Against, A. Lippold, ib. 7970(1972), 149 ff. 28 It was stated in HAC 1964/5 (1966), 272 = Emperors and Biography (1971), 16. 29 Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 72 ff. - with quotation (ib. 79, n. 2) of the earlier statement. 30 ib. 220. For the terminus ante quern Chastagnol has recently argued several times in favour of 398 or 399. 26

XI Fiction in the Epitomators* T H E theme of anecdotes and scandal at once evokes Marius Maximus, of sharp relevance to the Historia Augusta. When the Vitae of the nine emperors in the sequence from Hadrian to Caracalla are put under scrutiny, a clear result emerges. The citations of Maximus stand out as additions to the basic text. By the same token, more of Maximus can be detected in the context. The argument depends on structure and composition, not on any prepossessions about the consular biographer. It is therefore not at all easy to contest or infringe.1 The various items inserted to the detriment of Marcus and his consort furnish proof and conviction. They are patent accretions. One specimen may suffice: Faustina's frolics with gladiators and with fishermen at Caieta.2 Aurelius Victor (it will be noted) neglected the seductive theme of gladiators and the consequent fables about the parentage of Commodus. He concentrates on the fishermen in Campania: 'ex nauticis, quia plerumque nudi agunt, flagitiis aptiores'.3 Which brings up the large question of sources and derivations, involving other epitomators. Close on a century has now elapsed since Enmann came out with his 'Kaisergeschichte', the common source of Victor and of Eutropius. The hypothesis has served more ends than one - and some question­ able or deceptive. Thus a way of escape for conservative critics, anxious to disallow the use of Aurelius Victor in the HA. The expedient avails no more. Traces of Victor are discovered in widely separate portions of the work. 4 Recent years have seen renewed and welcome attention paid to the epitomators. 5 Among the results is a tendency (not a little paradoxical) to discount the KG or even deny its existence. One scholar, deprecat­ ing 'auteurs fantomes', affirms that the KG is not required as a * Reprinted from Bonner HAC 1977/8 (1980), 267 ff. 1 However, several recent critics hold to M. M. as the basic source. 2 HA Marcus 19. 7, cf. remarks in HAC 1970 (1972), 293 f. (above, 36 f.). 3 Victor 16. 2. But he had plenty to report later on about the gladiatorial exploits of Commodus, including the anecdote about an otherwise unknown Scaeva (17. 4-6). 4 A. Chastagnol, Rev. Phil, xli (1967), 85 ff.; HAC 1966/7 (1968), 53 ff. 5 Notably by J. Schlumberger, Die Epitome de Caesaribus (1974).

Fiction in the Epitomators

157

hypothesis. 6 For another, there is 'no proof that Aurelius Victor summarizes any earlier authors'; and indeed, in his judgement, the epitomators 'relied chiefly on oral tradition and their own memories'. 7 It would no doubt be entertaining to pursue the corollaries of those assertions to a deadly end. However, let the plain and modest reasons for the postulate of a common source be again affirmed. It explains both resemblances (often verbal) and variants in selection, reflecting the idiosyncracy of the authors. Also, and above all, the errors they share. For example, both in Victor and in Eutropius a battle at the Pons Mulvius in the year 193, and Pescennius Niger killed at Cyzicus; and both writers conflate the son and the grandson of the Emperor Gordian. 8 Therefore, despite benefits that accrue from alertness and scepticism in the face ofQuellenforschung, there are limits to negation or nescience. The postulate stands, since there is no other way of accounting for the literary phenomena. 9 And now, to approach the main theme. Some anecdotal material from Marius Maximus percolated to the epitomators by the channel of the KG, so it is assumed. His 'Twelve Caesars' terminated with Elagabalus, styled for dispraisal ultimus Antoninorum. From Maximus and from problems concerning the early Vitae, intricate and by now tedious, it will be a relief to turn aside and inspect the subsequent rulers down to Carus and Carinus and the accession of Diocletian, as portrayed in the epitomators. A summary catalogue of the fictional items should afford various instruction. Distinctions can be drawn - or waived for convenience. Some of the fabrications had an official origin ultimately, as in the embellishment of the Emperor Claudius both at his accession and by the manner of his death; and the fable about the interregnum after the death of Aurelianus proceeds from an error. Again, some items go back to the common source, whereas others are the peculiar property of either Victor or the Epitome, inventive in their diverse fashions. The content of these abridged biographies being so restricted, the divergences 6 Thus P. Dufraigne in his edition of Victor (Bude, 1975), xxvii; xxiv. Even Chastagnol labelled the KG as 'la tres hypothetique et trop commode Histoire Imperiale', HAC 1964/5 (1966), 56. 7 W. den Boer, Some Minor Roman Historians (1972), 20; 110. That scholar discussed Festus but omitted the Epitome. 8 The Epitome, however, distinguished the two: Gordian III was 'nepos Gordiani ex filia' (27. 1). 9 As was affirmed in his last (and posthumous) paper by E. Hohl, Wiener Studien lxxi (1958), 147. See now T. D. Barnes, HAC 196819 (1970), 13 ff; The Sources of the Historia Augusta. Collection Latomus 155 (1978), 92 ff. The KG is accepted without question by P. L. Schmidt, P-W Supp. xv (1978): discussing Aurelius Victor.

158

Fiction in the Epitomators

become notable. Eutropius, who likes facts and dates, is not only more sober. He appears to be closer to the KG. 10 What is here essayed is not a comparison, in one aspect, of three epitomators. The fictions, albeit sporadic and often rudimentary, disclose a number of devices that were taken up and developed by the author of the Historia Augusta. Anterior in Victor (360) and Eutropius (369), they are closely contemporaneous in the Epitome. That opuscule was composed shortly after the decease of Theodosius. Epitome and HA, neither can be shown to influence or aliment the other. The fictions may be marshalled under eleven headings. As follows: (1) Invented ancestry. The prime exhibit in history is the great secret known to good friends but not disclosed until the year 310: Constantine was nothing less than the grandson of Divus Claudius, hence 'post duos familiae tuae principes tertius imperator', so the orator proclaimed (Pan. lat. VI. 2. 4).11 The Epitome offers two pieces of fiction, (a) Claudius himself was the son of an emperor: 'hunc plerique putant Gordiano satum, dum adulescens a muliere matura institueretur ad uxorem' (34. 2). The fable clearly alludes to the boy Gordian. Chronology contradicts - and is irrelevant, given flagrant ignorance in the epitomators. No point therefore in adducing the boy's uncle (Gordian II), whom the HA happens to present as a notable voluptuary, with twenty-two acknowledged concubines and multifarious progeny, (b) Probus was 'genitus patre agresti hortorum studioso Dalmatio nomine' (37. 1). The figment is double and delightful.12 First, the name 'Dalmatius'. It occurs in the family of Constantine, and it might have been a name of his father. Second, the horticultural parent of Probus. Highly appropriate because of viticulture promoted by that emperor: 'opere militari Almam montem apud Sirmium et Aureum apud Moesiam superiorem vineis conseruit' (37. 3). Eutropius had the identical sentence (IX. 17. 2), but his predecessor Victor eschewed the place names (37. 3). (2) Faked transmission of the power. When Gallienus was assassinated in the camp outside Mediolanum (by his Danubian and Balkan generals) Claudius was not there. He was holding a post at Ticinum. But Gallienus before he expired was able to declare his successor: 10 His longest biographies therefore acquire great value: those of Trajan, Marcus, Aurelian. On the other hand, next to nothing (but benevolent) on Severus Alexander, a long reign. 11 The explicit corollary that Helena was a daughter of Claudius does not seem to have been drawn. For variant versions of the alleged ancestry see Emperors and Biography (1971), 204 f.; Historia xxii (1973), 214 f. 12 'Dalmatius' was accepted without question in PIR2 D 2 and in PLRE (1971).

Fiction in the Epitomators

159

'insignia imperii ad Claudium destinaverat' (Victor 33. 28). The Epitome has the same fabrication, recording the dispatch of the 'indumenta regia' (34. 2). (3) Bogus characters. 'Dalmatius' has already been registered. The Epitome produces two more specimens, viz. (a) Gallonius Basilius. It was he who conveyed to Ticinum the 'indumenta regia'. For which function, the name 'Basilius' is itself a designation. Yet 'Gallonius Basilius' is not impugned in standard works. 13 The name 'Gallonius' also appealed to the author of the HA. It is 'Gallonius Avitus' who is instructed by Aurelian to make provision for the Gothic princesses (among them 'Hunila') established at Perinthus (Quadr. tyr. 15. 6). (b) The parent of Aurelian. This ruler was 'genitus . . . ut quidam ferunt, Aurelii clarissimi senatoris colono inter Daciam et Macedoniam' (35. 1). As in the other epitomators (and in the HA) no awareness that the Emperor's gentilicium was in fact 'Domitius'. The phrase 'ut quidam ferunt', like 'plerique putant' for the extraction of Claudius (34. 2), is a normal device. Compare, in the ostensibly scrupulous enquiry about Aurelian, 'ortus, ut plures loquuntur, Sirmii'(HA Awr. 3. I). 14 (4) Heroic deaths, (a) According to Victor, 'Deciorum mortem plerique illustrem ferunt' (29. 5). He subjoins what the father said when the son was killed: 'detrimentum unius militis parum videri sibi'. The Decii enjoy a noble repute in the pagan tradition, for an obvious reason. It is not certain that the epitomators (or their source) had ever heard of the 'Decian Persecution'.15 (b) Eutropius has a curt statement about the end of Claudius- 'morbo interiit' (IX. 11.2). The other two present a legend, in slightly diverging versions. For the victory over the Goths, the Sibylline Books enjoined the sacrifice of the first man in the Roman Senate, the person indicated came forward, but the Emperor intervened, for it was his office and duty, 'qui re vera senatus atque omnium princeps erat' (34. 4). Hence the rout of the barbarians - and edifying comments from Aurelius Victor. The Epitome goes one better. It supplies the name of the man 'sententiae in senatu dicendae primi', viz. Pomponius Bassus (34. 3). That is, the eminent Ti. Pomponius Bassus, twice consul (in 259 and in 271) and Prefect of the City. Ammianus knew the story: 'Claudio glorioso ductore et eodem 13

Accepted in PLRE, with citation of PIR2 G 49. There happens to be a Basilius in the time of the author, praefectusurbiin 395 (C. Th. vii. 24. 1): from Spain, according to Zosimus (v. 40. 2). 14 The HA there adduces also Dacia Ripensis, ut nonnulli. To be preferred, cf. Eutropius ix. 13. 1. 15 The historical resonance of Deems' ordinances tends to be overvalued by modern scholars. Cf. remarks in Emperors and Biography (1971), 200.

160

Fiction in the Epitomators

honesta morte praerepto' (XXXI. 5. 17). Further, in another passage, when stigmatizing the military incompetence of Constantius, he makes a clear allusion to Claudius: 'alium ad Deciorum exempla vovisse pro re publica spiritum' (XVI. 10. 1). The devotio of the Republican Decii was present to the mind of Victor in his praise of Claudius, 'quippe ut longo intervallo Deciorum morem renovaverit' (34. 2). That is, the duo Decii, in Cicero's formulation.16 (5) An emperor's cognomen. Eutropius presents Severus Alexander as a youthful military hero. He was keen on discipline and he even disbanded some mutinous legions: 'militarem disciplinam severissime rexit. quasdam tumultuantes legiones integras exauctoravit' (VIII. 23). 17 His predecessor Aurelius Victor found the same item in the source, 'tumultuantes legionum plerasque constantissime abiecit' (24. 3). But he was inspired to add something false and feeble. The severitas of Alexander was such as to earn him 'etiam Severi cognomenum!' (24. 4). Comparable ignorance and folly enticed the Epitome to make play with the name of an earlier emperor, Helvius Pertinax - 'iste coactus imperium repugnansque suscipiens tale cognomentum sortitus est' (18.1). (6) An ancient ritual. Victor is extremely hostile towards Gallienus, whose crimes will not be forgotten as long as civilized life endures 'dum urbes erunt'. He describes in vivid language what happened at Rome when the death of Gallienus was announced. The Senate, so he says, decreed that the agents and relatives of Gallienus should be cast down the Scalae Gemoniae; and the mob burst in, uttering dreadful imprecations: 'cum irruens vulgus pari clamore Terram matrem, deos quoque inferos precaretur, sedes impias uti Gallieno darent' (33. 31). The passage has been lifted from Suetonius with little change. Such was the joy at Rome on the death of Tiberius that 'pars Terram matrem deosque Manes orarent ne mortuo sedem ullam nisi inter impios darent, alii uncum et Gemonias cadaveri minitarentur' (776.75.1). Victor's contribution to fictional history has met with peculiar treatment at the hands of recent scholars. His editor misses the Suetonian origin;18 and a historian appears to regard the item as authentic and valuable.19 (7) Oracles. The consultation of the librifatales (the stylish phrase in 16

Cicero, Deqfficiis in. 16; CatoMaiorlS. That Alexander disbanded any of the Roman legions is neither attested nor probable. Plain fiction happens to assign him the creation of a legio quarta (HA Maximin. 5.3). 18 P. Dufraigne (ed. Bude, 1975). 19 According to W. den Boer, Victor has written 'in such a way as to enable us to reconstruct the official phraseology of a damnatio memoriae (o.c. 107). 17

Fiction in the Epitomators

161

the Epitome) that led to the devotio of Claudius has already been mentioned. Victor, and only Victor, has the following item. When Carus in his invasion of Mesopotamia passed beyond Ctesiphon, he was struck by lightning. His own fault, says Victor, since he marched too far, neglecting the limit ordered by oracles: 4adusque oppidum memoratum perveniri victoria licere' (38. 4).20 The epitomator adds judicious comment, as is his wont: 'proinde arduum fatalia devertere, eoque futuri notio superflua'. (8) Omens, portents, and haruspices. Victor provides three specimens, (a) When old Gordian after his proclamation was sacrificing at Carthage, the beast suddenly gave birth. The haruspices (and the Emperor, himself an expert) recognized that death was portended for him and ultimately for his son, 'mitem atque innoxium praefantes fore ut illud pecus, nee diuturnum' (26. 3 f.). This youthful son, a praetextatus (27. 1), is Gordian III, in fact a grandson of the proconsul of Africa.21 (b) Victor singles out one among many portents that occurred under Philip: when, 'pontificum lege' some animals were sacrificed, 'suis utero maris feminarum genitalia apparuere' (28. 4). In the interpretation of the haruspices a deterioration in morals was impending. To prevent which, the Emperor forbade male prostitu­ tion (28. 6). Hence an excuse for the author to divagate into reflections on human life, at some length (28. 7-9). (c) when Gallienus was appointed Caesar by his father, a disastrous flood of the Tiber ensued, although the season was summer. The experts had the explanation. Young Gallienus by reason of his 'fluxum ingenium' would be a public calamity: like the river, he arrived from Etruria (32. 4). And so it came to pass. (9) Anecdotes, (a) The son of Philip was so grim and morose by nature that from the age of five no means could be devised for making him laugh. He averted his gaze in disgust when at the Ludi Saeculares he caught out the parent in irreverent behaviour, 'petulantius cachinnantem' (Epit, 28. 2). (b) Victorinus the Gallic usurper was a good soldier, but 'libidine praecipiti', and in the end he fell victim to his lusts, having seduced the wife of an actuarius called Attitianus (i.e. Atticianus), who organized a conspiracy. Thus Victor (33. 12). Eutropius has a briefer account, without the name (IX. 9. 3). But Victor digresses into a denunciation of actuarii (that is, commissariat officials) and the enormities they commit (33. 13). (c) Besieged at Mediolanum, Aureolus hit upon a device for having Gallienus removed, namely a list of Gallienus' generals 'quasi destinati ab eo ad necem'. It worked. Thus Victor, at some length, and with comments 20 21

For that oracle, secj. Straub, Studien zur Historia Augusta (1952), 123 ft". P. Dufraigne assumes ad loc. that Gordian II is alluded to. But Victor ignored him.

162

Fiction in the Epitomators

(33. 2 0 - 2 6 ) . T h e Epitome carries a brief reference to the assassination of the E m p e r o r : 'eiusdem Aureoli commento a suis periit' (33. 2). T h e story has a double interest. First, it is modelled on the murder of Aurelian at Caenophrurium (Victor 35. 8; Eutropius IX. 15. 2; Epit. 35. 8). O n l y Eutropius has the place name. Second, the motive is clear: to exculpate the Danubian and Balkan generals, Aurelian in the forefront, w h o formed and executed the plot in the camp outside M e d i o l a n u m . Claudius, one recalls, benefits from a different fabrica­ tion: he was absent on duty at Ticinum. (d) After winning great victories Probus exclaimed that soldiers would soon not be needed any m o r e . T h u s Victor: 'brevi milites frustra fore' (37. 3); Eutropius: 'brevi milites necessarios non futuros' (IX. 17. 3). (e) Carinus is pre­ sented as a criminal character. N o t only adulteries - he put to death comrades from his schooldays w h o had criticized him however mildly. T h u s Eutropius: 'matrimonia nobilia corrupit. condiscipulis q u o q u e , qui eum in auditorio vel levi fatigatione taxaverant, perniciosus fuit' (IX. 19. 1). The Epitome has the identical phraseology, w o r d by w o r d , apart from the omission of Vel levi'. 22 (10) Jokes, (a) When killing at Aquileia not only Maximinus but his son, the troops cried out 'militari ioco, ex pessimo genere nee catulum h a b e n d u m ' (Epit. 25. 2). (b) The usurper Marius had been an ironsmith. N o wonder, therefore, that he should essay to repair the R o m a n State, like the great Marius who was 'eiusdem artis auctor stirpisque'. That was what they said, 'ioculariter' (Victor 33. 11). The n a m e , it is clear, provokes the fabrication that C. Marius was likewise a 'ferri opifex'. 2 3 (c) After sparing the life of Tetricus, the Gallic e m p e r o r , Aurelian made him 'corrector Lucaniae'. All three have this particular. T h e Epitome subjoins an elegans iocus. Aurelian said 'sublimius habendum regere aliquam Italiae partem quam trans Alpes regnare' (35. 7). (11) Virgilian quotations. When Tetricus, escaping from his troops, cast himself on the mercy of Aurelian, his appeal was couched as 'eripe m e his, invicte, malis' (Eutropius IX. 13. 2). The use of the poet had a precedent in the annals of imperial warfare. At the murderous siege of Hatra Julius Crispus, a tribune of the Guard, angered Severus by an apt quotation, scilicet ut Turno contingat regia coniunx nos animae viles inhumata infletaque turba sternamur campis. 24 22

In the text of Pichlmayr (ed. 2, 1966), taxaverant should be read instead oftaxaverunt. * Not found elsewhere. As for the alleged ancestry, P. Dufraigne thinks it probable 'qu'il y ait la trace de la propagande menee par I'usurpateur' (o.c. 161). That notion entails a depreciation of 24 Aurelius Victor. Aen. xi. 371 ff, reported in Dio lxxv. 10. 2. 2

Fiction in the Epitomators

163

The list can be put to good employ. In the first instance, for a literary appraisal. It brings out divergent habits and predilections in the three epitomators. Victor is the most discursive, fervent in allegiance to education and the Roman tradition, eager to obtrude his opinions on state and society. The latest of them, the author of the Epitome is highly peculiar, and for certain items Greek sources can be surmised.25 Only he advances to the technique of invented characters. They share disquieting features. Trivial anecdotes crowd out essen­ tial facts in many of these potted biographies. Thus Aurelius Victor, praised by Ammianus for his sobrietas, devotes inordinate space to three omens, to the verdicts of the haruspices - and to his own reflec­ tions thereon. Even Eutropius, brief on Carinus, cannot resist the story about his condiscipuli. They also share a common source. To promote and justify Quellenforschung was not the purpose of the present disquisition. None the less, something of value emerges from the catalogue of fictional devices. The Epitome could draw on its predecessors, Victor and Eutropius. But it would not be easy to establish the use of Victor by Eutropius. However that may be, the KG, often deprecated or denied in the recent time, comes into its own. The viticultural operations of the Emperor Probus are probatory. 26 According to Victor, 'Pannoniasque et Moesorum colles vinetis replevit' (37. 3). Victor left out the topographical details present in his source, namely the Mons Alma and the Mons Aureus. They crop up later, in identical phraseology in Eutropius (IX. 17. 2) and in the Epitome (37. 3).21 N o w Victor knew that neighbourhood. He was at Sirmium when Julian met him in the summer of 361, 'scriptorem historicum . . . virum sobrietatis gratia aestimandum', as Ammianus styles him (XXI. 10. 6). But this is not a matter of 'oral tradition' - merely and plainly the way in which different writers treat their basic text. Observe for confirmation the patria of the Emperor Decius. The first testimony, that of Victor, has 'Sirmiensium vico ortus' (29. 1). But Eutropius and the Epitome supply the name of the village, 'e Pannonia inferiore, Budaliae natus' (IX. 4; 29. I). 28 25

cf. the scholars cited in Emperors and Biography (1971), 236; and J. Schlumberger (o.c, 1974), passim. 26 When one writes about the HA, it may be permissible to employ some of its word-play: 'si Probum cogitas, est adulescens vere probus* (Prob. 4. 4). 27 For this item, sec T. D. Barnes, CQ xx (1970), 201 ff. It is clear evidence for the KG. 28 For the literary habits of Victor, observe that he has fishermen in Campania (16. 2): the source had Caieta, cf. HA Marcus 19. 7.

164

Fiction in the Epitomators

Epilogue To resume: the value of the fabrications. When classified by type and by stages of emergence in the 'subsidiary biographies' of princes and pretenders in the earlier portion of the Historia Augusta, they exhibit a progression that anticipates the full efflorescence of fiction later on. Continuity is demonstrated - and the true bent and purpose of the author is revealed.29 As concerns the present topic, the epitomators by sporadic items anticipate the plethora pervading the HA. For example, faked ancestry of emperors, omens and portents, Sibylline Books and oracles that emit Virgilian verses, trivial anecdotes, traditional jokes of the schoolroom, dreadful puns on names, and so on. Noteworthy, however, is the way in which the ingenious impostor takes a hint (several times from Aurelius Victor), and expands a theme with lavish and ornate fabrications, displaying fantasy, talent and humour, especially towards the end of his inimitable enterprise, get­ ting better and better - a development that not all scholars have discerned or credited. The author had space to fill, and invention was congenial. Or rather, not even subsidiary but contemplated from the inception. Four specimens may be briefly adduced. (1) The smith Marius. Coming upon the great ancestor alleged by Aurelius Victor, the author duly produces a Sallustian oration for this vir strenuus beginning with 'scio, conmilitones' (Tyr. trig. 8. 8 ff). With sundry metallurgical allusions the usurper proclaims that all Alamannia and all Germania will now learn that the Romans are veritably a 'ferrata gens'. (2) An interregnum of about six months after the death of Aurelian. The brief reign of Tacitus tended to fade from memory. Julian in his Caesares ignored this virtuous prince who was 'egregie moratus et rei publicae idoneus', according to the Latin tradition;30 and the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius passes without a break from Aurelian to Probus. 31 Indeed, the six months' rule of Tacitus could be regarded as a mere interlude between two military heroes, five years of the one, six of the other. Such, it appears, was the original notion, leaving a vestige in the phrase 'interregni species' in both Victor and the Epitome 29

cf. HAC 1968/9 (1970), 285 ff. = Emperors and Biography (1971), 54 ff. Eutropius ix. 16, cf. Epit. 36. 1: 'vir egregie moratus'. Victor called him 'mitem sane virum' (36. 1). 31 The epitomators would not find much in the way of an 'oral tradition' about Claudius Tacitus. 30

Fiction in the Epitomators

165

32

(35. 12; 35. 10). But Victor went on to assume and to explain an actual vacancy in the power. What has happened is clear. The six months of Tacitus was employed twice: for the interregnum and for the reign. The mistake might go back to the basic source, the KG.33 Against which, however, observe that Eutropius saw nothing abnormal in the transition from Aurelian to Tacitus (IX. 16). Victor is therefore the culprit, betrayed by his overt propensities.34 With dire consequences, the echo of which is not yet mute. 35 After the murder of Aurelian, the armies and the senate competed in 'pudor ac modestia', virtues rare enough in mankind and notably so in soldiers. They sent embassies to and fro. Finally, in the sixth month the Senate creates an emperor. Everybody was happy 'quod . . . legendi ius principis proceres recepissent'.36 In Victor's eager assumption the Senate not merely elects a ruler but chooses him. With the incentive the HA constructed an opulent romance: most of the Vita Taciti.31 (3) No more soldiers needed, said Probus, according to Victor and Eutropius. The HA exploits the felicity that may be expected to ensue, in a vivid and ample piece of declamation (Prob. 20. 4-5); and, as is his manner, the author returns to the charge before the end, ever more exuberant (23. 1-5). (4) Prophecies. The author invents for fun and derision - in an age when oracles were enlisted for high and solemn purposes. In 394 the great Nicomachus Flavianus announced for the new faith its imminent termination with the cycle of 365 years: that is, reckoned from the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar.38 This author bothers no longer with lists of omens or with anecdotes about portents. He rises to a pair of masterpieces. First, world dominion from Ireland to Ceylon is promised by haruspices to the line of Tacitus - but they will have to wait for a thousand years (Tac. 15.3). Second, the descendants of Probus will accede each and all to the highest honours - 'but we have not seen any of them yet. However, they have all eternity before them.' (Prob. 24. 3). A mocking allusion, so it appears, to Petronius Probus - and to the joint consulship of his 32

Compare the HA on Tacitus and Florianus: 'quasi quidam interreges inter Aurclianum et Probum' (Tac. 14. 5). ■" Thus E. Groag, P-W v, 1349, cf. 1404; E. Hohl, Klio xi (1911), 284. 34 As assumed in Emperors and Biography (1971), 238. 35 That is, a 'senatorial restoration' under Tacitus. 36 Victor 36. 1. The passage calls for emendation. See the Appendix. 37 That is, fifteen Teubner pages. The factual portion is hardly more than a dozen lines, taken from Greek sources. 38 Augustine, De civitate Dei xviii. 5. 3.

166

Fiction in the Epitomators

sons in 395. 39 The malice and irony have been lost on a number of critics in the recent time. 40 Appendix An emendation in Victor. The sentence which describes the election of Tacitus proceeds as follows: 'cunctis fere laetioribus quod militari ferocia legendi ius principis proceres recepissent' (36. 1). It looks as though something has gone wrong. Dufraigne, the latest editor, betrays no sign of disquiet; and he offers the translation 'presque tout le monde se rejouissait fort que la fierte des soldats eut reconnu aux senateurs le droit de choisir le prince.' N o w the word ferocia can be used in a good sense. But not militaris ferocia, cf. Curtius IX. 7. 18. Victor's estimate of the military is hostile and angry. Their behaviour in this instance (namely surrendering to the Senate the choice of an emperor) was a paradox, for, as he had stated, 'pudor ac modestia' are virtues 'prope ignota militibus' (35. 11). For Victor the troops are like barbarians, cf. 'militaribus ac paene barbaris' (37. 7). His other specimen of the word ferocia will therefore be suitably adduced: 'pacata exterarum gentium ferocia' (1.2). 41 Dufraigne's apparatus registers no emendation of the passage. But the Addenda to the second edition of Pichlmayr (1966) noted '(mitiore) militari ferocia', the suggestion of F. Walter (madein 1919). W. A. Baehrens had objected ('jedenfalls nicht'), expressing some slight approbation of '(a) militari ferocia' (Arntzen).42 Neither is attractive, but Walter may have been on the right track. What is required to go with militari ferocia is a word indicating an abatement of the normal savagery of the soldiers - and a participle rather than an adjective. Perhaps mitigata. Compare 'mitigandae ferociae tempus' (Seneca, Ad Helviam 6. 1) and 'mitigemus ferociae flatus' (Ammianus XIV. 10. 4). Or perhaps something like remittente. Observe a little further down 'concedentibus modeste legionibus Tacito regnante' (37. 6). Once the problem is recognised, and the necessity to bring the text into accord with the situation as Aurelius Victor conceived it, an alternative offers. The next chapter furnishes guidance. 39

Dessau saw the relevance of Petronius Probus - and Mommsen could not gainsay him. Thus A.. Momigliano: 'I cannot see the point of the joke on "aeternitas" unless it was true, when the author wrote, that the prophecy had not yet been fulfilled' (Secondo contributo alia storia degli studi classici (1960), 201). 41 Both specimens offerocia were ignored in TLL. 42 W. A. Baehrens, Bursiansjahresberichteccvui (1926), 7. 40

Fiction in the Epitomators

167

Probus said, 'brevi milites frustra fore'. Whereat the troops were incensed, and they killed him: 'hinc denique magis irritati', etc. (37. 4). Victor seizes the occasion to digress upon the power of the military 'abhinc militaris potentia convaluit ac senatui imperium creandique ius principis ereptum' (37. 5).43 Victor's reversion to the theme of the Senate's prerogative is relevant to the passage at issue, where the Senate regained a lost authority through the election of Tacitus. One might therefore read 'quod militari ferocia (ereptum) legendi ius principis proceres recepissent.' Two types of remedy are thus propounded. It was not the purpose of this note to impose any one emendation: merely to show that the text does not make sense as it stands.

43 As elsewhere, Victor is hasty and inadvertent. Probus had himself been proclaimed by the troops, 'in Illyrico' (37. 2).

XII More Trouble About Turbo* I. M O R E can be discovered about the life and the actions of Marcius Turbo than about any Prefect of the Guard apart from Aelius Seianus. The sources are abundant, they exhibit a wide and a welcome variegation. 1 By the same token, a sequence of problems. To waive the earlier career of this paragon of military and civilian achievement, they stand as follows. (1) The mandate to deal with the Jewish rebellion in Egypt and in Cyrenaica, in 116 and 117. It was supposed for a time that Turbo was Prefect of Egypt. For that office, the successive tenures of Rutilius Lupus and Rammius Martialis leave no room. The notion has lapsed. (2) Next, a brief command in Mauretania. That is, Caesariensis in the first place, but it may have embraced Tingitana, since disturbances tended to spread. The predecessor in Caesariensis is not known. Indeed only one of the procurators happens to stand on record since the year 69. On Turbo followed Seius Avitus, attested in 119, who had governed Tingitana before the decease of Trajan.2 (3) The extraordinary command on the Danubian frontier. Hadrian left Turbo in charge when he resumed his journey to Rome in the summer of 118. The sphere of competence and the title of authority are matters in controversy. (4) The prefecture of the Guard. Hadrian quickly appointed his trusted friend in 119, with Septicius Clarus for colleague. Septicius was demoted three years later, but Turbo enjoyed a long tenure, until the vicinity of 135, such is the general assumption. No source discloses a colleague for Turbo after 122 (which the Emperor's further peregrinations entailed), and no commanders of the Guard are on named attestation until the year following the death of Hadrian. Turbo's vacation of the Guard is therefore a question of moment: death in office, voluntary retreat, or dismissal by the capricious ruler. Reaching the age of sixty in January of 136 and broken in health, Hadrian was at last under constraint to give thought to the succession, hence a complexity of intrigue infecting his entourage. * Reprinted from Bonner HAC 1979/81 (forthcoming). 1 For the testimonia, H.-G. Pflaum, Les Carrieres procuratoriennes (1960), 199 ff.; B. E. Thomasson, Senatores Procuratoresque Romani Nonnulli (Goteborg, 1975), 41 f.; B. Dobson, 2 Die Primipilares (1978), 226 ff. CIL xvi. 165; AE1913, 157.

More Trouble About Turbo

169

II. If that were not enough, problems of identity and nomenclature have impinged. O n an inscription at Sarmizegethusa Turbo carries the style ' Q . Marcius T u r b o Fronto Publicius Severus'. 3 It is strange (and n o t explained) that the nomen 'Gallonius' should be omitted, to which ' F r o n t o ' adheres, as certified in later kinsfolk of the Guard Prefect. R a p i d u m in Caesariensis disclosed the procurator T. Flavius Priscus Gallonius Fronto Marcius Turbo; and he also emerged on a fragment at Caesarea. 4 Finally, the right-hand portion of the latter inscription was discovered. 5 Combined, they established an equestrian career of manifold interest and appeal. It was claimed for the Guard Prefect. 6 Several scholars accorded credence, despite so much that was implausible. D o u b t was not slow to emerge. 7 Disproof followed, on convergent criteria, both of epigraphy and of history. 8 Something of value remained: an equestrian who as procurator pro legato had governed in succession Dacia Inferior and Mauretania Caesariensis. T h e date would be worth knowing. The title pro legato implies an emergency and the command of legionary troops. Various evidence shows warfare on the borders of Dacia in the early years of Antoninus Pius, about 142. 9 There was also trouble towards the end of the reign, during the governorship of Statius Priscus, who acceded anomalously to the fasces in 159, a new man w h o entered the Senate as quaestor after an equestrian career. 10 The question remains open. Inscriptions from Dacia or from Mauretania may turn up, deciding it painlessly. By g o o d fortune a document soon emerged at Cyrrhus in northern Syria. 1 1 T h e first line missing, it revealed 'C.fil. T r o . Fron/toni T u r b o n i /Publicio Severo / d o m o Epidauro'. That is, origin from a R o m a n colonia on the Dalmatian littoral. The inscription further carried the posts held by Marcius T u r b o down to his command of the M i s e n u m fleet, in 114. 12 Only sporadic doubt was conceived about identity. 1 3 3

ILS 1324 (subsequent to the year 128). Cf. I.L. Afr. 421 (Utica). AE 1911, 108; 1931, 25 (cf. 1941, 111). 5 L. Leschi, CRAI1945, 144 ff. whence AE 1946, 113. 6 L. Leschi, with several in close sequence. 7 E. Birley, Gnomon xxiii (1951), 442; H.-G. Pflaum, Latomus x (1951), 476 (giving up his first impressions). 8 R. Syme, JRS xliv (1954), 118: reviewing A. Stein, Die Prafekten von Agypten (1950). Subsequently in JRS Hi (1962), 87 ff. = Roman Papers (1979), 541 ff. That paper was originally q composed in 1949. JRS lii (1962), 92 = RP (1979)", 549 f. 10 ILS 1092, cf. A. Stein, Die Reichsbeamten von Dazien (1944), 28. A date late in the reign of Pius for the two governorships of T. Flavius Priscus was preferred by Pflaum, Les Carrieres procuratoriennes (1960), 378. He did not discuss the evidence for warfare in Dacia. " E. Frezouls, Syria xxx (1953), 247 ff, whence AE 1955, 225. 12 C/L xvi. 60. 13 B. E. Thomasson, Die Statthalter der r. Provinzen Nordafrikas ii (1960), 251 ff. A residual doubt, 'si eius est', survived in Senatores Procuratoresque Romani Nonnulli (1975), 41. 4

170

More Trouble About Turbo

III. In the Historia Augusta Turbo happens to find name and mention no fewer than six times. On welcome information ensues disquiet or alarm. Not all of the items might deserve credence. However that may be, they serve a purpose. They illustrate structure and sources in the Vita Hadriani. In the first place, doublets and accretions. One doublet is of obvious and cardinal value for analysis of the Vita. Leaving Catilius Severus in charge, the new ruler departed from Syria and 'per Illyricum Romam venit' (Hadr. 5. 10). The text then digresses into measures in honour of Trajan, and Hadrian's deferment of the title 'pater patriae'. But Hadrian has not reached Rome in the next section of the narration (if such it should be called). He is still on his journey, since 'audito dein tumultu Sarmatarum et Roxalanorum praemissis exercitibus Moesiam petit' (6. 6).14 On that statement follows the appointment of Turbo to a special command: 'praefecturae infulis ornatum Pannoniae Daciaeque ad tempus praefecit' (6.7). A little lower down Hadrian's arrival at Rome is registered for the second time, likewise the appointment of Turbo: 'Romam venit Dacia Turboni credita titulo Aegyptiacae praefecturae . . . ornato' (7. 3). The interweaving of two sources has seldom failed to be discerned and estimated. The two notices about Turbo overlap, and though lacking precision, they combine and permit interpretation. Turbo was put in charge of Dacia and of Pannonia Inferior, so it is generally held. Pannonia Superior would be excessive as well as superfluous. The minor province served to curb the Sarmatae Iazyges in the plains extending towards Dacia. The first passage adduces 'praefecturae infulae'. That is, the insignia of office, a term of late Latinity.15 The second is more specific, describ­ ing Turbo as invested 'titulo Aegyptiacae praefecturae'. The item has been the occasion of perplexity and controversy, to no good end.16 And some fancy that Turbo on the Danube in fact bore the title of the Egyptian prefecture.17 What the author (or rather each source) was trying to explain is obvious, namely that Marcius Turbo held rank and authority equipollent to that of a Prefect of Egypt. Nor would the title of this anomalous command evade formulation, if it was ever expres­ sed. That is, 'pro legato'. IV. There were disturbances on the vulnerable borders of Trajan's 14

Neglect of the structure of the Vita produced a journey of Hadrian from Rome to Moesia in 118. Thus B. W. Henderson, The Life and Principate of the Emperor Hadrian (1923), 45, cf. 282; C.H. V.S. and M.H., OCD2 (1970), 485. 15 Jerome, Epp. lvi. 7; C. Th. ix. 41. 1. 16 Summarized inJRS xxxvi (1946), 161 f. = Danubian Papers (1971), 164 f. 17 H.-G. Pflaum, o.c. (1960), 206: 'son titre de praef. Aegypti'.

More Trouble About Turbo

171

Dacia. The consular legate died on a campaign, namely C. Julius Quadratus Bassus (suff. 105): general in the second war against the Dacians, governor of Cappadocia and Galatia, governor of Syria.18 To take his place, Hadrian installed a Roman knight. Some scholars invoke the military emergency.19 It defies assessment. Weightier reasons may be surmised. The new ruler was in trouble. The deathbed adoption at Selinus, guaranteed by a dispatch to the Senate which bore the signature of Trajan's widow, was an incentive to rumour and scandal. 20 Then supervened in the course of the winter an abrupt and hasty action: the execution of the four consulars on charges of treason not easy to authenticate. That was enjoined (or confirmed) by decree of the Senate - and contrary to Hadrian's wishes, so he alleged in his autobiography (7. 2). It was expedient to advertise without undue delay a return to 'normal government'. Professions of honour to the memory of Divus Traianus, of respect for the Roman Senate, did not accord well with senators excluded from two governorships, Dacia and Pannonia Inferior. The anomalous command of Marcius Turbo found a quick termination early in 119, so it may be assumed.21 While in the company of Hadrian on the Danube, Turbo held a position equal to that of a praefectus praetorio. The second prefect, Acilius Attianus, had departed from Selinus, taking with him the imperial ladies and the ashes of Trajan (5. 10). It was a short step to explicit designation when Turbo came to Rome. Promotion for Turbo entailed the removal of the prefects in office when Trajan died, namely Acilius Attianus (present along with Plotina and Matidia) and Sulpicius Similis, then in command of the cohorts at the capital. About Similis, nothing is reported in this context, for praise or for blame. About his colleague the biography offers a double explanation. It is no surprise. First of all, the demotion of Attianus, who was accorded senatorial rank, is represented as a compliment to the high assembly: 'ut, cum Attianum ex praefecto praetorii ornamentis consularibus praeditum faceret senatorem, nihil se amplius habere quod in eum conferre posset, ostenderit' (8. 7).22 Something different comes up a little lower down. Hadrian could no longer tolerate the 'potentia' of his minister. He even tried to kill 18

Pergamum viii. 3, no. 21, cf. PIR2) 508. W. Weber in CAHxi (1936), 303; A. Mocsy, Pannonia and Upper Moesia (1974), 100. 20 Dio lxix. 1. 4, cf. HA Hadr. 4. 10. 21 The year when Turbo, along with Septicius Clarus acceded to the Guard (Hadr. 9. 4 ff.) cannot be impugned. In Dacia Superior Sex. Julius Severus (suff. 127), is attested in 120 (C/Lxvi.68;AE1968,30). 22 For the interpretation of the passage see A. Chastagnol, HAC 1975/6 (1978), 125 f; R. Syme JRS lxx (1980), 76. 19

More Trouble About Turbo

172

him - 'nisus est eum obtruncare'. He laid on Attianus the blame for the execution of the four consulars, and, a strange notion, he had to compel him to ask for release: 'cui cum successorem dare non posset quia non petebat, id egit ut peteret, atque ubi primum petiit, in Turbonem transtulit potestatem' (9. 4). A further incrimination attended upon Attianus. Arriving in Rome, he wrote to Hadrian asking authority to put to death both thepraefectus urbi and two consulars residing in exile (5.5). That Hadrian had grown tired of Attianus, formerly his guardian and a witness, if not an accessory, to certain transactions at Selinus, that was an easy inference for men of the time or for writers in the sequel. For estimate of the HA, it is expedient, and sometimes possi­ ble, to segregate fact from rumour or motivation. The section of the biography that registers the change of Guard Prefects concludes with the decease of Hadrian's mother-in-law and the honours he paid to her (9. 9). Matidia's consecration carried due recognition from the Arval Brethren in December of 119.23 On the standards normally obtaining in erudite enquiry, that is to say, facts in no way objectionable (and supported, although that was not necessary, by the historical situa­ tion), the year stands inexpugnable in which Marcius Turbo and Septicius Clarus acceded to the command of the Praetorian Guard. V. Constructions built upon the best available materials are liable to be impaired or even demolished when a new document obtrudes. A military diploma from Dacia, dated to August 10 of the year 123, presents items of unusual interest.24 Issued for three auxiliary regi­ ments in Dacia Porolissensis under the procurator Livius Gratus, it includes another unit, an ala 'quae est in Pannon. Inferiore' (no gover­ nor specified). Soldiers in all four units had been 'dimissi honesta missione per Marcium Turbonem'. The document evoked instant response. The career and'chronology of Marcius Turbo would have to be revised and corrected, so it was declared in an authoritative publication.25 Turbo, they assumed, was still holding his Danubian command in August of the year 123. When did he then accede to the Guard? Perhaps not until 125.26 New discoveries inspire euphoria and whet the appetite for further innovations. In this instance brief reflection on government should have given pause. To have Marcius Turbo still in charge of Pannonia 23 24

C/Lvi.2080.

AE 1973, 459: M. M. Roxan, Roman Military Diplomas 1954-1911 (1978), no. 21. 25 In annotation on AE 1973, 459 the editors made a portentous pronouncement: 'le nouveau texte oblige a re voir la chronologie de la fin de sa carriere'. 26 H.-G. Pflaum, Annuaire de VEcole Pratique des Hautes Etudes 1915/6, 373 f.

More Trouble About Turbo

173

Inferior in August of 123 meant that a state of emergency in the Danubian lands lasted for more than five years. No comment need be subjoined. Diplomata exhibit a number of anomalies. The dating by consuls does not always concord with the imperial titulature.27 This time the interpretation is at once evident, namely the delayed issue of a 'tabula honestae missionis'. For parallel, observe what happened to a cohort that earned distinction from Trajan in the second war against the Dacians. The soldiers received the grant of Roman citizenship 'ante emerita stipendia' in August of 106. That is the consular date. Trajan's titulature however is that of 110. There is no call to dwell further on anomaly or delay in the proce­ dures of bureaucracy.29 The cavalrymen released from service by Marcius Turbo had been forgotten and were economically included in the document of 123. Turbo was no longer there, neither was their prefect. The ala is described as 'cui praefuit M. Minicius Marcellinus'. VI. There the matter might rest, did not the evaluation of sundry items in the HA come into question. If Turbo did not accede to the Praetorian Guard until a juncture later than August of 123, the tenure of his predecessor Acilius Attianus is prolonged, despite the surmise of alienation from the Emperor, plausible enough in itself without the explanations proffered in the Vita. Likewise that of Sulpicius Similis, whom Septicius Clarus replaced, joining Marcius Turbo as colleague (Hadr. 9. 4 f.). And finally, the dismissal of Septicius (11.3) would fall later than 123. As was stated above, Hadrian changed his prefects in 119. The year cannot be impugned. To vindicate the HA is a diversion all too rare. This time it is enjoined as a duty. Analysis, or for that matter cursory inspection, shows two strands in the Vita, the one neutral or favour­ able to Hadrian, the other prone to detraction or gossip. Four items of brief annotation happen to carry the name of Marius Maximus.30 Other and longer passages can be assigned without effort to the same source. 31 It is also detected in the Vita Marci where imputations against Faustina are retailed at some length.32 T w o pieces in the biography of Hadrian stand in close relevance to the present theme. Setting out from Rome on his first journey to the 27

2H

For pertinent examples, JRSxxxvi

CILxvi. 160.

(1946), 159 f. = Danubian Papers (1971), 161.

29 Duly noted by the first editor, I. I. Russu, Dacia xviii (1974), 160 f. Note also clear and cautious assessment of the document by M. M. Roxan, RMD (1978), no. 21. For a full discussion of the diploma and its problems see G. Alfoldy, ZPE36 (1979), 233 ff 30 HA Hadr. 2. 10; 12. 4; 20. 3; 25. 4. C f G. Barbieri, Riv.fil. xxxii (1954), 39. 31 Emperors and Biography (1971), 114 ff; 126 ff. '2 MAC 1970 (1972), 291 ff (above, 34 ff).

174

More Trouble About Turbo

provinces, the Emperor came to Britain (11. 2) and after constructing his wall he went back to the continent, to Gaul (12. 1). In between occurs a passage replete with anecdote and scandal (11. 3-7). It opens with the dismissal of Septicius Clarus and Suetonius Tranquillus, and of many other persons. The reason alleged is peculiar indeed, a lack of respect towards Sabina: 'quod . . . familiarius se tunc egerant quam reverentia domus aulicae postulabat' (11. 3). Let the allegation pass for the moment. More important, the structure of the writing, the date and place of the incident. The whole passage is a patent insertion in the travel narrative. Before long the name of Marius Maximus crops up in an anecdote that relates a scene at Tarraco (12. 4); and the end of that narration is clearly indicated by a reference to frontier defences (12. 6). A legitimate question arose, since the compiler is elsewhere con­ victed of haste and negligence.33 Did he insert the passage in the right place? Perhaps not. Hence an engaging theory. The demotion of the two officials occurred six years later, in 128: and support was sought from the fact that Hadrian's consort acquired an accession of dignity in that year, being henceforth styled 'Sabina Augusta'. 34 On that show­ ing consequences of no small interest might follow for the life and writings of Suetonius Tranquillus. And indeed, reinforcement accrued recently from another quarter. The Dacian diploma showed that in August of 123 Septicius and Turbo were not yet commanders of the Guard, so it appeared.35 Demolition and revision are seductive pastimes, to be condoned or even approved when they bring out the miserable condition of the written record. Doubt was conceived about the date and the placing of the passage that reported the demotion of the two officials. That doubt, it can be argued, was premature. The compiler inserted the passage where it belongs. 36 Next, the scene of their misdemeanour. Rome during the ruler's absence abroad, that was the general assumption.37 It ignored plain 33

34 Tacitus (1958), 779. J. A. Crook, Proc. Camb. Phil Soc. iv, 1956/7 (1958), 18 ff. The supporting argument was hardly worth discounting. Vibia Sabina had probably acquired the title of'Augusta' long before 128. Perhaps in 119 when her mother Matidia died. See W. Eck, P - W S u p p . xv, 910 f. 35 Thus, following Pflaum, J. Gascou, Latomus xxvii (1978), 436 ff. Suetonius, he argued, was still the secretary ab epistulis in 128. It was on Hadrian's visit to Africa in that year that Hippo honoured Suetonius (AE 1953, 73), Utica the Prefect of the Guard (I.L. Afr. 421). 36 As firmly stated by G. B. Townend, Historia x (1961), 108 f. Inspecting the structure of the Vita confirms, from 11.2. (Hadrian to Britain), by 12. 1 (to Gaul), by 12. 3 ff. (atTarraco), down to 12. 6 (resumptive: measures for frontier defence in the western provinces). 37 A. Mace, Essai sur Suetone (1900), 214: H. Ailloud in the Bude edition (1932), p. x; G. Funaioli, P-W IVA, 597 (Suetonius); A. Stein, IIA, 1557 f. (Septicius); F. Delia Corte, Suetonio eques Romanus1 (1967), 10; W. Eck, P-W Supp. xv, 911 (Vibia Sabina); A. Carandini, Vibia Sabina (1969), 65.

More Trouble About Turbo

175

facts of government. O n his journeys the Emperor normally has the c o m p a n y of one of his Guard Prefects; and he cannot do without his secretary ab epistulis.38 O f less value perhaps his consort, but she could n o t be left behind. That would facilitate intrigue and foment malicious gossip. In this instance what is vindicated is only the procedure of the compiler. T h e anecdote possesses the credit of its sponsor, to be deemed Marius Maximus. That is, dubious in the extreme. It brings in Sabina, with Hadrian's estimate subjoined and quoted - 'uxorem etiam ut m o r o s a m et asperam dimissurus, ut ipse dicebat, si privatus fuisset'. N o confidence will therefore be accorded to the delinquency of Septicius and Suetonius. The former, being a friend and patron of polite letters, formed a useful contrast and complement to the military qualities of T u r b o - and to be presumed congenial as a travel c o m p a n i o n . M o r e is k n o w n about the character of Suetonius. 39 T o begin with, neither may have been a wise choice. 40 VII. N e x t , Hadrian's ingratitude towards friends and allies, with dire results for some of them. Senators and knights, it comprises twelve names on varying counts, several in no way plausible (15. 2 - 8 ) . O n w h i c h follows the polymath's comportment towards the exponents of arts and letters: 'professores o m n i u m artium semper ut doctior risit contempsit obtrivit' (15. 10). The passage concludes with an anecdote by w a y of corroboration, the quarrel with the sophist Favorinus. 41 A different portrait is on exhibit a little further on. Hadrian lent all of t h e m support and encouragement, notably Favorinus; and if any teachers had to be discarded for inadequate performance, he would not let t h e m go without honour and enrichment (16. 10 f ) . T h e conclusion is clear. Hadrian was capricious and changeable, 'semper in omnibus varius'. N o n e the less, the contrast does not reside in attitudes of Hadrian on different occasions. 42 It represents two assessments - and t w o sources. Defining Hadrian's atrocious behaviour, the hostile account leads off with three names, 38

As proposed in Tacitus (1958), 779. For the secretary, observe F. Millar, The Emperor in the Roman World (1977) ,90. For the value of two commanders of the Praetorian Guard, for their complementary qualities and functions, see further the detailed exposition in JRS lxx (1980), 64 ff 39 From the revealing notices in Pliny, cf. (briefly), Tacitus (1958), 91. 40 See now 'The Travels of Suetonius Tranquillus', Hermes cix (1981), 105 ff 41 For Hadrian's disagreements with sophists, scholars, and experts, cf. G. W. Bowersock, Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire (1969), 50 ff. They encouraged malicious exaggerations, JRS lxx (1980), 73 f. 42 That explanation was proffered by A. R. Birley, Septimius Severus (1971), 318. Reasonable at first sight - but the structure of the biography deters.

176

More Trouble About Turbo

prope cunctos vel amicissimos vel eos quos summis honoribus evexit postea ut hostium loco habuit, ut Attianum et Nepotem et Septicium Clarum (15.2). It ends with Julius Servianus, the husband of his sister 'quern mori coegit'. Before Servianus occurs the statement U m ( m ) i d i u m Quadratum et Catilium Severum et Turbonem graviter insccutus est (15. 7). T h e names of U m m i d i u s Quadratus (suff. 118) and Catilius Severus (cos. II120) convey the reader to the last biennium of the reign, to the intrigues and discords supervening when the sexagenarian ruler was constrained to provide for the succession. Towards the end of 136 he took in adoption Ceionius C o m m o d u s - which sealed the fate of old Servianus (now in his ninetieth year) and his young grandson. 4 3 C o m m o d u s perishing, Hadrian had recourse to Aurelius Fulvus, in February of 138. So far what seem to be the essential facts. Much remains obscure. 44 It is a temptation to snap up and exploit any grain of information. Catilius, so it is later stated, was removed from the urban prefecture after Hadrian adopted Aurelius Fulvus (24. 6 - 8 ) . He was a figure in prominence, being styled 'proavus' to the grandson of Annius Verus (Marcus 1.9). Hence a notorious problem. 4 5 A short solution is to have Catilius become the step-grandfather of the boy Marcus through m a r r y i n g an heiress in the group. 4 6 U m m i d i u s Quadratus (suff. 118) also comes into the dynastic g r o u p . In 136 he betrothed his son to Cornificia, the sister of Marcus, so it is deduced. 4 7 It is not clear that U m m i d i u s was an ally of Catilius - or Turbo of either consular, for all that the notice in the Vita links the three names t h r o u g h the resentment of the ruler. That could not with safety be assumed, even were it certain that T u r b o was still among the living in the season of manifold perturbations. 43

The youth Pcdanius Fuscus (son of the consul of 118) was aged eighteen, according to Dio lxix. 17.3. The HA (Hadr. 23. 10) has the reverse order. That is, Servianus and Fuscus destroyed before Hadrian's adoption of Ceionius Commodus. 44 For the argument based upon a horoscope, that Fuscus died in the spring of 138 see T. D. Barnes, The Sources of the Historia Augusta (Collection Latomus 155, 1978), 45. 45 Thus Groag, PIR2 C 357 (in no confidence); R. Syme, Tacitus (1958), 793, with an aberrant notion. 46 That is, he acquired the relict of the opulent Domitius Tullus (cos. II suff. 98), who died about 107 (Pliny, Epp. viii. 18). For this solution, Historia xvii (1968), 95 f. = Roman Papers (1979), 682 f. 47 HA Marcus 4. 7; 7. 4, cf. PIR2 A 708. The son of the match is M. Ummidius Quadratus (cos. 167). C. Ummidius Quadratus (suff. 118) was already linked to the Annii. Like Aurelius Fulvus (cos. 120) he may have married an aunt of the boy Marcus. On which, see now Harvard Studies lxxxiii (1979), 308.

More Trouble About Turbo

177

VIII. Provoked by the HA, the final problem about Turbo now makes a suitable entrance. It concerns the other source for these transactions, namely Cassius Dio, and a proper estimate of his proce­ dures as a historian. 48 In Book LXIX Dio (at this point Xiphilinus) presents the following order of events: the adoption of Ceionius Commodus, the end of Servianus and his grandson, an anecdote illustrating the merits of Servianus (17.1-3). Next, a long excursus devoted to two other persons of note in the reign, viz. Marcius Turbo and Sulpicius Similis, equipped with suitably edifying anecdotes about each in turn (18 f.). In the evocation of the two Guard Prefects Turbo precedes Similis who, as Dio incidentally discloses, had died seven years after receding into a welcome retreat. The historian's exposition is not annalistic but discursive and resumptive. It cannot be taken that Turbo's demise furnished the incentive to the digression. To assign to any year either his death or the termination of his mandate goes beyond known evidence. What matters is his vacating the Guard, whether by decease or by persuasion from the ruler, not without a standard formula of politeness to be observed when a high official was on the way out. 49 Some were perhaps glad to go, as Similis declared on his gravestone. 50 Turbo got into trouble with Hadrian, so the HA (that is, Marius Maximus) declares. The phrase is 'graviter insecutus est'. It is not quite enough to certify demotion, though such is the general assumption.51 The subversive biographer may have been eager to advertise a flaw in the model relationship which tradition (Cassius Dio bears witness) averred to subsist without a trace of impairment. Another item in this rubric counsels a doubt. Of Hadrian it asserts 'Heliodorum famosissimis litteris lacessivit' (15. 5). This man, C. Avidius Heliodorus, prospered after invective or dislike. He is discovered holding the prefecture of Egypt when Hadrian died.52 It is a pity that more is not known about some other names on the list of Hadrian's victims. For example, two beside Servianus driven to suicide, one reduced to dire impoverishment. 53 The date and the reason for Turbo's departure from the Guard alike baffle ascertainment. In any event, after a prolonged tenure that approached if not equalled the seventeen years of Aelius Seianus. One of Dio's stories brings him into relation with Cornelius Fronto, there 48

F. Millar, A Study of Cassius Dio (1964), 70 f. Pliny, Pan. 86 (an anonymous Guard Prefect early in the reign). Dio lxix. 19. 3. 51 Thus A. Stein, P-W xiv, 1599; H.-G. Pflaum, Carrieres (I960), 205 (putting his retirement in the year 135). « PIR2 A 1405. « S e e f u r t herJRS lxx (1980), 74. 49

50

178

More Trouble About Turbo

assumed an orator already in high and public repute. Fronto (suff. 143) was probably born about the year 100. T h e story might thus convey T u r b o into the vicinity of 133. Hadrian returned from his last journey in 134. The ruler may have found that it was n o w time to release his commander of the Guard - or he deferred the action for t w o years. Who can tell?54 As has been indicated, it would be hazardous to accept the allegation that appears to combine T u r b o with the two consulars and bring him into the ambit of high politics and secret compacts. It has the sole warrant of Marius Maximus. I X . T o conclude. As Cicero somewhere says, 'quorsum igitur tarn multa de Maximo?' 5 5 The answer is prompt and doubly pertinent. First, to disseminate doubt about a number of statements deriving from one source of the Vita Hadriani. It was the design of the consular biographer, continuing Suetonius Tranquillus, to compose a 'chronique scandaleuse' of the Antonine dynasty, not sparing even the saintly Marcus. 5 6 His performance was an incentive to the author of the Historia Augusta when he embarked on authentic and total fiction. Second, sources and composition in the early sequence of imperial biographies, the nine from Hadrian d o w n to Caracalla. Turbo helps, m o r e than once. Marius Maximus as the basic source, that was an early assumption, easy and obvious. A tradition formed. Arduous to subvert, so it appears. Many champions are on show in the recent time. 5 7 Inspection of the structure tells against, notably in the Vita Hadriani, T h a t biography exhibits a complicated interweaving. By contrast, the Vita of Antoninus Pius, where the basic text, a sober product, has not been m u c h tampered with. It furnishes the best point of departure for an enquiry. 5 8 N o t M . M . but a nameless biographer. A m o n g adepts of Quellenforschung the propensity has been constant to find a name and affix a label. T o refrain is better as well as safer. A clear example offers, the c o m m o n source used by Plutarch in the biographies of Galba and O t h o and by Tacitus in Books I and II of his Histories. 54

Like Turbo's colleague through long years since 122, the prefects holding office in Hadrian's last days (Hadr. 24. 2) baffle ascertainment. The pair in office under his successor is not attested until 139. That is, M. Petronius Mamertinus and M. Gavius Maximus (ILS 2182). 55 Cicero, Cato Maior 13. 56 Emperors and Biography (1971), 113 ff.; HAC 1970 (1972), 293 ff. (above, 36 ff.). 57 For some of the names, Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968), 91. And observe the recent brief statement of A. Chastagnol, HAC 1975/6 (1978), 131. As with other 'traditional' assumptions concerning the HA, full and clear expositions in defence have been rare indeed. Welcome therefore is A. R. Birley, Septimius Severus (1971), Appendix ii. 58 As in HAC 1966/7 (1968), 137 ff. = Emperors and Biography (1971), 36 ff.

More Trouble About Turbo

179

The hypothesis of Ignotus has been expounded in detail.59 Some discount or ignore. Yet it remains a necessary postulate, so a recent enquirer is emboldened to affirm - and also the most economical.60 To repeat, analysis of the structure decides. If Maximus is the basic source, where do the doublets and accretions come from? Only one device avails for dispute or evasion. As follows. The author of the HA in his hasty compilation of the earlier biographies, eager to go on and exploit his talent for original composition (which is demonstrated in the lives of princes and pretenders, commonly called the 'secondary Vitae'), first of all discarded anecdotes and trivia. He later changed his mind and put them back, some duly certified by citation of Marius Maximus. In the long and prolonged disputations about the HA various expedients have been enlisted, some subtle, some elaborate, others the product of desperation. If the matter is complex, all the more reason to aim at economy, and at clarity. The problem presented by the early Vitae was not the main concern of Hermann Dessau nine decades ago. Briefly assuming a biographer who wrote before the middle of the Third Century, he eschewed the name of Marius Maximus. 61 Silence carries weight and authority. In the face of neglect, of dispraisal and confident declarations, Dessau tends to be right all through.

59

HAC 1966/7 (1968), 131 ff. = Emperors and Biography (1971), 50 ff. T. D. Barnes, The Sources of the Historia Augusta (1978), 98 ff. Obvious to most, but not named by Dessau. Referring to the early biographies of emperors, he said 'diese Abschnitte sind, wie sich leicht beweisen lasst, unverandert entnommen einem Autor der vor der Mitte des 3. Jahrhunderts geschrieben hat' {Hermes xxvii (1892), 601). 60 61

XIII Hadrian and Antioch* I. Hadrian's second long journey lasted for six years, from 128 to 134. T h e Vita abridges and curtails, drastically. It conveys him to Athens, thence by way of Syria to Egypt (spring of 130) where, after remarks about Antinous, the miserable narration fades out and a different topic takes over. Hadrian's sojourn in Syria claims two brief notices, separated by an intrusion, anachronistic, which mentions the outbreak of the rebellion in Judaea. T h e first notice runs as follows: Antiochenses inter haec ita odio habuit ut Syriam a Phoenice separare voluerit, ne tot civitatum metropolis Antiochia diceretur (14. 1). O n surface inspection, the item is manifestly suspect. It imputes a m o t i v e , Hadrian's desire to humble the city of Antioch. Also an intention that was not carried out, namely to split the province of Syria. T h e allegation should have been segregated long since and consigned where it belongs, to the study of structure and sources in the early series of the imperial biographies. N o n e the less, pertinacious attempts have been made to establish a basis or vestige of fact. Weber in 1907 gave the matter serious atten­ tion. His observations were vague and diffuse. l N o r was his statement satisfactory a quarter of a century later. Quoting the passage, he failed to elucidate it, being content with phrases about 'Dezentralisation.' 2 Traditional doctrines continued to invoke a measure attributed to Hadrian, namely his elevating to the rank of metropolis three cities in the R o m a n province: Samosata, Tyre, Damascus. T h e device enjoyed much favour. Thus Magie in his edition of the Historia Augusta. 3 Again, Honigmann in the standard treatment of Syria: n o doubt, he opined, that Hadrian intended some impairment of Antioch's predominance. 4 Further, discussing Tyre, Eissfeldt * Reprinted from Bonner HAC 1979-81 (forthcoming). 1 W. Weber, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Kaisers Hadrianus (1907), 232-4. 2 W. Weber, Berliner Abh. 1932, 81: in the long paper that amalgamated the two consulars from Pergamum, A.Julius Quadratus (cos. II105) and C.Julius Quadratus Bassus (suff. 105). 3 D. Magie (Loeb, 1930), ad loc. 4 E. Honigmann, P-Wiv A (1932), 1681, cf. 1686: 'deralte Plan Hadrians die Provinz Syria zu teilen.'

Hadrian and Antioch

181

brought up from Suidas an obscure and forgotten rhetor: Paul, who from Hadrian was able to secure the title of metropolis for the city of his birth. 5 As happens, obsolete information was taken over and transmitted.6 Coins of Samosata and Damascus exhibit the title for the first time in the reign of Hadrian, it is true. 7 Tyre is in another case- already under Domitian, in 93/4, and continuous in the sequel.8 And there is more to be said about Tyre. Sundry inscriptions have suffered neglect. II. The matter concerns the component parts of Roman Syria, the provincial council at Antioch, cities acquiring the title of'metropolis, the origin and scope of minor regional councils. The evidence is sparse, and often perplexing. For clarity it will be desirable to set forth the different questions in a certain order. The province was heterogeneous, as history dictated. The earliest imperial inscription to record a governor is the notorious Titulus Tiburtinus, for a long time assigned to Quirinius. 9 It has 'Syriam et Pho[enicen optinuit].' Syria also took in Cilicia Pedias, from 44 BC onwards until the early years of Vespasian. The region was too small to stand alone. Pedias duly fell out, to be joined to Tracheia when the kingdom of Commagene was annexed in 72. Some instruction emerges from the numerous inscriptions that honour the magnate of Pergamum, Julius Quadratus, consul suffect in 94, consul for the second time in 105, governor from 100 to 104.10 Ten of them register 'Syria' only. But two add Phoenice and Commagene. 11 The same formulation occurs when Pergamum honours his kinsman Julius Quadratus Bassus (suff. 105).12 It is never found again. Then, a surprise. To Phoenice and Commagene, two documents add Tyre. Both belong subsequent to Quadratus' second consulship, but before the proconsulate of Asia, which he held in 109/110. One is Ephesian, the other Pergamene. 13 On the other hand, another inscrip5

Suidas (ed. Adler ii, no. 819). This Paulus has failed an entry in PIR and P-W. In P-W vii A (1943), 1900 O. Eissfeldt neglected coins of Tyre and several relevant inscriptions. Nor is much to be gleaned from M. Chehab, 'Tyra l'epoqucromaine', Melanges. . . Beyrouth xxxviii (1962), 13 f. I BMC, Greek Coins, Galatia, Cappadocia, Syria (1899), 118; 283 f. H BMC, Phoenicia (1910), 262. 9 ILS 918. L. Piso (cos. 15 BC) emerges as the better claimant. 10 For the catalogue, PIR2 J 507. II IGRiv. 374 (Pergamum: set up by Gerasa.); Inschr. v. Didyma 151 (set up by Tyre). The latter was not noted in the list in Weber, Abh. Berlin 1932, 57 ff. 12 Pergamum viii. 3, no. 21. 13 Forsch. in Ephesos iii, no. 33; ILS 8819a (Pergamum: honouring his sister Polla). 6

182

Hadrian and Antioch

tion at Pergamum, later than the proconsulate, registers Syria without any adjuncts. 14 The separate mention of Tyre is an anomalous tribute to that city. Tyre is otherwise subsumed under Phoenice, of which it was the capital. III. Next, the assembly of the province, meeting at Antioch for homage towards Caesar, to the accompaniment of various games and spectacles. The evidence for this koinon is scanty to a degree. The standard exposition devoted to 'Provinziallandtage' takes up barely a page. 15 It is a welcome accession that a recent discovery should reveal the first and earliest high priest of Caesar Augustus, by name Dexandrus: a dynast of Emesa hitherto unknown. 16 An inscription of the early imperial epoch registers a pugilist of Magnesia three times victorious at the koina of Syria and of Cappadocia, twice at that of Lycia.17 The date cannot be closely determined. 18 Now Cilicia belonged, until 72; and that name duly occurs along with Syria and Phoenice on another document recording an athlete's successes.19 When Commagene accrued to the province one would expect it likewise to participate in the assembly. What stands against? Only the fact that Samosata, the capital of the land, happens not to exhibit on coins the title of metropolis until the reign of Hadrian. Under Trajan the other portion of the province of Syria is Phoenice. It then covered a wide expanse of territory. That is shown by the dedication at Didyma on which Tyre honours the governor Julius Quadratus. Tyre is there designated as 'metropolis of Phoenice, of the cities of Coele Syria and of other cities/ 20 'Coele Syria' is an appella­ tion that fluctuates alarmingly through the ages. In this instance it embraces a vast hinterland behind Phoenicia, taking in Damascus and the Decapolis. So far therefore three metropolis: Antioch, Tyre and Samosata, corresponding with the three regions of the province Syria as registered early in the reign of Trajan. The next document of rele­ vance, carrying the date 119/120, brings up a priest of the provincial 14

/LS8819. J. Dcininger, Die Provinziallandtage der r. Kaiserzeit (1965), 87 f. He stated that no dgxiegevg was so far attested. 16 AE1976, 678(Apamca). 17 Inschr. v. Magnesia 149. 18 The editor stated 'gutc Schrift der augusteischen Zeit.' 19 IGRi. 445 (Naples). 20 Inschr. v. Didyma (1958), 151. The document was first published by Cumont, from Haussoullier's MS copy, in CRAI1929, 89. It shows Trajan not yet 'Dacicus'. 15

Hadrian and Antioch

183

koinon.21 A certain Diogenes, a citizen of Gerasa, had held the priest­ hood of the four regions (ejzaQ%£iai) at the metropolis Antioch. The capitals of those four regions can only be Antioch, Tyre, Samosata, Damascus. Hence, so it was deduced, Hadrian created two new and subsidiary koina, with Samosata and Damascus as chief cities.22 The conclusion is clear for Damascus, Coele Syria being separated from Phoenice. For Samosata one may conceive strong doubts, as has been briefly indicated.23 There is a further complication, arising from a dedication to Hadrian in the back country of Phrygia, set up by an equestrian officer called M. Julius Pisonianus.24 It is of value on several counts. Commander of the Cohors I Sugambrorum (which was stationed at Praesidium Montanensium in the western zone of Moesia Inferior), he had brought his regiment to Eumeneia. Pisonianus declares his city of origin: 'domo Tyro / metropolis Phoenices / et Coeles Syriae.' On the above showing (the dated inscription of the Gerasene Diogenes) the document would have to be assigned to the very begin­ ning of Hadrian's reign.25 It might not be so.26 Pisonianus may have chosen to keep the proud and ample designation of his patria, even though rendered obsolete when Tyre forfeited to Damascus presidency over the cities of Coele Syria. It did not survive elsewhere. When in the year 174 the Tyrians resident at Puteoli sent home a complimentary address, Tyre is only 'metropolis of Phoenice and of other cities'.27 IV. To sum up, and to revert to the question at issue. It will be useful to quote from the latest statement about regional divisions and councils in Syria.28 First, 'Hadrien crea deux petits koina de Commagene et de Coelesyrie, avec Samosate et Damas pour metropoles.' Second, THistoire Auguste (Vita Hadriani 13) laisse 21 Published by A. H. M.Jones JRS xviii (1928), 157. Then Gerasa (1938), no. 53 and SEG vii. 847. 22 Thus Jones, o. c. 157: 'the creation of two minor KOLVOL of Commagene and Coele Syria'. Cf. J.-P. Rey-Coquais, JKSlxviii (1978), 53. 23 Indeed, observe the statement of Jones that Samosata 'bore from the first the title of metropolis of Commagene' (The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces2 (1971), 263). 24 Published by Buckler, Calder, and Cox inJRS xvi (1926), 74 f., whence AE 1927, 95. 25 Thus J.-P. Rey-Coquais JRSlxviii (1978), 54. 26 The editors put it late in the reign, c.134. Likewise, discussing the garrison at Eumeneia, E. Ritterling, JRS xvii (1927), 30 f. The cohort next turns up in cA57, in Moesia again, as emerges from M. M. Roxan, RMD (1978), 50. 27 OGIS 595. Another inscription from Puteoli, fragmentary (IGR i. 419), styles Tyre metropolis of Phoenice. In the gap after that title Haussoullier supplemented [KCLI zcbvKardL Kodfjv Svgiav] jidXeajv. 28 J.-P. Rey-Coquais, J-RSlxviii (1978), 53 f. (brief and compressed).

184

Hadrian and Antioch

entendre que les gens d'Antioche virent dans la mesure d'Hadrien un geste d'hostilite.' 29 The reference to the HA could have been omitted with advantage.30 Three comments are in place. First, a measure here assigned explicitly to the outset of Hadrian's reign has nothing to do with an allegation about his comportment a decade later. Second, the creation of a pair of minor koina is not the sort of particular likely to engage any source of the HA. Third, Samosata may be conceded the rank of metropolis at an earlier date. If so, it is Tyre that suffers diminution rather than Antioch through the loss of Coele Syria and the elevation of Damascus. The proper interpretation of a literary text is in question. It declares no action of the ruler, only his desire or design. Allegations of that kind tend to be taken up hastily, without regard to context or veracity, to the detriment of history. Suetonius relates as a rumour that Caesar the Dictator proposed to abandon Rome and take the government with him: 'migraturum Alexandream vel Ilium.'31 Or again, the HA. Marcus Aurelius intended to establish new provinces beyond the Danube, Marcomannia and Sarmatia. The project was frustrated not only once but twice: by the rebellion of Avidius Cassius and by his own decease when one more year was necessary.32 The matter engages earnest debate. No surprise, since the nature of the evidence forbids a firm decision. At the most Herodian can be discredited, who laid the blame on Commodus - and that is a gratifying result.33 V. The Historia Augusta in fact asserts an intention to split the province of Syria. That was to happen in the year 194, precisely, after Severus defeated his rival Pescennius Niger. And for adequate reasons. By separating Phoenicia, Severus reduced the military importance of Syria. While Syria retained the frontier zone along the Euphrates, with two legions, the new province had a wide extension, taking in Emesa, Damascus, Palmyra. Tyre was the capital, with the governor, the legate of III Gallica, stationed on the northern border at Raphaneae, not far from Emesa. That measure furnishes both the clue to the notion in the Vita and its source. That is, an author of the period, the consular biographer Marius Maximus. Another specimen of retrojection is not beyond surmise. Such was Hadrian's skill in astrology that on the first day of January he set down 29

The HA reference should read '14. 1'. Downey, refusing credence, rejected it to a footnote (A History of Antioch in Syria (1961), 223). However, to explain the allegation, he quoted Magie and cited Weber. 31 Suetonius, Divus Julius 79. 4. 32 HA Marcus 24. 5; 27. 10. ■" G. Alfoldy, Historia xx (1971), 84 ff. Reprinted in Marc Aurel (ed. R. Klein, 1979), 389 ff., with copious 'Nachtrage' on the controversy (425-8). 30

Hadrian and Antioch

185

in writing all that he was destined to experience in the course of the year, so the Vita reports (16. 7). The item recurs in the biography of Aelius Caesar, certified by the name of Maximus (Ael. 3. 9). It encouraged the author to indulge in various divagations concerning Hadrian's familiarity with the horoscope of the prince-with fearsome results for some scholars in the recent time. To refuse Hadrian an interest in the science of the Chaldaeans would be premature and superfluous. The fable produced by Maximus reflects the notorious and well documented predilections of Septimius Severus. Of twenty-four references to astrology in the HA, six per­ tain to Hadrian, eight to Severus. By contrast, nothing in Dio's account of Hadrian, which is largely anecdotal.34 VI. That is not all. Hadrian's personal motive comes in, a hatred of Antioch not attested by other evidence. Some find the assertion paradoxical. According to the local chronicle of Malalas, the Emperor embellished Antioch through elaborate improvements to the water works in the suburb of Daphne, commemorated by a festival on June 23. 35 The benefaction, be it added, does nothing to disprove conflict or ingratitude, perhaps more than once. Emperor and city could derive benefit from mutual acquaintance. Hadrian went eastwards with Trajan in the autumn of 113, described as his legatus (Hadr. 4. 1). A blank of four years then intervenes. The record of the campaigns offers no action or function. That omission has not deterred amicable speculation.36 Hadrian is next discovered in charge of Syria and its army when Trajan died at Selinus in August of 117. The new ruler saw Antioch again towards the end of his first journey (in 123 or 124); and then in 129/30, when the city may be presumed his base and winter sojourn. A later visit is not excluded before he returned to Rome in 134. The people of Antioch were conceited and satirical, eagerly fasten­ ing on the habits and behaviour of a ruler, not least if he paraded a superior intellect. The ordeal ofJulian is the classic document. Hadrian for his part was capricious and prone to omniscience. As the HA puts it, in a phrase that surpasses the author's normal style at this stage in the compilation, 'professores omnium artium semper ut doctior risit, contempsit, obtrivit' (15. 10). Quarrels with artists or men of letters are on show, as part of the standard tradition a century 34

For this thesis, HAC 1972/4 (1976), 291 ff. (above, 80 ff). Malalas 277 f. For a full account, G. Downey, o. c. 221 f A curious story about Hadrian's blocking one of the springs is reported by Ammianus (xxii. 12. 8) and by Sozomenus (Hist.eccl.vA9). 36 W. Weber in CAH xi (1936), 299 has Hadrian 'chief of the general staff and 'at the nerve-centre of all action.' 35

186

Hadrian and Antioch

later. Cassius Dio furnishes three names.37 The Vita goes much further - twelve friends of different categories, including consulars and even the Guard Prefect Marcius Turbo, whom the ungrateful ruler brought to hazard or ruin, to destitution or to suicide (15. 9-13). 38 As concerns Hadrian's brushes with intellectuals, a number of the allegations are variously vulnerable.39 A small specimen may suffice: 'Heliodorum famosissimis litteris lacessivit' (15. 5). This man, Avidius Heliodorus, known as a philosopher of the Epicurean persua­ sion, turns up holding the prefecture of Egypt when Hadrian ended his life.40 Heliodorus happens to come from Cyrrhus, in the north-east of Syria, a region that might have appeared backward. Antioch, the great city, makes a poor showing in the annals of arts and letters. Although clever and histrionic, the inhabitants cannot put up even a sophist in this period. By contrast, Tyre or Gadara of the Decapolis; and Cappadocia was soon to bring on some adepts.41 No Antiochene familiar or agent of Hadrian is discoverable. On the other side, his brand of Hellenism, with signal favour for Athens and the cities of western Asia, was not congenial to their style of living; and sympathy with Epicureans discountenances crude luxury. Indiffer­ ence or estrangement might be the answer. The HA has Hadrian impelled by 'odium' (a strong word) to lessen the prestige of Antioch. As has been shown, the notion of splitting Phoenice from Syria reflects a later age and will be attributed without discomfort to Marius Maximus. Maximus earns four citations in the Vita, all unfriendly in tone, each appearing an addition to the basic source. One of them is highly relevant to the present topic. In Alexandria Hadrian held converse with scholars at the Museum: 'multas quaestiones professoribus proposuit et propositas ipse dissolvit' (20. 2). On that neutral state­ ment (sharply divergent from his treatment of professors in 15. 10, quoted above) follow the words 'Marius Maximus dicit eum natura crudelem fuisse et idcirco multa pie fecisse quod timeret ne sibi idem, quod Domitiano accidit, eveniret.' As in the other eight biographies of the emperors down to Caracalla, Maximus is cited for annotation or for supplementation. 42 37

Dio lxix. 3. 4 ff. (Dionysius of Miletus and Favorinus); 4. 1 ff. (Apollodorus). ™ - From Maximus, it is argued, cf. Emperors and Biography (1971), 115 f.\JRS lxx (1980), 73 f. Also above, 175 f. 39 F. Millar, A Study of Cassius Dio (1964), 64 f.; G. W. Bowersock, Greek Sophists in the Roman 40 Empire (1969), 50 ff. PIR2 A 1405; H 51. 41 For the cities producing sophists, G. W. Bowersock, o. c. 17 ff. 42 Reasons of structure therefore suggest that the basic source is not Maximus but Ignotus. Not all scholars agree - but see now T. D. Barnes, The Sources of the Historia Augusta (1978), 99 ff.

Hadrian and Antioch

187

VII. Emperor and Antiochenes in confrontation, the theme was seductive. One wonders whether the fluent biographer, whom the HA towards the end styled 'homo omnium verbosissimus,' did not vouchsafe some more revelations. Antioch crops up in the biography of Verus. After describing Verus' residence at Laodicea, Antioch and Daphne, the author inserts two sentences that interrupt the exposi­ tion. The first runs 'risui fuit omnibus Syris quorum multa ioca in theatro in eum dicta exstant' (7. 4). The topic of'ioca' uttered by Syrians recurs a few lines lower down, ineptly subjoined to Verus' return to Rome and celebration of his triumph: 'fertur praeterea ad amicae vulgaris arbitrium in Syria posuisse barbam. unde in eum a Syris multa sunt dicta' (7. 10). The same source may perhaps be assumed. 43 Whatever opinion be held about a beard removed at a lady's bidding (and none will seek help from iconography), the 'arnica vulgaris' is tangible and authentic. None other than the marvellous creature from Smyrna, that Panthea whose charms are delineated by Lucian, whose grief for dead Verus was evoked as meaningless by Marcus Aurelius. 44 In the early sequence of imperial biographies there was not much need for the author's peculiar talents of invention. He had Marius Maximus. His own hand and manner is disclosed by an amusing figment in the biography of Severus Alexander. Congregating at a festival, Antiochenes, Egyptians, and Alexandrians gave voice to licence and defamation, for such was their habit. They derided the Syrian prince, labelling him as a 'Syrus archisynagogus' (Alex. 28. 7). The author refrained from specifying the name and nature of the implausible collocation. It is merely 'quodam tempore festo'.45 VIII. Antioch may perhaps have feared Trajan. His successor, who advertised a democratic demeanour, could hardly hope to keep immune from 'ioca'. Whereas at Alexandria his infatuation for Antinous might inspire friendly and fabulous elaboration from poets like the ineffable Pancrates, the Bithynian youth or the Emperor's beard would attract the malevolent and sportive at Antioch. Wise rulers took personal insults as they came, and Hadrian had a recent text for guidance: 'et tulere ista et reliquere.'46 The author of the Misopogon gave way to intolerance. Hadrian (such is the assertion) conceived an 'odium 43

Although the basic source itself is not excluded, cf. T. D. Barnes, JRS lvii (1967), 72. Lucian, Imagines 10; Marcus, Ad se ipsum viii. 37. 45 Some scholars discovered a confirmation of 'archisynagogus'. On which, Emperors and Biography (1971), 274. 46 Tacitus, Ann. iv. 35. 4. 44

188

Hadrian and Antioch

Antiochensium.' The notion lends itself to invention or to sustained fiction. And aversion can be muted or toned down to disenchantment: je remarquai da vantage l'eternelle legerete de ce peuple medisant et moqueur.' 47 As elsewhere, the plausible carries no warrant of authenticity. In the present instance the credit for a fabrication adheres to the consular biographer, avid for scandal and detraction.

47 M. Yourcenar, Memoires d'Hadrien (1951), 225. The author refrained from implying anger or conflict.

4s

XIV Emperors from Etruria* I. The annals of the Empire exhibit a long parade, ever changing in shape and colour as regions of Italy and the provinces bring up in turn senators, consuls, emperors. The process was accelerated by sundry pressures and emergencies (notably civil war) or diverted by Fortuna into results often paradoxical. When a century had passed since the battle of Actium the aristocratic line ofjulii and Claudii went down in ruin, to be supplanted by its allies and friends or by the sons of clients and ministers. The first pretender was Sulpicius Galba, of the old patriciate. Seven months declared him incompetent of empire. In rapid succession followed Otho and Vitellius, both sons of consuls and hence belonging to the new nobility; and their inferior by birth and rank prevailed, Flavius Vespasianus from the Sabine country. Otho came of a family 'vetere et honorata atque ex principibus EtruriaeV If that is conceded, the patria of these Salvii, namely Ferentium, lacked prestige or history; and their emergence was recent. 2 Otho's grandfather (born of an obscure woman, 'incertum an ingenua') was reared in the household of Livia, to whose patronage he owed entry to the Senate and a praetorship; and he made a resplendent marriage (no name cited). Then Otho's father, with a suffect consul­ ship from Tiberius (some found their physical resemblance noteworthy and suspicious). Otho showed loyalty to Claudius, governed provinces, and was adlected among the patricians. II. The Flavian dynasty began under happy auspices - an emperor with two sons and sundry relatives. In the first place a nephew, the son of Flavius Sabinus; and Petillius Cerialis had married Vespasian's sister Domitilla. 3 Death .thinned the company. The Petillii fade out, and Domitian destroyed three kinsmen of consular rank. When Domitian completed the fifteenth year of his reign there remained as heirs * Reprinted from Bonner HAC 1979/81 (forthcoming). 1 The first chapter of the Suetonian biography has precious details. For late Republican and imperial senators from Etruria, see above all M. Torelli, Dialoghi d\ Archeologia iii (1969), 285-363; and supplements in Arh. Vestnik xxviii (1977), 251-4. 2 The hypogeum of the Salvii (late Republican) is far from impressive. On which, A. Dcgrassi, Scritti vari III (1967), 155 ff. 3 For those relatives, G. B. Townend JRS li (1961), 54 ff.

190

Emperors from Etruria

presumptive two boys, the sons of Flavius Clemens, whom he had put to death the year before. That brief estimate neglects the Caesennii. Though one of the most ancient houses of Etruria, from Tarquinii, they were slow to come up under the Caesars. They arrived in fine style with Caesennius Paetus in 61, the first new name to open the Roman year for a decade. Paetus had married a daughter of Flavius Sabinus, as an inscription reveals.4 In the same year Flavius Sabinus, recently returned from seven years in Moesia, acquired the prefecture of the city. The season arouses interest on several counts. The power of Seneca was verging to the end, and various signs indicate new influences operating in govern­ ment, whether open or unobtrusive. 5 In the next year Caesennius Paetus went out to the Cappadocian command and incurred a disaster in Armenia. Emerging ten years later and instructed by Vespasian to annex the kingdom of Commagene, he mismanaged the affair, provoking serious hostilities. Adequate reason perhaps to deny him admission to the patriciate or that second consulship that fell to other Neronian relics. Better, death supervened, as happened to so many governors of Syria.6 Another Caesennius had enjoyed no good fortune in warfare. In the autumn of 66 the insurgent Jews cut to pieces a Roman army, the core of which comprised XII Fulminata. The legate was Caesennius Gallus, perhaps absent at the time, as is implied in the narration of Josephus.7 In the sequel a bad reputation accompanied that legion; and Gallus may not have acceded to the fasces until a dozen years elapsed. He is discovered as governor of Cappadocia-Galatia, appointed by the Emperor Titus in 80.8 Gallus had ' Aulus' for praenomen, anomalous in that family and not shown on any inscription at Tarquinii. It may arouse a suspicion that he was polyonymous, compare A. Didius Gallus Fabricius Veiento. A link, albeit tenuous, might be sought in the nomenclature of a later person, a Roman knight of libertine extraction: L. Fabricius L. f Pal. Caesennius Gallus.9 Fabricius Veiento and Vibius Crispus were the great masters of patronage, their operations already visible in the vicinity of 61. 10 The M L S 995. 5 Eprius Marccllus was consul suffcct in 62, Petronius Niger (and also perhaps Vibius Crispus) 6 in the near vicinity. On that topic see ZPE 41 (1981), 125 ff. 7 Josephus has him retire to Caesarea after a foray in Galilee {BJ ii. 213). That is, before the 8 disaster incurred by the consular legate. Perhaps clever exculpation. PIR2 C 170. y CIL xiv. 354 (Ostia), adduced in Some Arval Brethren (1980), 73. The original praenomen of Veiento himself may have been 'Lucius'. 10 In 60 a knight, condemned for extortion, had his penalties mitigated 'Vibii Crispi fratris opibus' (Ann. xiv. 28. 2): Crispus had not been named hitherto. In 62 Fabricius was sent into exile for trafficking in patronage (xiv. 50).

Emperors from Etruria

191

Fasti of Ostia now disclose the full name of the latter as L. Junius Vibius Crispus; and the same prefix attaches to Caesennius Paetus the consul of 6 1 . u That consul had a homonymous son who acceded to the fasces in 79 and in due course went to Asia as proconsul in 92 or 93. He had been military tribune in a legion at the time of his father's mishap. III. A younger son of the consular legate, long overlooked, was present with his mother, consigned for safety to the fortress of Arsamosata. 12 It takes no great effort to detect him in 'P. f. Stel. Sospes' who stands at the head of an acephalous inscription in Pisidian Antioch. 13 There is a further benefit. The patronymic proves that the original name of his father is P. Caesennius. The curious will suitably recall the dignified and corpulent P. Caesennius whom Cicero derided.14 Again, not that it matters much, the cognomen Paetus may derive from the item *L. Junius': Junii Paeti are later on record, under Hadrian and Pius. If so, P. Caesennius was one of the latest consuls to lack a cognomen. The cursus of Caesennius Sospes shows him praetor about 88 (the year of Cornelius Tacitus). In 92 he saw warfare in Domitian's 'expeditio Suebica et Sarmatica', as legate of XIII Gemina and earned the appropriate decorations. Sospes then passed to Galatia, governing one half of the dual province that was temporarily divided after the decease of Antistius Rusticus (suff. 90). A legion and a praetorian province, Sospes stood in prospect of a consulship in 97 or 98 - and perhaps a military command after no long interval. And perhaps something more. If Domitian continued in the purple, the two boys had no guarantee of survival. There had recently been a sequence of unhealthy seasons - and five other children, to be presumed ephemeral, had been born to Clemens and Domitilla, as the inscription of their nurse happens to disclose.15 Whatever the prospects or aspirations of the Caesennii (socially superior to Salvii and Flavii), they were annulled by the assassination of Domitian. The plot was contrived in the Palace, and it somehow produced as emperor Cocceius Nerva. Not likely to be vouchsafed any duration, Nerva was constrained to avert an armed proclamation by adopting as son and successor the legate of Germania Superior. 1

■ AE 1968, 6 {Fasti Ostienses); 1973, 141 f. (wax tablets). Ann. xv. 10.3; 13. 1. ILS 1017. The dating has caused much controversy. For the solution here assumed seeJRS lxvii (1977), 38 ff. Not all arc disposed to accept. Thus R. K. Sherk, AJP c (1979), 167 f. (discussing governors of Galatia). 14 Cicero, Pro Caecina 27. Inscrr. of the Caesennii at Tarquinii (not numerous) yield three specimens of the praenomen (CIL xi. 3415 f; 7569). ' 5 ILS 1839. 12

13

192

Emperors from Etruria

Sospes, it appears, came unscathed through these memorable but obscure transactions - and the Caesennii had influential friends still extant. 1 6 H o w e v e r , caution is in place. Since about fifteen years separate the t w o Caesennii (the military tribune and the small boy at Arsamosata), it is not certain that Sospes was the son of a Flavia Sabina. Sospes receded, but he is to be identified as L. Caesennius Sospes, consul suffect in the summer of 114, when Trajan was conquering Armenia. 1 7 T h e next generation is represented by L. Caesennius A n t o n i n u s (suff. 128), perhaps a son, perhaps descended from the suffect of 79. O f the significant cognomen, the last trace survives in the consul of 163, A . J u n i u s P. f. Fab. Pastor L. Caesennius Sospes. 18 In this instance, so it can be argued, nomenclature from the maternal line, not a Junius taking in adoption a Caesennius. 1 9 IV. With Trajan a Hispano-Narbonensian nexus seized the power, lasting for close on a hundred years. For a brief space it incurred danger of infringement from a potent Italian group. Hadrian at the age of sixty, in sore vexation with the problems of the succession, rejected the next of kin and chose as his heir L. Ceionius C o m m o d u s . O f w h o m the Historia Augusta states in an unimpeachable passage that registers his son and son's birthday: 'origo eius paterna pleraque ex Etruria fuit, materna ex Faventia' (Verus 1.9). While the name of the Ceionii is u n c o m m o n and Etruscan, their patria is not to be sought in Etruria. Rather Bononia, an ancient foundation of the Etruscans. Along the Aemilia, some 40 miles further, lies Faventia, whence the Avidii, from which family Ceionius C o m m o d u s took his wife. Etruria still has to wait a long time for its Caesar. When the A n t o n i n e dynasty collapsed, a chance offered, as previously for transitory rulers of varying types. O n Domitian had followed Nerva, eminent a m o n g the new imperial nobility, a figure at court and in high society. H e derived from the old Latin colony of Narnia. When, re-enacting the end of Domitian, the son of Marcus Aurelius was assassinated, the power went to Helvius Pertinax, a low-born Italian from Liguria, and perhaps the son of a freedman. O n Pertinax followed Didius Julianus (of respectable stock from Mediolanum), 16

Fabricius Veiento, by conjecture one of them, was still alive in 98 (Pliny, Pan. 53. 1). As disclosed by the diploma in the Sofia Museum (still not published after a quarter of a century). For an interim text see M. M. Roxan, Roman Military Diplomas 1954-1977 (1978), no. 14. 18 ILS 1095. 19 It was wrongly assumed a case of full adoption inJRS lxvii (1977), 46. Junius Pastor, it will be noted, carries the tribe of Brixia. 17

Emperorsfrom Etruria

193

who had pursued with success the normal career of a senator. So far, and never again, the northern zone of Italy. In the early Principate Transpadana had rivalled the excellence of Narbonensis and Spain. Africa furnished the fourth imperial dynasty through the victory of Septimius Severus (many Africans had been emerging in the previous generation). By accident it became Syrian, for the careerist from Lepcis had married a lady of Emesa; and by paradox the last of the Syrian princes, Severus Alexander, prolonged his reign for thirteen years. 20 From this point, from the year 235, tradition in the person of Aurelius Victor registered an abrupt social declension. As he avers, the 'fortunae vis' consigned the commonwealth 'etiam infimis genere institutoque' (24. 11). Victor was dismayed by the proclamation of Julius Maximinus, a soldier emperor - about whom misconceptions and a multitude of sheer fables persist, fostered by incautious acceptance of the label 'Maximinus Thrax' which the author of the Epitome applied. Of the origin of Maximinus and of his merits an equitable assessment should not lie beyond reach.21 However that may be, a trivial disturbance in Africa threw up the proclamation of an elderly proconsul, which would have led nowhere had not the Roman Senate seized the opportunity with unexpected alacrity; and after the suppression of Gordianus it chose for emperors a pair of consulars well advanced in years, namely Pupienus and Balbinus. 22 The origin of the former, M. Clodius Pupienus Maximus, excites curiosity and may repay it. The nomen is extremely rare. At Volaterrae two freedmen Pupieni pay honour to his daughter who bears the aristocratic name of Sextia Cethegilla.23 Another item of some interest has turned up: L. Clodius Tineius Pupienus Bassus, a youth of senatorial family.24 The name 'Tineius' derives from Tinia, the supreme god of the Etruscans; and a senator of that name (residing at Tibur) carries the tribe Arnensis which points to Clusium.25 The Latin inscriptions of Etruria happen to yield only one Tineius.26 20

How the government was carried on is a question. Emperors and Biography (1971), Ch. xi. For the problems of their ages and careers see now X. Loriot, ANRWW. 2 (1975), 704 ft'. That scholar argues that Balbinus, the bis consul of 213, is not the Emperor but his father. 23 CIL xi. 1740. Otherwise the cities of Italy appear to yield only the libertus of L. Clodius Pup(Pienus) inix. 5765 (Ricina in Picenum). It is strange that Groag in PIR2C 1179 did not claim Pupienus for Volaterrae. For the arguments here summarized see Emperors and Biography (1971), 173ff. 24 AE 1945, 22 (Tibur), set up by Tineius Eubulus, described as the freedman of his mother. 25 ILS 1207. The clue was not detected by H. v. Petrikovits in the excellent article on the Tineii (P-Wvi A, 1373 ff.). 26 CIL xi. 2794 (Volsinii). The Etruscan name 'tins' is frequent at Clusium; C/E 3632-46, cf. E. Fiescl in P-W vi A, 1390. 21

22

194

Emperorsfrom Etruria

Pupienus achieved high rank, consul for the second time in 234, Prefect of the City - and he had previously been a governor on the Rhine. On the maternal side he claimed aristocratic descent, as witness Sextia Cethegilla his daughter and 'Africanus', the cognomen of his son (consul in 236 as colleague of Maximinus), recalling the Sextii Africani. Another son, by his full style T i . Clodius M. f. Pupienus Pulcher Maximus', was a patrician, as his career demonstrates (ILS 1175). Tibur (of which he was patronus) produced the inscription - like that of young Tineius Pupienus. Installed in the front ranks of the Senate, and with some potent friends or allies, Pupienus was deemed 'capax imperii'. It is not clear that his Etruscan patria possessed much significance in a cosmopolitan Senate that welcomed wealth and education from widely diverse regions. Nor does it convey unusual enlightenment to an enquirer in a later day. The general theme retains its validity, despite surprises all through. The province Asia came out with consuls before the second dynasty ended. And many under Trajan, not so much products of the old Italian diaspora as aristocrats, the descendants of kings and tetrarchs; and Asia might have been expected after the efflux of time to convey one of its magnates to the purple. Not so - it is Syria, and with Antonius Gordianus remote Cappadocia, and before long even an Arab. 27 After the six years reign of Gordian's grandson supervened Philippus Arabs (an authentic Arabian from Trachonitis). To this extraneous emperor it was vouchsafed to celebrate the thousand years of the City, in 248. Before long the 'deum ira in rem Romanam' responded with civil war and barbarian invasions, with one emperor killed by the Goths and another made captive by the Persians, with the pestilence that raged for fifteen years.28 V. In the classic phrase of Edward Gibbon the Empire 'was saved by a series of great princes who derived their obscure origin from the martial provinces of Illyricum.' By the common acceptation that series begins in the year 268, with Claudius, chosen by the conspiracy of his allies, the Danubian and Balkan generals in the camp outside Mediolanum. 29 21 For the origin of Gordian (sometimes fancied an Italian aristocrat), see A. R. Birley in Essays Presented to E. Birley (1966), 56 ff. 2K The onset of the plague was put in 253 (Jerome, Chron. p. 219 H), its duration conveniently covering the reign of Gallienus. It had started earlier, cf. Eutropius ix. 5. 29 Th e common term 'Illyrian', vague and vicious, is to be deprecated, cf. Historia xxii (1973), 310 ff.

Emperors from Etruria

195

A process of history thus manifested its culmination. It is therefore expedient to give a thought to two predecessors in the ascension of the military, products of the frontier wars, namely Maximinus and Decius. They were far removed from parity of rank. Maximinus had risen to equestrian posts, but Decius was that rare phenomenon, a Danubian consular from Sirmium, governing Moesia Inferior in 234, and passing under the rule of Maximinus to Tarraconensis.30 He was again on the Danube when he made his proclamation against Philip in 249. All for his campaigns against the Goths, Maximinus was con­ strained to neglect senatorial politics and the building up of a faction to support him. He showed discretion, it is true, in the choice of consuls; and he kept in office the governors already appointed.31 Decius was in a better posture. By age and standing he would not lack some resources of allies and coevals in the 'amplissimus ordo\ Matrimony conferred 'decus ac robur' on rising talent and energy. Philip had for consort Marcia Otacilia Severa, about whom nothing can be ascertained. Decius married an Etruscan lady, Herennia Cupressenia Etruscilla. While Herennii are indistinctive, her second name is portentously rare and echoes back to Cupressenus Gallus, consul suffect in 147.32 The elder son of Decius is Herennius Etruscus, the younger Hostilianus.33 To explain that name, no suitable Hostilius can be conjured up. In a compressed statement about the next ruler the Epitome presents him as Hostilianus Perpenna.34 In the summer of 251 Decius met his end in battle, killed by the Gothic invaders at Abrittus in the southern Dobrudja, not far from Tropaeum Traiani. In the campaign his partner was Vibius Gallus, a consular from Perusia, who assumed the purple and took Hostilianus in adoption. VI. About the extraction of Vibius Gallus there is abundant documentation. An inscription discloses the great-grandfather, an equestrian magnate and patron of the city: C. Vibius C. f. L. n. Tro. Gallus Proculeianus (ILS 6616, of the year 205).35 After a missing generation comes Vibius Veldumnianus, whose status is not specified 30

After sundry uncertainties, PIR1 M 373 and PIR2 D 28 amalgamate. X. Loriot, ANRWii. 2 (1975), 679 f. 32 Revealed by FO xxviii. Otherwise only Cypressenia Servanda (CIL vi. 22199). 33 By his full style C. Valens Hostilianus Messius Decius (PIR1 V 8). 34 Epit. 30. 1. Most peculiar. For a late specimen of the name, observe the Perpenna who was praefectus urbi (ILS 5703), probably under Valentinian iii. For an invented name in this source one notes Gallonius Basilius who brought the 'regia indumenta' to Claudius at Ticinum (34. 2). 35 For his second cognomen observe the proto-Augustan magistrate at Perusia: L. Proculeius A. f. Titiagnatus(/LS6617). 31

196

Emperors from Etruria

on the document. The cognomen attracts due attention: clearly local and perhaps theophoric, in view of the goddess Voltumna.36 It recurs with Junius Veldumnianus, the consul of 272 (ILS 3405: Rome). No specimen of 'Veldumnius' itself has turned up. A wife of the Emperor Gallus before his accession was 'Afinia M. f. Gemina Baebiana cl. f., uxor Vibi Galli' (ILS 527: Perusia). Her family name had come to transitory eminence long before with L. Afmius Gallus, noteworthy through the eponymous consulate of 62, the year after Caesennius Paetus.37 Afinia transmitted the name to her son, whose full style was 'C. Vibius Afinius Gallus Veldumnianus Volusianus' (ILS 522 etc.). The youth, it may be observed, did not take over from his father the item 'Trebonianus'. Certified by coins, inscriptions and papyri (but not found in any ancient author), it is accorded preference in the modern convention that knows the Emperor as Trebonianus Gallus. Renaming his city he called it 'Colonia Vibia Augusta Perusia' (ILS 6613). There is not much profit to be got from looking for Trebonii - or for Volusii (because of the son's cognomen) ,38 A daughter of the Emperor has been detected in Vibia C. f. Galla, who repaired the baths at Alba Fucens. 39 That was premature. There is no sign that the lettering (on a mosaic) permitted any close date - and the nomenclature is all too common, compare 'Vibius Maximus'. Which did not prevent the Emperor from being evoked when Vibii Galli turned up on honorary inscriptions at Aesernia.40 Not but that their earliest traces might amuse the curious: in the vicinity of Caecinae and Persii on theatre seats at Volaterrae, and in the person of a frantic declaimer who went off his head.41 VII. After Decius and Gallus the command on the Lower Danube produced a third emperor. Unlike Maximinus, who stayed at his task, Gallus went to Rome, and two years later the troops, perhaps resent­ ful, proclaimed Aemilius Aemilianus. Going out to confront him in the summer of 253, Gallus and Volusianus were defeated and killed. Aemilianus, 'obscurissime natus obscurius regnavit', in the phrase of 36

W. Schulze, LE 252 f., citing also 'Veltymnus.' The name is fairly widespread but shows the Etruscan form at Clusium and Volaterrae (LE 112). 38 However, the latest consular Trebonius on record is Ap. Annius Trebonius Gallus {cos. 108). The Annii are Perusine, cf. M. Torelli, Dialoghi di Archeologia iii (1969), 301. 39 AE 1952, 19 = AE 1962, 30: fromF. de Visscher, Us Fouilles de Alba Fucens (1955), 140 with pl. xxxi. According to that scholar she may have been exiled to Alba. Identity was also taken up with no misgivings by R. Hanslik, P-W viii A, 1993; 1999. 40 S. Diebner, Aesernia Venafrana (1979), 145. 41 AE 1957, 221; Seneca, Controv. ii. 1. 25. 37

Emperors from Etruria

197

Eutropius (IX. 6). He lasted for three months, being overthrown by Valerian in the autumn. P. Licinius Valerianus, in the estimate of the epitomators, came of a g o o d family — h o w ancient, it is a question — and he had been on prominence already in the year 238. 42 His son was quickly made both a Caesar and an Augustus. The name of that son, P. Licinius Egnatius Gallienus, indicates that of his mother, viz. Egnatia Mariniana (PIR2 E 39). A n u m b e r of consular Egnatii existed in that period, the most illustrious being Victor Lollianus (suff. c. 220), w h o m Valerian at once appointed praefectus urbi (E 36). They do not avow a local origin. H o w e v e r , the mysterious legends 'Virtus Faleri' and Tietas Faleri' on coins of Gallienus have found an explanation: Falerii his mother's patria.43 T h a t is, Etruscan, but in the wider and geographical sense. His o w n cognomen, rare enough, contributes - compare the nomen 'Gallonius'. Revision of an inscription at Ferentium introduces L. Gallonius, senator of the early Antonine period. 44 An anecdote transmitted by Aurelius Victor possesses a dubious relevance. When Gallienus was made a Caesar, the Tiber rose in great flood, 'diluvii facie'. Which the soothsayers pronounced ominous for future calamities, since the unstable young man, 'fluxo ingenio', was comparable to the river 'quia Etruria accitus venerat' (32. 3 f ) . T h e portent occurred 'adulta aestate'. The elevation of Gallienus belongs to the autumn of the year, a season more plausible for inundations. 4 5 VIII. Etruscan descent and nomenclature, that now remains to be assessed. In the first place, maternal extraction. It claimed proper emphasis and potency elsewhere, the nomenclature of the wife's family (so often superior in birth and rank) being annexed - and it m i g h t even suppress a senator's o w n and inherited name. Waiving Gallienus, Pupienus Maximus and Vibius Gallus offer a challenge. Should those emperors be regarded as violent exceptions or as not anomalous? O n e might cast about for other Etruscans in the vicinity. N o t much can be expected to emerge. Names of senators are sparse in written sources that concentrate on biographies of emperors; 42

Zosimusi. 14. l,cf. HA Gord. 9. 7. For Valerian, PIR2 L 258; for Gallienus, L 197. A. Alfoldi, Num. Chron. ix5 (1929), 369 = Studien zur Geschichte der Weltkrise des 3. Jahrhunderts nach Christus (1967), 111. The origin of Gallienus and his local tics have been discussed b y j . Gage, ANRWii. 2 (1975), 834 f. He invoked Falerio (in Picenum). 44 CIL xi. 7423. On which seeJRS Hi (1962), 96 = Roman Papers (1979), 554 f. Schulze (LE171) noted the names Gallonius and Gallienus on the same inscr. {CIL vi. 18861). 45 Alfoldi assigned the anecdote 'nicht eine zufallige Beziehung' (o. c. 111). The only comment on the passage by P. Dufraigne in his edition (Budc, 1975) is 'la gens Licinia etait effectivement originaire d'Etrurie'. 43

198

Emperors from Etruria

and the record of provincial governors suffers many gaps.46 Pro­ consuls of Asia and Africa in fact become scarce during the reign of Severus Alexander. For Africa after Antonius Gordianus down to the year 260 epigraphy seems able to certify not more than three or four; and Asia is not much better served.47 Moesia Inferior yields some compensation. Three of the legates in office between 241 and 247 may detain for a moment. 48 (1) The abridged nomenclature of a fragment at Tomis (IGR I. 615) is interpreted as 'C]aes(enn.) Vinius'. For what it is worth, the second name might also be Etruscan. It is indigenous at Perusia as 'Vinal' (CIE4173; 4431). (2) Prosius Tertullianus. The name is most uncommon - yet nothing can be done with it.49 (3) Prastina Messalinus. This man is a descendant of the enigmatic consul ordinarius of 147, governor of Moesia Inferior not long after: by his full style C. Ulpius Pacatus Prastina Messallinus (cf. AE 1959, 323: Oescus). A neglected fragment at Aquileia furnishes Tap. Messalin. c. v.'. 50 Now the Papiria is the tribe of Sutrium, and that town offers a specimen of'Prastina', that preternaturally raxzgentilicium.5X It may be noted in passing that some have claimed for Italian (hence by implication from Etruria) C. Julius Volusenna Rogatianus, pro­ consul of Asia in 254 (PIR2] 629). The cognomen speaks for Africa.52 By the same token M. Saenius Donatus, an arvalis under Alexander (PIR1 S 41). This Etruscan name, evoking early immigrants or activity of the consul of 30 BC, shows a sharp concentration at Cirta.53 Vibius Gallus, it will be recalled, was governor of Moesia Inferior 46 The senators of the period have been catalogued by G. Barbicri, L'Albo senatorio da Settimio Severo a Carino (1952). 47 B. E. Thomasson, P-W Supp. xiii, 9; D. Magic, Roman Rule in Asia Minor (1950), 1585 f. 48 For the details, A. Stein, Die Legaten von Moesien (1940), 101 f. 49 Schulze renounced and offered no specimens (LE 90, n. 5) - the Italian volumes of the Corpus give no help: ix (1), x (3). For much needed statistics see now A. R. Birley, The Fasti of Roman Britain (1981), 174. Schulze omitted another rarity, 'Clonius', to be presumed Etruscan and of interest because of Q. Atrius Clonius, suff c. 214 (PIR2 A 1322). See TLL, Onom. From Italy only CIL xi. 303, with L. Salvius Clonius: territory of Viterbo, therefore probably from Fcrentium. 50 CIL v. 874: reported as 'bonis litteris'. This senator had been adjected into the patriciate. 51 CIL xi. 3259. Schulze strangely said that the name was 'oft bclegt' (LE 90). For the nomenclature of the Antonine senator see further Dacia xii (1968), 336 = Danubian Papers (1971), 219 f. 52 PIR2) 629. No other specimen of the nomen is cited by Schulze (LE285), but Africa offers one (CIL viii. 20185). The commoner form of the name is 'Volasenna', with examples from Volaterrae and from Arrctium (LE 103): attractive because of P. Volasenna, a Neronian pro­ consul of Asia (PIR* V 616), and, now accruing as suffect probably in 44, C. Volasenna Severus (/4E 1973, 151). 53 H.-G. Pflaum in Limesstudien (Basel 1959), 111; R. Syme, Historia xxvi (1978), 595 (adducing AE 1967, 556: Milev). Both Rogatianus and Donatus were listed among the 'Italici' by G. Barbicri, o. c. 448.

Emperors from Etruria

199

when proclaimed in 251. Italian senators are thus discovered in charge of the most critical section of the northern frontiers. The position of Gallus would have gratified the epitomator Aurelius Victor, had he been aware of it. When introducing Valerian he disclosed one of his preoccupations with the comment 'qui quamquam genere satis claro, tamen, uti mos etiam turn erat, militiam sequebatur' (32. 2). Before long the son of Valerian extruded senators from most of the military commands. This rubric will suitably conclude with an equestrian officer, L. Petronius Taurus Volusianus.54 After his military career Taurus became praefectus vigilum and praefectuspraetorio. Then, elevated to the Senate, he shared the fasces as consul with Gallienus in 261, to end as Prefect of the City six years later. The inscription, at Arretium, honours Taurus as patronus of the city, but he has the tribe Sabatina which would concord with an origin from Volaterrae or Vulci. The son of Gallus also has 'Volusianus' for cognomen. Some have supposed a link - and it might be so, despite the frequency of the name or a social discrepance. In any case, Taurus perhaps owed earlier advancement to Gallus. With emperors changing so rapidly, sundry continuities obtained, not all of them quite enough to attest alliances or a nexus. The sporadic facts here adduced, while not devoid of instruction or relevance, do not lead very far, so it may with reason be objected. IX. The other cause of obscurity and a dearth of names is the parlous condition of the written sources. Though scrappy, the three epitomators transmit odd items of value deriving from the common source that was postulated by Enmann. 55 Both Eutropius and the Epitome supply Budalia, the village (8 miles west of Sirmium) where Decius saw the light of day. Victor chose to suppress the name: 'Sirmiensium vico ortus' (29. 1). Again, while Victor has Abrittus (in a mutilated form) where Decius and his son perished, it is absent from the other two. 56 On the other hand, manifold misconceptions or plain errors, which, like the resemblances, bring joy to adepts of Quellenforschung.51 They 54 ILS 1322 (Arretium), cf. E. Groag in F-W xix, 1225 ft".; H.-G. Pflaum, Les Carrieres procuratoriennes equestres (1960), 601 ff. 55 And a necessary postulate, cf. now briefly, T. D. Barnes, The Sources of the Historia Augusta (1978), 92. 36 Important for the basic source, since also in Jerome, Chron. p. 218 H. Similarly, while all three epitomators have Gallus and Volusianus killed at Interamna, Jerome adds Forum Flaminii as a variant (p. 219). 57 For the treatment of these years in the Epitome secj. Schlumberger, Die Epitome de Caesaribus (1974), 134 ff.

200

Emperors from Etruria

are most notable when occurring in the curt and sober Eutropius. T h u s the Decii killed beyond the Danube, 'in barbarico'; whereupon the Senate creates as emperors 'Gallus Hostilianus et Galli filius Volusianus' (IX. 5). That, is, three persons conflated into two. Victor and the Epitome, though far from clear on these transactions, have s o m e h o w managed to avoid the mistake. T h e Epitome produces a primary specimen. Gallus and his son were 'creati in insula Meninge quae nunc Girba dicitur' (31. 1). What the inept fellow has perpetrated is obvious. He has taken up and trans­ ferred the birth place of Aemilius Aemilianus, w h o m he recognised as African and styled a 'Maurus' (31. 2). 58 Girba, one of the towns, had in the course of time imposed its name on Meninx, the island of the Lotophagi. 5 9 T h a t is not all. Space is lavished on trivia or anecdotes. 60 Most of w h a t Victor has to say about the Emperor Philip amounts to the exposition of a single topic (28. 1-9). Namely the millennial festival of R o m e and one of the 'prodigia portentaque' thereupon attendant. As the haruspices pronounced, 'solutionem posterorum portendere vitiaque fore potiora'. T o counter which, Philip debated whether he should not abolish the practice of male prostitution. The author adds edifying reflections ( 7 - 9 ) . T h e Epitome, much shorter, has the son of Philip, strangely named 'Gaius Julius Saturninus', and described as an austere child, 'severi et tristis animi'. He manifested disapproval of the parent for unseemly laughter on the solemn occasion. 61 X . Brief c o m m e n t on the treatment of four rulers in the epitomators leads on to the Historia Augusta. The text breaks off in 244, to take up again in 260 after Valerian had been defeated and captured by the Persians. T h e author, ceasing to be 'Julius Capitolinus', opened a new sequence under the name of'Trebellius Pollio', from Philip and his son to Claudius and Quintillus. That is vouched for by 'Flavius Vopiscus' w h o defended his performance from criticism (Aur. 2. 1), who later extolled his diligence and accuracy (Quadr. tyr. 1.3). T h e lacuna has excited curiosity on different counts - and even a suspicion that the missing biographies were never written, that the ingenious impostor employed a pretence not unknown to later expo58

He was an African according to Zonaras xii. 21. P-Wvii, 1369; xv, 859 f. 60 For the catalogue and a discussion, MAC 1977/8 (1980), 267 ff. (above, 156 ff.). Of some interest as precedents for practices of the HA. 61 Epit. 28. 3. The boy's alleged character happens to reflect his true name, Severus, taken from the mother, Marcia Otacilia Scvera - which that author can hardly have known. 59

201

Emperors from Etruria 62

nents of historical fiction: a mutilated manuscript. And indeed there are peculiar phenomena. T h e H A nowhere names either Gallus or Aemilianus, not even to distinguish the latter from the homonymous usurper in Egypt w h o earned five mentions, apart from a full length portrayal (Tyr. trig. 22). Again, one of the two references to the Decii as a pair, which comes at the end of a disquisition on good and bad e m p e r o r s , is perfunctory and looks like an afterthought. 63 D o u b t s can abate. The author was capricious and unpredictable, also hasty and incompetent. For example he failed to use an edifying transaction he could find in the pages of Victor: the noble Claudius was willing to offer up his life by a 'devotio' like that of the Decii in the old times (34. 1-4). In the H A neither scope nor choice of material would respond to certain themes in predilection among modern enquirers. The author probably ignored the persecution of Christians by the Emperor Decius and abridged the foreign wars. For the campaigns against the Goths a copious narration availed, that of the historian Dexippus, as is p r o v e d by various signs, notably by the citation of consular years. 64 For the rest, meagre Latin sources and his own inventions. Their skill and their splendour is on show in the last place before the lacuna and in w h a t follows. In the volume devoted to Maximus and Balbinus, 'Julius Capitolinus' exhibited a pair of senatorial orations c o m b i n i n g style and sagacity. Also a full length comparison between the collegiate pair of rulers, Maximus being assumed a person of h u m b l e extraction. T h a t biography was at the same time diffuse and repetitive. The essential historical transactions had already been expounded in the previous books about Maximinus and the Gordiani. The author might n o w have flagged and decided to write more economically about Philip and the others. N o n e the less, invention and fluency after as before. The perform­ ance of 'Pollio' opens with eloquent and reasoned missives sent by vassal princes to the Persian monarch. They reminded him of the p o w e r and tenacity of the Romans, they warned him against pride and elation issuing from the capture of Valerian. Aurelius Victor was too short, but his source (the KG), although not expansive, carried a number of valuable particulars. Its employ­ m e n t by the H A can easily be established a little later, for Aurelian and 62 Thus A. R. Birlcy, in Latin Biography (cd. T. A. Dorey, 1967), 125 f. A good example is Die Bernsteinhexe of Wilhelm Mcinhold. 63 Aur. 42. 6: 'tametsi Dccios excerpere debeam, quorum et vita et mors veteribus comparanda est'. 64 For the Greek sources, T. D. Barnes, o. c. 108 ff.

202

Emperorsfrom Etruria

for Probus. 6 5 Although the author, misled about the Gordiani, had been m o v e d to denounce 'quidam imperiti scriptores' (Gord. 2. 1), he continued to draw on Victor not only for isolated facts but as the inspiration for long and elaborate lucubrations, such as the inter­ r e g n u m of six months between the death of Aurelian and the accession of Claudius Tacitus. 6 6 X I . T o revert to the lacuna. It may afford some measure of instruction or entertainment to indulge in brief surmise about the author's scope and manner in the missing biographies of four emperors. Philip the Arab was a criminal character, but the epoch carried a potent appeal by reason of the thousand years of Rome's duration. The author was waiting for the ceremony. Well in advance he catalogued the mass of wild beasts at Rome, destined for the Persian triumph of the third Gordian and put on exhibit by Philip at his Ludi Saeculares (Gord. 33. 1-4). Furthermore, a small detail. T h e author at an earlier stage had alluded to that emperor's views about male prostitution. 67 T h e festival was no doubt described with due solemnity, with details invented or drawn from contemporary pageantry - and perhaps embellished by a quotation or echo of the national poet, after the author's fashion. And a pagan writer might not have missed the bitter c o m m e n t of Aurelius Victor. The next anniversary, in his own time, had been passed over: 'adeo in dies cura minima Romanae urbis' (28.2). In due course the alert and versatile author was happy to come out w i t h the travesty of a public ceremony, mocking the decennial festival of the undesirable Gallienus. The procession happens to be equipped w i t h a phrase in hexameter rhythm: 'ibant praeterea gentes simulatae'

(Gall. 8.7). N e x t , the heroic end of the Decii, father and son, to be extolled in patriotic fervour and with evocation of the 'duo Decii', the Republican m o d e l . Victor also had the father's words 'detrimentum unius militis p a r u m videri sibi' (29. 5). T h e r e is something else. In the report transmitted by Greek authors Decius, appointed by Philip, made every effort to prevent his own proclamation by the troops. 6 8 He thus conforms to a favoured type, the reluctant usurper. Further, when Decius came to Rome he assumed the name 'Traianus': not only ingratiating to the Roman Senate but a name of remembered power in the Danubian lands. That 65

W. H. Fisher JRS xix (1929), 125 ff.; T. D. Barnes, CQ xx (1970), 198 ff. Victor rather than the KG, cf. Emperors and Biography (1971), 238. 67 Elag. 32. 6; Alex. 24. 4. Vital for his use of Victor, cf. A. Chastagnol, Rev. Phil xli (1967), 68 85 ff. Zosimus i. 23 f.; Zonaras xii. 19. 66

Emperors from Etruria

203

title, not recorded by any historian or biographer, would elude the H A . A melancholy loss, given the exuberant fictions about 'Ulpius Crinitus' w h o claimed descent from the Emperor Trajan (Aur. 10. 2), w h o in his oration when taking Aurelian in adoption declared a family tradition (14. 5). 69 A b o u t Vibius Gallus and his son not much can be divined. Victor had little to report apart from the plague. Hostilianus perished, but Gallus and Volusianus amassed credit since they cared for the Roman plebs, or at least for their funerals: 'quod anxie studioseque tenuissimi cuiusque exsequias curarent' (30. 2). There is a chance that the HA was favourable towards Gallus and his son. According to Victor, the Senate conferred on them the 'augusta imperia'. However, as has already been observed, they have no mention elsewhere in the HA. A b o u t Aemilianus, Victor was inconsequent. He bribed the troops. Victor goes on to incriminate him and then concedes a gentle rule and blameless decease: 'tres menses usus modesto imperio morbo absumptus est' (31. 2). According to the basic source he was a Moor, from Girba(cf. Epit. 3 1 . 8 ) . Girba in the late epoch had a government factory for the production of purple dye. 7 0 It is the purple k n o w n to Pliny by the general term of Gaetulian. 7 1 T h e H A is addicted to inventing the omens of that colour that announce an imperial destiny. For Aurelian the sponsor was Callicrates, suitably styled 'Tyrius' - and the only one of thirty-four bogus authors to be equipped with a local appellation {Aur. 4. 2). T h e author has also a fancy for ornate vestments, appertaining to either sex. T h e long list of equipment that Valerian instructed the procurator of Syria to furnish for Claudius, then a military tribune, after reaching a cook and a mule driver and 'mulieres speciosas ex captivis duas', goes on to an item of purple clothing, with precise specification: 'albam subsericam unam cum purpura Girbitana'. 72 What the author might have done for the man of Girba in the way of picturesque and corroborative detail might baffle the imagination - if one paid n o heed to Firmus, a usurper in Egypt. Firmus was a merchant prince w h o manufactured paper and sent argosies so far as India (Quadr. tyr. 3. 2 f.). For omens and portents the author could derive encouragement from Victor (if he needed it). The haruspices on the occasion of the millennial 69 It is also a pity that the author did not know about Ulpia Severina, the consort of Aurelian: like other wives of emperors, certified only by coins and inscriptions. 70 Not. Dig. Occ. xi. 70. 71 Pliny, NHv. 12; ix. 127. 72 Duly cited in his list of 'Africana' by E. Birley, HAC 1968/9 (1970), 88.

204

Emperors from Etruria

festival, with comment on the 'Etruscorum artes' (28. 8), and the Tiber flood when Gallienus arrived from Etruria (32. 3 f.). On Vibius Gallus he could spread himself-if aware of the Perusine origin. Latin sources were not promising, such was the ignorance that obtained in the middle of the Fourth Century. The fact might have been embed­ ded somewhere in the narrations of Greek historians. XII. Etruria was fertile ground for portents. None is employed to embellish the first of the fictional biographies, that of Hadrian's heir, although the Ceionii were assigned Etruscan ancestry.73 Antoninus Pius, however, benefits from the insertion of two favourable omens in that country. Earthenware jars that had been buried emerged to the surface, and swarms of bees occupied his statues everywhere.74 Otherwise only two items in the whole work concern Etruria, heterogeneous and variously instructive. First, Aurelian proposed to improve viticulture along the coastal zone where 'per Aureliam usque ad Alpes maritimas ingentes agri sunt hique fertiles ac silvosi'. Nothing came of it. He was stopped by objections from his Guard Prefect (Am. 48.2 ff.). Second, the author when declaring (not for the first time) that he insists on 'digna memoratu' and eschews trivial information about personal habits and daily life, goes on to furnish some examples: 'non enim scimus . . . utrum Tusco equo sederit Catilina an Sardo' (Quadr. tyr. 6. 4). 75 That is all. And never a city of ancient Etruria, not Volaterrae or Volsinii, not Clusium or Perusia, not even as the invented home of a usurper. Making as he does such lavish and ingenious play with nomenclature, the author seems not much attracted towards place names in any context, even the fictional. XIII. But, it will be said, these are frivolous or recondite matters, like what our friend deprecates: 'levia persequimur cum maiora dicenda sint' (Quadr. tyr. 4. 4). It is time for 'digna memoratu'. The HA is not anywhere moved to contrast or oppose Italian emperors and extrane­ ous. The criterion of excellence is military valour combined with devotion to tradition and the Roman Senate. Referring to Diocletian and the Tetrarchs, Aurelius Victor furnished the classic and oft-quoted appreciation of Illyricum (39. 26). 73

AeL 2. 8, taken from Vems 1. 9. Which is important for the order of composition. Pius 3. 5. For the fictitious character of the other omens, T. Pckary, HAC1968/9 {\970), 161 f Sardinia might not look promising for horses. But observe the 'militares equi' in Ammianus xxix. 3. 5. 74

75

Emperors from Etruria

205

And towards the end the HA pays them its tribute: 'quattuor sane principes mundi, fortes, sapientes' etc. {Car. 18. 4). But no word there or previously to commend the 'Genius Illyrici'.76 Yet the author redeems himself and recognizes continuity in government. The Emperor Probus trained a whole school of generals. The list comprises eleven names, among them Diocletian and Constantius - along with several that are fictitious (Prob. 22. 3). Moreover, to reinforce the lesson he adopts a device that exhibits historical insight as well as a sense of structure. That is, beginning with Decius, a sequence of interlocking rulers, as though predestined. Decius decreed that Valerian should assume the office of censor (Val. 5 f.); to Claudius he awarded military decorations (Claud. 13. 8) and the charge of a mixed brigade (16. 1 ff). Then Valerian supplies Claudius with equipment (14. 1 ff), and so on. XIV. Continuities and processes subsist, defying rapid changes of rulers. At first sight Pupienus Maximus and Vibius Gallus stand out as anomalous phenomena. Brief reflection abates any surprise. When opportunity beckoned in a season of turmoil, each occupied an advantageous posture. Pupienus, a bis consul with aristocratic connec­ tions, was in the forefront of the committee of twenty elected by the Senate. He was recognized as senior to his colleague Balbinus - and he had governed one of the frontier provinces. Vibius Gallus stood in command of a large army when Decius perished, and he adopted the surviving son. Herennia Etruscilla retained the title of Augusta, so it is held.77 Some have wondered whether she operated in his favour as a 'nouvelle Tanaquil', either in the camp or at Rome. 78 So little being known, it will be superfluous to ask whether Gallus might not have thought of marrying this widow. As has been indicated, too much should not be made of Etruscan ancestry; and there is no call to suppose relations of amity or ancient affinities between Pupienus and Gallus. What is noteworthy is Italian aristocrats in the high commands, subsequent to the Severan dynastyand under menace from the rise of the low-born military from various regions, soon to culminate in the predominance of Danubian and Balkan men, with Maximinus as an ominous precursor. XV. The long persistence of local families is an engaging theme. In the senatorial order the last Caesennii in the male line were Sospes (suff. 114) and Antoninus (128), the name transmitted for a time 76 77 78

Put on the Roman coinage by Decius. Thus A. Alfoldi, CAH xii (1939), 167. No indication in PIR2 H 136. Thus J. Heurgon, Studi etmschi xxiv (1955/6), 92.

Emperors from Etruria

206 79

through females. A presumed Caesennius, legate of Moesia Inferior c.243, has been cursorily noted. The Caecina family from Volaterrae was beyond question the 'amplissimum totius Etruriae nomen'. 80 They are the first to invade the Fasti of the early principate, showing five suffect consuls from Caecina Severus (1 BC) to Caecina Paetus (PAD 70).81 The son of Paetus died young, and the direct line then lapsed.82 The next senator to come up is A. Caecina Tacitus, perhaps towards the end of the Third Century. 83 This numerous gens had long since ramified in several directions. Thus to Italia Transpadana with Caecina Alienus of Vicetia (suff. 69); and Caecina Tuscus, Prefect of Egypt under Nero, indicates by his cognomen not the patria but the 'ultima origo'. 84 Further, Tarraconensis can exhibit an equestrian Caecina Severus of some consequence. 85 Of the families of substance and repute, some lived on, happy as they were, enjoying local honours, prestige in the region, and dignified leisure ('honesta quies'). They disliked the imperial city, and they resented the influx of aliens that pervaded every order of society. Not indeed that all of their sporadic senators could assert the antiquity of Caecinae and Caesennii. Though the Vibii were ancient, long established and prominent at Perusia, it is not certain that the parent of the Emperor had entered the Senate. Nor is the ascendance of Pupienus discoverable. The Rufii of Volsinii were destined to long duration. Their first senator, the son of a procurator, may belong before the Severan period.86 XVI. Epilogue. Ascent to the 'amplissimus ordo' required resources of land and money. Frontier zones of energy and progress in the closing epoch of the Republic (Transpadana, Narbonensis, and the two Spains) go forward under the Caesars to produce officers and fiscal agents of the government, then in due course senators and consuls. 79 PIR2 C 175; 177a. Also A 1178 and the maternal ascendance ofjunius Pastor, revealed by /LS 1095. 80 Cicero, Pro Caecina 104, cf. Ad. Jam. vi. 6. 9. Hl Including A. Caecina Primus in 53: from the Ostian Fasti, communicated by F. Zcvi. 82 CIL ix. 39 (Brundisium): going to Asia in the company of his father and dying in the great pestilence of the year 80, such is the painless inference. 83 P/£2C107. 84 Attempts to endow Tuscus with ILS 8966 (Volsinii: acephalous) are to be deprecated. The man is patently Seius Strabo. 85 ILS 2716. Also P. Licinius Caecina, 'in scnatum nuper adscitus1 (Tacitus, Hist. ii. 53. 1, cf. Pliny, NHxx. 199). 86 CIL xi. 2698 (Volsinii).

Emperors from Etruria

207

The condition of Etruria is a problem: deficient evidence and ambiguous criteria. The acme falls under the first dynasty, so it has been claimed, with a clear declension in the sequel and a low level in the prosperous age of the Antonines.87 Measured by consuls in the earlier epoch, one family engrosses a large portion, the Caecinae. They soon fade out, and the Caesennii had an equal duration, of about seventy years. Yet others come on the scene. For example, the Vicirii (consuls suffect in 89 and 98) now concede their patria, which is Rusellae.88 Hazards in the evidence may mislead, as ever; and, although Etruscan consuls begin to become rare in a season when the Fasti are fairly complete for some years (under Antoninus Pius), one might bring up in 147 Prastina Messallinus and Cupressenus Gallus. Furthermore rational conjecture adds the Tineii and Pupienus Maximus. Nor are consuls or senators enough. The wealth or effort of previous equestrian generations comes into the count. There is a danger of oversight or omissions all through, as happens in these studies.89 General pronouncements are variously vulnerable, especial when they make appeal to economic history or theorising. Some care has to be devoted to criteria and definitions. For guidance and admonition may serve the notorious 'crisis in Italian agriculture' coming to a head in the reign of Trajan.90 A comprehensive appellation that embraces the whole country from Transpadana to Bruttium can offer little illumination. Again, in a minor matter, the African disturbances of the year 238 have encouraged various and conflicting interpretations.91 Premonitory symptoms of decline might be sought in some regions. For example, fewer public buildings set up by African communities with the approbation of proconsuls. 87

M. Torelli, o. c. 340, cf. 341 f.: 'la quieta estinzione dcgli ultimi rami con radici etrusche nel senato di eta antonina non ne c altro che una mesta appendice priva di construtto, la cui ricerca c piu curiosita di antiquario che esigenza di storico.' One cannot but acquiesce in most of this firm clear verdict. And the author is well aware of the historical limits of prosopographical enquiry (ib.). 88 V. Saladino, ZPE39 (1980), 229 ff., revealing a military tribune who makes a dedication in honour of the British victory of Claudius Caesar. 89 Thus Prastina occurs, although Sutrium lacks significance; and Cupressenus should be added to Torelli's list of senators 'incertae originis' (o. c. 323 ff). For Valerius Festus {suff. 71) whose tribe is Pomptina (ILS 989: Tergcste) most scholars have overlooked CIL xi. 1863 f. (Arretium), registering Crispinia L. f. Firma Valeri Festi and L. Valerius A. f. Pomp. Festus. This polyonymous senator has Calpetanus and Rantius in his nomenclature. The former is patently Etruscan; for the latter, LE 78, n. 1. Add also 'L. Gallo[nius' (xi. 7423; Ferentium): on w h o m J / e S h i (1962), 95 = £P(1979), 554 f And one might wonder about Fabricius Veiento. For the distribution of the cognomen, W. C. McDermott, AJP xci (1970), 137 f. Again, for the Passieni observe the bilingual inscription at Clusium (xi. 2376 = C/E868). 90 Associated with the potent name of Rostovtseff. 91 For a sober and searching investigation see now F. Kolb, Historia xxv (1977), 440 ff

208

Emperorsfrom Etruria

Financial stringency comes in, inflation of the currency and what not. Evidence from provinces cannot be held relevant to Italy. As in other lands, many regions had been autarchic, or reverted to that condition, not disastrously. The rich domain of Arretium and C l u s i u m abounded in grain, in wine and oil until ruined by the stagnation of the river Clanis. 92 T h e r e is a chance that some parts of Etruria benefited from a modest renascence, from the Severan period onwards. It would be hazardous to evoke the sporadic emergence of two emperors, Pupienus M a x i m u s and Vibius Gallus; and the present pages deprecate insistence on Etruscan members of a Senate which kept a number of Italians although drawing its recruitment from the wide world. T h e r e can be different types of renascence. As other climes and ages demonstrate, either prosperity or adversity evokes secession or rebel­ lion, regional patriotism, the revival of religion or fervour for antiqua­ rian studies. T h e advertisement of a local cult or gentile god at Perusia has been attributed to Vibius Gallus. 93 A century or so later Rufius Festus (proconsul of Africa in 366) invoked the goddess of his city: 'Nortia te veneror, Lari cretus Vulsiniensi' (ILS 2944). That was innocent enough. T h e last days saw an enhancement of the 'Etruscorum artes' (to use the phrase of Victor). T o defend the old faith the high aristocracy, not content with R o m a n tradition and the Latin classics, fell back in retreat on 'haruspicina', on portents and prophecy, on the folly of magic and theosophy. T h a t is an ample and complex theme. A discourse that led off with Caesennii may suitably terminate with a Caecina. When Rutilius N a m a t i a n u s in the autumn of the year 417 sailed up the coast of Etruria and put in at the harbour of Vada Volaterrana he met Caecina Albinus. 9 4 Rutilius was a good pagan. The parent of his friend stands on exhibit in the Saturnalia of Macrobius.

92

For cereal yields at Clusium and Arretium, Pliny, NH xviii. 66; 87. J. Heurgon, o. c. 100 ff. He draws attention to the medallion with 'Apollo Arnazi': perhaps a gentile god, like those listed in Tertullian, Apol. 24. 8. 94 Rutilius, hin. 566. gi

XV Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed?* controversies serve a variety of purposes. On the lowest count they afford nutriment, unfailing even if meagre, to tired and traditional topics. Industry reaps easy reward since bibliographies abound. There is a further benefit if the evidence never offered prospects of a solution. A number of problems, ostensibly historical, are devoid of substance. For example, the date of the Nativity. When curiosity or dispute first arose, the facts were beyond the reach of ascertainment. Which did not deter Tertullian. Rebuking the sceptical and ignorant, he told them to consult the records of a Roman census held in Judaea. Debate goes on. New discoveries add sustenance, eagerly snapped up. A text from Palestine, lurking in the Louvre, was published for the first time in 1930: it had been catalogued as 'une dalle de marbre, envoyee de Nazareth en 1878\ This document is an imperial edict forbidding under penalty the violation of sepulchres; and experts in Greek epigraphy put the lettering in the first century of our era. The Nazareth Decree (for some thus styled it, incautiously) created a stir. By 1937 it had spawned some thirty learned papers (apart from refer­ ences innumerable). Nor did it forfeit its seduction in the fifties. Interest faded in the sequel. The object hardly matters any more - and so far no copy seems to have turned up of the despatch which Pontius Pilate sent to Tiberius Caesar, as Tertullian testifies. For a recent parallel, observe the Decree of Themistocles, enjoining various measures to be taken at an early stage in the campaign that was to terminate with the Battle of Salamis. The copy was inscribed on stone about two centuries later. That is not the point. The document belongs to a recognizable class of patriotic fabrications already put to good employ by Athenian orators.

ERUDITE

Debates about authenticity and authorship have a perennial charm. Pseudepigrapha flourished in Antiquity, in compensation, perhaps, for the decadence of epic and the rudimentary condition of the novel. * Reprinted from the London Review of Books, 4-17 Sept. 1980, 15 ff.

210

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

Certain literary genres, such as letters of poets or sages, and their biographies, carry the meaning and motive on the surface. The read­ ing public clamoured for information about the early life of authors w h o attained classic fame - and early writings were duly manu­ factured. T w o letters of advice are extant, addressed by Sallust to Julius Caesar. In the course of the last sixty years or so they have engaged zealous champions, both historians and students of Latin literature. O n e of the products has 50 BC for its 'dramatic date', so most critics hold. For believers that is also the 'real date'. Those who acclaim this Sallust are impelled to extol his political insight and sensitivity to issues of the day. They say less about that prescience of future events which enabled him to write with three major assumptions in mind: w a r will come, Caesar wins, Caesar proceeds to augment the size of the R o m a n Senate. K n o w n systems of literary education have recourse to the imitation of classical models. Hence impersonation, and no thought of decep­ tion. There are traps for the unwary. The Pseudo-Sallust possesses the style and manner several years before the great innovator created it for the writing of history - and he overdoes it, as may happen to a parodist in any age. Style or anachronism, either criterion by itself may be enough to c o n d e m n a product once it has come under suspicion for other reasons, such as dubious provenance or a motive all too patent. D e v o t e d to literary imposture, the present essay may conduce to s u n d r y reflections about the duration of controversies, why they continue and h o w they find an end. Some are kept going by pertinacity or equivocation. They may lapse or perish through fatigue and inanition. A new weapon or a single sharp blow is not so common. By its amplitude, by the inherent problems and their repercussions, the Historia Augusta stands without a rival in any age. These imperial biographies are the sole Latin source of any compass for the years AD 117—284, from the death of Trajan to the accession of Diocletian. T h e y convey a double assertion - six authors, and they wrote at different times during the reigns of Diocletian and of Constantine ( w h o died in 337). T h o s e claims went unchallenged until the year 1889, when a young scholar, H e r m a n n Dessau, made a discovery that alarmed his seniors. Dessau's exposition was firm and lucid: a single author, and he perpetrated his imposture at a later season, towards the end of the Fourth C e n t u r y .

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

211

It w o u l d be instructive, though perhaps tedious, to recount the annals of prolonged warfare, the ebb and flow of battle, the names of ancient power. Historians were the principal contenders, eager for facts and preoccupied with the dating of the work. That was unfortu­ nate. T h e primary approach to the HA should be literary: structure and sources, language and authorship. O f the six ostensible biographers, 'Vopiscus' is the last in order. He n a m e d three of them as predecessors. However, neither he nor they assert that they are writing in collaboration. That must be stated at the outset, to preclude misconceptions. Some critics make the incautious assumption. For support and parallel, appeal has even been made to large histories of multiple authorship published at Cambridge. The notion is ingenious. Taken a step further it entails an e d i t o r - b u t also a planner, however incompetent. O n cursory inspection, the name labels fall apart. Their apportion­ m e n t was often peculiar or in conflict with the text. One of the 'Six' polishes off the life of Marcus Aurelius, quickly. He is denied the sequel of C o m m o d u s . O r he will announce the next biography, only to be pre-empted by somebody else. Gibbon preferred to cite them ' w i t h o u t distinction, under the general and well-known title of the Augustan History'. N o t all scholars in the recent time have paid heed to the salubrious admonition. Error ensues, and multiple delusions. T h e labels of identity were carelessly attached. They are an afterthought, that is clear. It would be worth ascertaining at what stage in composition the author chose to pass himself off as a collec­ tion, first of all four (but later rising to six). Perhaps (so it can be argued) w h e n he had finished compiling and abridging his source for the nine emperors from Hadrian to Caracalla. About this time, creat­ ing a novelty in biography, he decided to write, as pendants to those rulers, the lives of t w o princes and three pretenders to the power. Fiction was almost total, like what was to follow, a culmination soon reached with Elagabalus and Severus Alexander. If the labels were waived or dismissed as pseudonyms, a case might still be m a d e for plural authorship in some form or other. At first sight the Vitae are alarmingly hybrid and heterogeneous. Reflection or scrutiny provides the explanation. The matter is diverse, and so is the treatment. T h e author compiles (as in the first sequence of Caesars), he translates from Greek sources, he indulges in free composition. The p h e n o m e n o n is likewise apparent in individual biographies. Style exhibits a wide range from the prosaic or even vulgar to rhetoric and eloquence. T h e c o m m o n features outweigh variation and divergence. Habits of language or grammar, unusual words and expressions recur in widely

212

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

separate portions of the HA. Above all, the author's fabrications, characteristic and recurrent. None the less, like the 'traditional date', the 'plurality of authors' still finds advocates especially among Italian scholars (national fancies in classical learning, and national contrasts, may afford some amusement). 1 Some continue to employ the names of the 'Six'. The more subtle, it appears, might be disposed to settle for a lesser company, but they refrain from specifying the number. Discreet cover is supplied by the term 'Scriptores Historiae Augustae'. As elsewhere in this controversy, clarity is called for. When dispute and dissent keep going, it is worth an effort to look for reasons. One of them is respect for tradition and the written word, deference to authority (that is, authority in the modern time). Classical scholars sometimes incur disparagement for sticking to their texts. In this instance, a paradox comes to light, and a pertinent question. One wonders whether conservative critics examine the Historia Augusta as a whole, whether they read it often enough. The 'literature of the subject' is a fatal substitute. Is there no end in sight? A new and novel technique might decide the question of authorship once and for all. The computer supervenes.2 Tojts arbitrament are submitted some of those regular and unobtrusive phenomena that betray the linguistic habits of an author. First, the HA as a whole is compared with a group of other writings, for length of sentences. It is shown homogeneous. Second, the Six are analysed by the types of phrase that begin or end a sentence. The response appears unequivocal. Doubts are sometimes voiced about the method when applied to vocabulary, and peculiar results may emerge when different portions of a known author are put to the test. It will not be easy to impugn the present operation. Those who conducted the inquiry may await attempts without undue apprehension. It remains to assess the consequences. They are various and valuable, extending far beyond questions of single or multiple authorship. Instant relief accrues for the plain man, perplexed or annoyed by the abstruse detail of an intricate controversy, prone to acquiesce in the authority of standard manuals - few clear and comprehensive state­ ments have been issued in recent years. He will be happy to see the work-force (helots or hierophants) now set free for useful tasks. For 1

Haifa dozen names could be cited. 'The Authorship of the Historia Augusta: Two Computer Studies' by I. Marriott (JRS lxix (1979), 65 ff). 2

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

213

example, Church History seen from the point of view of non-fanatical pagans, or a biography of Athanasius. To friends of the Six dismay may percolate. Sundry arguments or devices lapse that were invoked to discriminate between biographers. Not so long ago a French scholar was able to equip them with an identity, each and all.3 Thus 'Spartianus', sober and intelligent (not the man to forge a document), or 'Lampridius', with a propensity towards moralizing and to scabrous details, and so on. Again, significance has been discovered in the fact that only one of them, 'Capitolinus', cites 'Junius Cordus' (long recognized by most as a non-existent author). The label 'Capitolinus' appertains to nine biographies. Like the HA itself, they cover the gamut, from compilation to mature and exuber­ ant fiction. Applying the same arguments to 'Capitolinus', advocates of plurality might have split him into two or rather three persons, without perceptible discomfort. Persons and names in fact opened the path and inspired the pioneer. When composing entries for the Prosopographia Imperii Romani, Hermann Dessau came upon items of nomenclature which, ostensibly anterior to the year 284, were not only invented but redolent of a much later a g e - such as 'Toxotius' and 'Nicomachus'. He drew the conclu­ sion. Hence joy and sorrow. Also efforts of evasion: aristocrats who bore those names in the second half of the Fourth Century no doubt had ancestors in the epoch of Diocletian and Constantine. In 1971 appeared the Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire. In certain respects a declension from Dessau - but the task was infinitely more arduous. A work of this kind is liable to omissions. One of them is notable, the sad fate of the Six. Four of them are left out, no excuse or palliation. Two qualify - 'Lampridius' and 'Vopiscus'. To 'Lampridius' was allocated a role and a personality: 'he refers to Christianity more often and in a less hostile spirit than the other biographers.' Together with the general inadvertence, that item, it may be noted, avows multiple authorship in the enterprise. Plural authors for the HA being now discountenanced, much writ­ ing goes down the drain. One fate carries off the learned along with the lazy, the clever no less than the credulous. For the faithful, a sombre consolation avails. They were not con­ futed through mere appeal to language and style and structure. The computer did it. By the same token, disappointment for those who had laboured in the vineyard or derived refreshment from fiction and imposture. At the eleventh hour a machine cheats them of reward. What then remains to be done? Quite a lot. First of all, to carry on the 3

H. Bardon, Le Crepuscule des Chars: Scenes et Visages de I'Histoire Auguste (1964).

214

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

historian's plain duty, to segregate fact from fraud. That entails Quellenkritik, to some a name of dread. The basic source of the first sequence of imperial biographies (the nine Vitae from Hadrian to Caracalla) needs to be defined beyond dispute, the accretions to be separated (and used for other purposes). Less is known about certain rulers than what earned credit from the illustrious author of the Memoires d'Hadrien (1951) or from professed historians. After Caracalla, invention has the larger part. The nature and quality of the Severus Alexander was no secret. As Gibbon declared, 'the mere idea of a perfect prince, an awkward imitation of the Cyropaedia\ A recent estimate puts the factual residue at about 2 per cent. Along with a mass of forged documents (letters and decrees of emperors, orations of senators) the HA carries over 200 bogus persons, of every rank and character, from 'Ablavius Murena' to 'Zosimio'. In one biography, that of the Emperor Tacitus (fifteen pages in a modern text), none of the names is genuine, save those of emperors. The semblance of authenticity is conveyed by an alternat­ ing technique, the names either rare and startling or drab and indistinctive. The HA adduces some thirty-five biographers or historians nowhere else on attestation. That is one of the main clues to the nature of the work. The prime exhibit is 'Junius Cordus': cited not as a main source for any biography but on the side. His function is to be scourged as a frivolous and deleterious writer. He has two entries as 'Aelius Cordus'. Like a novelist, the author forgot. Proust was not clear whether the husband of Mme Verdurin was 'Auguste' or 'Gustave'. Not but that 'Aelius Junius Cordus' still has fanciers. As have other fables. Severus Alexander, 'so an author of the time relates,' worshipped at a domestic chapel in which stood images of Christ and Abraham, along with a pair of pagan sages or saints. The beliefs of the Syrian prince do not fail to seduce adepts of religious syncretism. Again, the Emperor Tacitus, on general exposition as an elderly senator of frugal and scholarly habits (each night he would read or write, save on the second of the month). For the full count the reader is exhorted to consult the copious biography written by 'Suetonius Optatianus'. This emperor claimed the historian as an ancestor and enjoined that copies of the books be made every year. Hence unique testimony to the transmission of classical texts in an obscure epoch. Next, language and style. By paradox this ample repertorium has had little attraction for the tribe of philologists, although displaying oddities in abundance: archaisms, rare or poetical words, neologisms and technical terms, peculiar expressions. There are also vulgarisms,

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

215

some creeping already into late authors, such as positus, equivalent to the missing present participle of the verb esse. Others anticipate Romance idioms, as fecit occidi or the preposition de instead of ex. Third, the author himself, to be sought and found in his fabrica­ tions. Apart from bogus characters one comes upon emperors and usurpers made vivid through physical appearances, diet and drink, literary productivity; then speeches and letters, consular dates, civilian and military posts, regiments and mixed bodies of troops, schedules of supplies, paintings and sculpture, Greek verses in translation, omens and oracles. That is not all. If the fabrications are catalogued in order, as each rubric appears for the first time, a clear progression will emerge. Developing in resource, the author improves all the time, and stands out before the end as a master of craft and audacity. At a public festival the Prefect of the City invites ' Vopiscus' to share his official carriage. Deploring the fact that no biography exists of Aurelian (his relative, to be sure), the Prefect offers memoirs written by that emperor and documents from the Bibliotheca Ulpia. He then goes on to allude to manifest defects in the four classic historians of Rome and adds encouragement. 'Do not worry. Write as you please. You will have for companions in mendacity those whom we admire as paragons of historical eloquence.' The scene is set in the carnival season when masked revellers went about the streets impersonating both high and low. The genial impostor has raised his mask for a moment. In a later place, pretending to a serious vein, he reverts to the theme and rebukes the four historians because they affect an elevated style. Biographers are modest, and they tell the truth. For proof, six names are appended (four of them spurious). The author's talent has not always secured recognition. Likewise the humour. Some of the jokes are feeble, like the pervasive puns on names, recalling the schoolboy or his instructors. But observe Gallienus interrupting the ceremonial pomp of his decennial festival with a clamour for his dinner: 'ecquid habemus in prandio?' And there are sustained efforts. A prophecy foretold that a descendant of the Emperor Tacitus will extend conquest to the ends of the world, imposing Roman governors on Ireland and Ceylon; and further, he will restore sovereignty to the Senate and die at the age of 120, leaving no heir. This is not to happen until a thousand years have elapsed. As the author explains, the descendants of Tacitus (who are numerous) are still waiting for the 'millesimus annus'. That a writer should exhibit so portentous an evolution in the course

216

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

of one and the same work is a rare and remarkable phenomenon. Yet such are the facts. Elsewhere early essays or first drafts have seldom been preserved. As Gibbon says, 'many experiments were made before I could hit the middle tone between a dull chronicle and a rhetorical declamation: three times did I compose the first chapter.' Saint-Simon furnishes a more revealing parallel. In 1694, when he was a youth on military service, he began a diary. Some of that sober record (but not much) was incorporated in the Memoires he composed in old age (between 1739 and 1749), having turned meanwhile into a blend of Suetonius and Tacitus, combining personal detail about monarch and courtiers with subversive commentary. N o w the HA is not just bad biography or dishonest history. Nor did dearth of evidence or sources running out reduce the author to inven­ tions. The five biographies of princes and pretenders (an original product) are defined by modern scholars as 'the secondary Vitae\ Not secondary, however, in his design and intention. They foreshadow the later exposition, the mature achievement. A question might occur about the literary genre. Describing portions of the HA, some speak of historical romance. Better, perhaps, 'fictional history'. A distinction might be drawn, on various criteria - but not clear or easy. B. Perry in his book The Ancient Romances (1967) excluded historical fiction, of set purpose. Not perhaps a good idea - and he omitted Xenophon's Cyropaedia. Some definitions need to be looked at again. The HA opens wide perspectives - namely, the purpose of literary fraud and its personal motives, the techniques of verification. Other media offer guidance, such as works of art or inscriptions on stone or metal. In the year 1881 the coast of Brazil delivered a Phoenician docu­ ment, set up by Hiram's men from Tyre, after a long voyage that began at Eziongebir on the Red Sea. Surviving only in copies, the text has been held genuine by a Semitic philologist (Cyrus Gordon). Superior literacy has rendered North America more prolific in preColumbian testimonies. About ninety years ago, a runic inscription was dislodged from the roots of a tree in rural Minnesota: a party of Norsemen (both male and female) had got that far in the year 1362. Until recently the stone was on proud exhibit in the Smithsonian Institute at Washington. When the object is extant, scientific tests can be applied (the Turin Shroud is said to be under inspection). They have not spared the bronze tablet which Sir Francis Drake erected on the coast of California, where it emerged from a sand hill. The specific metal alloy

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

217

was not in use in the sixteenth century. The proof was superfluous. Where Drake's memorial would have written 'for ever' the tablet has 'forever'. Similarly, later grammatical forms on the Minnesota stone. A single w o r d may condemn, and the economical solution is sheer delight. Elaborate literary deceptions offer tougher resistance, or hold out, not suspected or impugned for a long time. In 1819, Hase, Keeper of Greek manuscripts at the Bibliotheque Royale, published frag­ ments of a Byzantine historian. The 'Toparcha Gothicus' (as it is called) furnished precious information about Russian history, otherwise so sparse in the tenth century. It is now exposed as a forgery. 4 T h e searching demonstration brought up other activities of Hase, and cast light on his devious character: an ambitious upstart and i m m i g r a n t of German origin, an erudite scholar who kept a secret diary written in Greek. Recent notoriety attends upon Sir E d m u n d Backhouse (the Hermit of Peking) w h o discovered the memoirs of a Chinese courtier that vouchsafe startling disclosures about the last empress. Once again the person concords with the product, as is shown by a masterpiece of detection. 5 T h e historian w h o conducted that stylish operation was alert to the wider implications of his theme. Concluding his portrayal of the venerable and bearded impostor, he subjoined brief reference to other artists, notably Lenormant, the French Hellenist and archaeologist, and the bibliographer T. J. Wise, who manufactured m o r e than fifty first editions of English poets. T h r o u g h the ages forgeries have been in constant employ to c o m m e n d the claims of a party, a government, a religion. Sacred relics and national antiquities often carry their purpose on their face, or not far beneath. N o r is the craving for personal fame absent, for academic rewards or pecuniary profit. Hase was thus impelled (though he got only the O r d e r of St. Vladimir, fourth class), and so was Wise. That need not detain. A pure and more amiable manifestation is here in question: deceit for its o w n sweet sake. H e w h o perpetrates a hoax enjoys a double delectation. He fools people, and soon or late they come to see that they have been fooled. Superior and subtle jokers are in no hurry to be found out. Thus the Scandinavian w h o composed the runes and planted the stone - a vagrant theological student, as was long suspected and in the end proved. T h e theme of revenge delayed beyond the grave has appealed to a 4 I. Sevcenko, 'The Date and Author of the so-called Fragments of Toparcha Gothicus', Dumbarton Oaks Papers xxv (1971), 117 ff. 5 H. R. Trevor-Roper, A Hidden Life (1976).

218

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

versatile humorist. In one of the stories of Alphonse Allais a local antiquary, at odds with colleagues, instructs a friend to order his interment, clothing the corpse in a suit of Chinese armour, sealing it in a Gallo-Roman sarcophagus along with a selection of Greek coins. He imagined with merriment 'la gueule que feraient les archeologues dans cinq cent ans\ Notable performers may still evade censure or renown. In 1912, the Classical Review published from the pen of R. W. Raper (a Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford, not previously known for productivity) a suspiciously eloquent contribution entitled 'Marones: Virgil as Priest of Apollo'. Noting the opinion that regarded the poet as a Celt, he raised protest: 'the scientist of the future will perhaps take a wider and more comprehensive view.' He then went on to expound his own theory. Virgil had for ancestress a Jewish lady. Kidnapped by pirates, she ended up in Italy, having married on the way in Thrace the priest of Apollo called Maron. Furthermore, her descendant himself became 'acquainted with the Hebrew Prophets' and we may even contemplate him 'reverently poring over the Book of Kings'. Raper's article evoked mild demur in the next volume of the periodical. Warde Fowler gravely pointed out, among other things, that at Rome Apollo was 'a deity who had never been a really important one'; and he alluded to 'Augustus' "Apollinarism" (in my opinion much exaggerated of late)'. The article seems to have had no other repercussions. Virgilian scholars were perhaps growing diffident, or rather discreet, about their own speculations, in dangerous proximity. The tone and content betray Raper's motives, while the source of inspiration and the date (or at least a terminus post quern) could have been divined. In 1907 appeared VirgiVs Messianic Eclogue, a composite work but mercifully short, with Fowler and Conway among the contributors. Five years later, the preface to the Oxford Book of Latin Verse spread itself on the Celtic spirit ('for that is what it was') and the Celtic extraction of the Transpadane poet. Virgil, by the way, thought that his city was an Etruscan foundation. The Historia Augusta has been described and discussed as a forgery, all too often. The term is harsh and misleading. It suggests criminality or profit, it connotes an offence subject to legal penalty or redress. The question must be asked, who suffers injury when the dead or the non-existent are impersonated? - and pseudonyms have been a harm­ less recourse. 'Imposture' is the better word. Once the author's sense of humour is recognized and conceded, a further step can be taken. The thing is

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

219

a hoax. The missing preface might have conveyed a gentle hint, averring research in a library or in family papers, a chance discovery in a temple or a tomb. The interview of 'Vopiscus' with the City Prefect suffices, or the general impression reinforced by a few revealing items. To use one of the phrases by which Albertine betrayed to the Narrator her growing sophistication, j'estime que c'est la bonne solution, la solution elegante'. The author avows and parades the tastes of a scholar. He is a collector of oddities and a word-fancier, quoting from the Latin classics and using various devices such as oracles emitted in the form of Virgilian verses or bogus characters with names borrowed from Cicero; and several turns of phrase put him in the close vicinity of scholiasts. ' Imposture of this sophisticated type presupposes both a literary tradition and erudition become professional. Italy in the Renaissance proliferated in pastiche and creative fiction. Annius of Viterbo not only composed volumes of pseudo-history. He staged an excavation, on ground suitably salted. The last quarter of the Fourth Century witnessed a marked and momentous renascence of letters and learning. Forgotten classics were revived and put into circulation, notably the satirist Juvenal, and they called for commentaries. In the train of erudition returned erudite fraud. Educated Christians had been employing familiar techniques for polemical ends or for edification. Jerome now wrote his Life of Paul, duly equipped with 'corroborative details' - among them metal gear in a cave left there by forgers of coins in the days of Antonius and Cleopatra. This Paul is put on show as the proto-hermit of the Egyptian desert, preceding Antony, whom Athanasius had celebrated. Paul gave delight to readers through long ages. In 1969 he lost his place on the calendar by decree of the Vatican. The epoch of Diocletian and Constantine was a bleak and barren tract of time. To accept and retain a whole school of Latin biographers was a strange dereliction of modern scholarship, impervious to the odour of fraud and the impact of a joke. Authorship and date can no longer be kept separate. Not much has to be said. From the year 1889 the hunt was on. More and ever more anachronisms were put up. Exhilaration of the chase enticed to false trails or premature kills, and some of the bag were liable to be rejected by sceptical or conservative assessors. No matter - many of the anachronisms have themselves become irrelevant and obsolescent anyhow. A literary criterion supervened. Dessau detected a piece of

220

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

the epitomator Aurelius Victor which had been inserted in the biography of Septimius Severus (as elsewhere, the compiler flagged, for the basic source was more ample than he needed). Victor was writing in 360. A path of evasion offered, it is true: the suspect passage might belong not to Victor but to Victor's source. That path is now blocked. Exact scrutiny establishes many more traces of the epitomator in diverse sections of the H A . N o t merely facts, but inspiration for the author to embark on stretches of sustained fiction. For example, the r o m a n t i c development of an alleged interregnum of six months ensuing after Aurelian was killed and before Tacitus was proclaimed. According to Gibbon, 'an amazing period of tranquil anarchy'. Misled by the documentation, he styled it 'one of the best attested and most i m p r o b a b l e events in the history of mankind'. T h e dedications which some of the Six address to Diocletian and Constantine should never have deceived. T h e egregious 'Lampridius' u n d e r t o o k to write about Elagabalus by express command of Constantine, albeit with reluctance, for the subject was repulsive; and he was emboldened to deter him from the influence of evil counsellors, especially eunuchs. Constantine should know, having lived under their dominance ('qui talibus inserviit'). O n e of the first and heaviest o p p o n e n t s of Dessau opined that the Six were a group of courtiers. Anachronisms (not merely the flagrant and absurd) have forfeited function and appeal in debate. A fairly broad consensus emerges, advocating the last decade of the Fourth Century. In consequence, historians modify their approach. They look for the impact of contemporaneous transactions, above all the proscription of pagan cults in 391 and the battle beside the River Frigidus when the cause w e n t d o w n in defeat in September of 394. Next, influences from other writers of the time, from Ammianus and even from Jerome. And finally, illumination is discovered on the social habits of the time, ranging from games and spectacles to learning and letters. It was a colourful age, R o m a n tradition and the old faith now defended by theosophists and classical scholars, while a senator, the noble P a m m a c h i u s , promenaded in the black garb of a monk. T h e H A being planted in a congenial environment, the temptation ensued to divine its purpose. Propaganda was an obvious answer. M a n y have sought the author in the ranks of the pagan aristocracy, in or close to the 'circle of Symmachus' (which, by the way, is liable like other literary groups to lose members on analysis). When 'propaganda' is surmised, various questions impinge: by w h o m exercised and for w h o m , to what end of persuasion, of defence, of

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

221

consolation. They have not found clear and convincing answers, although something might be said in favour of a rearguard action conducted by a pagan and a patriot. The political opinions of the author are no secret. He admires the imperial tradition, he extols the prestige of the Senate, he is devoted to the memory of the Antonine rulers. A man who elected to write biographies of good and bad emperors had no choice. Doctrine and attitudes are predictable. They were there already in the Latin sources. The references to Christianity have been solicited with loving or anxious care. No inordinate concern with contemporary cults and beliefs seems to come out. This pagan might have been scabrous and savage. There was promising material, from ambitious bishops to militant monks. Jerome showed what could be done. He employed his talents of derision and invective to satirize the Roman clergy: luxurious and crafty, ensnaring pious widows of birth and wealth. Instead, our friend turns out to be innocuous or humorous, as when Aurelian reproves the Senate for neglecting to consult the Sibylline Books, for behaving no better that a conventicle of Christians. A prime document is the Letter of Hadrian, close towards the end of the work. The Emperor warns his brother-in-law against indulgence towards Egyptians. There is no true religion in the whole country, money the only god. Votaries of Serapis and Christ are interchange­ able hypocrites. When the Patriarch of the Jews pays a visit to the land of Nile each party tries to convert him, forcibly. The treatment accorded the Jews is in fact an instructive clue, avowing gentle malice and a taste for the exotic. Thus the ritual eating of ostrich flesh (so a Syrian prince is made to allege) or the Gallic virago 'Vituriga' who changed her name to 'Samso'. This in a season when homilies of Chrysostom at Antioch erupted in coarse abuse, when a bishop on the Euphrates, mustering his flock and enlisting the monks, proceeded to burn down a synagogue. The Emperor Theodosius tried to intervene but had to give way before the potent authority of Ambrose. It is not wholly fanciful to discover in the HA an unobtrusive plea for toleration; and admonition can be conveyed under the cover of frivolity. None the less, it is a misconception to assume a serious purpose. The HA is a genuine hoax. As in the beginning Dessau declared, 'eine Mystifikation liegt vor.' The text discloses a rogue scholar, delighting in deceit and making a mock of historians. Perhaps a professor on the loose, a librarian seeking recreation, a civil servant repelled by pedestrian routine. The computer having spoken (or better, the text), the single author

222

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

leads towards a suitable milieu, hence to the time of writing. Is there any escape, any device left for combining single authorship with the 'traditional date' - or rather 'ostensible dates'? In the past conservative critics displayed agility and much resource. One elaborate exposition, of weight and authority, operated with five groups of biographies and two editors, one Constantinian, the other Theodosian. The echoes of it are not yet mute. A recent theory summarily proposes three authors (an Anonymus followed by 'Pollio' and 'Vopiscus'), a collection made before the year 330, some interpolations between 400 and 410.6 It will not be easy to resuscitate once again the old expedient. The season for editors and interpolators is past and perished. Plain testimony from Aurelius Victor puts the HA as a whole subsequent to 360. All manner of things have been seen in the course of this controversy. A single author may now have to be conjured up with a long life to fit the ostensible dates, and a long span of activity - say, sixty or seventy years . . . There are precedents, albeit imperfect. At one stage in the controversy the fashion obtained of assuming that an annalistic history was the basic source exploited in the first sequence of imperial Vitae, from Hadrian to Caracalla. In the early years of this century E. Kornemann produced an annalist of superior quality (perhaps a senatorial jurist in the 'circle of Ulpian') who was over eighty when writing under Severus Alexander. He could also assign a name, viz. 'Lollius Urbicus', whom the HA happens to cite - and who might be presumed a grandson of the general who invaded Scotland. About the same time O. T. Schulz came out with a performer almost centenarian. Having been a schoolfellow of Marcus Aurelius (born in 121), he survived to recount the reign of Caracalla (killed in 217). The conjoint themes of history and fiction encourage brief mention of Courtil de Sandras, a soldier and literary adventurer, whose Memoires de Mr. d'Artagnan were exploited rather than surpassed by Dumas. The composition is fluent and attractive, enriched with lively episodes and an adequate measure of corroborative details. On a mission to London the famous 'Mousquetaire du Roi' had conversations with Cromwell and, an easier enterprise, seduced TAnglaise', the mistress of the French ambassador. Towards 1912, the Memoires attracted the attention of a medieval scholar, Charles Samaran, who had been a member of the Ecole des Chartes since 1897. He was able to rectify error, discard fiction, and bring supplement from unpublished archives. The result was a neat u

L. Fared, Storia di Roma vi (1961), 331.

Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed

223

and elegant book. 7 Alert and active as ever, Samaran celebrated his 100th birthday in October of 1979, to the delight of his many friends. While ternpus, dies,fortuna permit the present essay to terminate with a personal tribute to the living, commemoration of a different order will not escape the reader. Ninety years have passed since the signal exploit of Hermann Dessau. During his life he suffered neglect or dispraisal (disciples were few, apart from the valiant Ernst Hohl), and post­ humous recognition was delayed or impeded. In recent times or even in recent years, Dessau's main arguments, so some held, had been refuted long since or remained highly dubious; while scholars and critics of repute may still be found defending 'the traditional date and the plural authorship' of the Historia Augusta.8

7 Charles Samaran, D'Artagnan (Calmann-Levy, 1912). * Timpanaro made a firm statement: 'proprio in base agli argomenti stessi di Momigliano, sarei ancor piu decisamente favorevole alia datazione tradizionale e alia pluralita di autori.' Quoted by Momigliano, EHR, lxxxviii (1973), 114.

BIBLIOGRAPHY A. It will be of use to have in one place the origins of the fifteen papers comprised in the present volume: Ch. I. 'Fraud and Imposture.' Pseudepigrapha I. Entretiens de la Fondation Hardt XVIII (1972) , 3 T h e Composition of the Historia Augusta. 'JRS LXII (1972), 123 'Marius Maximus Once Again.' HAC 1970 (1972), 287 T h e Son of the Emperor Macrinus.' Phoenix XXVI (1972), 275 V. T h e Ancestry of Constantine.' HAC 1971 (1974), 237. 'Astrology in the Historia Augusta.' HAC 1972/4 (1976), 291 'Bogus Authors.' HAC 1972/4 (1976), 311 'Propaganda in the Historia Augusta.' Latomus XXXVII (1978), 173 T h e Pomerium in the Historia Augusta.' HAC 1975/6 (1978), 217 X. T h e End of the Marcomanni.' HAC 1977/8 (1980), 255 'Fiction in the Epitomators.' HAC 1977/8 (1980), 267 'More Trouble about Turbo.' HAC 1979/81 (1983 forthcoming), 303 'Hadrian and Antioch.' HAC 1979/81 (1983), 321 'Emperors from Etruria.' HAC 1979/81 (1983), 333 XV. 'Controversy Abating and Credulity Curbed?' The London Review of Books (September 4, 1980), 15 B. To round off the rubric, two observations occur. First, the first four chapters of Emperors and Biography (1971) derive from discourses held at Bonn between 1965 and 1968: T h e Bogus Names.' HAC 1964/5 (1966), 257 'Ipse Ille Patriarchìi: 1966/7(1968), 119 'Ignotus, the Good Biographer.' 1966/7(1968), 131 T h e Secondary Vitae.' 1968/9 (1970), 285 Second, T h e Historia Augusta: Three Rectifications.' J TS XXI (1970), 101; and three reprints in Roman Papers (1979), namely Chapters 49, 50, 57: 'Fiction and Archaeology in the Fourth Century: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Quaderno 105 (1968), 23 'Not Marius Maximus.' Hermes XCVI (1968), 494 Three Jurists.' HAC 1968/9 (1970), 309 C. The bibliography offered in Ammianus and the Historia Augusta (1968) was continued and supplemented in Emperors and Biography. After the latter volume was given to the Press (in April of 1969), six volumes of the Bonn Colloquium accrued, published between 1970 and 1980; and a seventh is due to appear in 1983.

Bibliography

225

Further, ten papers with express bearing on the HA are reprinted in J. Straub, Regeneratio Imperii (1972); A. Chastagnol furnishes a second general report, embracing the years from 1963 to 1969, in his Recherches sur l'Histoire Auguste (1970); and finally, T. D. Barnes, The Sources of the Historia Augusta (Collection Latomus, Vol. 155, 1978), with its 'Index of Modern Scholars.' D. The list that follows is a key to periodical articles, reviews and the like cited in the footnotes. Books and other separate publications are there registered by title and date. A L F Ö L D I , A. 'ZU den Christenverfolgungen in der Mitte des 3. Jahrhunderts.' Klio XXXII (1938), 251. 'The numbering of the victories of the Emperor Gallienus and of the loyalty of his legions.' Num. Chron.5 IX (1929), 218. Reprinted in Studien zur Geschichte der Weltkrise des 3. Jahrhunderts nach Christus (1967), 73. ALFÖLDY, G. 'Barbareneinfalle und religiöse Krisen in Italien.' HAC 1964/5 (1966), 1. 'Eine Proskriptionsliste in der Historia Augusta.' HAC 1968/9 (1970), 1. 'Der Friedenschluss des Kaisers Commodus mit den Germanen.' Historia XX (1971), 84. 'Marcius Turbo, Septicius Clarus, Sueton und die Historia Augusta.' ZPE 36 (1979), 233. ANDERSON, J. G. C. Trajan on the Quinquennium Neronis.'J#S I (1911), 173.

BAEHRENS, W. A. 'Bericht über die Literatur zu einigen wichtigen Schriftstellern des 3. und 4. Jahrhunderts aus den Jahren 1910/11 -1924.' BursiansJahresberichte CCVIII (1926), 1. B A L D W I N , B. 'The Vita Avida: Klio LVIII (1976), 101. BALLAND, A. 'Un taureau dans un arbre.' Mélanges Boyancé (1974), 39. BARBIERI, G. 'Mario Massimo.' Riv.fil. XXXII (1954), 36; 262. BARNES, T. D. 'Hadrian and Lucius Verus.'JRS LVII (1967), 65. 'The lost Kaisergeschichte and the Latin historical tradition.' HAC 1968/9 (1970), 13. ' A senator from Hadrumetum and three others.' HAC 1968/9 (1970), 45. 'Three Notes on the Vita Probi: CQ XX (1970), 201. 'Ultimus Antoninorum.' HAC 1970 (1972), 53. 'Some persons in the Historia Augusta.' Phoenix XXVI (1972), 140. 'Imperial Campaigns, A.D. 285, 311.' Phoenix XXX (1976), 174. B EC H ART, T. 'Ein Alemanneneinfall am obergermanischen Limes unter Elagabal.' Epigraphische Studien VIII (1969), 53. B I R D , H. W. 'Suetonian influence in the later lives of the Historia Augusta.' Hermes XCIX (1971), 129. BlRLEY, A. R. 'The Oath not to put Senators to Death.' CR XII (1962), 197. 'The Origins of Gordian I.' Britain and Rome. Essays presented to EricBirley (1966), 56. 'The Augustan History.' Latin Biography (éd. T. A. Dorey, 1967), 113.

226

Bibliography

B IRLE Y, E. Review of A. Stein, Die Präfekten von Ägypten in römischer Zeit. Gnomon XXIII (1951), 440. 'Africana in the Historia Augusta.' HAC 1968/9 (1970), 69. CAMERON, A. D. E. Review of J. Straub, Heidnische Geschichtsapologetik in der christlichen Spätantike. JRS LV (1965), 240. Review of Ammianus and the Historia Augusta. JRS LXI (1971), 254. T h r e e Notes on the Historia Augusta.' CR XVIII (1968), 17. C ARCOPINO, J. 'Le bâtard d'Hadrien et l'hérédité dynastique chez les Antonins.' Rev. et. anc. LI (1949), 262. Reprinted in Passion et politique chez les Césars (1958), 143. C H A S T A G N O L , A. 'Notes chronologiques sur l'Histoire Auguste et le Laterculus de Polemius Silvius.' Historia IV (1955), 173. 'Le problème de l'histoire Auguste: État de la question.' HAC 1963 (1964), 43. 'Zosime II, 38 et l'Histoire Auguste.' HAC 1964/5 (1966), 43. 'Emprunts de Y Histoire Auguste aux Caesares d'Aurelius Victor.' Rev. phil. XLI (1967), 85. 'L'utilisation des 'Caesares' d'Aurelius Victor dans l'Histoire Auguste.' HAC . 1966/7 (1968), 53. 'Les recherches sur l'Histoire Auguste de 1963 à 1969.' Recherches sur l'Histoire Auguste (1970), 1. 'L'Histoire Auguste et le rang des préfets du prétoire.' Recherches sur l'Histoire Auguste (1970),39. 'Latus clavus et adlectio dans l'Histoire Auguste.' HAC 1975/6 (1978), 133. CHÉHAB, M. 'Tyre à l'époque romaine.' Mélanges . . . Beyrouth XXXVIII (1962), 13. CORRADI, G. 'Le fonti della Storia Augusta.' Nuova Rivista Storica XLVll (1963), 164. CROOK, J. A. 'Suetonius ab epistulis.' Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. IV 1956/7 (1958), 18. D'ELIA, S. 'Per una nuova edizione critica di Aurelio Vittore: Conclusioni.' Boll, di studi latini III (1973), 52. DEGRASSI, A. 'Il sepolcro dei Salvii a Férento e le sue iscrizioni.' Scritti vari III (1967), 155. D E I N I N G E R , J. 'Brutus und die Bithyner. Bemerkungen zu den sog. griechischen Briefen des Brutus.' Rh. Mus. CIX (1966), 356. D E S A N C T I S , G. 'Gli S.H.A.' Rivista di Storia antica I (1896), 90. DESSAU, H. 'Über Zeit und Persönlichkeit der S.H.A.' Hermes XXIV (1889), 337. 'Über die S.H.A.'Hermes XXVII (1892), 561. Review of J. Hasebroek, Die Fälschung der Vita Nigri und Vita Albini in den Scriptores Historiae Augustae. Woch.fürkl. Phil. 1918,389. DETLEFSEN, D. 'Das Pomerium Roms und die Grenzen Italiens.' Herrn«XXI (1886), 497. FlSHER, W. H. 'The Augustan Vita Aureliani.'JRS XIX (1929), 125. F R E N O , W . H . C . 'Open questions concerning the Christians and the Roman Empire in the age of the Severi. JJTS XXV (1974), 333. F R É Z O U L S , E. 'Inscription de Cyrrhus relative à Q. Marcius Turbo.' Syria XXX (1953), 247.

Bibliography

227

GAGÉ, J. 'Programme d"italicité' et nostalgies d'hellénisme autour de Gallien et de Salonine.' ANRWII 2 (1975), 828. G A S C O U , J. 'Nouvelles données chronologiques sur la carrière de Suétone.' Latomus XXXVII (1978), 426. GEFFCKEN, J. 'Religionsgeschichtliches in der H.A.' Hermes LV (1920), 279. GOFFART, W. 'DidJulian combat venal suffragium?' Class. Phil. LXV (1970), 145. GORDON, C. H. 'The Authenticity of the Phoenician Text from Parahyba. ' Orientatici XXXVII (1968), 75. GRIFFIN, M. T. 'DeBrevitate Vitae.'JRS LII (1962), 104. GUE Y, J. 'La date de naissance de l'empereur Septime-Sévère, d'après son horoscope.' Bull. soc. nat. ani. France 1956, 33. HABICHT, C. 'Falsche Urkunden zur Geschichte Athens im Zeitalter der Perser­ kriege.' Hermes LXXXIX (1961), 7. HELM, R. 'Hieronymus und Eutrop.' Rh. Mus. LXXVI (1927), 138; 254. H E U R G O N , J. 'Traditions étrusco-italiques dans le monnayage de Trebonien Galle.' Studi etruschi XXIV (1955/6), 91. HlND, J. G. F. 'The Middle Years of Nero's Reign.' Historia XX (1971), 488. 'Is Nero's quinquennium an enigma?' Historia XXIV (1975), 629. HOHL, E. 'Vopiscus und die Biographie des Kaisers Tacitus. ' Klio XI (1911), 178;284. 'Zur Historia-Augusta-Forschung.' Klio XXVII (1934), 149. 'Bericht über die Literatur zu den S.H.A. für die Jahre 1916-1923.' Bursians Jahresberichte CCLVI (1937), 127. 'Über das Problem der Historia Augusta.' Wiener Studien LXXI (1958), 132. JACOBY, F. 'Die Überlieferung von Ps. Plutarchs Parallela Minora und die Schwindelautoren.' Mnem.3 VIII (1940), 73. Reprinted in Abh. zurgr. Geschichtsschreibung (1956), 359. JOHNE, K . - P . 'Die Biographie des Gegenkaisers Censorinus.' HAC 1972/4 (1976), 131. JONES, A. H. M.Review ofAmmianusandthe Historia Augusta. JTS XX (1969),320. KLEBS, E. 'Das dynastische Element in der Geschichtschreibung der römischen Kaiserzeit.' Hist. Zeitschr. XXV (1889), 229. KOLB, F. 'Der Aufstand der Provinz Afrika Proconsularis im Jahre 238 n. ehr.' Historia XXVI (1977), 440. L ABROUSSE, M. 'Le Pomerium de la Rome impériale.' MEFR LIV (1937), 165. LEPPER, F. A. 'Some reflections on the "Quinquennium Neronis." 'JRS XLVII (1957), 95. LlPPOLD, A.'Der Einfall des Radagais und die Vita Aureliani in der Historia Augusta.' HAC 1970 (1972), 149. LORIOT, X. 'Les premières années de la grande crise du Ille siècle: De l'avènement de Maximin le Thrace (235) à la mort de Gordien III (244).' ANRWU 2 (1975), 657. McDERMOTT, W. C. 'Fabricius Veiento.' AJPXCl (1970), 129.

228

Bibliography

MALCUS, B. 'Die Proconsuln von Asien von Diokletian bis Theodosius II.' Opusc. Adi. VII (1967), 91. MARRIOTT, I. 'The Authorship of the Historia Augusta: Two Computer Studies'. JRS LXIX(1979),65. M ATTINGLY, H. 'The reign of Macrinus.' Studies Presented to D. M. Robinson (1953), 962. MITCHELL, C. 'Archaeology and Romance in Renaissance Italy.' Italian Renaissance Studies (ed. E. F.Jacob, 1960), 455. MOMIGLIANO, A. 'An Unsolved Problem of Historical Forgery.' Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes XVII (1954), 22. Reprinted in Secondo Contributo (1960), 105. Also in Studies in Historiography (1966), 143. 'Ammiano e la Historia Augusta.' Atti Ac. Torino CIII (1968/9), 423. Reprinted in Quinto Contributo (1975), 93. Review of Ammianus and the Historia Augusta. EHR LXXXIV (1969), 566. Reprinted in Quinto Contributo (1975), 104. Review of Emperors and Biography. EHR LXXXVIII (1973), 114. Reprinted in Sesto Contributo (1980), 714. MOMMSEN, Th. 'Die Scriptores Historiae Augustae.' Hermes XXVI (1890), 252. Reprinted in Ges. Sehr. VII (1909), 302. MOREAU, J. 'Nachträge zum Reallexikon für Antike u. Christentum (RAC). Constantius I, Constantinus II, Constantius II, Constans.'Jahrbuchfür Antike u. Christentum II (1959), 158. MURRAY, O. T h e 'Quinquennium Neronis' and the Stoics.' Historia XIV (1965), 41. NUTTON, V. 'L. Gellius Maximus, Physician and Procurator.' CQ XXI (1971), 262. OLIVER, J. H . 'The Augustan Pomerium.' Mem. Am. Ac. RomeX (1932), 145. 'The Ancestry of Gordian I.' A/PLXXXIX (1968), 345. PEKÄRY, T. 'Statuen in der Historia Augusta.' HAC 1968/9 (1970), 151. PlGANIOL, A. 'L'état actuel de la question constantinienne 1930/49.' Historia I (1950), 82. PFLAUM, H . - G . 'Apropos des Préfets d'Egypte. ' LatomusX (1951), 471. 'Remarques sur l'onomastique de Cirta.' Limesstudien (Basel, 1959), 96. 'La valeur de la source inspiratrice de la vita Hadriani et de la vita Marci Antonini à la lumière des personnalités contemporaines nommément citées.' HAC 1968/9 (1970), 173. R E Y - C O Q U A I S , J . - P . 'Syrie romaine de Pompée à Dioclétien.'JRS LXVIII (1978), 44. RITTERLING, E. 'Military forces in the senatorial provinces.' JRS XVII (1927), 28. SALADINO, V. 'Iscrizioni latine da Roselle (II).' ZPE39 (1980), 215. S ALAMA, P. 'L'empereur Macrin Parthicus Maximus. ' Rev. et. anc. LXVI (1964), 334. SCHWARTZ, J. 'Avidius Cassius et les sources de l'histoire Auguste.' HAC 1963 (1964), 135.

Bibliography

229

SESTON, W. 'Sur les traces de Marius Maximus.' HAC 1964/5 (1966), 211. S E V C E N K O , I. 'The Date and Author of the so-called Fragments of Toparcha Gothicus: Dumbarton Oaks Papers XXV (1971), 117. SHERK, R. K. 'A Chronology of the Governors of Galatia: A.D. 112-285.' AJP C (1979), 166. S T R A U B , J. 'Die Zinsgesetze des Severus Alexander.' Regenerate (1972), 304. S YME, R. Review of A. Stein, Die Projekten von Ägypten. JRS XLIV (1954), 116. Review of A. Stein, Die Reichsbeamten von Dazieri JRS XXXVI (1946), 159 = Danubian Papers (1971), 160. 'The Wrong Marcius Turbo. JRS LII (1962), 87 = RP (1979), 541. 'Hadrian and Italica.' JRS LIV (1964), 142 = RP (1979), 617. 'Legates of Moesia.' Dacia XII (1968), 331 = Danubian Papers (1971), 213. 'Not Marius Maximus.' Hermes XCVI (1968), 494 = RP (1979), 650. T h e Ummidii. ' Historia XVII (1968), 72 = RP (1979), 659. 'ThreeJurists.' HAC 1968/9 (1970), 309 = RP (1979), 790. 'Danubian and Balkan Emperors.' Historia XXII (1973), 310. T h e Enigmatic Sospes.'JtfS LXVII (1977), 38. 'Donatus and the Like.' Historia XXVII (1978), 588. 'Ummidius Quadratus, Capax Imperii/ Harvard Studies LXXXIII (1979), 289. 'Guard Prefects of Trajan and Hadrian. JRS LXX (1980), 64. T h e Travels of Suetonius Tranquillus.' Hermes CIX (1981), 105. 'Governors dying in Syria.' ZPE41 (1981), 125. THORNTON, M. K. T h e Enigma of Nero's Quinquennium.' Historia XXII (1973), 570. TIMPANARO, S. 'Due noterelle al testo di storici antichi.' Studi di storiografia antica in memoria di Leonardo Ferrerò (1971), 127. TORELLI, M. 'Senatori etruschi della tarda repubblica e dell' impero.' Dialoghi di Archeologia III (1969), 285. With 'Qualche addendum.' Arh. VestnikXXVlll (1977), 251. TOWNEND, G. B. 'Some Flavian Connections.'JRS LI (1961), 54. T h e Hippo Inscription and the Career of Suetonius.' Historia X (1961), 99. VAN BERCHEM, D. 'Les Marcomans au service de l'Empire.' Carnuntina (ed. E. Swoboda, 1956), 12. WEBER, W. 'ZU der Inschrift des Julius Quadratus.' Berliner Abh. 1932, 57. WHITE, P. T h e authorship of the Historia Augusta.' JRS LVII (1967), 115.

INDEX OF PERSONAL NAMES Emperors, members of theirfamilies, and ancient authors are registered by their normal or conventional names

Abgarus of Edessa, correspondence with Christ, 5 Abraham, as astronomer, 5 Acholius, known from Symmachus, 105 'Acholius', two of this name in HA, 102, 103, 105,107 Acilius Attianus, Guard Prefect, 171 f, 173 Aelius Caesar, L., origin of family, 192; his horoscope, 83f., 86, 185; alleged the son of Hadrian, 86f.; speech, current in late antiquity, 98 'Aelius Cesettianus', 117 'Aelius Lampridius', commanded to write by Constantine, 24, 220; his biographies, 21 f., 58; interest in Christianity, 28, 100, 126, 154, 213; includes astrological items, 96; admitted to PLRE, 28, 100, 213; as characterized by a scholar, 213 'Aelius Sabinus', 105 'Aelius Spartianus', interested in astrology, 94, 96; favourably regarded by a scholar, 213 AEMILIANUS, emperor, origin, 196f, 200, 203; in Aurelius Victor, 203; not named by HA, 201 Aemilianus, usurper in Egypt, 201 'Aemilius Parthenianus', 102 Afinia Gemina Baebiana, wife of Gallus, 196 Afmius Gallus, L. {cos. 62), 196 Africanus, character in Ammianus, 106 ' Africanus', his drinking habits deplored, 106 Alexandria, daughter of Avidius Cassius, 39 Alfoldi, A., on the HA, 110, 113, 125 Allais, Alphonse, humorist, 218 Ambrose, patron of Fritigil, Marcomannic queen, 150; able to dominate Theodosius, 221 A M M I A N U S , the lost books, not exploited by HA, 13, 55; nature of influence on HA, 12, 14, 91, 105, 106; on deuotio of Claudius, 69, 159f.; on northern tribes, 149, 153; on Hadrian and Antioch, 185; on aristocratic tastes in reading, 40, 128, 129; praises Aurelius Victor, 163; cites Marius Maximus, 15; language, 77, 94 Annius of Viterbo, writes pseudo-history, 10, 219 A N O N Y M U S VALESIANUS, excellent source,

on birthplace of Constantine, 63, of

Licinius, 65; on Constantine, his relationship to Claudius, 68, his Dalmatian governorship, 73 Antigonus of Nicaea, compiler of horoscopes, 85 Antoninus, twin brother of Commodus, 90 Antonius Polemo, M., ruler of Olba, 138f. 'Apollonius Syrus Platonicus', 83, 101 Apollonius ofTyana, his letters, 7; known to HA, 101; his biography translated, 105 Appius Octavius Suetrius Sabinus, C. {cos. II 240), 118 'Arabianus', possible inspiration for the name, 59f. Arbaces, Persian general, 9 ' Arbaces', early ruler of Media, 9 Arellius Fuscus, Augustan rhetor, 101 'Arellius Fuscus', 101 'Asclepiodotus', not an author in HA, 100, 102 ASCONIUS, on literary impersonations, 3 'Athala', suggested Germanic name of Attalus, 151 Attalus, Marcomannic king, 151 Atticianus, actuarius cuckolded by Victorinus, 161 AUGUSTINE, his interest in astrology, 85, 94 A U G U S T U S , closures ofJanus, 131 f.; alleged extension ofpomerium, 133f, 137 AULUS GELLIUS, on the name of astrologers, 80; on a lecture of Favorinus, 85; on extension of the pomerium, 133, 143 AURELIAN, origin, various versions, 65, 123, 159; omens at birth, 107; gentilicium unknown to HA, 75, 159; links with other emperors, forged by HA, 75f.; an alleged kinsman, 215; not chosen as ancestor by Constantine, 70; not an author, 101; operations against Marcomanni, 154; alleged extension of the pomerium, 136f.; spares Tetricus, 162; proposes to improve viticulture, 204; safeguards Gothic princesses, 152, 159; rebukes Senate for behaving like Christians, 154, 221; death, 70, 162; 'interregnum' after his death, 116, 164f., 220; favourably portrayed by HA and Aurelius Victor, 115, 162 'Aurelius Apollinaris', poet, 98 'Aurelius Festivus', in PLRE, 100

Index of Personal Names 'Aurelius Verus', biographer, 44, 105 AURELIUS VICTOR, City Prefect, 56; his qualities as a writer, 49, 140, 163; his methods and sources, 157, 163; see also Enmann, KG of; use of Suetonius, 160; use of Caesares by HA established, 13, 30, 35, 114,140, 220, 222; an inspiration to HA, 14, 114, 140, 164f., 220; on Augustus and Tiberius, 147; on Nero, 139,141f., 143f.;on Faustina, 37, 156; on Severus, 115; on Macrinus and Diadumenianus, 49f.; on Severus Alexander, 160; on Ulpian and Paul, 143f.; on Gordiani, 26; on Philip, 22, 200; on Decius, 199f., 202; on Gallus, 203; on Gallienus and Pipa, 151, 152f.; on Claudius Gothicus, 69, 152, 158f.; on Aurelian, 115, 136f.; on Tacitus, 70, 116, 164f., 202; on Tetrarchs and Illyricum, 63, 75, 204; oracles and omens in, 161, 203f.; on northern tribes, 149; on Rome in his time, 202; his hostility to Gallienus, 69, 151, 160, 161, 197, to military emperors, 166f, 193, 199, to bureaucrats, 116, 119 'Aurelius Victor Pinius', critic of Macrinus, 56 Aureolus, rebels against Gallienus, 161f. A U SON I US, as evidence for the biographies of Marius Maximus, 15, 31, 37; possibly alluded to in HA, 15, 40, 42; on famous cities, 122 'Autronius Tiberianus', 120 Avidius Cassius, C , defeat ofBucolici, 36; usurpation, 37f.; his military discipline praised by HA, 115; accorded descent from Republican Cassii, 121 Avidius Heliodorus,C, relations with Hadrian, 85, 177, 186 'Avidius Severus', father of Avidius Cassius, 115

231

Brutus, his Greek epistles, 7 'Burburus', renowned drinker, 106

Caecinae, of Volaterrae, 206, 207, 208 'Caclestinus', in PLRE, 100 'Caelianus', tutor of Diadumenianus, 60 Caesennii, 191, 198, 205f, 207 Caesennius Antoninus, L. {suff. 128), 192, 205 Caesennius Gallus, A., 190 Caesennius Paetus, L. (cos. 61), 190; his full nomenclature, 191 Caesennius Paetus, L. (suff. 79), 191 Caesennius Sospes, L. (suff. 114), 191f, 205 Caesennius Sospes, L. (cos. 163), 192 'Callicrates Tyrius', author cited by HA, 98, 99; lists omens foretelling rule of Aurelian, 107, 203; significance of'Tyrius', 108 Cameron, A. D. E., his views on composition of HA, 12f., 14, 15f.,21f.,112 Carcopino, J., on Hadrian's heir, 86 CARINUS, his criminal character, 119, 162 C A R U S , his alleged Roman origin, 122; struck by lightning, 161 Carvilius, British king, 152 Casperius Aelianus, in Philostratus, 7 C A S S I U S D I O , on Julius Caesar, 133; on Augustus, 131, 133f.; his account of reign of Hadrian, 85, 185; on death of Pedanius Fuscus, 86; on Hadrian's quarrels, 186; on his final years, 177f.; account of reign of Severus, too detailed for HA, 13, 53f.; on Severus and astrology, 88; on origin ofjulia Domna, 89, of Pertinax, 90; as source for reign of Macrinus, 46,48, 51, 53; on letter of Elagabalus, 57 Catilius Severus (cos. II 120), 23, 118, 176 'Catilius Severus', 23 Cebes, in a 'letter' of Plato, 6 Ceionii, their patria, 192, 204; allegedly favoured by Constantine, 121 Backhouse, Sir E., his notable deceptions, 'Ceionius Albinus', victim of Septimius 129,217 Severus, 117, 121 Baebius Macer, City Prefect, 23, 118 Ceionius Commodus, L., see L. Aelius 'Baebius Macer', Guard Prefect, 23 Caesar 'Baebius Macrianus', 23 'Ceionius lulianus', 121 B A L B I N U S , 193,201,205 'Ceionius Postumus', father of Clodius Balzac, a device for authenticity, 103 Albinus, 121 Barnes, T. D., on HA's use of Marius 'Celsinus', 100 Maximus, 15f.; on composition of HA, 18 C E N S O R I N U S , astrological writer, 92, 94 Basilius, City Prefect, 159 'Censorinus', usurper, 118f. Baynes, N . H., his theory about the HA, 110, Chastagnol, A., on date and authorship of 123, 128 HA, 110, 113, 125, 128; on City Prefecture, Bentley, Richard, exposes letters of Phalaris, 3 119 Bonosus, usurper, alleged bibulous, 106; his C H R Y S O S T O M , his anti-Jewish homilies, 221 Gothic bride, 152 C I C E R O , reminiscences of, in HA, 60, 124; Bonosus, water-drinking monk in Jerome, astrological language in, 92, 93; evidence 106 for an extension ofpomerium, 133; a Pipa in, Boyle, defends letters of Phalaris, 3 151; quoted, 178

232

Index of Personal

'Claudia', niece of Claudius Gothicus, 71 'Claudia', sister of Probus, 75, 123 CLAUDIAN, his polemic against Constantinople, 122, 125; on Danubian invaders, 146, 150 CLAUDIUS, as senator, 115f.; scholar, 134f.; his extension ofpomerium, 131, 135 CLAUDIUS GOTHICUS, origin and family in HA, 7If.; family links with other emperors forged by HA, 75f., 123, by Epitome, 76, 158; chosen as ancestor by Constantine, 67f., 70f., 74, 152, 158; his defeat of Goths, 67f., 124; favourable accounts of his accession, 69, 152, 158f, 162, of his death, 69, 159f; deuotio not in HA, 70, 201; Gibbon on,194 'Claudius Eusthenius', author, accepted as genuine, 98 CLODIUS ALBINUS, his literary compositions, 98; his alleged pedigree, 121, 126 'Clodius Celsinus', 120 Clodius Pupienus Pulcher Maximus, Ti., son of Pupienus, 194 COMMODUS, his alleged illegitimacy, 36f., 81,156 'Constantina', sister of Claudius Gothicus, 71 C O N S T A N T I N E , his birthplace and patria, 63f., 124; adopts Claudius Gothicus as ancestor, 67f., 70f., 74, 152,158; in HA, 24, 73,114,220 CONSTANTIUS, his family origins unknown, 63f.; relationship with Claudius variously represented, 67f., 71 f., 124; links with other emperors forged by HA, 75f.; governorship of Dalmatia, 73; progenitor of Augusti, 117 Corneille, his mode of addressing Sophocles discussed, 3 Cornelius Fronto, M. (sujf. 143), 177f. Cornificia, sister of Marcus, 176 Crispus, son of Constantine, 74 'Crispus', brother of Claudius Gothicus, 71, 74,76 Ctesias, fictional historian, 9 Cupressenus Gallus (sujf. 147), 195, 207

Names

persecution of Christians, 159, 201; his heroic death, 159, 195, 199f, 202 D E M O S T H E N E S , authenticity of his letters, 7 Dessau, H., exposes true date and authorship of HA, 109f., 210; his arguments long resisted, 223; establishes use of Aurelius Victor in Vita Severi, 49, 114, 140, 219f.; on significance of aristocratic nomenclature in HA, 120, 213, of fraudulent ancestryof Constantine, 67, 78; on propaganda in HA, 126, 127, 155; on the early biographies, 179; on sortes Vergilianae, 108; on use of Eutropius in Vita Marci, 153; quoted, 221 Dexandrus, dynast of Emesa, 182 D E X I P P U S , his History, a source for HA, 70, 72, 201 'Diabolenus', 152 DlADUMENlANUS, his age, character and titles variously described, 48f.; his horoscope, 90 DlDius JULIANUS, his origin and status, 192f. Dido, queen of Carthage, 108 D I O C L E T I A N , dedications to, in HA, 18, 25,

35, 73, 81 Diogenes, citizen of Gerasa, 183 DOMITIAN, his Danubian wars, 148; destruction often consulars, 115, of relatives, 189f. Domitilla, niece of Domitian, 191 Domitius Alexander, usurper in Africa, 73 Domitius Aristaeus Arabianus, legate of proconsul of Asia, 59 Dossena, creator of archaic Greek sculpture, 2 Drake, Sir Francis, his tablet found on the Californian coast, 216 f. Dryantianus, son-in-law of Avidius Cassius, 39 Dufraigne P.,"editor of Aurelius Victor, 166 Dumas, his source for D'Artagnan, 222 Egnatia Mariniana, mother of Gallienus, 197 Egnatii, prominent in third century, their origin, 197 Eissfeldt, O . , on Hadrian and Syria, 180f. ELAGABALUS, on Diadumenianus, 57;

'Dagellius Fuscus', 101, 105 Dalmatius, name in the family of Constantine, 76, 158 'Dalmatius', father of Probus in Epitome, 76, 152,158 Damis, in Philostratus, 7 D'Artagnan, fiction about him, 222 Decii, Republican heroes, 159f, 202 DECIUS, his origin, 163, 195, 199; his marriage, 195; reluctant usurper, 202; his

proposes fourteen City Prefects, 22, 119; plans war against Marcomanni, 81, 153f. 'Encolpius', 103 Enmann, KG of, its use of Marius Maximus, 37; common source of Latin epitomators, 14, 30f., 49f., 140,151,156f., 163,199, 201; on annexations of Nero, 139; Decius, 63, 199; Gallienus, 69, 151f.; Claudius Gothicus, 69; Tacitus, 164f; Probus, 76, 163; used by HA, 13f., 30f, 50f., 53, 61, 136, 140

Index of Personal Names E U M E N I U S , unaware of importance of Claudius Gothicus, 70f. EUSEBIUS, credits correspondence between Christ and Abgarus of Edessa, 5; ignores Claudian ancestry of Constantine, 68; ignores the emperor Tacitus, 70, 119, 164 Eutropia, half-sister of Constantine, 74 EUTROPIUS, his qualities as an epitomator, 49, 140; his main source, see Enmann, KG of; cited by Orosius, 132; source of HA, in Vita Marci, 32, 35, 153; compared with other epitomators, on Nero, 139; Macrinus and Diadumenianus, 49f.; Severus Alexander, 160; Gallienus, 151; Claudius Gothicus, 69, 159; Constantius' relationship with Claudius, 68; the usurper Victorinus, 161; Tacitus, 164; Probus, 158, 162, 163; Carinus, 162; on origins of northern emperors, 65; on northern tribes, 147, 149, 153; Virgilian quotation in, 162 'Eutropius', father of Constantius Caesar, 71f.,74,76 'Fabius Ceryllianus', 105 'Fabius Marcellinus', 44, 103; possible inspiration of the name, 105 'Fabius Sabinus', counsellor of Severus Alexander, 118 Fabricius Caesennius Gallus, L., knight at Ostia, 190 Fabricius Veiento, A. (suff. Ill 83), 190, 192, 207 'Falconilla', in Acts of Paul and Thecla, 7 'Faltonius Probus', 120 Fausta, wife of Constantine, 66 Faustina, alleged immorality, 36f, 81, 156; complicity in rebellion of Avidius Cassius, 37f. Favorinus, sophist, his refutation of astrology, 85; relations with Hadrian, 175 F E S T U S , Breuiarium, 30, 140, 151, 157

FIRMICUS MATERNUS, treatise on astrology, 92,94 Firmus, usurper, 106, 203 Flavia Sabina, wife of Caesennius Paetus, 192 Flavius Clemens (cos. 95), 190, 191 Flavius Priscus Gallonius Fronto Marcius Turbo, T., not the Guard Prefect of Hadrian, 169 Flavius Sabinus, brother of Vespasian, 189, 190 'Flavius Vopiscus', his origin, 107; grandfather, 114; date of his writing, 74, 120; in PLRE, 28, 100; encouraged by the City Prefect, 20,120f., 215; cites three of his co-biographers, 211; defends 'Trebellius Pollio', 200; on historians and biographers,

233

25f.; not favourable to Christianity, 126, 154; not interested in astrology, 92 Fritigil, Marcomannic queen, 150, 155 'Fulvius Asprianus', 105 Furius Maecius Gracchus, City Prefect, 121 f. GALBA, emperor, 189; his father's wife Mummia Achaica, 106 G A L E N , imitated, 8

GALERIUS, his origin, 65; Maximianus Caesar in HA, 73 GALLIENUS, family origin, 197; a hostile omen, 161, 197; uxorious, 151, 152f.; impatient for his dinner, 215; assassinated, 161 r.; fictions concerning the succession, 69, 152, 158f; hostility of sources to, 68f, 151,160,202 Gallonius, L., Antonine senator, 197 'Gallonius Avitus', 152, 159 'Gallonius Basilius', 69, 76, 152, 159, 195 GALLUS, origin, family and name, 195f, 208; accession, 198, 205; in HA, 201, 203; in Epitome, 200; death, 196, 199, 206 'Gallus Antipater', 28, 77, 100 Gargilius Martialis, equestrian officer, 101 'Gargilius', recurring as 'Gargilius Martialis', 100,103 'Gellia', in Martial, 60 'Gellius', possible inspiration for the name, 59f. Gellius Maximus, usurper in Syria, 60 G E T A , his horoscope, 88

Gibbon, quoted, 194, 211, 214, 216, 220 Gordon, Cyrus, Semitic scholar, 4, 216 'GORDIAN I, his origin, 121, 194; a cultivated figure, 98, 119, 126; accession, 193; his death foretold, 91, 161 GORDIANII, voluptuary, 158; ignored by Victor, 161; his death foretold, 91 GORDIAN III, opens Janus, 132; alleged the father of Claudius Gothicus, 77, 158 G o RDI AN I, confusions concerning their number and identity, 26, 77, 157, 161 HADRIAN, his birthplace, 121; interest in astrology, 17, 81f., 84f., 89, 184f.; his horoscope preserved, 85; early months of his reign, 168, 170f; changes Guard Prefects, 171f., 173f.; alleged intention to split Syria, 180f, 183f; hatred of Antioch, 123, 180, 185f.; quarrels with friends and artists, 175f., 185f.; his view of his wife, 175; his arrangements for the succession, 176f., 192; alleged the father of Aelius Caesar, 86f; 'letter'to Servianus, 91, 106, 221; in possession of letters of Apollonius of Tyana, 7

234

Index of Personal Names

Hannibal, admired by Pescennius Niger, 19 Hartke, W., on the HA, 110, 127 Hase, H., fraudulent librarian, 217 Helena, mother of Constantine, 63 'HeliusMaurus',99, 103 Herennia Cupressenia Etruscilla, wife of Decius, 195, 205 Herennius Etruscus, son of Decius, 195 HERODIAN, a source of HA, on rivals of Severus, 13, 18; on reign of Macrinus, 15, 32, 46, 49, 51, 52, 54; on Commodus, 184; on Severus, 88; on origin of Maximinus, 64 Hiram, King of Tyre, his men discover Brazil, 4,216 Hohl, E., champion of Dessau, 110, 223; on sources, purpose and authorship of HA, 31, 125, 127, 128; his edition of the text, 17f., 57,101,104 'Homullus', 23, 41f. Honigmann, E., on Hadrian and Syria, 180 HORACE, his 'letter' to Maecenas, 5, 6; refers to Sugambri, 146 Hostilianus, son of Decius, 200, 203; his name, 195 'Hunila', Gothic princess, 28, 152, 159

Julius Cottius, M., his kingdom annexed by Nero, 138f., 141f. Julius Crispus, quotes Virgil, 162 Julius Haterianus, antiquarian writer, 101 Julius Pisonianus, M., equestrian officer, his dedication to Hadrian, 183 Julius Polemo, ruler of Pontus, his kingdom annexed by Nero, 138f., 141 f. Julius Quadratus, A. (cos. II105), 181, 182 Julius Quadratus Bassus, C. (suff. 105), 171, 181 Julius Servianus, L. (cos. Ill 134), hostile to Hadrian, 83; 'letter' of Hadrian to, 86, 106, 221; his death, 86, 176 JULIUS VALERIUS, astrological terms used

Jacoby, F., accepts some HA authors, 98

Klebs, E., on the HA, 78 f, 109 Kornemann, E., accredits the historian 'Lollius Urbicus', 222

by, 94

Julius Volusenna Rogatianus, C , proconsul of Asia, 198,254 'Junius Cordus', sometimes 'Aelius Cordus', 17, 44f., 103f.; possible origin of name, 105; his function in HA, 25, 33, 104, 214; cited only by 'Julius Capitolinus', 95, 104, 213 'Junius, L.', in nomenclature of Vibius Crispus and Caesennius Paetus, 191 Junius Tiberianus, City Prefect, 117, 120; encourages 'Vopiscus', 20, 120, 215 IGNOTUS, source ofPlutarch and Tacitus, 30, JUVENAL, rediscovered in late fourth century, 10, 40, 129; on literary impersonations, 3; 178 includes Sugambri, 146; possible source of a IGNOTUS, source of early Vitae in HA, 15, name in HA, 105 3 1 f , 8 4 , 8 5 , 89, 179 Juvenalis, Guard Prefect, 88 'Insubcr', as a label, 124

J E R O M E , and HA, 106, 128; and KG, 30, 151;

on annexation of Cottian Alps, 139; on northern invaders, 149f; his fictional devices, 5,219; his gift for satire and invective, 221 Johne, K.-P., on the HA, 109f Julia Domna, letter of Apollonius of Tyana addressed to, 7; her horoscope, 87f. JULIAN, on his family origins, 64f, 68, 73; on emperor as senator, 116; unpopularity at Antioch, 185, 187; ignores emperor Tacitus, 70, 120, 164; his interests allegedly served by HA, 110 Julius Asclepiodotus, Guard Prefect of Constantius, 100 'Julius Atherianus', his cognomen not in need of emendation, 101 JULIUS CAESAR, his extension o(pomerium, 133; his alleged plan to abandon Rome, 184; his achievements played down by Claudius, 135; his Bellum Gallicum, 127 'Julius Capitolinus', his biographies, 27f., 58, 201; sole sponsor for 'Junius Cordus', 95, 104, 213; not interested in astrology, 92, 96

LACTANTIUS, ignores Claudian ancestry of Constantine, 68 Lambrechts, P., supporter of Baynes, 129 'Lampridia', mother of Pescennius Niger, 59 Lecrivain, J., on sources of Vita Hadriani, 34 Lenormant, French Hellenist, 217 LlCINius, his origins, 65; claims descent from emperor Philip, 73 Ligorio, notorious forger, 3 Livius Gratus, procurator, 172 LIVY, on enlargement of Rome by Servius Tullius, 143 Lollia Paullina, 134, 135 Lollius, M., defeated by Sugambri, 146 Lollius Urbicus, Q . , general, 60, 105, 222 'Lollius Urbicus', historian, 31, 60, 105, 222 L U C I A N , on Panthea, 187

M A C R I N U S , his reign, the variant accounts, 46f; his cruelty, 52, 57; his poetry, 52, 98

Index of Personal Names 'Maecia Faustina', daughter of Gordian I, 121 'Maecius Faltonius Nicomachus', 121; against boy princes, 117 Maecius Faustinus, rhetor, 121 Maecius Marullus, virclarissimus, 121 'Maecius Marullus', father of Gordian I, 121 'Maeonius Astyanax', 105 Magie, D., on Hadrian and Syria, 180 MALALAS, on Hadrian and Antioch, 185 Manni, E., on date of Vita Claudii, 79 Marcia Otacilia Severa, wife of emperor Philip, 195, 200 Marcius Turbo, Q,, his career, 168f, 171f.;in HA, 170f.; his quarrel with Hadrian, 176f, 186 M A R C U S A U R E L I U S , in dynastic

arrangements of Hadrian, 87, 176; account of his reign in HA, 34f; scandals concerning Faustina, 36f, 40, 81, 156; German wars, 149, 153, 184; dislike of Antioch, 123; criticism of Panthea, 187; 'letter' to Senate, 2 Marius, ironworker and usurper, 14,114, 140, 162,164 Marius, C , in Aurelius Victor and HA, 14, 114, 141, 162, 164; admired by Pescennius Niger, 19 MARlUsMAXIMUS, his imperial biographies, 15f, 31 f, 40, 55; read in late Antiquity, 40, 54f, 129; a source of HA, the nature of his contribution disputed, 15f, 21, 31f, 178; see also IGNOTUS; citations of in HA examined, chapter III passim; a subsidiary source, for Hadrian, 17, 47, 83f, 89f, 93, 173f, 177f, 184f, 186f, for Marcus, 40, 81, 156, 173, for Severus, 87, 89, 184f; not the basic source for Macrinus, 55; basic source for Elagabalus, 43, 54f; references to, in Vita of Severus Alexander, 23f, 41f, 43f.; censured by 'Flavius Vopiscus', 25f. Maroboduus, king of Marcomanni, 147 M A R T I A L , used by HA, 22, 60; on Nero, 145; refers to Sugambri, 146 'Maryllinus', ancestor of Hadrian, 93 Matidia, her death, 172 MAXIMIANUS, 73; father-in-law of Constantine, 66 M A X I M I N U S , 162, 195; his origin, 64, 66, 193,

205 'Maximus', father of Probus, 76 Mazzarino, S., on the HA, HOf 'Memmia', wife of Severus Alexander, 106, 121 Minicius Marcellinus, M., 173 Momigliano, A., ontheHA,78f, 95,99, 111, 126,129

235

Mommsen, Th., his theory about the HA, 78f, 109, 129; on role of'Junius Cordus', 103; quoted, 132 Moses, anticipates Plato, in Jewish pseudepigrapha, 5; in HA, 77; his longevity, 91, 126 Mummia Achaica, 106, 121 Neratius Priscus, L. (sujj. 97), 33 NERO, his closure ofJanus, 132; alleged extension of pomerium, 137f, 143; late accounts of his reign, 141f N E R V A , 191; in Philostratus, 7; his origins, 192 Nicetes of Remesiana, 66 'Nicomachus', linguist, 99, 105, 213 Nicomachus Flavianus, possible inspiration of name in HA, 105; his son, suggested author of HA, 128; announces end of Christianity, 165 'Nonia Celsa', wife of Macrinus, 60 'Nonius Gracchus', 60 'Nonius Murcus', 60 Nummius Albinus, City Prefect, 117 'Nummius Ceionius Albinus', 117 Onasimos of Cyprus or Sparta, 102 Onesimus, in Jerome, 106 'Onesimus', 102, 103, 106, 107 OROSIUS, on closures ofJanus, 132; on northern campaigns of Tiberius, 147 O T H O , his origins, 189

OviD, 6; refers to Sugambri, 146 'Ovinius Camillus', 24, 44, 56 Pammachius, senator and monk, 220 Panthea, mistress of Verus, 187 Passieni, on inscription at Clusium, 207 Paul, apostle, his travels with Thecla, 5; his correspondence with Seneca, 5, 7 Paul, desert hermit invented by Jerome, 5,219 Paul, jurist, his career, in HA, 18, 61, 143f. Paulinus, his Vita Ambrosii, 150 Paulus, forgotten rhetor, 181 Pausanias the Regent, his letter to Xerxes, reproduced by Thucydides, 4 Pedanius Fuscus, his fate, 85f, 176 Pedanius Fuscus, Cn. (cos. 118), disappearance

of, 85 PERTINAX, emulated by Pescennius Niger, 18; his good image, possibly subverted by Marius Maximus, 42; omens at his birth, 90; his cognomen explained, 160; his origin, 192 Perry, B. E., excludes historical fiction, 9,216 'Pescennia Marcellina', 23

236

Index of Personal Names

P E S C E N N I U S N I G E R , as portrayed in HA, 13,

18f., 23, 47, 58, 122; his death, 157 Peter, H., on role of'Julius Capitolinus', 27; on sources of Vita Hadriani, 34; his list of HA authors, 100, 101, 102, 107; resistant to arguments of Dessau, 109 Petillius Cerialis, Q . (suff. II 74), 189 Petronius Probus, Sex., inspiration of items in HA, 119, 120, 165f. Petronius Taurus Volusianus, L. (cos. 261), his origin and career, 199 PHILIP, his origin, 194; his morose son, 161, 200; his wife, 195; against male prostitution, 22, 161, 200, 202; his Ludi Saeculares, 202 PHILOSTRATUS, fact and fiction in his Life of Apollonius, 7 Pilate, his letter to Herod, 8 'Pinianus', addressed by 'Flavius Vopiscus', 120f. Pipa, mistress of Gallienus, 151f, 155 'Pipa', as a name, 151 'Pipara', in HA, 152 Piperacius, comically named soldier, 152 Piso, L. (cos. 15 B.C.), 181 P L A T O , anticipated by Moses, 5; authenticity of the Platonic epistles, 6f. P L I N Y THE ELDER, on northern tribes, 148 P L I N Y THE Y O U N G E R , on emperor as senator,

116 PLUTARCH, on Galba and Otho, his source also used by Tacitus, 30, 178 PSEUDO-PLUTARCH, Parallela Minora, 2, 98 Pompeius Falco, Q . (suff. 108), 7f. Pomponius Bassus, Ti. (cos. II271), 69, 159 'Prastina', raregentilicium, 198 Prastina Messallinus (cos. 147), 198, 207 Prastina Messallinus, legate of Moesia Inferior, 198 P R O B U S , his patria, 123; his father, 76, 152, 158; family links with other emperors, forged in HA, 75f., 123, in Epitome, 76,152, 158; not chosen as ancestor by Constantine, 70; commemorates Claudius Gothicus, 68; rescues 'Valerius Flaccinus', 75, 155; his school of generals, 75, 205; his descendants, greatness predicted for, 120, 165; promotes viticulture, 76, 158,163; respects the Senate, 115; forecasts redundancy of soldiers, and dies, 162, 165, 167; favourable judgment of HA on, 77 'Probus', not City Prefect, 117 'Proculus', very common cognomen, useful to forgers, 8 PROPERTIUS, on the Sugambri, 146 Prosius Tertullianus, legate of Moesia Inferior, 198

Proust, on fictional letters, 3; one of his inadvertences, 214; his Albertine quoted, 219 Pseudo-Victor, Epitome oi, its sources, 38, 49, 151, 163; see also Enmann, KG of; qualities, 140, 163; compared with other epitomators, on Tiberius and Sugambri, 147; on Nero, 139, 141f.; on name of Pertinax, 160; on Macrinus and Diadumenianus, 49f; on son of Philip, 161, 200; Decius, 163, 199f; Gallus, 200; Claudius Gothicus, 69, 76f, 158f.; Aurelian, 65, 136, 159; Probus, 76, 152, 158, 163; Carinus, 162; Galerius, 65; evidence for Marcomanni in Pannonia, 150f., 155; bogus characters in, 152, 159 PUPIEN US, his family origins, 193f., 205, 207; in HA, 23, 201 QUINTILIAN,3,

10,98

'Quintilius Marcellus', counsellor of Alexander, 118 QUINTILLUS, brother of Claudius Gothicus, 69, 70 'Ragonius Celsus', 120 'Ragonius Clarus', 113 Raper, R. W., an undetected hoaxer, 218 Rufii, of Volsinii, 206 Rufius Festus, proconsul of Africa, 208 Rutilius Namatianus, 208 Sabinus, City Prefect, 118 Saenius Donatus, M., his origin, 198 Saint-Simon, his literary development, 216 SALLUST, the purpose of his writing, 127; the bogus epistulae, 3, 5f., 210; Sallustian echoes, in HA, 14, 100, 114, 141, 164, in Aurelius Victor, 140; quoted, 131 Salonina, wife of Gallienus, 151, 152 Salvius Julianus (cos. 148), not City Prefect, 117 Samaran, Ch., centenarian scholar, 222f. 'Samso', 'virago' previously called 'Vituriga', 28, 126, 221 Sandras, Courtil de, writes fictional memoirs, 222 Saturninus, astrologer, 91 Scaurinus, teacher of L. Verus, 23 'Scaurinus', 23 Schultz, O . T., conjures up a historian almost centenarian, 222 Seeck, O . , on date and authorship of HA, 110, 128; on date of KG, 151 S E N E C A , his 'correspondence' with Paul, 5,7; on extension ofpomerium, 135

Index of Personal Names

237

Orosius, 132; his memory and works Septicius Clarus, Guard Prefect, 168, 173; fostered by emperor Tacitus, 72, 214 dismissed, 174f. TACITUS, the emperor, his origin and family 'Septiminus', 103 name unknown to HA, 71, 75, 76; his reign 'Septimius Arabianus', 60 misrepresented by the sources, 70, 116, SEHTIMIUS SEVERUS, his African origin, 193; 119f, 164f; ignored by Julian and his interest in astrology, 87f, 185; his senatorial victims, 115, 117; splits province Eusebius, 70, 120, 164; his scholarly habits, of Syria, 184 214; his regard for historian Tacitus, 72, Serenus Sammonicus, 23 214; a prophecy about his remote 'Serenus Sammonicus', 23 descendants, 215 S ER VI US,.scholiast,shares a word with HA,138 T E R E N C E , quoted by HA, 56,116 Seston, W., supporter of Baynes, 129 TERTULLIAN, on authorship of romance of S E V E R U S A L E X A N D E R , his Syrian origin, Paul's travels with Thecla, 5; on Seneca, 5; 193; adopted by Elagabalus, 154; his his use of language of astrology, 92, 94; on military discipline, 160; in HA, his the date of the Nativity, 209 genealogy, 121; the ideal prince, 58f, 115; Tertullus, lover of Faustina, 37 against panegyrics of emperors, 47, 61; Tetricus, spared by Aurelian, 162 measures for City Prefecture, 119, against Thecla, her travels with Paul, 5 male prostitution, 22; 'archisynagogus', 90, Themistocles, his alleged decree, 4, 209 123, 187; his domestic chapel, 72, 90, 214; 'Theoclius', 99 his interest in astrology, 90, 96f.; money Theodora, wife of Constantius, 74 lender, 112; his liking for game-pie, 17 T H E O D O S I U S , alleged object of HA Sextia Cethegilla, daughter of Pupienus, 193, propaganda, 127f. 194 'Thrasybulus', astrologer, 90, 97 S I D O N I U S A P O L L I N A R I S , an item about Thrasyllus, astrologer, 91, 93 astrologers, 91 THUCYDIDES, reproduces letter of Pausanias SOPHOCLES, the correct form of address, the Regent, 4 discussed in Proust, 3 T I B E R I U S , addict of astrology, 84, 92; his SOZOMENUS, on Hadrian and Antioch, 185 northern wars, 146f; his death, 160 STATIUS, quoted on Marcomanni, 148 Timesitheus, his stern qualities appreciated, Statius Priscus (cos. 159), 169 115 'Statius Valens', biographer, 44 Tineii, senatorial, 193, 207 Straub, J., on date and purpose of HA, 110, Titus Tatius, his enlargement of Rome noted l l l f , 125,128 by Tacitus, 134 S U E T O N I U S , ah epistulis, dismissed by 'Toxotius', 120,213 Hadrian, 174f; his biographies, portents T R A J A N , credited with extension of the and wonders in, 80; on Caesar's plan to pomerium, 137, 143; on Nero, 141f, 144f; abandon Rome, 184; on 'letter' of Horace to province of Syria under, 182; and Maecenas, 5, 6; on Otho, 189; on closure of 'Homullus', 23, 41 Janus by Nero, 132; does not refer to 'Trebellius Pollio', writes under the pomerium, 131; hardly refers to City Tetrarchs, 74, 78,120; his biographies, 77f, Prefects, 118; on consular victims of 201 f.; scant reference to astrology, 92; Domitian, 115; a source for HA, 87, 91, 92, defended by 'Flavius Vopiscus', 26, 200 93, 101, 106; ultimate source of late Tullius Cicero, Q., Commentariolum Petitionis epitomators, 139, 146f, 160 attributed to, 7 'TurdulusGallicanus', 28, 75, 100, 102, 105, 'Suetonius Optatianus', flagrantly fictitious biographer of the emperor Tacitus, 105, 214 107 Sulla the Dictator, 131, 133 Sulpicius Similis, Guard Prefect, 171,173,177 Ulpian, jurist, his career in HA, 18,61, 118, 143f.; his alleged 'circle', 222 S Y M M A C H U S , 12, 113; nature of his'circle', 'Ulpius Crinitus', 89, 123, 203 128,220 Ummidius Quadratus (suff. 118), his quarrel TACITUS, his origin, 122; his sources, 30, with Hadrian, 176 134f., 178; onpomerium, 131, 132f, 143; on Nero, 132, 139, 145; on northern tribes, 'Vagellius Fuscus'?, 101 147, 148; on soldiers in Syria, 123; and VALERIAN, his family, 197; on Claudius astrology, 80f., 84, 92f; quoted by Gothicus, 71; rewards Probus, 75, 155

238

Index of Personal Names

Valerius Festus (suff. 71), 207 'Valerius Flaccinus', rescued from the Quadi, 75,155 Valerius Homullus, M. (cos. 152), 23, 35f., 42 'Valerius Marcellinus', possible inspiration of the name, 105 Valerius Messalla, M. (cos. 53 B.C.), quoted by Aulus Gellius, 133, 143 Vannius, king of the Quadi, 148f. 'Vectius Sabinus', 117f., 128 'Veldumnianus', cognomen, 196 Velius Rufus, C , his inscription, 148

Vicirii, patria of, 207 Victoria, mother of Victorinus, 124 Victorinus, Gallic usurper, seducer, 116, 161; his mother, 124 VIRGIL, alleged juvenile works, 5f.; his alleged ancestry and familiarity with Old Testament, 218; used and quoted in HA, 108; sortes Vergilianae, 77, 83, 96, 101, 108, 219; quoted by Julius Crispus and Tetricus, 162; misquoted by Seneca, 99; quoted in this volume, 99,108; misquoted in this volume, 72, 79

V E L L E I U S P A T E R C U L U S , refers to

V I T E L L I U S , emperor, 189

Marcomanni, 148 'Venustus', 71 Vertacus, astrologer, 91 VERUS, L., not treated separately by Marius Maximus, 15; allegedly poisoned, 37f.; in Syria, 187 VESPASIAN, and senators, 114; closure of Janus, 132; extension otpomerium, 134f.; the dynasty, 189f. Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, 119 Vibia Galla, repairs baths at Alba Fucens, 196 Vibii Galli, 196 Vibia Sabina, wife of Hadrian, 174f. Vibius Crispus, Q . (suff. Ill 83), his full name, 190f. Vibius Gallus Proculeianus, C., great­ grandfather of emperor Gallus, 195 Vibius Veldumnianus, father of Gallus, 195f., 206

VITRUVIUS,93

VOLUSIANUS, son of Gallus, made emperor with his father, 200; his name, 196, 199 ' Vulcatius Gallicanus', 29, 107 Warde Fowler, W., classical scholar, 218 Weber, W., on Hadrian and Syria, 180 Wise, T. J., delinquent bibliophile, 217 X E N O P H O N , the Cyropaedia, 9, 214, 216

Yourcenar, M., 188,214 Zenobia, her letter translated by 'Nicomachus', 105 ZONARAS, on accession of Tacitus, 116 ZOSIMUS, on Claudius Gothicus, 69, 124; his unique reference to Marcomanni, 149